An alternative idea for change
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.