'Beware of foot-dragging on Constitution amendment<\/p>\n
A more democratic 2004 election would require a new election
\nlaw, which in turn depends on the ongoing, foot-dragging
\namendment to the 1945 Constitution. The slow process is \"by
\ndesign\", says lawyer Todung Mulya Lubis, who is with the Center
\nfor Electoral Reform (CETRO). The following are excerpts from an
\ninterview with The Jakarta Post's Ati Nurbaiti:<\/p>\n
Question: Clearly there still is strong resistance toward
\namending the Constitution. Your comment?<\/p>\n
Answer: The Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI
\nPerjuangan) now even seems to want to stop the process. What PDI
\nPerjuangan is doing is basically using all means to stay in power
\nbecause it does not approve the changes necessary to strengthen
\nthe democratic system. We are now seeing how power tends to
\ncorrupt.<\/p>\n
However, there have been positive developments.<\/p>\n
The principle of direct presidential elections (which CETRO
\nand other groups advocate) has been adopted in the earlier
\namendment process; but this will not mean anything if the
\nelection law is not revised.<\/p>\n
Revision is deliberately being stalled. So the 2004 elections
\nwill remain the same if new laws are not ready.<\/p>\n
Another good thing is the amendment that the president is no
\nlonger an \"indigenous\" citizen, yet discriminatory legal
\ninstruments remain.<\/p>\n
The chapter on human rights is still not ideal, but despite
\nthe clause against the retroactive principle (regarding past
\nhuman rights violations) it is relatively better compared with
\nthe earlier one. So we have some changes that encourage
\ndemocratization.
\nWhat other amendments should take place?<\/p>\n
We want independent candidates in the legislature and local
\ncouncils, and as president and vice president. But how can local
\nparties join elections while the law says they must have
\nrepresentatives in at least two thirds of all provinces?<\/p>\n
So we're still far from (achieving an ideal constitution). We
\nare worried about attempts to stop this process by the largest
\nfactions. So our highest call is still an independent commission
\non the constitution, given so much backroom dealing.<\/p>\n
For instance, regarding direct presidential elections, this is
\nnot possible in a multiparty system, as no party would get more
\nthan 50 percent of the votes. So in the second phase it would
\nstill be the factions in the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR)
\nthat determined the president-elect.<\/p>\n
What we have therefore is the sovereignty of the MPR, not of
\nthe people. All these factions now have a joint interest to
\nmaintain the MPR, while the earlier amendment process already
\nmoved towards the end of the need for the MPR, (to be replaced
\nby) a joint session of the legislature and provincial councils.<\/p>\n
Now PDI Perjuangan is even questioning this amendment, saying
\nthis is against the founding fathers' wishes, and that it
\nthreatens the existence of the unitary state of the republic.<\/p>\n
No such thing will happen. These kinds of reactionary thoughts
\nare deliberately being raised again to bring us back to the old
\npolitical environment. In (studying) the Constitution's history I
\nhave never been convinced that the founding fathers intended the
\n1945 Constitution to be the law of the land -- including (first
\npresident) Sukarno. It was drawn up in such haste.
\nThere is now hardly time to struggle for an ideal constitution.
\nWhat can be done to at least strive for some checks and balances?<\/p>\n
A stronger government is one that is democratic ... But here,
\nas there is no opposition, civil society needs to watch this
\nprocess. We have no hope of substantial change. Both the
\nexecutive and legislative branches can still maneuver around the
\namendment regarding a limit on the presidential term (where there
\nwas none before).<\/p>\n
(There are) efforts to strengthen state institutions, while we
\nintended to swing the pendulum back toward a strong civil society
\ninstead.<\/p>\n
So all that can be done is to watch out so that the current
\nprocess is not killed off. This was evident in the statement of
\n(PDI Perjuangan secretary-general) Sutjipto, who said that the
\nparty did not want changes to the Constitution. Many in NGOs have
\nwanted to give up and ignore the process, but I've said that
\ncannot be, even if we don't agree with (the legislators).<\/p>\n
We must still call for a constitutional court, a right to
\nexist for local parties, the implementation of direct
\npresidential elections and independent candidates.
\nYou said you plan to meet MPR Speaker Amien Rais. What's your
\nobjective?<\/p>\n
Amien Rais was in the forefront of the reform movement, and
\nwas highly critical on the repressive nature of the 1945
\nConstitution. So he should be in the forefront of advocacy for an
\nindependent commission.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/beware-of-foot-dragging-on-constitution-amendment-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}