House leaders differ over broadcasting bill changes

JAKARTA (JP): There were signs of disagreement yesterday between the speaker and deputy speaker in the House of Representatives in relation to an unprecedented second deliberation of the broadcasting bill, which is scheduled to begin on Aug. 25.

Shortly after House Speaker Wahono told a plenary session that the House had accepted the government's demand for amendments to the bill, Deputy House Speaker Soerjadi expressed regret over the previously unheard-of chain of events.

"We have thoroughly deliberated the bill, reached agreement and had the bill signed -- only to have it returned to us," said Soerjadi, who also chairs the Indonesian Democratic Party (PDI).

"The decision to return the bill to the House has shown that the government lacks trust in our strenuous efforts," he added.

President Soeharto has refused to sign the bill, which was passed by the House last December because of a number of problematic articles.

R. Hartono, the new minister of information, has said that the amendments now sought may include stipulations on national broadcasters' coverage, license terms and the dubbing of foreign programs.

The bill's re-deliberation was originally scheduled to start on Thursday, but was postponed because Hartono had a more pressing commitment. The new schedule stretches over one month because of a House recess from next Monday until Aug. 15.

A special 21-member committee has been appointed by the House in relation to the re-deliberation, but Soerjadi stressed that the committee's task was limited to preparing an agenda for a second deliberation -- not to agreeing to the amendments sought by the government.

"The decision to endorse or reject the amendments will be taken during the deliberation," he said. "How can we approve it if we do not know yet which articles need amending?"

Hartono said the second deliberation could be completed before the end of the House's current term on Sept. 30.

Wahono said the House welcomed the government's request for a re-deliberation of the bill "for the sake of the national interest."

"On one hand, this uncommon course of events has provided both the government and the House with a lesson in the importance of paying greater attention to the core content of bills.

"But, on the other hand, we have unquestionably gained greater experience, proving our sufficient maturity in performing our constitutional duties," Wahono said.

He added that the need for a second deliberation had given rise to a new procedure in the legislative process.

The Constitution provides that the President may make laws with the consent of the House. In the three decades of the New Order period, the House has never failed to pass a bill proposed by the government.

Senior constitutional lawyer Sri Soemantri said the second deliberation lacked a basis in law and suggested that the government should give effect to the broadcasting bill as it stands and then propose an amending bill.

However, another constitutional expert, Yusril Ihza Mahendra, said there was nothing wrong with a second deliberation, since a bill cannot be enacted without the approval of both the government and the House. (amd)