Legal Literacy - Recently, the public has witnessed many universities initiating joint statements (petitions). Joint statements containing criticism and concern that are sweeping the Indonesian state. Academics consisting of lecturers and students called for disagreement and deep sadness over the behavior and political choices that have been carried out by President Joko Widodo. Disappointment came when the figure or political figure who was originally known as a mainstay political figure is now just a memory.

Academics' Petition Part of Political Orchestration Electoral?

Jokowi was showered and flooded with criticism and responses that considered him to have no ethics. Ethics are considered the main point of the points of the statement made. This condition reflects that democracy has been tried to be expressed in the willingness to think and act democratically. Democracy has taught the Indonesian people to live appropriately in realizing their politics. So, is every argument or statement made by academics part of a political orchestration electoral with a specific purpose?

Campus agendas that can be fairly assessed as independent and responsible cannot necessarily be considered part of political intrigue. Every statement that is managed and formulated in the joint statement has been sufficiently believed to be based on tested expertise or scientific explanations. But is that sufficient belief also sufficient to be understood as a rooting of democracy that is trying to be revived so that it can grow and continue to develop?

The many initiatives that have emerged must of course be appreciated and respected. Every inch of statement or argument revealed in the petition is ammunition for the public to be made aware of but not to be argued over. The main problem limit of the 2024 election implementation process is not limited to Jokowi. The aggregate of community interests from all over the country is the main capital to continue to fight for. Petitions should not only reprimand Jokowi, more than that, invite every member of society to continue to oversee and maintain the dignity of democracy towards its adulthood.

The democracy that developed during the reformation should not target tendentious criticism dominated by certain figures. The question is whether the political situation in Indonesia is only about certain figures or figures? What about the ideas of these figures, including the commitment of these figures? The public must not only see the surface that appears, the public must also be invited to realize and accept the consequences of the various appearances that have not yet appeared.

Division in the Five-Year Politics Should Not Happen

Leading up to the D-day of this five-year political contestation, division should not occur. Each candidate has conveyed their vision, mission, ideas, and various actions that have been attempted in each of the five debate sessions that have been held. The debate should be used as one of the indicators that helps and directs the public towards national goals. Debate is the main element to see the capacity and capability of candidates. Political sentiments towards certain figures should no longer occur. The public must condition a condition of peace and constructive understanding towards improving the nation and state for the better.

The role of every member of society as Indonesian citizens, including academics, should not only be encouraged to feel disappointment or sadness. They must understand how democracy can be accepted and appreciated as educational institutions become filters towards a better and enlightened society. Living together in society and public exchange requires the involvement of educated citizens. Citizens do need to provide input in political communication and interaction before making decisions based on consideration of discursive, perspective and reflective arguments. Citizen involvement can also be expressed as preferences and shared values that deliberation models want to support. Petitions submitted by each campus should be based on arguments that are weighed and reviewed transparently. This petition can be a consensual step based on the best argument by prioritizing the primacy of truth.

Quoting Habermas' view, a German philosopher who places hope in consensus based on the strength of sound discourse that can only be achieved through the exchange of objective and valid arguments and prospects. The explanations and explanations that each campus wants to highlight must be considered a common occurrence of academic freedom to voice the main principles of democracy.

Each campus is indeed trying to remind political parties and actors in the political contestation to represent critical and rational voters in analyzing each program and vision and mission conveyed. Every academic community that has worn intellectual clothes only does not cause certain primordial sentiments and certain interest calculations. Rationality must be above emotion and of course must be realistic and compatible as well as efficient and effective.

The actions of academics should not be accused of being oriented towards the stigma of innuendo or dealing with certain political interests. The phenomenon of voicing the academic podium that is petitioned must be a positive virus to strengthen the motivation of political awareness and critical awareness. The collective petition that has been sounded by the academic community must be a progressive step from civil society. This step has invited all elements to continue to improve, and politics in Indonesia must be directed at political discussions that are not just about transparency and certain moralities. The choices available after this phenomenon occurs are whether you want to be a fanatic voter or a rational voter, or a militant supporter or a critical supporter?