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.