JP/ /DPR

MPR/DPR - A spectacle of turbulence and contention.

Meidyatama Suryodiningrat The Jakarta Post Jakarta

Some 250 years-ago American James Madison wrote that democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention.

Madison's prophetic discourse on the peril of an assembly undermining democratic values, aptly portray the current plight of Indonesia's highest democratic institutions.

His forewarning of "no cure for the mischief of factions" ring true.

The esteemed members of the People's Consultative Assembly and House of Representatives in 2001 not only turned themselves into a spectacle, but at times a shameless fist-to-cuffs farce, making a mockery of the suffering many have endured to erect the democratic process.

The pinnacle for 2001 must be the accomplishment of the 700- member Assembly, 500 of whom are members of the House, in brewing what in essence was a constitutional coup on a president losing a grip on both his power and senses.

After hounding Abdurrahman Wahid for over six months on alleged misuse of funds, the Assembly finally threw the gauntlet on the blind cleric's fervid presidency.

What had threatened to become a protracted national crisis, however, was quickly absolved as Abdurrahman had few allies left in the Assembly.

But the success of turning a potential powder-keg into a smooth leadership transition was not so much the suave role of legislators, but the refusal of the military and police to execute Abdurrahman's order to dissolve the House.

Abdurrahman's departure was followed by the automatic ascendance of Megawati Soekarnoputri.

How she must have felt standing before, and receiving the almost unanimous support of the Assembly, knowing that 18-months earlier many of them successfully sabotaged her presidential candidacy.

The 2001 leadership change was the apex of the preponderance the Assembly and the House has garnered in the reform era.

A power which has tilted the delicate system of checks and balances with legislators becoming a lethal constraint on government, but itself unparalleled by any other institution.

Some would argue this is by design as the constitution clearly places the Assembly in divine power over the nation.

But it also raises the dangerous specter of tyranny by assembly, particularly one which includes non-elected members.

Disillusioned by their initial support for Abdurrahman's failed administration, the leadership change motivated the Assembly and House to yield a greater show of commitment to support Megawati.

Coupled with the fact that the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle, the party she chairs, is the largest faction in both the Assembly and the House, legislators have so far been less feisty in badgering the government.

How long this spirited cooperation lasts remains to be seen.

But when they do end it, their remarks will definitely start by trumpeting their favorite rallying cry: "in the name of the people."

We repeatedly hear our representatives claim to speak for "the people's interest".

Based on the concept of a "general will" -- what people want if they knew what was best -- this notion injects legislators with a sense of righteousness to exercise their politicking.

But our elected representatives, self admittedly, are not agents of the voting mass. They are tokens for the party which ushered them in.

Thus rather than the people's interest, the rationale of their exploits seem closer to Karl Marx's notion of "false consciousness" -- the people's desires are false as they don't know what they want and only these distinguished members of the assembly do.

False notions of their exalted position makes many forget that their presence in the legislative chambers is to serve the public interest.

Their oversight breeds politics at its worst -- "war by other means" -- with parties sabotaging each other or making backroom deals for personal political benefit.

How many times this year have the public we been victims of acts or legislative products devised by backroom handshakes.

Take the National Police bill. It was controversial from the start as it placed maintenance of security and order as the predominant police duty ahead of serving and protecting the public.

Legislators recognized the concerns and seemed to heed the criticisms when it initially delayed the bill and formed a team for further review.

But weeks later it was quietly passed untouched. The delay turned to be a ruse, not to mention that some political agenda may be afoot.

Another case was the four rounds of debates needed by a House steering committee to merely decide whether an inquiry into alleged graft by House Speaker Akbar Tandjung should even be considered.

The case is an ethical challenge, which will continue in 2002, on whether the House is willing to pursue alleged abuse of power among its own ranks with the same vigor that it does in other institutions.

The new House Code of Conduct provides a basis for supervising legislators' behavior. But ultimately it depends on the sincerity of those who practice them.

The paradox in discipline was no more evident than in the the last session of the House a fortnight ago.

During the plenary session several legislators urged their colleagues to be more punctual and disciplined in meetings.

"The House leaders must learn to be punctual. If it is scheduled to begin at 9 a.m. they must attend on time," Suratal HW of PDI Perjuangan said.

But his remarks were made in front of a half empty assembly hall.

The attendance sheet showed that only 248 out of the 488 House members due to attend were present for the last plenary session of 2001.

Former legislator Yahya Zaini lamented the lack of discipline of House members in attending meetings.

Yahya, who served in the House between 1997 to 1999, said average attendance in the past was around 70 percent. But in the current House it had dwindled to the minimal quorum of just over 50 percent.

Is this what is expected of people who's average minimum monthly income is Rp 15 million, about twice higher than Indonesia's annual percapita income.

Not surprisingly they have been repeatedly criticized for lacking a sense of crisis.

Numerous commissions continue to take various "comparative studies" abroad on people's expense.

How necessary is a visit by about a dozen legislators to Australia to see how much parliamentarians there get paid?

How wealthy do legislators have to be before they remember that they are also obliged to pass legislation?

Even House speaker Akbar Tandjung concedes that the House has lagged in this primary duty.

Akbar does not agree with critics who say that the House's overzealous control of the government has left its law making tasks neglected.

"This is not entirely true," he says while adding that the House's control functioned has also not impeded the executive from conducting its job.

But the fact remains that only 30 bills were passed in 2001, with about 30 more waiting.

The progeny of our first democratic general election in 44- years may continue to erode our faith, but Indonesians must retain hope in the democratic process for the ills of an "assembly" is not ours alone as it has been persistent through history.

Just as Plato over a thousand years ago remained faithful in the belief that the trouble with democracy was not the absence of the rule of law, but that the wrong people are running it -- those who have little virtues.

We may also take heart, as Mark Twain in his typical satire wrote: "Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of Congress, but I repeat myself!"

I-BOX

Some key legislation passed by DPR in 2001

* The establishment of Banten Province. * Human Rights Tribunal Bill * The establishment of Banten Province. * The establishment of Gorontalo Province. * Special Autonomy for Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam * Special Autonomy for Irian Jaya * Oil and Gas Bill * National Police Bill * State Security Bill