Do legislators need crash course?

Do legislators need crash course?

By Cornelis Lay

YOGYAKARTA (JP): Prospective members of the House of
Representatives, elected earlier this year, are enjoying special
attention.

With the present cabinet nearing the end of its term, a
ministry for special assignments has been set up in an
unprecedented move to "empower" the new legislators.

Initially the ministry was not created to empower the house
but it evolved and its brief now includes holding an "informal
discussion" to give a "more profound understanding" of the
legislators' tasks.

At the local level, members of regional legislative assemblies
(DPRD I and II) have become involved in the same undertaking
since 1994, following the 1992 general election.

The education and training agency of the Ministry of Home
Affairs has been coordinating attempts to give House members a
thorough understanding of their role.

These activities have been carried out across the country and
the materials are substantial in nature. Regional assemblies have
evaluated these activities and the outcome was positive.

Indeed the activities, which are devoid of ceremony, are a
serious undertaking and utilize experts from respected
universities throughout the country.

A similar endeavor for members of regional assemblies is set
to begin in September but preparations began a long time. In
July, more than 60 experts from various disciplines spent two
nights in Puncak, West Java, collecting the necessary materials
and syllabus.

Hence, in terms of substance, what is happening is not new
except for the involvement of the House. As a result, the
informal discussion or crash course for members of the House does
carry some political weight. Moreover the course was opened by
the President himself and top political figures are presiding
over proceedings.

However limited the course, it will have a positive impact on
the performance of the House. The interaction between House
members and experts, in the process of acquainting themselves
with various aspects of social life, will give the legislators a
more profound and broader understanding of their task which
begins in October.

The present House has better qualifications, in terms of the
educational background and the experience of its members.
However, the political turmoil that has hit the Indonesian
Democratic Party (PDI) has resulted in the emergence of a number
of House members who, psychologically and technically, may not
have been prepared to serve as people's representatives.
Therefore, it may be theorized that significant gaps will exist
between members of the House. The informal discussion will be
able to help bridge these gaps, that is, if it is conducted in
earnest.

The crash course will be useful for House members who have an
adequate educational background and experience. Understanding
must be shared by House members in view of, among others, a
change in their function, role and the difference between the
working character of the House and the experience and education
of previous House members.

For experts and those from university circles, interaction
with the House provides not only a chance to communicate their
"dreams" but also an ample opportunity to learn. In this way, the
intellectuals may come up with more reasonable suggestions which
are in tune with the problems the House faces.

There are many other benefits which may be derived from a
crash course among House members. There is, however, one issue
which may result in the course being devoid of substantial
meaning.

The course is held with an assumption that the substance of
all problems, which have prevented our House from performing its
functions adequately, lies within the House itself. It is even
assumed that the substance of the problems rests on the shoulders
of each House member individually.

Therefore, it is also assumed that the course will be a
prescription with great efficacy and it will eliminate individual
sources of failure from the House. We are all aware, however,
that this assumption is far from reality. Facts show that most of
the problems facing the House are structural in nature and lie
outside the realm of the House itself.

Thus, we must realize that the course is part of an effort to
remove the hurdles which stand in the way of the House. This
activity will be useful to solve problems which are individual in
character and lie within the House itself. The solution to most
other problems, meanwhile, must be found in other areas which are
structural in character and lie outside the House.

In other words, efforts to empower the House will only work if
improvement in the quality of House members, as individuals, is
coupled with changes in principle, which are structural in
character, in the political area.

Without this awareness, the course will result in the
emergence of House members as individuals with higher
qualifications and expectations but in tight, structural
shackles.

In this situation, empowerment may have two possible results.
First, House members will become more apathetic, lowering the
quality of the House's performance. Second, House members will
breed covert radicalism which can easily give birth to serious
problems.

The writer is a lecturer in political science at Gadjah Mada
University, Yogyakarta.