Whose representatives?<\/p>\n
The race for the November presidential election will likely
\nintensify after the General Elections Commission finishes
\ncounting the votes this week or next. Since neither of the two
\nfront-runners has won enough votes to secure the presidency
\noutright, the focus will turn to the 65 seats for "functional
\ngroups" in the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR). What happens
\nwith these 65 representative votes could well be the decisive
\nfactor in November.<\/p>\n
Next on the KPU's main agenda will be to decide how the 65
\nseats are distributed. They are given to representatives of
\nsocietal groups, including religious councils, women's
\norganizations, professional associations and business groups. The
\nrepresentatives are chosen by their respective groups, with the
\nendorsement of the House of Representatives, and final approval
\nby the president.<\/p>\n
Their presence in the MPR is mandated by the 1945 Constitution
\nto ensure that every group in society is represented in the
\nstate's highest decision-making body. It is all fine and good
\nconcerning their involvement in drawing up the State Policy
\nGuidelines; their presence ensures the interests of their groups
\nare taken into account. But when it comes to electing the
\npresident, especially in the close race assured in November's
\nelection, there is the moral question: Who will they really
\nrepresent when they vote?<\/p>\n
The groups are already well-represented by the political
\nparties. Some, in fact, may be grossly overrepresented. The ulema
\nselected for MPR seats, for example, will join several others who
\nhave taken up political careers. Some journalists also won MPR
\nseats in last month's elections, as did many scholars, teachers,
\nartists, lawyers and entrepreneurs. Workers, with three labor
\nparties representing them in last month's elections, still failed
\nto secure any representation.<\/p>\n
As the swirling debate on the presidential election clearly
\nshows, members of the functional groups are split on the issue.
\nOne group of ulema supports the nomination of incumbent B.J.
\nHabibie, but another has expressed support for Megawati
\nSoekarnoputri. Some journalists, scholars and lawyers were
\nelected in last month's elections to represent Habibie's Golkar,
\nand others for Megawati's Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle
\n(PDI Perjuangan). There is no way of telling, or God forbid,
\nforcing the 65 functional representatives in the MPR to vote for
\none or the other candidate if their own groups are divided on
\nthis issue.<\/p>\n
The presence of the representatives in the MPR is one of the
\nanomalies of our Constitution. Its intention -- that the highest
\nstate organ in the country encompasses every group in society --
\nis noble. It may even have served its purpose when the nation was
\nin its infancy, and political parties at the time were deemed as
\nnot representing all groups in society.<\/p>\n
But, as history has shown, this noble intention was abused by
\nSoeharto, who personally selected the representatives to ensure
\nthat he was unanimously elected president six times in the past
\n32 years. With Habibie clearly trailing Megawati after last
\nmonth's elections, there is the danger that he, too, will follow
\nthe lead of his political mentor, vetting candidates for the
\nfunctional representatives to bolster his own position. After
\nall, he will have the final say in their selection. Looking at
\nlast month's election results, one can be sure that Habibie will
\nbe counting on the support of the 65 representatives to have any
\nrealistic chance of beating Megawati.<\/p>\n
Given that we have yet to amend the 1945 Constitution, the
\nnation will have to follow the prescribed election procedures,
\nincluding selecting the functional representatives. But there is
\none way in which these selected representatives could help
\npromote our fledging democracy: They should abstain when called
\non to vote in November. If they follow their conscience, this is
\nexactly what they are expected to do. A pledge to abstain made
\nbefore they are sworn in to office would help to put to rest the
\ndebate, and probably an ugly fight, over how they should vote.<\/p>\n
We already find ourselves with too many kingmaker wanna-bes
\njostling for position in the run-up to November. The minority
\npolitical factions, which include the military, are showing signs
\nthat they want to land as many concessions as possible in return
\nfor their support for the candidates.<\/p>\n
While the presence of the functional representatives in the
\nMPR is probably justifiable or at least constitutional, they
\ncannot be used to tip the balance in a democratic race. Like the
\n38 seats allocated to the military, the seats for the functional
\ngroups are not elected offices. They should not be used to foil
\nthe people's will, which has already been clearly expressed in
\nthe June elections.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/whose-representatives-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}