Analysts criticize Gus Dur's stance on interpellation

JAKARTA (JP): Political observers slammed President Abdurrahman Wahid's performance at Thursday's interpellation at the House of Representatives, saying he missed a golden opportunity to boost his public image and reconcile his political differences with the legislature.

Indonesian Institute of Sciences political analyst Ikrar Nusa Bakti said that instead of clearing things up, the President's answers only prolonged the "dispute" between himself and the House.

Ikrar asserted that Abdurrahman seemed to miss a very simple point raised by the House, which was to prove whether he was lying when he said he dismissed two economic ministers because of corruption.

Instead of answering questions about the dismissals, Abdurrahman instead launched an attack against the House and said the interpellation was unconstitutional.

"Although it is true that there are different views about the legality of the interpellation motion, it is the Supreme Court which has the right of judicial review and to compare the law with the 1945 Constitution, not the President," he remarked.

Ikrar lamented that the outcome of Thursday's proceedings would only create an "unhealthy" domestic atmosphere. He asserted that Abdurrahman should have made better use of this opportunity.

Similarly, an observer from the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, J. Kristiadi, said Abdurrahman should have used the momentum to tone down the differences of opinion between himself and the House.

"Gus Dur should have used the opportunity to win back the public's heart, and somehow apologize for his possible misconduct in dismissing the two ministers," Kristiadi said, referring to Abdurrahman by his nickname.

He said the likely outcome of Thursday's events was that the public would perceive the President's actions as a move to muffle legislators who were asserting their rights.

In Yogyakarta, Gadjah Mada University political observer Riswandha Imawan said Abdurrahman simply chose not to reply to the House's questions.

"And, as usual, he even created a new problem by questioning the House's constitutional right on the interpellation motion. It would be much easier if he said 'I'm sorry,'" Riswandha said.

Political observer Nana Sutikna of Jendral Soedirman University in Purwokerto concurred. "This is Gus Dur's habit. He seems to feel he is the only one that can do no wrong ... just like Soeharto, who never wanted to apologize for what he did."

Gadjah Mada University rector Ichlasul Amal also slammed Abdurrahman for not being honest and straightforward in revealing the reasons behind the dismissals of ministers Laksamana Sukardi and Jusuf Kalla in April.

"This is not the era of political secrecy. His political influence and popularity will drop.

"Abdurrahman's reasoning for not disclosing everything was politically weak, as there is no clear classification of what may be called a 'state secret,'" Ichlasul said.

In Bandung, constitutional law expert Bagir Manan of Padjadjaran University said Abdurrahman's move to question the constitutional validity of interpellation was irrelevant.

"A country is not only ruled by its constitution, but also its laws and regulations," Bagir said.

University of Indonesia political scientist Arbi Sanit was one of the few who saw a silver lining in the whole affair. He claimed the President's responses were strategic answers that would improve the image of the House and the President.

He said that throughout the interpellation, the rupiah strengthened and the market reacted positively. "It was the most strategic move for himself, while at the same time it did not undermine the House, did not ruin its public image and increased the value of rupiah." (25/44/45/swa/edt/jun/dja/)