Elected politicians make 2nd rate legislators

Kurniawan Hari, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

I swear to God: That I will fulfill my duties as a member of the House of Representatives (DPR), excellently and impartially. That I will uphold the Pancasila state ideology, 1945 Constitution and the laws of the country. That I will uphold democracy, dedicate myself to the nation and the unitary state of Indonesia. -- Oath read by members of House of Representatives before taking office.

The behavior of our elected politicians in the House of Representatives (DPR) in 2002 has been nothing short of shameless.

In terms of passing legislation, they are way off target. And in terms of discipline, they are way off base.

The politicians whom the nation elected to office in 1999 in what amounted to the most democratic election in four decades, have been locked in seemingly endless bickering, either between themselves, or with the government, over the last year.

Most of the things that they did were designed largely to serve their own personal or narrow interests. They were rarely for the good of the nation. All this came at the expense of the national legislative agenda, which they control.

Over the year, the House barely completed a fifth of the legislative enactments that have been sent to its way.

Not that they were ignorant of their own shortcomings.

House Speaker Akbar Tandjung never failed to remind his DPR colleagues at the start of every session of the need to get their act together, be it in monitoring the government, or in debating and passing legislation.

Akbar also set out ambitious goals each time a new session began, and of course, the House never made any serious effort to even get anywhere close to the targets.

When opening the year's first session, Akbar pledged that the House would finish the deliberation of 24 bills between January and March. The House only managed to endorse three.

This pattern held for the other sessions during the course of 2002. Because of the House's failure, the number of pending bills continues to mount.

The House members were never serious in discharging their legislative duty. They spent the greater part of their time politicking. Even with their schedule already tight as a result of the mountain of outstanding bills, they managed to establish additional special commissions that had nothing to do with their legislative duties.

The commissions respectively looking into the presidential instruction (Inpres) fund and probing the management of the Senayan sports complex are examples of political issues that took up much of time and resources but in the end produced very little.

Poor attendance during the commission meetings deliberating bills reflected how little the legislators cared about their duties.

There were times when the House was forced to endorse a bill even though the quorum for a plenary meeting had not been met. Instead, the bills were endorsed based upon the argument that a quorum had been fulfilled according to the attendance list, even of the members concerned were not necessarily in physical attendance.

The bill on broadcasting was passed in November after two years of heated debate. The endorsement had to be delayed once because the plenary meeting did not meet the quorum either based upon the body count or the attendance list.

With the House members' performance falling short of public expectations, they still had the audacity to ask for additional money, supposedly to help speed up the bill deliberation process.

In July, a meeting between the House leadership and President Megawati, usually an occasion for addressing major problems facing the nation, was used instead by the House to lobby for extra money.

House members already receive Rp 12.4 million in basic salary and allowances each month. On top of that, they receive Rp 300,000 for each hearing they attend, and Rp 750,000 for deliberating a bill.

"This is extortion," political analyst Andi Mallarangeng said commenting on the House's demand for more money.

Looking at their poor attendance records, few would disagree that the legislators do not deserve any extra money until they show greater discipline.

The first plenary meeting of the year on Jan. 6 virtually set the pattern for the remainder of the year. It was delayed for more than one hour as it did not meet the quorum requiring at least half of the 500-strong House to be in attendance.

Despite being aware of the problem, the House leadership showed no will to ensure greater discipline among legislators.

The House's standing orders allow for the establishment of a disciplinary committee to discipline errant members. None has been set up.

The House leadership has its own reasons for not setting up a disciplinary committee.

House Speaker Akbar Tandjung, the subject of a corruption inquiry, would be among the first to face such a committee.

Akbar was found guilty of corruption involving Rp 40 billion during his term as a member of President B.J. Habibie's cabinet in 1999. He is appealing against the verdict, and has been allowed to stay free pending a final court ruling.

Despite being a convicted felon, he has managed to keep his job as Speaker because his Golkar party still has formidable clout as the second largest faction in the House.

A motion to get Akbar removed from the speakership was initiated by Dwi Ria Latifa of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan) in September. The effort failed to generate enough support.

The House has been tainted by other reports of corruption throughout the year.

There was the allegation of money being passed to legislators from the Indonesian Bank Restructuring Agency (IBRA) to ensure their support for the sale of Bank Niaga.

But, at least, two House members showed they had consciences.

Indira Damayanti Sugondo, the whistle blower in the IBRA-Bank Niaga scam, and Sophan Sophiaan, also of the PDI Perjuangan faction, quit their House seats because they found the corruption in the House to be simply overwhelming. So much so that they decided they could not longer fight it from the inside. Needless to say, many in the House found their departure a cause of major relief.

Given that the image and reputation of the House have become so abjectly dismal, it is little wonder that the public has become even more apathetic about politics.