Backroom deals may spoil amendment process
Backroom deals may spoil amendment process
Kurniawan Hari, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta
The public would not likely be satisfied with the amendments to
the 1945 Constitution, if it were done by the People's
Consultative Assembly (MPR), because it would be marred by
political compromises, according to several political pundits.
Assembly Speaker Amien Rais revealed on Thursday that a group
of senior figures wanted the process of constitutional reform to
be stopped altogether, but reformist groups in society had
demanded the drafting of a completely new constitution.
"What is being done by Assembly members is a manifestation of
the expectations of everyone. It is in the middle of the extreme
opinions," Amien claimed at the opening of a two-day review
seminar on the drafting of the next constitutional amendment.
The amendment process is being carried out by the Assembly's
ad hoc committee for amendments (PAH I).
Speculation has been rife that the legislators are trying to
make political deals among themselves in anticipation of gaining
advantages in the 2004 general election, especially as several
politicians who are not members of PAH I, have reportedly been
actively participating in the meetings.
The first meeting was hosted by old-guard politician Achmad
Tirtosudiro who is also chairman of the Supreme Advisory Council
(DPA) and the second one took place at the residence of Jusuf
Kalla, a senior Golkar figure who is also Coordinating Minister
for People's Welfare.
Amien, who hosted Wednesday's meeting promptly denied the
allegations saying: "No, we did not talk about deals for 2004."
PAH I chairman Jakob Tobing hailed the fact that other
politicians were attending the meetings, "because it would help
committee members by smoothing the way in the amendment process."
A coalition of experts and non-governmental groups have
repeatedly called for the establishment of an independent
commission, wholly separate from the legislature, to amend the
constitution. But legislators have consistently and firmly
rejected any such proposal.
During Thursday's session on the amendment, pundits
recommended that the Assembly should, at the very least, not be
given authority to change or amend anything that is concerned
with presidential elections.
In reference to a proposed change in the presidential
elections, experts said that if presidential candidates failed to
garner more than half of the total votes in a country-wide first
round election, then there must also be a country-wide second
round election instead of granting the Assembly the authority to
elect the president.
They were commenting on article 6A of the amendment draft of
the Constitution.
One alternative says that if the presidential and vice-
presidential candidates -- who will run as a two-person team --
failed to collect more than half of the votes, the Assembly would
have the authority to elect the president and vice president.
Another proposal calls for the election's second round in
another direct presidential election with only the top candidates
from the first running.
Former police chief Awaluddin Djamin said the proposal for a
two-round, direct presidential election stemmed from a distrust
of the Assembly.
"Why should there be an alternative to give the Assembly the
authority to elect the president?" he asked.
A member of the General Election Commission (KPU) Ramlan
Surbakti concurred, saying that a direct presidential election
would preserve the pluralism of the nation.
Other participants, including Hadar Gumay of the Center for
Electoral Reform (Cetro), Fadli Zon of the Institute for Policy
Studies (IPS), Tarman Azzam of the Indonesian Journalists
Association (PWI), agreed with a direct presidential election.
"If we trust the people, there is no choice but a direct
presidential election. So, there can be no election by the
Assembly," Hadar said.