The Importance of a Reconciliation Campaign After the 2019 Election by Youth and Media
By: S. Zaliha )*
On April 17, 2019 ago, this nation held a big agenda in the implementation of democracy. On that day more than 187 million voters both domestically and abroad for the first time will vote simultaneously for legislative candidates (Pileg) and Presidential Candidates (Pilpres). With the simultaneity, the 2019 elections have several differences with the 2014 elections. Starting from the implementation, the number of political parties participating in the election, to the method of counting political parties. The fundamental difference from the implementation of the 2019 Election is simultaneity. In 2014, Pileg and Pilpres were held separately. The difference is indicated by the incorporation of the Pileg Law, the Presidential Election Law, and the Election Implementation Law into only the Election Law. In addition, the number of political parties (political parties) competing in the 2019 Election compared to the 2014 Election is also different. In the 2014 election, the election was attended by 12 national political parties and 3 Acehnese local political parties. Whereas in the 2019 Election, 16 national political parties were added, plus 4 local political parties in Aceh.
After going through a long and tiring process, finally on Sunday (6/30/2019), the General Election Commission (KPU) has held an open plenary meeting and appointed presidential and vice-presidential pairs Joko Widodo – Ma’ruf Amin as elected president and vice president in 2019 Presidential Election. The pair number 01 was elected as the president and vice president of the Republic of Indonesia for the 2019-2024 period with 85,607,367 votes or 55.50% of the total national legitimate votes. The plenary meeting was held by the KPU following the Constitutional Court’s decision regarding the dispute over the results of the 2019 presidential election. The Constitutional Court (MK) decided to reject all of the 2019 presidential election disputes that were previously proposed by pair number 02, Prabowo Subianto-Sandiaga Uno.
Thus, after a series of political contestations in this 2019 election. After a series of debates, as well as a lawsuit that accompanied, both during the campaign period and the announcement period of the results, now the elected president and vice presidential pair has been legally established. After the determination of the elected president and vice president of the KPU, all parties returned to strengthen the brotherhood and unity.
We hope that all parties can receive the results of the whole set of electoral mechanisms with a big soul. We also hope that all kinds of debates that have raged during the campaign period until the last few months, can subside and we can all go hand in hand to strengthen the brotherhood as a nation. The determination of the Indonesian presidential and vice-presidential pair elected by the KPU a few days ago must be able to end all the disputes and debates. Nevertheless, the issue leaves important questions including the question of reconciliation. KBBI means “Reconciliation” as an act of healing friendship to return to its original state. National reconciliation, thus can be interpreted as an effort to heal the relationship of brotherhood and national unity, after being cracked or torn apart by the strengthening of debate, verbal abuse, and hatred.
Then, we as a society, especially the younger generation, also have the same duty and contribution to campaign for national reconciliation. Here, cyberspace or especially social media can be a very powerful tool to fuel national reconciliation. With the device in hand, each individual must actively voice the messages of peace. On social media, expressions of hostility and hatred are time to be eliminated, replaced by expressions that prioritize brotherhood, compassion, and caring for others. We can return to greet, comment in a friendly and peaceful manner, with people who yesterday may have different political views with us. Here, words or languages full of ethics, manners, and manners are very important things put forward in seeking reconciliation on social media. There are no more hateful, hostile, and insulting words in the comments column. There should be no more provocative uploads and sharing content that provokes commotion, as well as mainstream media.
All must reflect, reflect, and see clearly what is really needed by this nation. Now, it has no relevance to continue to debate, let alone indulge in hostility and hatred. The presidential election is over and the elected leader has been determined. There is no use to continue to maintain hatred and hostility. What is more important and what we need now are friendly and peaceful voices that invite us to go hand in hand, strengthen cooperation and mutual cooperation to create harmony for a better nation’s life in the future.
In this context the role of the younger generation is significant. With the mastery of information technology possessed by the younger generation, they can participate in reducing communication conflicts in the media, reducing the creation and dissemination of hoax news, correcting misinformation. The younger generation can also participate by controlling themselves not to be trapped using technology for negative behavior. Like making and spreading hoaxes and other behaviors that violate the Electronic Information and Transaction Law (ITE).
Elections and the whole series of processes that are safe, peaceful, successful and with integrity are a common dream. But that does not come by itself. Strong commitment is needed from all elements of the nation. Including the younger generation and election stakeholders to make it happen. This commitment can only be built when all parties want to interpret the presidential election comprehensively, not purely pursuing results, but obey written and unwritten regulations in the electoral process and respect the norms, ethics, and values of national unity. With that commitment, the political conditions in the country after the 2019 Election will remain conducive.
)* The author is an activist at the Library Institute