Indonesia's 'three musketeers' face the nation's problems

Indonesia's 'three musketeers' face the nation's problems

By Mochtar Buchori

JAKARTA (JP): Three names have come under limelight lately:
Megawati Soekarnoputri, Sri Bintang Pamungkas and Judge Adi
Andojo Soetjipto. The three of them have become the focus of a
multitude of informal public discussions.

In the public eye they are exalted as extraordinarily
courageous characters, perceived as persons who refuse to panic
in the face of intimidation, refuse to budge in the face of brute
power, and refuse to kneel down in the face of overpowering
might.

Outwardly, each of these three personalities are fighting for
a separate cause. Megawati is fighting for her existence as a
party leader, Sri Bintang Pamungkas for his innocence, and Adi
Andojo for his integrity.

Viewed within the context of Indonesia's society today,
however, it is difficult not to assume that they are fighting for
a common cause, namely fighting against what they perceive as
unjust and willfully wrong execution of power.

For reasons unknown to me, it seems that their perception of
justice and injustice conforms to that of the public's. As such,
it is perceived that they are fighting for a public cause.

How is it that these three names remain popular with the
public, despite the fact that they have been clearly rejected and
more or less condemned by high-ranking government officials?

This question is particularly important with regard to Judge
Adi Andojo who is not a politician and who has never done
anything in his life to enhance his popularity.

Can it be that at the moment the public and the corps of high-
ranking government officials are at two opposing sides with
regard to concepts about justice, decency and honor? Can it be
that in their consciences they are alienated from one another?

I have no answer to this question. And I doubt I will ever
find an answer to it. But I think that part of the explanation
can be found in the following:

For quite some time there has been a growing gap between the
public and the officialdom with regard to the concept of justice,
decency and honor.

It has been demonstrated in many cases that the definition of
justice, decency and honor adopted by government officials
differs significantly from that adopted by the public.

The public has, of course, never formulated and expressed its
concept of justice, decency and honor in an articulate way. But
objections over court rulings expressed by the public in a number
of cases, or disagreements with opinions about honorable and
decent acts in public life expressed by government officials
constitute undeniable evidence that the public has its own
criteria regarding these three concepts.

I think that every government has the moral obligation to
comprehend and be sensitive to the sense of justice, honor and
decency that exists at any one period within society.

Without this knowledge and sensitivity it is virtually
impossible for any government to generate an atmosphere within
society which makes the public feel that the law is being
observed and that justice prevails.

Failure to incorporate the public's feelings about justice,
honor and decency into court rulings or into government
pronouncements results, ultimately, in loss of credibility and
loss of public respect. And no one can govern effectively without
the public's trust and respect.

Public reaction towards the latest developments with regard to
the Indonesian Democratic Party, Sri Bintang Pamungkas, and the
allegation of collusion within the Supreme Court suggests very
strongly that the government's credibility has been greatly
eroded.

Harsh statements and bold pronouncements by government
officials about how things should be perceived and how the public
should behave will not make members of the public change their
opinion regarding these three cases. In spite of all the punitive
statements that government officials have launched against the
three characters involved, they remain in high regard with the
public.

What makes people like me feel sad and depressed about this
whole affair is that high-ranking government officials seem to be
totally disregarding the public's feelings about justice, honor
and decency.

Denying undeniable facts, for instance, constitutes a much
employed tactic to win an argument by force and not by reason.
While the public perceive such acts as indecent and dishonorable,
it seems that many government officials regard them as normal and
creditable.

And although blaming a third party every time an undesirable
situation arises is perceived by the public as an dishonest act,
again it seems that many high-ranking government officials regard
such an act as harmless and permissible.

Practices like this cannot, within the present circumstances,
enhance the respectability of the government in the public's eye.
More often than not the public sees such tactics as an effort to
wrongly protect those who may really be responsible for the
occurrence of such a situation.

How much longer will this situation last in our society?
Living in mutual distrust has never been a healthy thing. It is
not healthy for family life, not healthy for business life, and
especially not healthy for a nation's life.

Who has the responsibility to restore the public's trust and
respect vis-a-vis government officials, government institutions
and the government itself? This is a question that must be
answered honestly if we really want to restore a healthy and
vigorous nation's life at this juncture within our history.

In the meantime, what are the prospects of Megawati, Sri
Bintang Pamungkas and Judge Adi Andojo, the three Indonesian
musketeers? Will they come out of this battle as victors, or will
they be crushed by sheer power and eventually be forgotten by the
public? Will they ultimately recede into political obscurity? No
one, I think, can answer this question with certainty at the
moment.

Equally important is the question about what will become of
this nation in the immediate future. Will it be able to restore
its capacity to reason and act responsibly, or will it degenerate
into a further vortex of political and bureaucratic
disintegration?

Again, no one can, I think, at the moment give a definitive
answer to this question. And I am afraid that the answers to
these two questions are interrelated.

Which means that the problem regarding the three personalities
is the problem of this nation. The issue of the three musketeers
has by now become too big to be separated from the national issue
of restoring the public's trust in and respect for the
government.

The decision of the government regarding these three public
characters will -- at least in the short term -- decisively
determine the course towards which this nation heads.

The writer is an observer of social and cultural affairs.