Habibie-KPU rift on election campaign to drag on

Habibie-KPU rift on election campaign to drag on

The Supreme Court, in response to a government appeal, has
conveyed its legal opinion on the difference of perceptions
between the government and the General Election Commission (KPU)
on the latter's decisions related to election campaigns. Arbi
Sanit, a University of Indonesia lecturer of political sciences,
comments on its political impacts.

Question: The Supreme Court said that KPU had no right to
regulate the role of ministers and state officials but it had the
right to issue regulations barring political party members who
work for the state from campaigning. What is your comment on such
a statement?

Arbi: Such a decision is ambivalent because it means that both
the President, as head of government, and the KPU are right,
meaning that the President has the authority to control his
Cabinet members and that KPU deserves the authority to regulate
general elections (including the banning of political parties
from recruiting government officials for campaigning).

The fact that the court has left the final decision to the
President, who is in charge of the elections, indicates that the
court is plin-plan (swaying with the wind, following whatever
opinion is dominant) because it is not used to its judicial right
to solve such a dispute. This will result in continuous conflicts
between the two institutions.

Q: What do you think about the court's opinion that KPU members
should not only be barred from campaigning but also from being
elected as members of the House of Representatives (DPR)?

A: It is fair because KPU members, as election organizers, are
supposed to be politically neutral. As a consequence of political
parties acting as election organizers, their members involved in
the commission must not take part in campaigning.

Q: Do you agree with the court's opinion that KPU was excessive
with its decision on the planned establishment of an honor
council for general elections?

A: The court is apparently tied to formal considerations in
making such an opinion. Because the KPU was appointed by the
President, it must also be responsible to him. If an honor
council was established, his power over the commission would be
cut off by the council.

I think the establishment of an honor council is politically
important to support the nation's strong desire to have a free
and fair general election because the authority of the President,
as head of state, is very weak.

Q: Do you think the KPU members were emotional when they decided
to bar ministers from campaigning?

A: Commission members were not emotional at all when they made
the decision because they based their ruling on people's
aspirations on political reform for fear of a repetition of
previous election practices, in which officials used state
facilities to campaign for their party.

Ministers, therefore, must be barred from campaigning until
clear rules and adequate supervisory institutions are established
to prevent them from abusing their authority.

Q: Now that most of Cabinet members belong to the ruling Golkar
Party and that President B.J. Habibie relies heavily on the
party's support for his presidential candidacy, will the court's
legal opinion put him at odds with the party?

A: Golkar will surely pressure Habibie to mistakenly use his dual
authority, both as head of state and as head of government. The
party, for example, might see through on its deputy chairman
Marzuki Darusman's warning that the party might withdraw its
support for Habibie's presidential candidacy if he bars ministers
from campaigning.

Q: The minister of justice said on Monday that the government
would soon issue a ruling on whether or not Cabinet members and
other government officials would be allowed to campaign. Will it
help settle the dispute?

A: No, because such a regulation will be issued by the President
as head of government, whose political level is the same as the
KPU chairman. Both the head of government and KPU chairman should
be responsible to the President as head of state.

Q: Some KPU members have threatened to resign if ministers are
allowed to campaign. Will this happen?

A: It is too early to tell as they are supposed to go on fighting
for the upholding of people's aspirations.

Q: Will the KPU-government dispute delay the schedule for general
election activities?

A: I don't think so. This dispute can be settled through the
forming of public opinion until the time prior to the campaigning
period -- on May 15 until June 4. Meanwhile, the schedules for
other election activities, including preparations, can go ahead.

Q: Will the public get angry if the government forces its will on
people by allowing ministers to take leave for campaigning?

A: Yes, because they feel strongly about power abuses such as
instances in the past general elections.

It might not be university students but political party
supporters who hit the streets to demonstrate, which could be
very fierce.

University students seem to be reluctant to demonstrate now
because they are not so enthusiastic about the general election,
which they think is not legitimate on the grounds that it is
being organized by an illegitimate government. (riz)