Introduction: A Nation in Flux

The resignation of President Suharto in May 1998 marked the end of an era in Indonesia. After 32 years of authoritarian rule, the nation stood at a crossroads, grappling with economic collapse, social unrest, and deep-seated political disillusionment. Into this volatile environment stepped Bacharuddin Jusuf Habibie, Suharto’s longtime protégé and vice president. His 516-day presidency, though brief and contentious, became a critical bridge between the New Order regime and the democratic transition that followed. Habibie’s tenure was defined by rapid reforms, fierce opposition, and the monumental task of organizing Indonesia’s first free elections in over four decades. This article explores the historical significance of the Habibie interregnum and the landmark 1999 election that set Indonesia on a new course.

The Sudden Rise of B.J. Habibie

B.J. Habibie assumed the presidency on May 21, 1998, following Suharto’s resignation amid massive public protests and economic turmoil. A German-trained aeronautical engineer, Habibie had served as Minister of Research and Technology for two decades, overseeing ambitious—and often criticized—industrial projects. His close association with Suharto immediately cast doubt on his reformist credentials. Many Indonesians viewed him as a continuation of the old regime rather than an agent of change. Moreover, his lack of military background and his ethnic origins from Sulawesi weakened his political standing from the outset.

Despite these handicaps, Habibie moved swiftly to distance himself from his predecessor. On May 23, he formed a “Reform Cabinet” and outlined an agenda focused on political liberalization, economic recovery, and anti-corruption measures. He released political prisoners, eased media restrictions, and promised to honor Indonesia’s agreements with the International Monetary Fund. Symbolically, he removed Suharto’s daughter from her post as Minister of Social Affairs and took steps to dismantle the business monopolies controlled by the Suharto family. These actions signaled a break with the past, however incomplete.

Challenges and Controversies

Habibie’s presidency faced immediate and unrelenting criticism. Opponents pointed to his inexperience, his controversial economic policies—including the so-called “Habibie Economic Paradox,” which prioritized high-tech industries over basic development—and his perceived incompetence in handling separatist movements in Aceh, West Papua, and East Timor. Ethnic and religious violence flared in Maluku, Central Sulawesi, and other regions, further undermining confidence in his administration.

Most damaging was the widespread belief that Habibie remained beholden to Suharto and his allies. This perception limited his ability to rally popular support or unify the nation. By May 31, 1998, retired generals were already calling for his resignation. Throughout his tenure, Habibie struggled to shake off the shadow of the man who had appointed him.

The Reform Agenda: Laying the Groundwork for Democracy

Despite these challenges, Habibie pursued a series of reforms that would prove foundational for Indonesia’s democratic future. He lifted bans on political parties, eased press censorship, and initiated constitutional amendments—including a two-term limit for the presidency. Most significantly, he oversaw the drafting of new electoral laws that paved the way for free and fair elections.

These changes were radical in a country where political life had been tightly controlled for generations. For the first time since 1955, Indonesians could openly form political organizations, criticize the government, and envision a competitive multiparty system. Habibie’s reforms, though driven in part by necessity, created an opening for civil society and opposition groups to organize and mobilize.

The 1999 Election Law: Rules for a New Democracy

On January 28, 1999, the Habibie government enacted a new political party law that set the stage for the upcoming election. The law allowed any group of 50 citizens aged 21 or older to form a political party, provided they adhered to four key principles: no advocacy of communism, no foreign funding, no espionage, and no activities harmful to foreign relations. These provisions reflected lingering anxieties from the Suharto era, particularly regarding communist ideology and external interference.

In the months that followed, 148 parties registered to contest the election. After a vetting process, 48 were approved to participate. The election was scheduled for June 7, 1999, with campaigning to take place from May 19 to June 4.

The Electoral Framework: How the Election Worked

The 1999 election was conducted under a mixed system combining direct and indirect elements. Voters directly elected 462 members of the People’s Representative Council , which was responsible for electing the president and vice president.

Voting rights were extended to all Indonesian citizens aged 17 and older, with exceptions for those on a government blacklist. Candidates were screened for alleged involvement in the 1965 communist movement, underscoring the enduring sensitivity surrounding Indonesia’s political history.

The Political Landscape: Parties and Platforms

The 48 parties that contested the election represented a wide spectrum of ideologies, from Islamist to nationalist to secular democratic. Major contenders included:

– The Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle , led by Megawati Sukarnoputri, which positioned itself as a pro-poor, nationalist alternative.
– Golkar, the former ruling party, which sought to reinvent itself without Suharto.
– The National Awakening Party , backed by the traditionalist Muslim organization Nahdlatul Ulama.
– The United Development Party , an Islamic party with roots in the New Order era.
– The National Mandate Party , associated with modernist Muslim intellectuals.

Many smaller parties also participated, reflecting the pent-up diversity of Indonesian society. Campaigning was lively and largely peaceful, with parties utilizing rallies, media, and grassroots outreach to connect with voters.

Election Day and Results

On June 7, 1999, approximately 93% of registered voters—some 112 million people—cast their ballots in what was widely hailed as a free and fair process. PDI-P emerged as the largest party, winning 154 seats, followed by Golkar with 120 seats. The results reflected a public desire for change, though no party secured a majority. The stage was set for complex coalition-building ahead of the presidential vote in the MPR.

Aftermath: The Presidency and Habibie’s Exit

The election results did not immediately resolve Indonesia’s political uncertainty. In October 1999, the MPR elected Abdurrahman Wahid as president and Megawati Sukarnoputri as vice president—a compromise that reflected the fragmented nature of the new parliament. Habibie, having withdrawn his candidacy amid criticism of his handling of East Timor’s independence referendum, left office after just 516 days.

His departure marked the end of Indonesia’s transitional government—and the beginning of its democratic experiment.

Cultural and Social Impacts

The Habibie presidency and the 1999 election had profound cultural and social repercussions. The loosening of media restrictions unleashed a wave of investigative journalism, political satire, and public discourse. For the first time in decades, Indonesians could openly debate issues of governance, corruption, and identity.

The election also catalyzed a resurgence of civil society. Non-governmental organizations, student groups, and religious associations played an active role in monitoring the election and advocating for reform. The participation of diverse ethnic and religious groups in the political process helped to mitigate—though not eliminate—regional tensions.

Legacy and Modern Relevance

B.J. Habibie’s legacy is complex and contested. To some, he was an ineffective leader who failed to address Indonesia’s most pressing problems. To others, he was a visionary who set in motion the reforms that transformed Indonesia into the world’s third-largest democracy.

The 1999 election remains a landmark in Indonesian history. It demonstrated that a peaceful transition from authoritarianism was possible, even under difficult circumstances. The electoral framework established in 1999 has endured, with modifications, through subsequent elections—including the introduction of direct presidential voting in 2004.

Today, Indonesia’s democracy is vibrant and resilient, though still grappling with corruption, inequality, and religious extremism. The Habibie interregnum and the 1999 election remind us that democracy is not a single event but a continuous process—one that requires courage, compromise, and constant vigilance.