DPR must suspend Akbar: Riswandha

DPR must suspend Akbar: Riswandha

The Golkar Party has stated it would withdraw its support for
President Megawati Soekarnoputri should the legislature decide to
form a special committee to look into the alleged graft scandal
involving its Speaker, Akbar Tandjung -- though this statement
was then retracted. Can the government work without Golkar's
support? The Jakarta Post talked to lecturer in politics
Riswandha Imawan of the Gadjah Mada University in Yogyakarta, who
spoke to reporter Sri Wahyuni.

Question: Golkar retracted an earlier "threat" to withdraw its
support for the President, despite the pact on a political
moratorium to let Megawati work undisturbed to 2004. Does this
change in attitude show that Golkar isn't solid, that its threat
is not significant?

Answer: There has been an effort (in Golkar) to escape from a
collective responsibility by sacrificing one person: (its
chairman) Akbar Tandjung. There is politicking within the party
to oust him from Golkar.

Akbar can no longer be maintained (to lead Golkar), as what he
has said regarding the scandal has not made any sense, his
statements were quite irrational. How could he say that the funds
were spent to help people out of a food crisis but channeled it
through an organization dealing with services for bereaved
families?

If Golkar members want to save the party they could let Akbar
be processed according to the law, and there is a (recently
issued) decree of the House of Representatives (DPR) which makes
this possible -- that in the case of indications that any of its
members are involved in a (legal) case, the member should be
temporarily released (of his responsibilities).

Akbar also said he never "physically" received the fund but
then said the cheques were just put on his table. Therefore, if
Golkar Party wants to maintain its existence, it should not
maintain Akbar and should just let him go.

It is indeed the issue (to oust Akbar) that has led to the
internal conflict within Golkar members. What I smell here behind
the Buloggate II case, therefore, is a fighting for the party's
highest post among Golkar members.

So what's really behind the rejection of a special committee
of the House to look into the case?

It just tells us that the difference between Buloggate I and
Buloggate II was that the fund involved in Buloggate II was
distributed more evenly than that of Buloggate I. Just consider
this. Why are two different people (former president Abdurrahman
Wahid and Akbar) involved in the same case, treated differently?
There is only one answer: Many politicians in Jakarta enjoyed the
money (from Buloggate II). It's tragic.

How should Megawati's government deal with the case?

To show that the government upholds the law, Megawati should
command her Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI
Perjuangan) to support the establishment of the House's special
committee.

The two, almost simultaneous, cases of Tommy's arrest and
Buloggate II, if well managed, would be a plus-plus, point for
Megawati's' government. They would be good capital for the 2004
election. Otherwise, it would be just a suicide action for her.

Megawati's stern action on upholding the law is being tested
this time and people are waiting for her act.

So what about the possible withdrawal of Golkar's support?

Don't be afraid of such a threat. There are many good and
qualified cadres of the nation outside Golkar. Such a threat will
have no effect on the government. This is a presidential cabinet.
The only possible thing that could happen should Golkar withdraw
its political support is the emergence of a new opposition in the
House.

Hence there would be two opposition forces, the National
Awakening Party (PKB) and Golkar. Theoretically, this would be
even beneficial for the government, as the two parties would be
controlling each other, and their control over the government
would be weaker. The executive would have more space to work.

Besides, Megawati should also remember that her government
only has two years left. There would not be a significant
difference, with or without Golkar's cadres in her government.
There is not much to be done within the remaining years. But,
with strict action against Akbar Tandjung and Tommy Soeharto, she
would gain an extraordinary political point.

What about the possibility of a coalition between PKB and
Golkar that could disturb Megawati's government?

I don't think there is such a possibility. PKB won't easily
forget how Golkar led the effort to topple Gus Dur (Aburrahman)
from the presidency.

Back to the Buloggate II case, do you see any possibility that
the money was used by Golkar?

Of course, I can see such a possibility, especially if we
could reveal that (Buloggate suspect) Dadang Ruskandar was a
Golkar cadre. Then there would be a strong indication that Golkar
used the money. Then the Supreme Court would have the authority
to decide whether Golkar has to be dissolved.

Dissolving Golkar may be too late. Besides, it would be
difficult to dissolve such a big party, the second biggest in the
country. The Supreme Court could just punish the party and ban it
from joining the coming election.