Commission proposals unfavorable to public role

Tertiani ZB Simanjuntak, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The nation has yet to arrive at a consensus on the ideal form and role of a constitutional commission, with none of the proposals that have been submitted to the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) giving a significant place for public participation.

With the MPR set to endorse the establishment of the commission, the key issue of a public role in the commission remains unsolved and it seems the desire for a people's constitution will remain unfulfilled.

Surprisingly, various public proposals on the commission are not favorable to the reform process that is striving for greater public participation. On the contrary, most proposals tend to give legislators a more dominating role as the people's representatives.

The latest support for the establishment of the commission has come from the country's largest Muslim organizations, Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) and Muhammadiyah. However, neither has given a clear picture on the public's role in the constitution-making body.

"The commission should deal with crucial matters in the amendment process. We'll talk about its form later," NU chairman Hasyim Muzadi told a media conference on Wednesday.

Muhammadiyah chairman Sjafi'i Maarif said it would be unwise not to involve the MPR in the commission.

Proponents for the inclusion of legislators in the commission argue that the presence of MPR members in the commission would ensure the continuity of the amendment process.

Sjafi'i dismissed the possibility of a new constitution, saying: "We're all agreed not to change the preamble to the 1945 Constitution ... and don't bring up the subject now, because there are still bitter debates on whether the change (to the preamble), for example, would mean the country is no longer a free Indonesia."

Earlier on Tuesday, the alumni association of Gadjah Mada University (Kagama) urged the MPR to insert a clause on the commission in the draft amendment of Article 37 of the Constitution to provide a strong legal basis for the commission.

"The amended article will also provide a binding force for the government and the House of Representatives to form the commission," Kagama chairman Ichlasul Amal, who is political observer, said.

Ichlasul argued that an MPR decree to establish the commission did not have a strong legal basis because it could be revoked any time at any given Annual Session.

"Moreover, according to Article 20 of the first amendment, the House of Representatives (DPR) has replaced the MPR as the supreme lawmaking body," he explained.

Chapters VII and VIIA of the second amendment state that the MPR is no longer the supreme lawmaking body. The third amendment, however, says that the MPR has the sole authority to form a constitutional commission and the commission would be placed under its jurisdiction.

Ichlasul, a former Gadjah Mada rector, added that the amended version of Article 37 should also mention that the structure, authority, task and working mechanism of the commission would be stipulated in law.

Experts and activists of the Coalition for A New Constitution have repeatedly stated that there is no reason to doubt the commission's ability to rewrite the Constitution as has been done in other countries such as the Philippines, Thailand and South Africa.

Several candidates for commission leadership began to surface on Tuesday, including Muslim scholar Nurcholish Madjid and constitutional law experts Usep Ranuwidjaja, Jimly Asshidiqie and M. Solly Lubis.