Elite row shows political immaturity

By Setiono

JAKARTA (JP): We all recall the close ties between Abdurrahman Wahid and reformist Amien Rais before they were elected to top positions of the country. Both expressed deep concern over the chaotic political situation at that time, and vowed to walk hand in hand to create a new Indonesia (Indonesia Baru) if the people entrusted them to lead the country.

They also extended their willingness to collaborate to solve the myriad of problems the country was facing and to promote democracy. They talked about upholding justice, enforcing the law, as well as eradicating corruption, collision and nepotism, which were rampant during the authoritarian and repressive New Order regime.

However, when their dreams came true, things seemingly did not turn out as people expected. The legacies that the New Order had left behind still flourish, injustices still prevail everywhere, and, if anything, the crisis has multiplied, leaving the common people to face uncertainty and a bleak future. The worst is that our country is facing a threat of national disintegration.

Ironically, when the nation is faced with multidimensional crises, the political elites, whom the people have put their hopes on, are busy bickering and finding fault with each other.

The Axis Force (a loose coalition between the National Mandate Party and a number of small Islamic parties), that played a key role in putting Abdurrahman Wahid (also known as Gus Dur) into the presidential post, has expressed its regret in appointing the President and has, in fact, withdrawn its support.

Upon evaluating that the President has failed in his tasks to carry out the mandate assigned by the People's Consultative Assembly and the House of Representatives, the members of the Axis Force have called on him to step down.

Gus Dur's rejection of the two nominated chief justices proposed by the legislature ignited further conflict with the House. The House accuses the President of violating the Constitution if the latter turns down the former's proposal. Furthermore, Gus Dur's refusal not to fulfill the summoning of the House's special committee on Buloggate and Bruneigate has indeed worsened the relationship between the two.

The seemingly never-ending disputes among the political elites have shown us a great deal, that in politics there are no permanent friends, there are no permanent enemies, but there is only one permanent interest.

Gus Dur's government is indeed facing many destructive challenges from his political foes, who ambitiously try to topple his regime. Gus Dur even blatantly spoke out that those in the legislature are among the ones who eagerly try to unseat him from his presidency.

Gus Dur seems to have sensed the political maneuvers planned by his political opponents. He is also probably aware of the fact that there seems to be a high-class conspiracy among the House commission to revive the practice of the old regime system.

The House's attempt to position Gus Dur in a dilemmatic situation to endorse one of the two chief justice nominees (either Muladi or Bagir Manan), both of whom are believed to be loyalist of the New Order, is clearly a maneuver to corner him.

The commission's refusal to hold another selection process for new candidates, and its threat to reject every proposal made by the President, shows political arrogance. Gus Dur's rejection of the two chief justice candidates from Golkar is naturally not unreasonable.

The temporal vacuum of the Supreme Court is deemed by many as the best option rather than being led by an unsuitable person. Learning from past and present experiences where injustice still prevails and law enforcement authorities lack the courage to take legal action, Gus Dur is on the right track when he cautiously mulls the appointment of a chief justice from nominations made by Golkar.

Numerous cases of human rights violations inherited from the New Order such as the massacre of Muslim radicals in Tanjung Priok in 1984, the bloody takeover of the PDI headquarters in 1996 and the killing of Marsinah (an East Java worker), just to mention a few, seem to have become matters of complete indifference by the law authorities.

While these cases remain unresolved and are not successfully brought to trial, other human rights violations are added. The bloody bombings on Christmas Eve that claimed many lives and the attacks of places of entertainments in Kemang, South Jakarta, indicate a lawlessness in the country.

Moreover, the Supreme Court's inability to put former president Soeharto's youngest son, Tommy Soeharto (who has been declared a fugitive), in jail has continuously made newspaper headlines. This has tarnished the image of the Supreme Court and has caused Indonesia's judiciary system to lose credibility in the eyes of the public, not to mention the world.

Interestingly, none of these cases has attracted and urged the legislature to establish another House commission to deal with these crucial matters. Instead, they are engrossed in probing the incumbent President's scandals and harshly criticizing and even condemning the President's performance. However, there are ample crucial matters that escape their attention.

If the legislature managed to establish a special commission for Buloggate or Bruneigate, then the question would be why is there no similar legal action taken to form a Bombinggate, a Soehartogate, a Tanjung Priokgate, or whatever "gate", for the considered lawless?.

At this point, it is relevant to cite George J. Aditjondro's assertion that "the allegations aimed at Gus Dur's inner circle are only political football, since those who accused the President of corruption, collusion and nepotism are themselves covering up corruption, collusion and nepotism in their own ranks." (The Jakarta Post, Jan. 10, 2001).

The persistent and never-ending disputes among the political elites reflect the immaturity in running politics. The euphoria of the country's democracy has been fallaciously misinterpreted by those who are naive and immature in practicing politics.

To them, democracy is simply seen as a method rather than a value. The term democracy has been notoriously perceived as a means of freedom in expressing one's own interests. Thus, the mass mobilization by Gus Dur supporters and opponents that was rumored to happen on Jan. 15 in Jakarta was actually the result of the naive interpretation of democracy.

In a critical period of political uncertainty, where social unrest and conflicts with religious overtones become rampant, followed by the unabating conflict of political elites, the role of impartial intellectuals in providing mature political education to the public, specifically at grassroots level, is imperative.

Since democracy is an on-going process of learning that involves the exercising of morality, political education is not the sole concern of the political leaders or politicians. It has been suggested that political education should not been assigned as a structural and a bureaucratic task, which does not have any concerns toward the importance of the society's political education.

Proportionally, political education is an intellectual and noble task and can only be executed by intellectuals who are free from political interests. Mature political education aims at providing rational and intellectual perspectives closely related with human's attitude in their life.

An intellectual may, for example, encourage the public, the political leaders or even the nation's top leaders to seek solutions by sitting down together rather than by mobilizing their supporters.

It is now high time to set an agenda for society's political education. In this case, the press may also take part in promoting and campaigning the importance of political education in our politically sick society. In so doing, the political illiteracies that our nation is suffering can be remedied.

The writer is a teaching staff member of the School of Education, Atma Jaya Catholic University, Jakarta.