An alternative idea for change
It has been a common phenomenon in developing countries -- notably those which have been ruled by heartless tyrants -- to experience a constitutional crisis. But for Indonesia, which has had its own democratic system for 46 years, the reality is more a case of tragic irony.
It is an inarguable fact that every time a dictator seized power, they claimed to be a true champion of democracy. Sukarno introduced "Guided Democracy", and Soeharto, a less-educated, military schooled and ruthless despot, called his system "Pancasila Democracy".
The two terms are actually euphemisms for the same system: dictatorship. Soeharto claimed that he was the sole interpreter of the Constitution and, during his three decades of rule, did not hesitate in crushing any party or individual harboring aspirations to amend the "sacred document".
However, one thing is clear: by abusing the Constitution both dictators managed to extend the duration and scope of their exclusive rule, despite the document originally being intended for only temporary use.
The constitution does, however, open the door for amendments through the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR). And after acknowledging the boisterous calls for constitutional amendment emerging after Soeharto's political demise in 1998, the MPR set up an Ad Hoc Committee in charge of the constitutional amendments.
But while the Committee is still working, many people are pessimistic that it will produce a new and modern constitution because the MPR, which is supposed to have the last say, lacks the people's trust. Many people do not fully trust the lawmakers because of their lack of integrity and ubiquitous self-serving influence.
And the public are very much aware that the legislative group most supportive of the status quo is the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan), which has the largest number of representatives among the multitude of political parties that emerged during the 1999 general election.
Therefore, to draft the new constitution, this country needs a new independent body whose membership consists of provincial representatives and constitutional law experts. The sponsors of this new voice is a group of non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
President Megawati Soekarnoputri, in her recent state-of-the -nation address, also endorsed the idea to set up a special commission for that purpose. However, without going into detail about the commission, the President suggested that important values from the old 1945 Constitution, which are included in its Preamble, should be included in the new document.
Indeed, all reasonable ideas from the 1945 Constitution and the new ones put forward by the new commission -- or whatever its name is -- should be important elements of a new constitution. Furthermore, the draft should be written with such transparency that no party ever has an opportunity to abuse it.
The NGOs have pointed to Thailand, which, in its effort to heal the wounds left by repeated military dictatorships, has achieved outstanding success in this area.
The country's new constitution was drafted by people's representatives from each province, who worked together with constitutional law experts. The final product was later submitted to the parliament, which had no authority to modify it. It could only accept or reject the draft. The new Thai constitution is the product of this procedure and it has successfully fostered political stability.
Appraisal of Thailand's experience indicates that the system is worthy of being implemented here. Possible challenges would include the selection of commission members to represent all provinces, and the organization of a referendum should the MPR reject the new draft. Last but not least, an enormous challenge would be working out how to make the MPR accept this new idea.