Has Amien Rais overstepped government bounds?<\/p>\n
The resignation of Amien Rais from the chairmanship of the
\nCouncil of Experts of the influential Association of Indonesian
\nMoslem Intellectuals (ICMI), has caused an uproar partly due to
\nthe controversy leading to his resignation. The Jakarta Post
\ntalked to political observer Muhammad A.S. Hikam about the issue.<\/p>\n
Question: How do you see the problem?<\/p>\n
Answer: The case simply shows that the power that be is
\noverwhelmingly strong in our \"democracy\" especially when it has
\nto face an intellectual like Amien Rais. Once he criticized
\ngovernment policies, especially when it involved certain elite
\nofficials and although he was an ICMI leader -- an organization
\nwhich has a close link to the government -- he was nevertheless
\nforced to relinquish his position.<\/p>\n
It was done as a kind of warning to others, outside or inside
\nICMI, not to be too critical of the government.<\/p>\n
Q: When Amien Rais resigned he made an ambiguous statement about
\nhis case. Why was that?<\/p>\n
A: On one hand, he had to make a formal answer. On the other
\nhand, as an honest person, he couldn't help himself from
\nrevealing the truth. That's why on a formal occasion he said that
\nhe resigned because of a heavy workload in his capacity as the
\nleader of Muhammadiyah (one of the largest Moslem organizations
\nin Indonesia). But on another occasion he told journalists that
\nhe was forced to resign because of his critical remarks about
\nsocial disparity, the practice of monopoly, collusion and others.
\nAnd the real cause of all this was actually his critical
\nattitude.<\/p>\n
Q: Didn't he realize that his conversation with journalists would
\ngo into print?<\/p>\n
A: That's right. That's always been a problem for a person like
\nAmien who is not a politician. He will never be able to hide
\nsomething too long behind formalities. He will always say
\neverything as it is. Everyone realizes that. Again, the real
\nproblem of his case was indeed his critical attitude.<\/p>\n
Q: Are you trying to say that he was forced to step down because
\nof his critical remarks?<\/p>\n
A: It's obvious. Amien's statements clearly show that.<\/p>\n
Q: What effect will Amien's case have on the Muhammadiyah?<\/p>\n
A: It's not clear at the moment. There are signs that some elite
\nleaders in the organization, like Lukman Harun, are trying to
\nexploit the case as an opportunity to topple Amien or at least
\nmake him less favorable among the Muhammadiyah community.<\/p>\n
Q: Do you think it's possible for Amien to be toppled in such a
\nway?<\/p>\n
A: There is of course always a possibility. The question is how
\nbig is the possibility. In this case, as long as the Muhammadiyah
\nelite leaders have a common stance on the case, Amien's position
\nas a top leader in the organization will not be in peril.
\nSecondly, as long as there is no intervention from the
\ngovernment, Muhammadiyah elite leaders will continue to support
\nAmien.<\/p>\n
With the government's support and blessing, Muhammadiyah
\nleaders like Lukman Harun or Sutrisno Mutham will probably be
\nable to create trouble for Amien. It's unfortunate that unlike
\nNahdlatul Ulama (another prominent Moslem organization),
\nMuhammadiyah has never experienced any external pressure.<\/p>\n
Q: What signs did you see to say that Harun is trying to
\ndestabilize Amien's leadership?<\/p>\n
A: A media report said, for example, that Harun is licking old
\nsores when he touched on Amien's critical remarks about
\nsuccession. He also said that Amien has brought politics into
\nMuhammadiyah which is supposed to be an educational and religious
\norganization. Harun always emphasizes that Muhammadiyah is not a
\npolitical organization or an NGO. In other words, he seems to be
\nwanting to paint a bad image about Amien's leadership of
\nMuhammadiyah.<\/p>\n
Amien himself earlier warned Lukman Harun to avoid
\nexaggerating things in Muhammadiyah for it could endanger Harun's
\nown position in the organization. I have noticed that
\nMuhammadiyah's support for Amien is still very strong.<\/p>\n
Q: Some say that Amien did make a political maneuver at the elite
\nlevel. What do you think?<\/p>\n
A: It seems to me that Amien mistakenly thought that
\nas an intellectual his critics would be well received by the
\ngovernment and that his criticism would improve things. He seems
\nto have miscalculated the government's reaction. Such open,
\nstraightforward and sharp criticism is considered illegitimate by
\nthe government. The government's reaction would be totally
\ndifferent had the criticism been aired by, for example, Gus Dur
\n(chairman of Nahdlatul Ulama).<\/p>\n
Q: What makes it different?<\/p>\n
A: It is the way the remarks are expressed. Gus Dur usually says
\nit indirectly and sometimes jokingly. But the main difference is
\nthe position of the two figures. Unlike Amien, Gus Dur is
\nconsidered outside the government circle. So, if Amien wants to
\nmake critical remarks he is supposed to do it differently. That's
\nwhy Amien should be pushed aside for doing so.<\/p>\n
Q: But Amien argued that he was simply practicing the Moslem
\ncreed amar ma'ruf nahi munkar (promoting good deeds and
\npreventing bad deeds). Has he practiced it the wrong way?<\/p>\n
A: The term amar ma'ruf nahi munkar has a very wide meaning.
\nThere are also various strategies and approaches. What Amien did
\nwas not incompatible to the supposed strategy. What he should
\nhave done is lobby government officials and promote his ideas
\nfrom inside the system. He was not supposed to criticize the
\ngovernment publicly. Indonesia, however, is a closed government.
\nIt can't be criticized openly. Amien might have forgotten this or
\nhe was simply trying to make it better.<\/p>\n
Q: Some said that Amien was naive when he made critical remarks
\non the Busang goldmine projects. What do you think of this?<\/p>\n
A: It was a shallow remark. What Amien criticized was not the
\ntechnical aspect of the project but the very idea underlining the
\nsovereignty of the state in managing it. According to him, the
\nway the government handles the Busang exploration is against
\nArticle 33 of the 1945 Constitution (which says that natural
\nresources are to be exploited for the maximum benefit of all the
\npeople). Amien is not naive for having such a thought. It is
\nindeed the core of the problem. Thus, Amien's remark is a very
\nbasic one. (swa)<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/has-amien-rais-overstepped-government-bounds-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}