Bulldozer democracy at the new Assembly

By Mochtar Buchori

JAKARTA (JP): When family members and friends congratulate me on being elected a member of the new House of Representatives (DPR) and People's Consultative Assembly (MPR), I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, it is a privilege to be a member of the DPR and the MPR, but on the other hand I realize that I am not really a politician, and I will never become one. I have acquired this special position only because my party pushed me in this direction.

Was I proud? Of course, but I have never been jubilant about the appointment. My ambition has always been to be a respectable player in any venture I have decided to join. And I knew from the very beginning that in this slippery domain of politicians I would never do well.

This premonition was substantiated during the sessions that followed. Even at the rehearsal session conducted prior to the official induction things already felt very uncomfortable. The many interruptions and obstructions, most of which I found unnecessary, were very disturbing.

The purpose of this rehearsal was for the new members to familiarize themselves with the protocol to be followed during the induction. To this end staff members of the DPR/MPR Secretariat General provided lengthy explanations about the rituals to be followed.

When comments and interventions from by new members touched upon things that I considered essential for democratizing the MPR and life in the society, the interventions were enjoyable.

But I resented the interruptions when they concerned trivial things that had nothing to do with the process of making the House and the Assembly more democratic.

For instance, when the floor debated whether members of the DPR/MPR should arise when the President and the first lady enter and leave the Assembly hall the deliberations were very stimulating. I felt strongly that this was truly a new legislature which refused to be subordinated to the executive body. When a member commented that the correct way of announcing the arrival of the President and the first lady was not Mr. & Mrs. President but Mr. President & the first lady, I found the comment thoroughly refreshing.

The annoying part came when a Secretariat General staff member tried to explain the procedures to be followed should voting be tabulated by an electronic device. The entire explanation was presented verbally, without one single visual prompt, either in the form of a diagram of the electronic voting machine or a chart outlining the voting process.

This feat was apparently beyond the capacity of the members, who in addition to being not entirely technology literate, also seemed to be suffering from technology phobia. After several repetitions, it became obvious that the majority of these respected members of the House and the Assembly would not be capable of casting their votes using the brand-new electronic instruments installed on their desks.

For some unknown reason, certain members became impatient with the persistent attempts of a Secretariat General staff member to carefully repeat instructions for use of the electronic instrument. These members shouted at the poor guy to shut up, and went on to say rudely that the Secretariat General had no right to tell the respected members of the House and the Assembly how they should conduct their voting procedure. If members of the DPR/MPR decided to cast their votes in a traditional manner, then that would be the end of the story.

At that moment a female member reminded the anti-electronics group that they had no right to bar other members from wanting to know more about the electronic voting method. The debate became very heated and nasty. It was then that I felt that if this particular scene were televised it would create an appalling impression on the millions of Indonesians who happened to tune in.

In fact I had the idea that the public would be shocked to discover that their representatives at the highest institution could show such disregard for norms of respectability. Another disappointing discovery regarding the new House and Assembly came to light after the voting was completed.

Whether the voting was open or secret, it was very obvious that the main motivation behind the voting was not to create a new Assembly that is more responsive to the people's aspirations than the old one.

The main motivation seemed to be to beat the other camp for apparently any reason. One friend who watched the entire procedure was so shocked by the sights that he coined the term "demokrasi kroyokan" (democracy brawl). Professor Sahetapy of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan) called it a "democrazy system". I myself am inclined to call it "bulldozer democracy".

Among members of this new DPR/MPR I know of many people who abhor this practice. On the other hand, there are many who appeared to be content with this practice. What worried a great number of people, including myself, was that this practice could lead to the notion that democracy is simply a matter of numbers. Whatever principles you stand for, if you fail to obtain the biggest number you just lose and have to sacrifice the principles you are trying to uphold.

The winner will always be the side that by hook or by crook manages to garner the greatest number of votes.

Suddenly I was thinking of the rumor that has been going around for some time, i.e. the "money politics" rumor. This rumor hints that money has played a substantial role both in the election of certain people to this respectable institution, and in deciding which way certain members will vote on any particular issue.

It has been rumored that a sum of Rp 300 billion has been circulated to influence MPR members.

Is there any truth to this rumor or is it merely one that has been purposely circulated to discredit certain people or groups of people? I don't know. I myself have never been asked by anyone to vote one way or another in return for money. No one has ever offered me Rp 1 million, let alone Rp 1 billion, and asked me to change my political attitude.

But should this rumor be true, then we must begin to think how we are going to account for this situation to our electorate, to those people who put their trust in us and who expect us to represent their interests. The figure of Rp 300 billion is a substantial sum of money, but the future of this nation is worth much, much more than any .

At this juncture, a feeling of guilt crept into my heart. I felt guilty that I did not try hard enough to protect the future of the people in my constituency. I felt unworthy of a seat in this supposedly respectable institution.

Window: Whether the voting was open or secret, it was very obvious that the main motivation behind the voting was not to create a new Assembly that is more responsive to the people's aspirations than the old one.