Jakarta - Elections, as a prerequisite for the functioning of a country's democratic system, are a manifestation of popular sovereignty without exception. This includes persons with disabilities, whose numbers in developing countries like Indonesia are predicted by the WHO to be 10 percent of the total population. However, has the current system been able to accommodate the aspirations of minority groups such as persons with disabilities?
The most tangible form of representation for a community group's aspirations is the presence or absence of their representatives in parliament, from the DPR RI and DPD RI at the national level, to the DPRD at the provincial, city, and regency levels. Yet, in the era of direct elections, specifically since 2004, where the MPR, consisting of the DPR and DPD, is directly elected by the people, parliamentary representatives who are persons with disabilities are almost non-existent, despite their significant numbers.
Where are the voices of persons with disabilities? Before delving into that, it's important to understand why representation for any group in parliament is necessary, including for persons with disabilities. Two crucial functions of parliament as a legislative body are its ability to create regulations or laws and to oversee the executive as the implementer of these regulations.
Laws are the highest regulations that can be made by parliament after the constitution or the 1945 Constitution. These regulations serve as an umbrella or reference for all implementing regulations, from Government Regulations, Regional Regulations, Ministerial Regulations, Head of Region Regulations, and so on. It is based on these regulations that central and regional governments operate, because, in essence, state policies are founded on the regulations that have been made.
For example, if you want a policy for a free screen reader application that can be used by all visually impaired people in Indonesia, there must first be a Ministerial Regulation from the responsible ministry, which refers to a Government Regulation, and a Law as its legal umbrella. Furthermore, to ensure the proper implementation of these regulations by central or regional governments, parliament has the authority to conduct oversight.
If necessary, parliament can summon policy implementers, such as ministries or regional government agencies, to monitor implementation progress. People's representatives in parliament can also provide input or convey findings of inconsistencies in policy implementation reported by the public to their representatives. Therefore, it is crucial to have representation for persons with disabilities in parliamentary seats.
Ideally, the aspirations of persons with disabilities should also be championed by persons with disabilities themselves. This does not mean that there are no non-disabled representatives who care about disability issues, but it will certainly be different if persons with disabilities themselves advocate for their community's interests. For them, disability issues will be top of mind among the many duties and issues that a people's representative must fight for.
What is the current state of representation for persons with disabilities in parliament? The last time there was representation for persons with disabilities was in the faction of group delegates in the MPR during the 1999-2004 period, whose members were appointed by the government to represent minority groups in society. Representatives in the Group Delegates faction were not chosen based on the number of votes received, but were directly appointed by the government.
In the era of direct elections since 2004, almost no disabled legislative candidates have obtained enough votes to enter Senayan (the parliament building). In fact, the open proportional system for electing legislative members can have both positive and negative effects for disabled legislative candidates. Starting in 2009, on the ballot papers for DPR and DPRD candidates, voters could directly choose the candidate's name, not just the party symbol.
This means that the candidate's number sequence does not affect their chances of getting a seat in parliament. This differs from a closed system where votes are distributed by the party to candidates in an order determined by the party. So, if there is a disabled representative in the list of candidates for that party, their name can be directly chosen without being given to other candidates.
However, with the condition of low political education and the dispersed domicile of persons with disabilities, this open proportional system is not very advantageous for disabled representatives. Furthermore, it becomes even more challenging, given Indonesia's not yet fully inclusive conditions, for disabled legislative candidates to compete with non-disabled candidates in terms of popularity and capital.
Therefore, affirmative actions or efforts are needed to bring about the representation of persons with disabilities in our direct democratic system. The author proposes two affirmative actions. First is the establishment of a minimum 10 percent quota for candidates submitted by each party to be included in legislative elections. This mirrors the existing gender mainstreaming policy, which mandates a minimum of 20 percent female candidates for each party.
Certainly, a similar approach can be applied to disability issues, as disability mainstreaming is also developing. Second is the creation of special electoral districts or similar policies that allow disabled candidates to compete only with other disabled candidates for votes. This is to ensure that there will be representation for persons with disabilities at all levels of legislative bodies, regardless of which candidate is elected.
This proposal might seem extreme, but it is quite worth fighting for by persons with disabilities and sympathetic parties, so that there are tactical steps to ensure the accommodation of the aspirations of persons with disabilities. In conclusion, the representation of persons with disabilities is a necessity because, with such a large number, it feels unfair if there is no representation in the legislature.
Therefore, political education for persons with disabilities is needed so that they are aware of their political rights not only to vote but also to be elected. Of course, a long struggle is required to achieve this. Hence, synergy and alignment of vision are absolutely necessary for the aspiration of parliamentary seats for persons with disabilities to be realized.
(DPM)