Additional work for the new MPR

Additional work for the new MPR

Soeharto's resignation from the presidency on May 21, 1998,
has paved the way for political reform as demanded by university
students and other society members. But thus far, the reformation
process does not show significant progress. Political affairs
analyst J. Soedjati Djiwandono proposes the best way to guarantee
the continuation of reform.

JAKARTA (JP): Since the general election, leading politicians
have been preoccupied with the process of political horse-
trading, especially now that no political party has won a clear
majority of the vote. They have been focusing their attention on
what kind of coalitions are to be formed, with which political
parties, and considering what kind of deal to make as the price
of such coalitions. The central issue has been the election of
the new president. What follows seems to be taken for granted, or
at least no one seems to care that much.

The issue of reform seems to have been set aside. At any rate,
the future of reform seems uncertain. Nor is it clear -- as it
was before the elections -- which parties are for reform, and
which back the status quo. This may not be an important
consideration for forming coalitions. I think it was Thomas
Jefferson who said: "My loyalty to my party ends, where my
loyalty to my country begins." It would appear that few
Indonesian politicians are familiar with that patriotic form of
wisdom, let alone attempt to emulate it.

Whoever is elected president, the new government is likely to
be busy with the urgent problem of grappling with the economic
crisis, reactivating the national economy, and running the
day-to-day business of the government. At the same time they will
be responsible for ensuring public order, and perhaps try to
pursue the corruption case against former president Soeharto, his
children and cronies. A new government may not have time to deal
with the problems of political reform. Above all, it may not have
the necessary constitutional power to implement fundamental
reform.

Indeed, in the eyes of many in society, I believe the
formation of a new government will not be the single most
important symbol of change, it will also be the most visible
manifestation of change. It may be the simple logic of the
ordinary person in the street that the election of the incumbent
President would make the recent general election appear a useless
and wasteful exercise.

That perception is due to the fact that not only was his party
the runner-up in the elections, but also, and especially, because
he was part and parcel of Soeharto's New Order regime. That
administration's manipulation helped to make him vice president,
then soon afterwards catapulted him to succeed Soeharto as
President. For this reason, how can the people be expected to
understand, and therefore to support, further reform processes?

To be sure, the new government will be one with assured
legitimacy. Hopefully, this will restore public as well as
international confidence in the government, a factor of great
significance in its efforts to overcome the severe economic
crisis that has beset the country for too long. But this will be
understood by the politically conscious segment of the
population.

Irrespective of which party will form a new government,
probably with the help of coalition partners, reforms must go on
unhindered. And given the understanding that reform is a change
within and through the existing system -- in our case the system
based on the 1945 Constitution -- this will be the responsibility
of the new People's Consultative Assembly (MPR), the supreme
governing body in our political system.

The new MPR should not stay idle after the election of a new
president and a new vice president. Unless a special session of
the MPR is convened in the event of a political crisis, 200 of
its members -- that is, apart from the 500 members of the House
of Representatives (DPR), who are concurrently members of MPR --
will be idle for the rest of their five-year term, even given the
possibility that the new MPR will sincerely initiate reform
measures.

It does not seem realistic, however, to expect the new MPR to
complete the reform process. Therefore, this time, the MPR --
especially the 200 members, the DPR being fully occupied with its
work with the executive branch -- should be entrusted with the
task of carrying on the reform process. This is not to expect
that the MPR will be able to complete the formidable task of
reform by the end of their term of office. With all due respect,
I do not think those honorable members are up to it.

At any rate, however, they would prepare the ground for the
continuation of the reform process by the next MPR -- if we still
have one -- within the next five years. Personally, I hope that
we will no longer have this clumsy institution in our future
political system, thanks, hopefully, to a new, more democratic
Constitution.

To that end, the MPR could form a special commission and
various committees, possibly under the leadership of the standing
committee. It could enlist help and input from various circles in
society. These could include politicians, intellectuals and
academics from different disciplines.

Whatever institution will be responsible for carrying on the
reform process, we must hope that in the course of time -- I do
not know how long -- to have better educated, more skillful, and
more sophisticated politicians. The ruinous effects of decades of
dictatorial rule, under both the Old Order and the New Order,
with their own styles of indoctrination, suppression of
individual freedoms, and impoverishment, in material, mental,
moral, and intellectual terms, were extreme and would seem to
almost be beyond treatment.

We may need years and years to recover. For everybody, that is
what reform in this country is all about.