{
    "success": true,
    "data": {
        "id": 1306187,
        "msgid": "presidents-progress-report-1447893297",
        "date": "2000-08-10 00:00:00",
        "title": "President's progress report",
        "author": null,
        "source": "JP",
        "tags": null,
        "topic": null,
        "summary": "President's progress report It is interesting to observe the opinions that members of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) have expressed about the President's progress report on Aug. 7, 2000, which was read by the cabinet secretary, particularly because to some MPR members this report is normative and qualitative and is, therefore, unsatisfactory.",
        "content": "<p>President's progress report<\/p>\n<p>It is interesting to observe the opinions that members of the<br>\nPeople's Consultative Assembly (MPR) have expressed about the<br>\nPresident's progress report on Aug. 7, 2000, which was read by<br>\nthe cabinet secretary, particularly because to some MPR members<br>\nthis report is normative and qualitative and is, therefore,<br>\nunsatisfactory. According to the honorable MPR members, a<br>\nprogress report must contain figures, or, in other words, be<br>\nquantitative so that it can be measured and compared clearly and<br>\nobjectively.<\/p>\n<p>Irrespective of whether figures are found in the attachment to<br>\nthe report, it is obvious that the President's progress report<br>\nwas made on the basis of and with reference to the broad outlines<br>\nof the state's policy. Therefore, the criteria for evaluating the<br>\nreport must be also be those based and referring to the 1999-2004<br>\noutlines of the state's policy, which is normative and<br>\nqualitative in substance. Therefore, it is not in place on the<br>\npart of the honorable members of the MPR to demand that the<br>\nPresident's progress report should neither be normative nor<br>\nqualitative. It must be borne in mind that the outlines of the<br>\nstate's policy must serve as a common yardstick.<\/p>\n<p>As a matter of fact, an evaluation of the President's progress<br>\nreport must be based on the implementation of the Annual<br>\nDevelopment Plan (Repeta) in particular and the Five-Year<br>\nNational Development Program (Propenas) in general. It must be<br>\nnoted, however, that the Propenas and the Repeta have been<br>\nstipulated by the President along with the House of<br>\nRepresentatives (DPR) (I emphasize the words \"along with\").<br>\nTherefore, if the Repeta\/Propenas are made the basis of the<br>\nevaluation, the DPR must also be held accountable for the<br>\nprogress (or setback) made by the President. Or, in other words,<br>\nin the Annual Session of the MPR, the DPR must institutionally<br>\nshare the responsibility for the acceptance or rejection of the<br>\nprogress report of the President. As mentioned earlier, the DPR<br>\nis also a party in the drawing up of the Repeta\/Propenas (with<br>\nthe President being another party) and is assigned the task of<br>\nsupervising its implementation.<\/p>\n<p>AMIR KARAMOY<\/p>\n<p>Jakarta<\/p>",
        "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/presidents-progress-report-1447893297",
        "image": ""
    },
    "sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
    "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}