Page 113 - SCANDAL AND DEMOCRACY
P. 113

98   Chapter 5



                Table 1.  Indices of electoral fraud, Indonesian elections, June 10, 1999.
              Votes counted: 16%.

                Province     Golkar     Golkar   PDIP (%     PDIP     Votes     Number   Registered
                              (% of   votes   of votes   votes   reported  of seats   voters/
                             votes for       for top 5           (%)               seat
                              top 5          parties)
                             parties)
                  Inner Islands
                Bali            8      9,192    88     100,081    18       9     226,685
                Jakarta*       12     93,463    41     322,333    18      18     281,792
                C. Java          16  201,853    47     603,555    12      60     312,010
                E. Java          14  372,548    40    1,050,108   20      68     320,759

                W. Java           7   11,321     9      14,970    25      82     308,945
                Yogyakarta     17     85,000    40     204,830    32       6     321,567
                  Outer Islands
                Aceh           15      7,816     8       4,186     6      12     123,858
                E. Kalimantan     31  63,184    39      80,006    25       7     190,763
                Lampung        24     51,905    52     114,462    12      15     245,087
                E. Nusa Tenggara  52  53,328    41      42,050     6      13     153,984
                N. Sulawesi    50     59,268    32      37,648    11       7     248,346
                S. Sulawesi    19     13,883    19      13,747     6      24     176,234
                S. E. Sulawesi  69    61,337    17      14,920    11       5     180,166
                E. Timor         34   15,032    53      23,291    12       4     105,024
                * Includes overseas ballots.
                  Source:  Joint Operations Media Center, Aryaduta Hotel, Jakarta, June 10, 1999.




                   On June 14, with 58 percent of votes counted nationwide, the pattern of slower
              returns from pro-Golkar regions became apparent (see  table 2  and  maps ). In Bali and
              the whole of Java (East, West, and Central), over two-thirds of votes were already tal-
              lied, and PDIP’s lead had reached 50 percent. Yet in the eight provinces where Golkar
              had a double-digit lead, only two-fifths of returns had come in. There was a clear cor-
              respondence between provinces with heavily weighted seats, a wide Golkar majority,
              and a slow rate of return—a situation indicative of manipulation through an electoral
              machine.
                   This discrepancy in return rates was the first indication that the Golkar machine
              might be holding back votes from provinces where the party was strong and there
              were more seats per registered voter—the formula Golkar had fought for earlier.    The
                                                                                    68
              second, little-noticed trend aiding Golkar was the slow but steady erosion of PDIP’s
              lead, also facilitated by the sluggish pace of outer island returns. While Golkar had
   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118