Constitution needs changes, experts claim

Constitution needs changes, experts claim

JAKARTA (JP): Legal experts called yesterday for revisions in
the 1945 Constitution to plug loopholes allowing for abuse of
power.

Prof. Harun Alrasid said its shortcomings including contents
open to various interpretations, which could be used by the
government as the means to justify its policies.

"Reform in the 1945 Constitution is needed if we want to
uphold democracy, if we want a democratic government and if we
want to empower all high state institutions in accordance to
their function," he said in a seminar on clean governance
organized by Nasional University here yesterday.

The lecturer in the law schools of the University of Indonesia
and the Nasional University said revisions should clearly
delineate areas left vague in the 1945 Constitution, such as the
function of state institutions, the limit on presidential terms
of office and general elections.

"The new constitution should limit the presidential term of
office to only two periods at the most," Harun said.

He continued that "the constitution should also clearly
specify that all members of the People's Consultative Assembly
(MPR) and House of Representatives (DPR) should be elected".

An amended constitution should also state that "general
elections be held using a district system and that both the
Assembly and the House consistently perform its task as a social
control to the executive".

The government's steadfast stance over the years has been that
the 1945 Constitution cannot be changed or amended.

Harun challenged this view, pointing to Article 3 of the 1945
Constitution which states that the MPR has the right to pass a
constitution.

Article 37 says that any change to the Constitution requires
the approval of two-thirds of the Assembly.

"So, according the 1945 Constitution, it is quite possible for
the country to have a new constitution," he said, stressing that
constitutional reform should be aimed at complementing and
completing the 1945 Constitution and upholding democracy.

He explained that the government's refusal to budge from its
opposition to constitutional reform was based on a 1973 Assembly
decree stating that changes would not be made to the 1945
Constitution.

"We should realize that Article 3 has a higher rank than the
MPR decree," he argued.

Ineffective

Meanwhile, A. Dahlan Ranuwihardjo, dean of the School of Law
of Nasional University, said the law would continue to remain
ineffective in eradicating corruption and nepotism if democracy
was not upheld.

"Freedom of speech, openness, human rights and freedom of
association should be respected in creating a conducive climate
to uphold democracy. People should not be barred from airing
their opinion, from criticizing the government.

"Besides, students should not be barred from staging rallies
in streets and from going to the DPR and government offices with
their aspirations," he said.

Dahlan also expressed dissatisfaction with the DPR for failing
to control the government.

"During the 30 years of the New Order government, the House
has never said 'no' to wrong policies made by the government. So,
that's why it is unlikely now for the House to call a MPR special
session to ask for the government's accountability of the latest
crisis.

"What the students are demanding in their movement can be seen
as an evidence that they are taking over the DPR function," he
said, referring to the wave of student demonstrations demanding
political and economic reform. (rms)