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.