Clobber threat should not be taken seriously
President Soeharto's recent statement to "clobber" anyone attempting to unseat him unconstitutionally has received widespread comments. Scholar Yusril Ihza Mahendra shares his view with The Jakarta Post.
Question: How do you interpret the president's statement?
Answer: What the president said is actually a description of the mechanism in our constitution. A president is elected by the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) to carry out the outlines of state policies (GBHN) and other constitutions under the supervision of the House of Representatives. So, if the House find that the president fails to toe the line according to the constitution, they have the right to remind and even question him in a special hearing.
In other words, Pak Harto was trying to say that he didn't want to keep his present position. Therefore, if people no longer want him, he will step down. But, he'll do that only if it is done constitutionally.
Q: He used the word "clobber" in his statement. What he meant by this?
A: We shouldn't worry about the term he used. We must see that he said it in front of an audience in a relaxed atmosphere and the President did say it jokingly. The word "clobber" was not meant to convey harsh action as the word suggests. What he meant by his statement is that if someone wants to unseat the president unconstitutionally, the state will take legal action against them.
Q: Was Pak Harto's statement hinting that the MPR would not nominate him again in the upcoming election?
A: Pak Harto was trying to warn those who attempt to unseat him before he finishes his presidential term (1998). After his term, it will be up to the MPR to decide whether to nominate him as a presidential candidate or not.
It is true that outside the MPR there are groups, like Sri Bintang Pamungkas' Indonesian Union Democratic Party (PUDI) or Princen's human rights organization, which have asked the House to hold a special hearing to ask for the president's responsibility in running the government. I myself received copies of the letters they wrote, but it's up to the House whether to fulfill such a request or not.
Q: Who, do you think, was on the President's mind when he made the statement? Could it have been Sri Bintang Pamungkas?"
A: From what I see either from PUDI's or Princen's, human rights organization's requests are constitutional. Everyone has the right to say whether something is or is not against the law. It's also constitutional for the House to hold such a hearing if they find a president does something serious against the law.
So far, I don't see any indication either from factions of the House including those from the dominant ruling party Golkar to do so. So I don't know for sure what was on the president's mind when he said that.
Q: Is there any sign that Pak Harto still wants the position for the next election?
A: I don't want to stretch my interpretation too far on that particular issue. What I see is that he doesn't seem to be clinging tightly to his position. If people want him to step down, he will do it. His principle is tidak neko neko (take it easy) and tidak ngotot (don't strive too hard) to be reelected as president. But up to the present time, all factions in the House do not seem to have any other candidate other than Pak Harto.
Q: Every time Pak Harto makes an important political statement, people always think there must be something behind it. What do you think of this?
A: Pak Harto's statement last week is not the first one of that nature. I think it was meant to remind everyone that in running a government there are certain constitutional rules to be obeyed. So, don't bother doing things unconstitutionally. I think it's an important statement because a presidential election has to be conducted properly and constitutionally so that it won't create disturbances.
A: Some people have said that the president's statement was nothing more than a warning to those who want to challenge him. Is this true?
A: The answer is "yes" if the person is trying to challenge him in the middle of his presidential term in an unconstitutional way. I think the word "clobber" was not only directed to those who want to unseat Pak Harto from the present position. It can also be directed to robbers, for example. If a police officer says he will clobber anyone who robs it doesn't mean that the officer can do anything he wants without regarding legal aspects. What he will do is "clobber" the robber legally. (swa)
Dr. Yuzril Ihza Mahendra is a lecturer of political science at the University of Indonesia.