House kills motion against convicted corruptor Akbar
House kills motion against convicted corruptor Akbar
Kurniawan Hari, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta
Despite pressure from the public and legislators, the House of
Representatives (DPR) failed again on Thursday to decide on a
motion brought against criminal convict Akbar Tandjung, speaker
of the House.
Akbar was found guilty of corruption and sentenced to three
years in jail in 2002 for his role in a Rp 40 billion (US$4.7
million) financial scandal involving the State Logistics Agency
(Bulog).
The Jakarta High Court upheld the ruling in January 2003,
prompting some 70 legislators to submit a motion seeking the
establishment of a House disciplinary committee to try and remove
the Golkar chairman from his post as House speaker. Akbar is free
pending an appeal to the Supreme Court, which is headed by former
Golkar member Bagir Manan.
During the House plenary meeting on Thursday, a heated debate
took place over the motion between legislators who wanted Akbar
to be disciplined and lawmakers loyal to the chairman of the New
Order political machine.
While the two camps argued, House deputy speaker Soetardjo
Soerjogoeritno, who was presiding, suddenly banged his gavel and
closed the plenary meeting.
This unexpected turn of events drew protest from legislators,
but Soetardjo, from President Megawati Soekarnoputri's Indonesian
Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan) simply waved his
hand.
According to Soetardjo, the plenary meeting on Thursday was
arranged simply to hear a report on the chronology of a motion
against Akbar by 72 inter-faction legislators.
Responding to the report, National Awakening Party (PKB)
faction chairman Rodjil Ghufron suggested that the plenary
meeting make a final decision to end the debate.
Dwi Ria Latifa, Firman Jaya Daeli and Permadi of PDI
Perjuangan concurred, suggesting that each faction should express
its stance on the issue.
"How can we talk about the eradication of corruption if we are
led by a convicted corrupter?" Ria Latifa asked.
Some legislators cited the case of former president
Abdurrahman Wahid and compared it to Akbar's. Abdurrahman,
popularly known as Gus Dur, was accused of misusing Rp 35 billion
in funds belonging to the State Logistics Agency (Bulog) and
receiving US$2 million from Brunei Darussalam.
The allegation led to Abdurrahman's removal from presidential
office in July 2001.
Mutamimmul 'Ula and Mashadi of the Reform faction and Hamdan
Zoelva of the Crescent Star Party (PBB) faction were among those
calling for a final decision from the House.
But Akbar's loyalists, Abduh Paddare of the United Development
Party (PPP) faction, and Ade Komaruddin, Agun Gunandjar Sudarsa
and Yahya Zaini of Golkar, emphasized that the motion against
Akbar's leadership could not be followed up because it was
regulated by House internal rulings.
"An expression by legislators is made only to comment on
policies of the government," Yahya added.
Prompted by confusion over the war of words, Soetardjo made an
unexpected decision.
He said that the controversy would be returned to the House
steering committee for further discussion. This decision
obviously reflected the House's reluctance to dismiss Akbar from
his post.
Chronology of the motion against Akbar
----------------------------------------------------------------
1. Sept.16, 2002 : 72 inter-faction legislators propose motion
against Akbar's leadership.
2. Sept.17, 2002 : House leaders discuss the motion and tell
the House steering committee to discuss it
further.
3. Oct.31, 2002 : A meeting of the steering committee asks
House leaders for their input on the issue.
4. Nov.5, 2002 : A meeting of House leaders says it needs
time
to assess the motion against Akbar Tandjung.
5. Nov.12, 2002 : House leaders conclude that there is no
regulation to follow up the motion.
6. Nov.26, 2002 : A steering committee meeting suggests all
factions inform their members of the House
leaders'
decision.
7. Jan.30, 2003 : A meeting of the steering committee decides
that
a plenary meeting on Feb.27 will hear
the chronology of the motion against Akbar.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Source: DPR