Assembly called racist over possible 'pribumi' decree

Assembly called racist over possible 'pribumi' decree

A'an Suryana and Fitri Wulandari, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) became the target of
criticism on Saturday and was accused of being racist and
discriminative for agreeing to include the word pribumi
(indigenous Indonesian or non-immigrant) in a draft decree on
economic recovery.

Opposition came from businessmen, students and legislators who
joined hands in their demand for legislators to take out the
racist and discriminative word from the draft decree.

Assembly Speaker Amien Rais said the term pribumi and non-
pribumi was outdated and must be avoided.

"The use of the word pribumi would cause controversy and
create an image that after living as a free nation for more than
half a century we still differentiate between pribumi and non-
pribumi," he said.

Chairman of the National Awakening Party (PKB) faction Yusuf
Muhammad also urged that discriminative nuances should be removed
from MPR decrees.

"We must not engage in discriminative acts against other
ethnic groups, the Chinese in particular," he said.

Yusuf maintained, however, that in the past (government)
policies were favorable to Chinese, causing suffering to the
majority of Indonesians.

Commission B in the MPR Annual Session agreed on Friday to
include the word pribumi. The inclusion of the word followed a
heated debate due to strong opposition from several commission
members.

The draft decree recommends, among other things, "Improving
the national economic structure by widening public participation
and emancipation, including gender equity, in order to boost and
develop the economic status of the underprivileged and indigenous
people."

The term non-pribumi refers to Indonesians of Chinese descent,
despite the fact that there are other non-indigenous people,
including Indians and Arabs.

Sutrisna from the Regional Representatives faction meanwhile
defended Commission B's decision.

"Seventy-five percent of our people are poor, they don't have
dignity, even our migrant workers are being sent home. Let's not
be hypocrites, we are indigenous and we are representatives of
the people, not of the business tycoons," Sutrisna said.

Other legislators also strongly demanded that the indigenous
people be given privileges in the economic sectors, to enable
them catch up with fellow Chinese-Indonesians who were already
ahead in the business sector.

Similarly, Soetardjo Soerjogoeritno of the Indonesian
Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan) said his faction
was against the use of the word pribumi.

The term could fuel antipathy and disappointment among the
ethnic Chinese, who have been living in harmony with locals for
hundreds of years and who have the same rights and duties as
other Indonesian citizens, said Soetardjo, who is also a deputy
chairman of the House of Representatives.

Another PDI Perjuangan legislator, JE Sahetapy, added that the
word pribumi was used only by Dutch colonialists.

"During the Dutch colonial times, there were many regulations
written in Dutch regarding public facilities that really hurt our
feelings, such as notices that read 'Entry to all except
indigenous and dogs'," Sahetapy said as quoted by Antara.

Opposition also came from the Student and Small Business
Coalition, who accused the MPR of being racist.

Alvin Lie Ling Piao, a member of the Reform faction,
threatened to walk out of the meeting if the plenary endorsed the
recommendation for the use of the word pribumi in the draft
decree.

"If the debate on pribumi and non-pribumi is continued, then
the MPR will regress," said Alvin, adding that the amended 1945
Constitution had eliminated the word pribumi.

He was referring to the amended version Article 6(1) on the
president and vice president, which says that presidential and
vice presidential candidates must be Indonesian citizens by
birth. The original version stated that the president and vice
president should be indigenous citizens of Indonesia.

Meanwhile, experts lambasted the decree as a throwback to the
New Order regime era, saying that such a dichotomy was the last
thing the country needed in its bid to recover from the economic
crisis.

Noted economists Pande Radja Silalahi and H.S. Dillon said
that the decree would only tear the country apart while at
present we needed to join hands to handle the crisis.

"We can't go back to the old paradigm. What we need to do is
to build the country based on social and economic justice,"
Dillon told The Jakarta Post.

Both Dillon and Pande said that should the decree be approved
it would have a negative impact on the country, not only
economically but also politically.

"People may interpret the decree according to their interests.
It will effect government policies," said Dillon.

In addition, Dillon said that it could prevent direct foreign
investment from entering the country.

"Who wants to invest in the country where the democratic
process is not functioning?" Dillon remarked.