Many Indonesians have taken to social media to express their disappointment at what they say was a lacklustre presidential debate kicking off the race to lead the island nation of 250 million people.
Indonesian netizens were tweeting with anticipation on Thursday night in the lead-up to the first debate ahead of April elections, sending hashtag #DebatePilpres2019 to the top of Twitter's world trends list.
But as the debate between President Joko Widodo and Opposition Leader Prabowo Subianto kicked off, the mood seemed to change as many criticised both men for parroting speeches rather than devising punchy rebuttals.
One social media user even compared it to a high school debate.
"This is a debate, not a memorising competition. They respond once to their opponent and they are done. High school students are even better than this and they do it in English," he posted on Twitter.
When the leaders were questioned about their plans to prevent terrorism and radicalisation, Mr Subianto responded by blaming the issues on "infiltration from overseas" and local injustice.
"I will support the deradicalisation program, I will invest heavily in pesantren [Islamic schools], teachers, and our people by improving their quality of life — they won't feel despair and hate the country," he said.
After a similar answer from the opposing side, program commentators said the discussion between two candidates "wasn't dynamic", as neither side was preparing follow-up questions to attack their opponent.
Leaders facing off in election for second time
As has become the norm in Indonesian political campaigns, the leaders wore outfits matching those of their running mates, with Mr Subianto and vice presidential candidate Sandiaga Uno arriving early to the venue in blue suits and maroon ties.
Mr Widodo and his running mate — wearing matching white shirts — arrived late due to one of Jakarta's notorious traffic jams.
President Widodo, known widely as Jokowi, is running for a second term against Mr Subianto, a former general who many accuse of a history of human rights abuses.
This is the second time the two men have faced off in an election.
In 2014, Mr Widodo narrowly beat Mr Subianto, gaining 53 per cent of the vote.
But after the election, many supporters of Mr Subianto questioned whether Mr Widodo was "Islamic enough" to lead the majority Muslim nation.
This year, Mr Widodo chose as his running mate 75-year-old Ma'ruf Amin, head of the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI), Indonesia's top Muslim clerical body.
In contrast Mr Uno, the former deputy governor of Jakarta, is an avid marathon runner who is often portrayed in the local media as a millennial magnet.
Religious matters appeared to be of particular interest to social media users, with a frenzy of posts pertaining to the pre-debate prayers of both candidates.
Mr Widodo's supporters tweeted that he prayed in the mosque with Mr Amin before the debate.
Others responded saying Mr Subianto and Mr Uno also prayed together and they have asked for blessings from Islamic scholars.
Local media reported both sides rehearsed for the debate, although they denied it.
Reports also claimed they both hired communications and political campaign experts to familiarise them with the talking points that were provided in advance by Indonesia's General Elections Commission (KPU).
The focus of the questions was law, human rights, terrorism, and corruption, but experts blamed the advance questions for a lack of energy shown by the speakers.
"This is what happened if the questions are already given to the candidates," Feri Amsari, the director of Centre Studies of Constitution at Indonesia's Universitas Andalas, said.
Praise among criticism
During his introductory speech, Mr Widodo expressed his vision for Indonesia, reading what seemed to be a pre-prepared text.
Mr Prabowo's opening remarks were more confident. Speaking without notes, he explained his vision for Indonesia and also gave the floor to his running mate to speak.
But his speech was criticised for repeating the key messages on his campaign materials.
Despite the negative reviews, Mr Widodo was praised for being more courageous in his rebuttals.
Several times Mr Widodo responded to his opponent saying, "don't just accuse, give evidence, and lodge an official report".
But many Indonesians were left disappointed when both candidates failed to fully address key issues such as military involvement in combatting terrorism,the controversial ITE law, and the status of the Corruption Eradication Commission.
There has been some speculation the two candidates agreed to stay away from controversial human rights issues.
However, Usman Hamid from Amnesty International Indonesia said the efforts of the two candidates need to be appreciated.
He also said both candidates committed to respecting human rights when combatting terrorism and deradicalisation, although they did not give specific answers regarding this nor did they prioritise it during the debate.
During the final segment, the debate moderators asked the candidates to give final two-minute statements in appreciation of their opponent, but both refused the offer.
Four more rounds of debates are scheduled in the lead-up to the April election.
The second, to be held next month, will focus on energy, food, natural resources, environment, and infrastructure.
The fourth debate, scheduled in March, will cover ideology, governance, security, and international relationships.
It remains to be seen if Indonesia's relationship with Australia will be mentioned by the candidates.
Erwin Renaldi
Source:https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-18/indonesians-presidential-debate-d...
