A House of shame

A House of shame

Once again, the House of Representatives went into recess on
Friday with little to show for its 10-week sitting period. But
this time, instead of the apology it owed the nation for letting
us down, the House ended the session by shamelessly demanding
more money from the government in return for its "hard work".

In the just-ended session, the House completed deliberations
on only three bills: one on improved copyright protection, one on
national science and technology, and another on the 2000 budget
calculations. When it began its session on May 13, 22 bills were
in the pipeline, most of which had been carried over from the
previous session, in which it endorsed only four bills.

This is now becoming an all too familiar pattern: the House
fails to keep up with its legislative schedule, the bills are
left pending until the next session and in the meantime new bills
arrive, all demanding the urgent attention of legislators.

The House is falling short in terms of quality as well. This
was exemplified by three bills whose endorsement was postponed at
the last minute because of protests from the public: the bills on
power, child protection and the establishment of the Riau
Archipelago Province.

Typically, House Speaker Akbar Tandjung blamed the public for
stalling their passage, but the fact that these objections came
at the eleventh hour showed the lack of transparency and the
failure of the House to fully consult with the public.

Many, if not most of the bills endorsed by the House have
never been put to thorough public debate resulting in laws that
are inapplicable. We know this from the number of laws that have
been sent back to the House for revision even though they were
only enacted in the past year or two.

Anyone still wondering why the national reform agenda has
stalled for much of the past year need only look at the
performance (or nonperformance) of the House. The reform agenda,
to a great extent, depends on the ability of the House to churn
out as much legislation as quickly as possible, to put Indonesia
on a strong footing in terms of the rule of law.

Most existing laws were designed for the purpose of shoring up
the regime of former president Soeharto. Others are simply
outdated, with some, like the Criminal Code, dating as far back
as the Dutch colonial period. These laws do not support the
process of nation-building, which requires democracy and rule of
law.

The legislative task for Indonesia is therefore daunting.

When the present (not-so-) honorable House members were
elected to office in 1999, it was with the understanding that
they would be advancing the reform agenda through their
legislative work. Now three years into their term, they have
disappointed the nation by failing to deliver what they were
elected to do. They have betrayed the trust that the people
placed in them in 1999.

This poor performance on the part of our elected politicians
is unacceptable. By delaying the deliberation of so many bills
that are urgently needed to move forward the reform agenda, they
are holding the nation hostage.

It is not like the legislators have not been busy these last
10 weeks. But their priorities seem to lie elsewhere, nowhere
near their legislative tasks. Some bills that were endorsed were
done so at a plenary session that did not even meet the quorum
because members were preoccupied with other matters.

Going by statements from legislators, the 2004 elections
appear prominently on their radar screens.

Many are content with exercising power to the point of abusing
their privileges. Witness the way they conducted fit-and-proper
tests for new ambassadors and members of the National Commission
on Human Rights. Instead of using clear-cut criteria, they turned
these fit-and-proper tests into a political game.

And the House members have become adept at cutting sweet deals
for themselves to the point of conspiring against the nation.
Witness the way they voted down the resolution to launch an
investigation of Speaker Akbar for his alleged role in the Bulog
scandal, even when public opinion clearly demanded it.

The Buloggate II episode reaffirmed our suspicion that public
opinion rarely influences the conduct of House members.

But if that was not disgraceful enough, the House saved the
biggest bombshell for the last minute. Last week, during a
consultation meeting with President Megawati Soekarnoputri, the
House leadership demanded more money in order to accelerate the
deliberation of all the bills that are piling up.

Already occupying some of the highest paying jobs in the
public service, and in spite of receiving money for every time
they attend a session and participate in the deliberation of a
bill, and in spite of falling behind in their work and in spite
of their incompetence, legislators had the audacity to ask for
more money, even at a time when the nation has barely emerged
from economic crisis.

Now if that is not extortion or blackmail, the sort of things
preman (hoodlums) engage in, then we don't know what is.