GLOBAL RESEARCH PUBLICATION ON DEMOCRACY IN INDONESIA: A BIBLIOMETRIC REVIEW AND SCIENTIFIC VISUALIZATION

IMPUNITY RESURGENT: THE POLITICS OF MILITARY ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDONESIA, 1998–2001

Indonesia's transition to democracy has been celebrated globally, yet beneath the surface lies a complex interplay between democratic principles and the enduring influence of Pancasila, the state ideology. This paper delves into the less-explored facets of Indonesia's democracy, probing whether Pancasila still exerts significant influence in shaping the country's political landscape. The analysis begins by contextualizing Indonesia's democratic journey, tracing its evolution from the authoritarian era to the present. It then examines the foundational principles of Pancasila and their historical significance, emphasizing its role as a unifying force amidst Indonesia's diverse socio-cultural landscape. Drawing on recent political developments, the paper investigates instances where Pancasila's influence intersects with democratic ideals, as well as instances where tensions arise. It explores how Pancasila has been invoked both to promote national unity and to justify restrictions on dissent and minority rights. Furthermore, the paper assesses the implications of Pancasila's enduring influence on Indonesia's democratic governance, particularly in relation to issues of political pluralism, freedom of expression, and minority rights. It highlights the challenges of reconciling Pancasila's collectivist ethos with democratic principles of individual rights and freedoms. Through this analysis, the paper contributes to a deeper understanding of Indonesia's democracy by shedding light on its complexities and contradictions. It underscores the need for critical reflection on the role of Pancasila in shaping democratic norms and practices, urging for a nuanced approach that upholds democratic principles while honoring Indonesia's unique socio-cultural heritage.

The role of Islamic modernization as the basis of democracy in Indonesia. Against the backdrop of sensitive ethnic, linguistic, religious and geographic diversity, this country requires a wise approach to maintain unity and integrity. The author links democracy with the modernization of Islam, discusses the history of democracy in Islam, especially during the time of the Prophet Muhammad SAW, and links it to the concept of the caliphate. In the context of Indonesian democracy, research highlights restrictions on government action, tolerance, equality before the law, free elections, freedom of political parties, respect for people's rights, and respect for minority rights. This research criticizes the view that democracy only succeeds after an era of authoritarianism, while trying to raise public awareness about their role in maintaining democracy. The research discusses the risks of political Islamization in the democratic party in Indonesia. This is highlighted as a challenge to the modernization of Islam, where Islamic political parties are often misunderstood as sources of radicalism. However, research emphasizes that the modernization of Islam as a pillar of democracy must be directed at tolerance, social justice, and a positive relationship between Islamic religion and politics, without ignoring the risk of political Islamization which could damage democracy. This research concludes that Indonesia needs a democratic approach based on Islamic modernization to achieve unity, tolerance and social justice. However, it is necessary to avoid the politicization of Islam which has the potential to damage stability and democracy.

Democracy in practice ccm prevent political violence in society. Democratic instirutions such as elections can help to avoid political violence because through elections different aspirations among people and groups in society that might become sources of soscial conflict and violence can be resolved institutionally. However, the democracy in Indonesia has become paradoxical. On the one hand, elections have to be held in order to maintain political stability, on the other hand it leaves many social conflict unresolved since political violence are tikely to occur. This article discusses the relationship between democracy political violence in Indonesia. This article focuses on the relationship between the election of 1997 and political riots that erupted during campaign time of the 1997 election. Some political factors related to the 1997 election that caused the riots will also be discussed in this paper. This paper will also propose that practicing more democratic system of government may be able to help prevent political violence in Indonesia.

<p class="p1">This article explores the complexity of the relationship between democracy and feminism in both theory and practice. For a long time, feminist theorists have put forward criticism of democratic studies, which emphasize the importance of transforming political institutions and addressing the measure of the goodness of democracy that is considered to be generally accepted. As a result, the voice and interests of women are considered merely complementary and not a priority. Feminist agendas—marked by the formulation of interests aimed at challenging patriarchy in a variety of manifestations—are increasingly scarce in the work of fighting for democracy in Indonesia, especially in the participation of women’s electoral politics. While non-electoral participation is more indicative of the presence of a feminist agenda, the challenge lies in the lack of linkages with electoral politics. The achievements of democracy over the past 20 years show the lack of contribution of democracy to the struggle that the women’s movement formulated with the breath of feminism. This article highlights the increasingly eroded feminist agenda in the consolidation of democracy in Indonesia. It is time for the consolidation of democracy to borrow the logic of feminism, which rejects the public/private; personal/political dichotomy; in the electoral/non-electoral political struggle.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></p>

Introduction: In order to combat climate change and accomplish the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the UN, the article emphasizes the growing significance of sustainable leadership. It highlights the necessity for companies to include environmental, social, and economic factors into their operations. One transformative strategy that promotes long-term value, organizational flexibility, and stakeholder trust is sustainable leadership. Scholars strongly support its beneficial effects, although the literature noticeably lacks bibliometric analysis. A thorough bibliometric analysis is suggested to close this gap by examining the evolution and present emphasis of sustainable leadership research, which will direct future scholarly and applied endeavours. Objective: This study aims to perform a bibliometric analysis of scientific literature focusing on sustainable leadership. The goal is to identify prominent themes, authors, sources, and highly cited articles in this field. Additionally, it seeks to discern trends over time in the publication of articles related to sustainable leadership. Design/Methodology/Approach: Utilizing bibliometric analysis, this paper examines articles gathered from the Scopus database using various keywords “Sustainable leadership”, “Sustainability Leadership”, and “Sustainable Leaders” . A total of 87 papers were subjected to computerized search methods. Graphical visualization of the bibliographic data was achieved through VOSviewer software and Scopus data analysis functions. Results: The paper conducts detailed research on sustainable leadership using bibliometric analysis that facilitates visualizing the publication evolution within the domain and delineates present research trends and potential future directions. It uncovers diverse themes, significant journals, influential articles, and key contributors. The study reveals evolving trends, prominent countries, and prolific authors, offering insights into sustainable leadership research dynamics. Conclusion: This research yields significant outcomes, contributing to both theoretical advancements and practical benefits for researchers, leaders, and practitioners. Beyond identifying influential figures, it furnishes a valuable tool for newcomers, facilitating collaboration, source discovery, and a deeper understanding of the scholarly landscape in sustainable leadership. This study stands out as one of the few to conduct a literature review or scientific mapping on sustainable leadership. Moreover, it distinguishes itself by meticulously selecting publications that strictly adhere to the sustainability criteria outlined by Avery (2006).

This paper aims to critically reflect on the development of democracy in Indonesia through the lens of Jonathan Floyd’s Political Philosophy. The background of this paper is the attitudes and policies of political elites and oligarchs in Indonesia, particularly in the context of the 2024 General Elections, which deviate from the 1945 Indonesian Constitution and Pancasila as the guiding principles of Indonesian communal life. The author questions the political attitudes and understanding of the political elite, which tend to undermine democratic life among grassroots communities in Indonesia—such as the stipulation of the age limit for presidential and vice-presidential candidates in Article 67 of Law No. 7 of 2017 and the selective process in political party membership. The method used in this paper is qualitative research. The findings and discussion are presented in four parts. First, the author describes the history of democracy in Indonesia from the Reform Era to the present. Second, the author explains the current political situation in the context of Indonesia’s 2024 elections. Third, the author analyses Jonathan Floyd’s Political Philosophy. Fourth, the author applies Jonathan Floyd’s Political Philosophy as a critical tool to reflect on recent democratic practices in Indonesia. Through these four areas of discussion, the author offers recommendations for a political model that should be embraced in the context of post-2024 election democracy in Indonesia.

In the history of Indonesia, civil-military relations changed in the reformasi era with the separation of the military and the police, resulting in the removal of the dual-function doctrine and military reform. Despite so, two decades after reformasi has not formed a standard and ideal mechanism to govern civil-military relations within the framework of objective civilian control. This paper addresses issues regarding (a) how the dual-function concept and internal reform within the military; (b) regulatory issues that govern military operations other than war; (c) the ideal model of civil-military relations in Indonesia to ensure democratic life and an overview of the siyāsah sharʻiyyah aspects. Using descriptive qualitative method and conducting discussions with military and human rights experts, this paper demonstrates that military reform in Indonesia after the New Order has not yet been fruitful to accomplish the mission to form professional soldiers. The military is still involved in political and civilian life under the pretext that there is no military assistance law. As a consequence, the ideal model of civilian control that puts the military under the control of civilian authority according to siyāsah sharʻiyyah principle has not been fully successful and effective.

In the history of Indonesia, civil-military relations changed in the reformasi era with the separation of the military and the police, resulting in the removal of the dual-function doctrine and military reform. Despite so, two decades after reformasi has not formed a standard and ideal mechanism to govern civil-military relations within the framework of objective civilian control. This paper addresses issues regarding (a) how the dual-function concept and internal reform within the military; (b) regulatory issues that govern military operations other than war; (c) the ideal model of civil-military relations in Indonesia to ensure democratic life and an overview of the siyāsah sharʻiyyah aspects. Using descriptive qualitative method and conducting discussions with military and human rights experts, this paper demonstrates that military reform in Indonesia after the New Order has not yet been fruitful to accomplish the mission to form professional soldiers. The military is still involved in political and civilian life under the pretext that there is no military assistance law. As a consequence, the ideal model of civilian control that puts the military under the control of civilian authority according to siyāsah sharʻiyyah principle has not been fully successful and effective.

Institutionalization and party resilience in Indonesian electoral democracy

What's Wrong with Indonesia's Democratization?

Research on Yoga for stress management: Bibliometric trends from 2000 to 2024

Chapter five studies the process of successful democratization in Indonesia after 1998. During the transition and consolidation of democracy, Indonesia was rocked by religious and ethnic violence. Despite the levelling off of some kinds of conflict, threats and violence remained high against minority communities in Indonesia, particularly against the Ahmadiyah. Much of the explanation for persisting nature of the violence can be explained by: firstly, the political timidity of elected officials to stand up to religious groups pushing greater intolerance on a range of issues; and secondly, the Ahmadis’ self-identification as Muslims. The Rohingya, as well as Muslims more generally, are scapegoats and viewed as extreme ‘outsiders’ in a society now opening up to the world. The chapter concludes that democratic reforms cannot be considered complete or consolidated until minority rights, human rights more generally, are protected, and that democracy, modernity, and secularism do not necessarily coincide.

Religious Freedom, Minority Rights and the State of Democracy in Indonesia

Introduction On 5 April 2004 Indonesia held its second democratic general election in the post-Soeharto era, inaugurating what will be the first leg of a series of elections utilizing a new system, which most Indonesians hope will breathe new life and stimulate change in a political structure deemed by many to be ineffectual as the promising advent of reformasi in 1998 gave way to the troubling reality of democratic consolidation, giving rise to prophecies of doom by security analysts speculating whether the Indonesian state could survive. (1) The proposition that democracy is an unattainable goal in multi-ethnic states, particularly in linguistically divided countries, is not new. (2) Similarly, there are those who point to the hypothesized link between the level of socio-economic development and stable democracy, making the case that democracy cannot thrive in an environment characterized by widespread poverty and illiteracy. (3) Likewise, many security analysts would be hard-pressed to explain the puzzling contradiction between Indonesia's high level of political violence since 1998 and its success at sustaining a democratic political system. Indeed the Indonesian paradox is explained better using the assumption that democracy is possible in deeply divided societies if the type of democracy practiced is consociational, (4) defined by Lijphart to consist of the following characteristics: * grand coalition governments that include representatives of all major linguistic and religious groups; * cultural autonomy for these groups; * proportionality in political representation and civil service appointments; and * a minority veto with regard to vital minority rights and autonomy. (5) While the Indonesian case is by no means perfect, the practice of reformasi since the fall of the Soeharto regime has exhibited the above characteristics in varying forms through the power-sharing arrangements that constituted the Abdurrahman Wahid and Megawati governments respectively. Moreover, there has been significantly a plethora of legislation on decentralization in 2001, that have been moderating a unitary system of government that was asymmetrical in favour of Jakarta, consequently empowering local initiative at the district (kabupaten) level. Indeed in analysing the 2004 general elections and the coalition building process leading up to the presidential elections, the major premise in this article is that the consociational dimensions of post-Soeharto Indonesian politics have contributed significantly to the consolidation of democracy in Indonesia. At the apex of the political structure is a national political elite committed to reconciling differences through bargaining between themselves. Through the combination and political dominance of the four socio-political forces that constitute Indonesian politics, namely Golkar, the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (Partai Demokrasi Indonesia-Perjuangan, PDI-P), Nahdlatul Ulama and the Muhammadiyah and the inclusive nature of their politics, grand coalition cabinets with ministers belonging to all main religious, linguistic, and regional groups have become the norm and such inter-aliran (6) power-sharing arrangements coupled with prudent constructive leadership will ensure a political system that provides for widespread diffusion of power, significantly enhancing stability. (7) Election System The management of the 2004 elections proved to be a daunting prospect for the General Election Commission (KPU, Komisi Pemilihan Umum): two or even three elections will be held between 5 April and 20 September 2004. With less than a year since the passage of the election laws on 8-9 July 2003, voters, election administrators and political parties have had to grapple with immense changes relating to the new frameworks for representation coupled with new structures for election administration. (8) The election framework is governed by conditions mandated by the Indonesian Constitution amended in 2001 and supported through a plethora of laws relating to political parties, the general elections, the presidential elections and the Constitutional Court. …