Despite the progress made on Indonesian women’s political participation, their inclusion is still bound in patriarchal terms that the Indonesian elite is not ready address. Overcoming this challenge should be Jakarta’s next big step. 

As International Women’s Day approaches, the campaign serves as yet another reminder that a gender gap persistently exists at various levels of society. With this year’s theme calling for inclusion, it is prudent to turn our attention to the Indonesian elections. A glaring absence of women on the Indonesian 2024 ballot papers should be troubling considering Indonesia has a candidate quota that requires political parties to nominate a minimum of 30 percent women candidates. It raises the question of the efficacy of positive action policies and programs designed to maximise gender participation, particularly as these policies are derived from and implemented in a political environment that is yet to be receptive to the idea of an autonomous woman in power.

Admittedly, Indonesia had its first and only female president in Megawati Sukarnoputri in 2001. However, a brief analysis of her political career showed no morsel of advocacy or policy in favour of the political advancement of women. As a politician who had legitimacy bestowed upon her as Sukarno’s (the founding father of Indonesia) daughter, Megawati is well-versed in the game of behaving like “one of the boys” to survive the political climate of her time. She made public statements against affirmative action and the candidate quota for women. Her government had also been indecisive about granting appropriate legal protection for women.

Progress has undoubtedly been made in Indonesia, no matter how minute it may seem to an Australian audience. Nevertheless, the 2024 Indonesian elections still demonstrate how Indonesian women are viewed by their leadership through ongoing paternalist narratives and policies. For instance, none of the presidential candidates’ policies this year sought to move beyond the traditional women’s roles of the Suharto era, and the prevailing ideology of state ibuism. Comparing their promises with current president Joko (Jokowi) Widodo’s policies on women reveals little thematic deviation. In a speech to 2016 Conference on Family Planning, Jokowi asserted that only a healthy and “prosperous mother, children and family can create [a] generation that have great quality, character, and personality.”

The core of this gender ideology views women as appendages and companions to their husbands, procreators of the nation, mothers and educators of their children, housekeepers, and members of Indonesian society. The order in which the permissible roles for women are listed speaks volumes about the desire of Suharto’s Indonesia to have women among the ranks of power.

It is a desire of many to claim that state ibuism is no longer present in Indonesian society and, indeed, educational opportunities for both boys and girls have been expanded. Indonesia’s labour laws have provided for women’s menstruation leave, maternity leave and breastfeeding breaks. Fertility controls have also allowed women to choose their time of pregnancy. However, these are not without their caveats.  Traditional familial roles for women remain implanted in Indonesia’s political and cultural fabric. In each of the three candidates (and their running mates) running for the presidency in the 2024 elections, not a single one proposed new policies for women that extended beyond the economic realm of what women can do for Indonesian society. Women’s issues were discussed only in the broad category of minority or vulnerable groups, hence reducing their capacity for agency. There were very few discussions on specific plans for reforms that would enhance women’s participation and leadership. Few even talked about the possibility of revising the recent changes to Indonesia’s criminal code that impose jail terms for those who disseminate information about contraception to unmarried women. None discussed the provisions that impose a four-year sentence on any woman who has an abortion (exceptions made for rape or medical emergencies).

The framing of women as a vulnerable minority, whether made deliberately or out of ignorance, has heavy implications. It suggests that women hold an inferior position to men and, thus, need protection as they do not share the same rights and privileges. The inherently paternalistic framing also allows the candidates to avoid having to address the structural inequalities that exist. In addition to the view that women belong to the vulnerable minority, the candidates’ discourses on women are also strongly focused on their reproductive roles. Ganjar Pranowo, the PDIP-backed presidential candidate, expressed a need for the protection of pregnant women. The Anies-Muhaimin candidate pair called for memuliakan ibu (honouring mothers) which implies that women can only be honoured in their role as a wife or mother. Prabowo and Gibran’s revolusi putih (white revolution), referring to their provision of free lunches and milk to school children to help mothers with stunted children, further reinforces the reproductive emphasis of traditional gender norms. As illustrated, these images were displayed throughout the election campaigns of all three candidates.

Not only were women absent from the line-up of presidential candidates, but the presidential programs proposed for women also lacked a comprehensive understanding of the diverse experiences of women. This highlights the dire need for the inclusion of women in Indonesia’s political system that goes beyond tokenism. Exceptional women do exist in Indonesia’s politics but they remain the exception rather than the norm. And in such times, it is more common for a woman to enter politics as a device for their ambitious male relatives. Bivitri Susanti, a constitutional law expert has commented that it is hard for a female candidate to become a leader if she does not have certain qualities – such as family connections or affiliations with a political party.

In sum, Indonesia’s elections have provided global audiences with more than an illustration of a successful democratic process. They have showcased that the cause for equality is still bound in patriarchal traditions, a condition that no leader is yet prepared to address. As International Women’s Day approaches, these illustrations offer both pause for reflection and for action. Women’s issues are not defined by borders, nor do the experiences of Indonesian women dissipate because of their geographical distance. In a globalising world, where information is readily available, it is the responsibility of the global citizen to question and expose the inequalities that still exist. Nearly 205 million eligible Indonesian voters have paid a visit to the polling booths for a new president and 50.09 percent of them were women.  There must be scrutiny across the political environment for there ever to be a chance for women to be treated as more than mere appendages to men.

Felicia Lim is a student at ANU whose research focuses on women’s security in the Asia Pacific region. Her previous papers have focused on the socio-political perceptions of women’s political participation in Indonesia, particularly after the mass murders of 1965-55. Her work also includes issues on sex work in Malaysia and the policy gaps surrounding it.

This article is published under a Creative Commons Licence and may be republished with attribution.