Search results

Political accountability is a crucial element of any democracy since it is a safeguard against power abuse and corruption, both urgent problems of many political systems in Southeast Asia. Based on social science theories, the author analyses from a comparative perspective the ways institutional engineering concerning different dimensions of political accountability influenced the quality of democracy in Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines. By highlighting the successes and shortcomings, this book evaluates the degree these institutional reforms resulted in the deepening, stagnation, or regression of the respective democratization processes in these three Southeast Asian countries

The Indonesian parliament and democratization -- Contents -- List of Tables -- List of Figures -- Acknowledgements -- Abbreviations and Indonesian acronyms -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Parliaments and democratization -- 3. Rubber stamp?: the role of the parliament during the last year of the presidency of Suharto -- 4. The awakening: the role of the parliament during the presidency of B.J. Habibie -- 5. Power broker: the role of the parliament during the presidencies of Abdurrahman Wahid and Megawati Soekarnoputri -- 6. The parliament between 1997 and 2004: changes and continuities -- 7. Conclusion and perspectives -- References -- Index -- About the author.

Democratization in Indonesia has altered the political decision-making processes in many ways. It has also brought about tremendous change to the role of the Indonesian parliament in the country's political system. Once characterized as a powerless rubber stamp, the parliament has developed into a comprehensive and more representative body able to fulfil its functions more adequately.In the literature on democratic transition, the impact of parliaments on regime changes and on the democratic reorganization of the most important state institutions and regulations is usually neglected. In the Indonesian case, however, the national parliament was one of the most decisive actors and is therefore the focus of this book.The author analyses the parliament's contribution towards the process of democratization. Thus, this book contributes not only to research on the Indonesian democratization process, but also to the comparative research on parliaments in transition processes in general

The increasing tensions between Islamists and the political leadership in Indonesia and Malaysia reveal that the relationship between religion and state has not yet been definitively settled in either state. The ongoing sociopolitical struggles over the relationship between Islam and national identity in both countries are also a result of their very different nation-building processes. To understand the current dynamics, it is necessary to analyze the specific ways in which Islam was incorporated in the constitutions of both countries after independence and how nation-building was directed by their respective political elites. Whereas Malaysia tried to build a nation based on the coexistence of different ethnic/religious groups, Indonesia meanwhile adopted an assimilationist approach — in which members of every ethnic/religious group were to be absorbed into one overarching nation. Due, not least, to these historical reasons, we can now observe a growing tendency toward dissatisfaction with the results of the nation-building processes among the Muslim communities in both of these countries.

The increasing tensions between Islamists and the political leadership in Indonesia and Malaysia reveal that the relationship between religion and state has not yet been definitively settled in either state. The ongoing sociopolitical struggles over the relationship between Islam and national identity in both countries are also a result of their very different nation-building processes. To understand the current dynamics, it is necessary to analyze the specific ways in which Islam was incorporated in the constitutions of both countries after independence and how nation-building was directed by their respective political elites. Whereas Malaysia tried to build a nation based on the coexistence of different ethnic/religious groups, Indonesia meanwhile adopted an assimilationist approach - in which members of every ethnic/religious group were to be absorbed into one overarching nation. Due, not least, to these historical reasons, we can now observe a growing tendency toward dissatisfaction with the results of the nation-building processes among the Muslim communities in both of these countries. (Asien/GIGA)

Am 21. März 2004, am selben Tag an dem in Sepang mit dem Großen Preis die Formel 1 zu Gast in Südostasien war, fanden in Malaysia die elften Parlamentswahlen statt. Ähnlich unspektakulär wie der erwartete Sieg von Michael Schumacher im Autorennen, verlief auch die Stimmabgabe der rund sieben Millionen Malaysierinnen. Die seit Jahrzehnten mit absoluter Mehrheit regierende Barisan Nasional (Nationale Front) erreichte einen Mandatsanteil von 90,4 % und stellt mit Abdullah Badawi auch den Premierminister. Die formale Machtübergabe von Mohammed Mahathir, des politisch mächtigsten Manns Malaysias, auf seinen Nachfolger verlief also reibungslos.

Insgesamt 38 Parteien stritten sich um die 560 Sitze im indonesischen Parlament, doch am Ende siegte eine Person: der amtierende Präsident Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.

Nach den Anschlägen von New York und Washington am 11. September 2001 haben die Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika eine umfangreiche Initiative zur Bekämpfung des internationalen Terrorismus gestartet, die auch für die Region Südostasien weitreichende Konsequenzen hat. So dominierten dann auch Sicherheitsfragen das Gipfeltreffen der asiatisch-pazifischen Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft APEC, das Ende Oktober 2003 in Bangkok stattfand. Präsident Bush setzte sich über die von den asiatischen Staaten favorisierte Wirtschaftsagenda hinweg und setzte den Anti- Terror-Krieg als Hauptthema auf die Tagesordnung