Can Aceh Learn from Scandinavia? : An Upside Down Comparison of Popular Representation

Abstract

The background for the analysis has been the recent democratization in Indonesia that has led to impressive and extensive freedoms, and the successful holding of elections. On the other hand, recent research on the state of democracy in Indonesia indicates that there are some major problems with the deepening of democracy beyond elections only. More specific research on the tsunami-affected and conflict-ridden Aceh province on north Sumatra, indicate that many of the problems with the deepening and further development of democracy is related to a need to extend the representation beyond the formal holding of elections, and a need to promote democratic participation from below (Törnquist, et al., 2010). Another ongoing study in the South Aceh district in the Aceh province aims to map what actually exists of additional forms of representation and participation.

By taking the definition of democracy as popular control over public affairs on the basis of political equality as a point of departure the aim has been to perform an ‘upside down’ comparison of democratic representation in Aceh and historically in Scandinavia. The logic behind the comparison is that instead of taking the relative successful democracy in Scandinavia as a point of departure for assessing democracy in Aceh, the problems with democratic representation in Aceh, will be the point of departure for analyzing Scandinavian experiences to see if any similar problems have been handled or solved successfully. The point was thus not to export a scandinavian model.

After specifying the problems in Aceh, the general situation in Scandinavia relating to the same issues was mapped. The relative successful development concerning some of these issues in Scandinavia seemed to be related to some additional factors that in turn was investigated further by aiming at tracing the processes behind the establishment of them. Some of these processes seemed to be related to some structural preconditions in pre-democratic Scandinavia, while other issues were clearly related to actual politics and active state intervention. The next step was thus to perform a thematic comparison of Aceh and Scandinavia where the possibilities for any of the findings serving as potential sources for inspiration for the further development of democracy in Aceh were discussed.