Democracy and Human Rights

The term democracy is already a word that is populist and down to earth, so that its scope is broad and is used not only to refer to practical politics but to all aspects of human life, both as individuals and as groups of people. For example, Economic Democracy, Social Democracy. Initially, the term democracy is a word that comes from Latin, namely, “demos” and “cratein or cratos”; where demos means the people or residents of a place and cratein means power or sovereignty. The point is the people who rule, or the government of the people, by the people and for the people.
The history of the development of democracy starts from the days of ancient Greece (500 BC – 476 AD), then the medieval era from (476 AD – 1500 AD) and modern times (1500 AD – present) where each period has a contextual democratic formula, according to the situation. existing in their respective days. In modern times, the term democracy was formulated by Abraham Lincoln, where the concept of democracy was driven by the spread of the notion of freedom in the United States which influenced the French Revolution and was formulated as Egalite (Equality), Fraternite (Brotherhood) and Liberte (Independence). Then from the eastern world, Dr. Sun Yat Sen introduced the term Democracy with the term Min Chuan.
The development of democracy in the XIX century emphasized the field of law because of the dominant influence of individual rights. The state and government do not interfere much in the affairs of their citizens, except in relation to the public interest. A good government is a government that governs little. The country is like a night watchman. The concept of laisses faire laisses aller has the opportunity to be independent, but also the opportunity to oppress others. The new face of democracy in the XX century departs from the experience of the XIX century. State and government play a broad role. Night guards do not only serve passively but play an active role in managing life and are responsible for the welfare of the community.
As for the characteristics of universal democracy, among others: (1) the life of the society in which its citizens play a role and in government through its elected representatives; (2) a government that guarantees freedom of speech, religion, opinion, union, upholding; (3) a majority government that respects the rights of minority groups; (4) a society that gives equal treatment to all its citizens. From this, it can be seen that the focus of democratic discourse is the people. By Pabottinggi (2002), asserted that democracy as a system of government with a paradigm of otocentricity and democracy as an institution of freedom. That is, the people who are the basic criteria of democracy.
The practice of democracy in Indonesia has actually been implemented for a long time. The practice of deliberation and consensus is an integral part of democracy. Since Indonesia’s independence in 1945 until 1959, Indonesia implemented parliamentary democracy in government, then 1965, and since 1959 the fall of the old order regime was replaced by the new order implementing Pancasila democracy until now. Symptoms in parliamentary democracy are unstable government because of the strong role of political parties and hampered development. In a guided democracy the strong role of the president as the center of power and the weakening of the power of political parties. Likewise, in Pancasila democracy in the New Order era, the dominance of the executive was still strong, as if the parliament was a subordination of the executive. Improvements continue to be made in line with the change of the new order with the reform order. The Basic Law is amended, the MPR consists of DPR members and DPD members who are directly elected by the people, as well as the president directly elected by the people.
Meanwhile, CICED (1998) as a Center for Indonesian Civic Education describes democracy as a multidimensional dimension, namely (a) philosophically, democracy as ideas, norms, and principles; (b) sociologically as a social system, and (c) psychologically as an insight into individual behavior in society. Because, CICED formulates democracy as a framework for thinking about managing public affairs on the basis of the principles: from, by and for the people, accepted as ideas, norms and social systems as well as individual insights, behaviors and attitudes that are contextually realized, developed and maintained. .
The universal pillar of democracy as a state social system consists of 11 pillars (USIS: 1995). Among other things, (1) people’s sovereignty; (2) governance based on the approval of the governed; (3) majority power; (4) minority rights; (5) guarantee of human rights; (6) free and honest elections; (7) equality before the law; (8) due process of law; (9) limitation of government constitutionally; (10) social, economic, political pluralism and values ​​of tolerance, pragmatism; (11) cooperation and consensus. Meanwhile, according to Sanusi (1998; 4-12), constitutional democracy according to the UUD’45 has 10 pillars, namely (1) democracy that believes in YME; (2) democracy with intelligence; (3) democracy with the rule of law; (4) democracy with a division of powers; (5) human rights democracy; (6) democracy in an independent judiciary; (7) democracy with regional autonomy; (8) democracy with prosperity; (9) democracy with social justice.
So that what distinguishes the pillars of universal democracy with Indonesian democracy is the pillar of democracy that is devout YME. According to Elposito and Voll, the distinctive characteristics of Indonesian democracy have been declared by Maududi and Muslims as a theodemocracy, which means that Indonesian democracy has the nuances of YME Godhead, while universal democracy has secular nuances. Democracy can also be studied from 3 traditions of political thought. According to Torres, the 3 traditions of political thought, among others: (a) Classical Aristotelian Theory; (b) Medieval Theory; (3) Contemporaray Doctrine. Based on the Classical Aristotelian Theory, democracy is defined as the government of all citizens who meet the citizenship requirements. The Medieval Theory emphasizes the application of Roman Law and popular sovereignity, so that democracy is interpreted as a foundation of supreme power in the hands of the people. It is different from the Contemporary Doctrine which emphasizes the Republican concept, so democracy is here defined as a pure form of government.

More clearly, Torres views democracy from two aspects, namely as formal democracy and substantive democracy. From the aspect of formal democracy, what is seen is democracy as a government system. Then from the aspect of substantive democracy that is seen is the democratic process, which is classified into four forms of democracy. Among other things: (1) protective democracy emphasizes the power of the market economy, so that the election process is carried out regularly to promote market activities and protect it from state tyranny; (2) developmental democracy views humans as beings who can develop their abilities and powers, and place democratic participation as the main route for self-development; (3) equilibrium democracy or pluralist democracy emphasizes balancing the value of participation and the importance of apathy, because apathy among the majority of citizens becomes functional for democracy. Intensive participation is seen as inefficient for rational individuals; (4) participatory democracy emphasizes that social change and democratic participation need to be developed simultaneously because they are interdependent.
Therefore it is necessary to provide education about democracy with its means, namely citizenship education, because the ethos of democracy is not an inheritance but as a concept that must be studied and experienced or applied in everyday life. In fact, the democratic process is not only a fast-growing process in western countries where the majority of the population is Christian as has been perceived by Huntington (1991). But actually the process of democratization has hit almost all countries in the world, including Muslim countries, as stated by Esposito and Voll (1996) with a comparative study of democracy in Iran, Sudan, Pakistan, Malaysia, Algeria and Egypt. According to Esposito and Voll (1996: 11) the rise of Islam and democratization in the Muslim world takes place in a dynamic global context and the two processes complement each other. Democratization in the Muslim world emphasizes (1) only one sovereignty, namely God, (2) the caliphate as a form of community political leadership, (3) shura as a tradition of deliberation, (4) ij’ma as a form of agreement and (5) ijtihad as a form of independent interpretation . So that the democratic process cannot always be measured from the criteria of western democracy but is seen contextually according to the development of the local socio-cultural situation. (4) ij’ma as a form of agreement and (5) ijtihad as a form of independent interpretation. So that the democratic process cannot always be measured from the criteria of western democracy but is seen contextually according to the development of the local socio-cultural situation. (4) ij’ma as a form of agreement and (5) ijtihad as a form of independent interpretation. So that the democratic process cannot always be measured from the criteria of western democracy but is seen contextually according to the development of the local socio-cultural situation.
According to Deutsh and Lipset (1950s in Denny, 1999: 1-2) the factors that influence the development of democracy are the level of economic development of a country; opening the mass media of urbanization, education and the unity of the nations; as well as historical and cultural experiences of citizenship. These three factors are parameters for the development of democracy in a country, this was stated by Bahmuller (1996: 222-223). The concept of civil society in Indonesia, which is translated from the term Civil Society, is closely related to the process of democratization in connection with the expansion of functions and optimization of the active role of citizens in an intelligent and good manner to build a truly democratic society according to the context of the country. According to Hikam, the main characteristics of civil society are volunteerism, self-sufficiency, high independence towards the state, linkages to mutually agreed legal values. Qualitatively, Indonesian civil society is characterized by (a) devotion to God Almighty, (b) the guarantee of human rights, (c) the wide participation of citizens in public decision making at various levels, (d) the enforcement of the rule of law and ( e) the implementation of civic education. Democratic education can be carried out in formal, informal and non-formal education, according to the vision of democratic education, namely learning democracy, through democracy, and for democracy or clearly described as a substantive, pedagogical and socio-cultural vehicle for building ideals, values, concepts, principles. , democratic attitudes and skills for citizens through the experience of democratic life. The missions of democratic education are: (1) to facilitate citizens to gain various access and to use intelligently various sources of information; (2) facilitate citizens to carry out conceptual and operational studies carefully and responsibly towards various ideals, instrumentation and praxis of democracy to gain confidence in individual or group decision making. Political praxis is defined as the embodiment of democratic concepts, principles and values ​​that involve individuals and society with all aspects of their environment; (3) facilitate citizens to have the opportunity to participate intelligently and responsibly in the praxis of democratic life in their environment. For this reason, the basic strategy of democratic education is the use of multimedia and learning resources, interdisciplinary studies, social problem solving, social research, social action, portfolio-based learning, strong learning (meaningful, integrative, value-based, challenging and active). Dewey’s portfolio-based democratic education model is defined as a learning model that uses visual and audio displays that are systematically arranged which depicts a thought process supported by a number of relevant data, which fully describes the integrated democratic learning experience experienced by students in the classroom as a whole. In this model, there is a public hearing simulation followed by reflection activities for individuals and all students to reflect on the impact of the long journey of learning democracy for students’ personal development as citizens. As for higher education, according to Udin S.
Today, the leadership crisis is one of the causes of the decline in the development and socio-political life of the nations of the world, including Indonesia. Such a huge crisis of confidence in leaders has caused a shift in people’s perceptions of the ideal figure of the nation’s leader, for example in the United States, which once idolized a white president, is now starting to look at people of color, marked by Obama’s advancement as a presidential candidate. People are getting tired of the political dynamics that promote violence in solving problems. Likewise for the people and nation of Indonesia who are now starting to look to the presidential or cabup candidates, cagub from non-political elites who are considered vulnerable to abuse of authority and broken promises.
The fighting between students as young Indonesian intellectuals also reflects the lack of exemplary leadership figures in the family, society, nation and state. Pay attention to the news in the mass media that shows the weakness of social control even on campus, so that brawls between students often occur accompanied by acts of breaking the law and disturbing public order, for example the use of drugs from types of marijuana to crystal meth, illegal possession of sharp weapons, from home-made weapons to the manufacturer. It is ironic that this happened in a country that was once independent because of the overflowing motivation for independence in its people who was driven by the fighting spirit of the youth as a trigger for the fighting value that never gave up in making changes for the good; now littered with thoughts of divide et impera due to differences in groups and interests. Whereas if the differences in groups and interests are made mental wealth, thoughts and collaborative interests that strengthen and serve each other, life in society, as a nation and as a state will be beautiful and harmonious.

 

Leave a Comment