AGO's report on scandals 'has no bearing on House'
AGO's report on scandals 'has no bearing on House'
JAKARTA (JP): The result of the Attorney General's Office's
investigation which cleared President Abdurrahman Wahid in the
Bulog and Brunei scandals will have no political or legal bearing
on Wednesday's House of Representatives' plenary session,
political and law experts say.
Sri Soemantri, a constitutional expert at Jayabaya University,
said that despite the attorney general's announcement on Monday
evening, the House should still go ahead with its plenary session
to appraise the embattled President's response to the second
censure.
"According to the Constitution, the memorandum has both legal
and political aspects. In terms of the two scandals, the House
censured the President on the political basis," he told The
Jakarta Post here on Tuesday.
The Attorney General's Office on Monday cleared the President
in its investigation into the two scandals.
It was the controversy over these scandals and the alleged
involvement of the President which led the House earlier this
year to issue the first memorandum of censure.
Unsatisfied with the response given by the President to its
first censure, legislators issued a second memorandum.
The House is set to convene on Wednesday to decide whether
they should call for a special session of the People's
Consultative Assembly.
Sri said the House censured the President on the political
basis because his alleged involvement was considered to have
violated the presidential oath and the 1998 Assembly decree on
clean governance.
"However, the President could be also censured if the court
finds him guilty in the scandal," he said.
Sri said further that the Constitution also guaranteed the
Assembly's right to hold a special session in which the President
could be asked for his accountability.
"The President could be impeached if the Assembly rejects the
President's accountability about his violation of the
Constitution in the two economic scandals," he said, citing that
such a process was not dependent upon a legal investigation or a
court ruling.
He said Abdurrahman was politically in a weak position because
his supporters were a minority at the Assembly.
"If the Assembly is asked to hold a special session, the
President will not automatically be impeached. During the special
session, negotiations among factions will be under way to seek a
political compromise. But, Gus Dur will be finished if he and his
supporters fail to offer a political solution that can win
support from their opponents," he said.
Sri, also a professor at Padjadjaran University in Bandung,
West Java, regretted that so far Indonesia had no law on
impeachment.
"The Constitution does not regulate the impeachment process.
We have no rulings on whether a President can be brought to
court, whether he or she should be suspended while undergoing an
investigation and being tried, or on what kind of court should be
set up," he said.
Maswadi Rauf, a political expert from the University of
Indonesia, said he was doubtful of the objectivity of the
attorney general's investigation.
Maswadi, however, said the Attorney General's Office's
investigation only increased controversy.
"It is very difficult for the attorney general to carry out a
fair and objective investigation into the scandals because the
attorney general was appointed by the President. The public will
also suspect political motives behind the investigation's
results, which were announced only two days before the House's
plenary session," he said.
Ramlan Surbakti from Airlangga University in Surabaya
concurred, saying both the House's censure against the President
and the impeachment process needed no legal proceedings.
"The House's censure against the President needs no legal
evidence because the legislative body is a political institution
and not a court," he said.
He said the President could be censured and impeached without
due legal court process. (rms)