A deplorable step
A deplorable step
Perhaps there are only a few Indonesians who know precisely
how many and which legislators have been removed from the House
of Representatives (DPR) by their own factions. Interest in such
matters appear to be low lately, and many people even seem to
believe that it demonstrates nothing but political maturity on
the part of factions concerned.
The habit of withdrawing outspoken members from the DPR almost
became a fashion in the 1970s, when political groupings were
rocked by internal squabbles. No less a person than Dr. Mohammad
Hatta, this country's highly respected first vice president and
one of the founding fathers of the Republic of Indonesia, called
for an end to this objectionable political habit.
That is why many people were shocked to hear of the sudden
withdrawal of Bambang Warih Koesoemo by the Golkar faction in the
House. The incident sent shock waves through the entire political
domain, since Bambang was known as an outspoken legislator who
liked to shoot from the hip.
For the many people who are wishing that the House would get
itself into better shape in order to get its messages across, a
legislator of this character is actually someone to pin their
hopes on. In the eyes of the Golkar ruling group, however, he is
a politician who has failed to observe discipline. And to make
the withdrawal look as if it were nothing but a routine matter,
the organization introduced the phrase "mid-term replacement", a
term popular so far only in the Armed Forces faction of the
House, where the military occupy allotted seats.
Golkar chairman Harmoko argued that any other organization
would have done the same thing. But reality does not seem to
support that notion. There are legislators of the same quality in
the United Development Party (PPP) and the Indonesian Democratic
Party (PDI) factions, and they have not been touched.
Bambang's withdrawal has caused strong reactions among House
members who say they deplore Golkar's step. As for the public,
many people seem to have become even more puzzled after it became
widely known that Bambang was closely connected to efforts to
uncover the huge amounts of bank debts owed by PT Kanindo. That
giant textile group is owned by Robby Tjahjadi, who in the early
1970s was jailed for his involvement in car smuggling activities,
but has since re-emerged in the business sector. Robby Tjahjadi,
by the way, is a major donor for the Golkar political grouping.
What is perhaps most deplorable in this instance is that the
withdrawal has almost gone unnoticed. The previous example of the
withdrawal of party activists was the that of two United
Development Party legislators by the party's chairman, H. Jailany
Naro, in 1984. Naro was then said to be the most trigger-happy
politician around. He was later deposed as party chairman in a
congress.
Regrettably, the habit has been revived by the dominant
faction, Golkar, which is expected to set good examples for the
development of our political system.
The question now is, why has Golkar not taken a different kind
of disciplinary action against its member? And can this nation
develop democracy properly if outspoken politicians are not
tolerated?
If the tradition comes into vogue once again, the first victim
of the trend will be the House, whose integrity has long been
called into question. Already, more and more people are now
registering their complaints with the National Human Rights
Commission rather than with the House.
From a certain point of view, however, Golkar may be right to
believe it is justified in reviving the withdrawal tradition. In
our general election system voters elect a "political
contestant", i.e. a political grouping, not an individual
representative. In the House, a legislator represents a party,
not his constituency.
Perhaps, all this is food for thought that could benefit the
future of our political system.