Constitutional crisis looms

The way things look, Indonesia is slowly but almost surely heading toward a constitutional crisis. And not unexpectedly, for a nation whose leaders are notorious for their lack of any sense of crisis, few people seem to know or seem.

The present row over the constitutional amendment process has exposed a wide gap between political parties, so much so that it is almost certain they will not reach a consensus in time for the annual meeting of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) in August. The MPR's failure to endorse the proposed amendments, in turn, will jeopardize the general election scheduled for 2004.

With the elections just two years away, the MPR has been unable to agree on many aspects of the polls, which are supposed to turn Indonesia into a more democratic country. While there is a consensus on a direct presidential election, the political parties are divided over the format of the election. And while they have agreed on a combination of the district and proportional representative systems, they differ on the exact mix.

Then there are disagreements over the future of the MPR itself, with plans to introduce a bicameral system and questions over the future of the interest group faction. All of these issues are contained in the Fourth Amendment package that is meant to be brought before the MPR for endorsement in August.

But the gulf is so wide, and may still be widening, that a consensus by August looks to be a remote possibility. The debate between the major players in the constitutional amendment process has even shifted away from the substance of the amendments to the question of whether the process itself should continue.

The debate has also shown that the political parties, in whose hands rests the fate of the 1945 Constitution, and therefore the future of this nation, are approaching the matter with an eye on the 2004 elections. They are acting more in the interest of their parties than in the interest of the nation. Even if the MPR reaches a consensus, we know it will be the result of political horse-trading among major players to keep power for themselves.

Delays in amending the Constitution's articles on elections have raised concern that the 2004 general election could be put back.

The government, wary of the prospect of a deadlock, has taken the initiative of drafting new legislation on elections and political parties even before the constitutional amendment process is completed. The bills will be submitted to the House of Representatives in May or June. It is uncertain whether the bills were drafted on the basis of the existing Constitution, or on the amended version as perceived by the government.

At the risk of being forced to redraft the bills to accommodate eventual changes to the Constitution, if and when it is amended, the government argues that it needs to prepare early. Voter registration and other election-related affairs are time- consuming and should begin as early as possible if they are to be completed in time for 2004.

Indonesia now faces three possible scenarios in 2004: the elections will not take place; the elections will be held using the old 1999 laws; the elections will take place using new laws based on the amended Constitution, which is bound to be flawed because it is the outcome of political horse-trading.

But any way you look at it, political reform, the goal of this whole exercise in amending the basic laws of the country, will not be served. Even if Indonesia survives a constitutional crisis, we know reforms will continue to move at a snail's pace at best, thanks to a bunch of self-centered politicians whose only concern is their personal power and where they will be in 2004.

Maybe if our politicians realized that they were plunging the country deeper and deeper into a constitutional crisis, they could see their way clear to establishing an independent commission to amend the Constitution.

The group currently in charge of the constitutional amendments, the MPR's Ad Hoc Committee I, whose members are drawn from the political factions in the Assembly, is wrought with vested interests, with each faction wanting to make sure that it stands the best chance of winning the 2004 elections. They, of all people, are the last people or organization we should entrust with the honorable task of amending the Constitution, and thus deciding our future.