The MPR and DPR: Scenes of
\nturbulence and contention<\/p>\n
Meidyatama Suryodiningrat
\nJakarta<\/p>\n
Evaluating the state of parliamentary democracy, one of the
\ncountry's founding fathers, M. Hatta, conceded that \"democracy
\nneeds practice ... there must be some for a nation not
\naccomplished in this exercise at the national level\".<\/p>\n
His remarks are as relevant today as they were in 1956. And
\nwhat a practice session it has been for members of the 1999-2004
\nPeople's Consultative Assembly (MPR) and the House of
\nRepresentatives (DPR) who are ending their five-year terms. Our
\nrepresentative assembly has been both a source of pride and
\nembarrassment. They united in the face of executive might to oust
\na reckless president, later engaged in fisticuffs against each
\nother on an issue that no one can now recall; they showed wisdom
\nand a spirit of conciliation in the colossal task of amending a
\nconstitution; a sacred text, but had no qualms in -- allegedly --
\naccepting hard cash to pass pieces of legislation.<\/p>\n
The chaotic-like nature of representative democracies is as
\nsymptomatic as cancer is to smoking.<\/p>\n
Some 250 years ago American James Madison wrote that
\ndemocracies have always been spectacles of turbulence and
\ncontention. Madison's prophetic discourse on the peril of an
\nassembly undermining democratic values, aptly portrays the plight
\nof Indonesia's own institution. His forewarning of \"no cure for
\nthe mischief of factions\" ring true.<\/p>\n
The 2001 presidential change was the apex of the Assembly's
\npreponderance garnered through the reform era. A power which has
\ntilted the delicate system of checks and balances with
\nlegislators becoming a lethal constraint on government, but
\nitself unparalleled by any other institution.<\/p>\n
President Megawati Soekarnoputri must have been reminded of
\nthe irony of the MPR and DPR's power when she received their
\noverwhelming support in October 2001, although just 18 months
\nearlier many had successfully conspired to sabotage her
\npresidential bid.<\/p>\n
Only time will tell how the outgoing Assembly and House will
\nbe judged. Apart from amending the Constitution and ousting a
\npresident, the House also passed about 160 laws.<\/p>\n
Too \"polite\" to impose stronger internal rules and regulations
\non themselves, the outgoing Assembly -- 70 percent of whom will
\nnot retain their seats -- have just enacted a more stringent Code
\nof Ethics for their successors.<\/p>\n
These new codes not only promise stronger punishments but an
\nMPR Ethics Council that can effectively impose sanctions, such as
\nthe public exposure of a notice. Removal from office, however, is
\nnot a sanction that can be applied by this ethics council. A
\nmember can only be removed from office by the either the House or
\nthe Regional Representatives Council (DPD).<\/p>\n
At the very least it will provide a basis for supervising
\nlegislators' behavior and cut down on absenteeism during
\nhearings.<\/p>\n
Delays and cancellations of hearings have become acute
\nproblems in recent years as attendance has often failed to meet
\nthe 50 percent quorum. The average 52 percent attendance rate
\npales to the previous House's 1997-1999 record of 70 percent.<\/p>\n
What can we say when people, who earn an average minimum
\nmonthly income of Rp 15 million -- about twice as high as
\nIndonesia's average annual per capita income, fail to even show
\nup to work.<\/p>\n
False notions of entitlement make legislators neglect their
\nmissions in the legislative chambers -- to serve the public
\ninterest.<\/p>\n
Often their oversight breeds politics at its worst, or \"war by
\nother means\", with parties sabotaging each other or making
\nbackroom deals for personal political or economic benefit.<\/p>\n
Take the National Police bill. It was controversial from the
\nstart as it placed the maintenance of security and order as the
\npredominant police duty ahead of serving and protecting the public.<\/p>\n
Legislators recognized the concerns and seemed to heed the
\ncriticisms when the House delayed the bill and formed a team to
\nfurther review it. But weeks later it was quietly passed
\nuntouched. The delay turned out to be merely a ruse.<\/p>\n
Thus, despite the new Code of Ethics and Standing Orders,
\nultimately the performance of the House will depend on the
\nsincerity of those who work there.<\/p>\n
What of the new -- 120 DPD and 550 House -- members?<\/p>\n
Many say there is hope given that an overwhelming majority are
\nnew members. However being new does not guarantee integrity, it
\njust means that the person has had not had a chance to be
\ncorrupted yet.<\/p>\n
The House in particular could be even more fractious with no
\nparty occupying more than 23 percent of the seats. We shall also
\nhave to wait and see how effective the Nationhood Coalition will
\nbe. Spurred on by Golkar and the Indonesian Democratic Party of
\nStruggle (PDI-P), the coalition boasts a total 323 seats. On
\npaper it has the makings of a tyranny by assembly.<\/p>\n
As Hatta in his observation in 1956 noted, \"party politics is
\nanomalous, because real power does not reside with the
\nresponsible authority but with the party board who has no
\nresponsibility (to the people)\".<\/p>\n
Our elected representatives, self-admittedly, are not agents
\nof the voting masses. They are tokens for the party which ushered
\nthem in. Despite the introduction of a limited open-list system
\nin the April 5 general election, only one legislator was elected
\nby a direct vote. The remainder won seats based on their ranking
\nin the party lists.<\/p>\n
Thus rather than the people's interest, the rationale of their
\nexploits seem closer to Karl Marx's notion of \"false
\nconsciousness\" -- the people's desires are false as they don't
\nknow what they want and only these distinguished members of the
\nassembly do.<\/p>\n
The progeny of our second democratic general election may
\ncontinue to erode our faith, but Indonesians must retain hope in
\nthe process for the ills of an \"assembly\" is not ours alone. It
\nhas been persistent through history.<\/p>\n
Just as Plato over a thousand years ago remained faithful in
\nthe belief that the trouble with democracy was not due to the
\nabsence of the rule of law, but that the wrong people were
\nrunning it -- those who have little virtues.<\/p>\n
We may also take heart, as Mark Twain in typical satire wrote:
\n\"Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of
\nCongress, but I repeat myself!\"<\/p>\n
The author is a staff writer for The Jakarta Post.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/the-mpr-and-dpr-scenes-of-1447899208", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }