JP/5/SOED

MPR, interest group delegates epitomize RI democracy

Soedijarto Member, People's Consultative Assembly Interest Group Faction Jakarta State University

After 56 years of independence, comprehension of the history, culture and aspirations of our founding fathers is waning. A recent article by intellectual Denny JA, published in a national newspaper is one such example of a lack of understanding of the basic concept of our nation state.

Some experts have also said that UUD 1945 is a hastily formulated product, and therefore could be judged a cumbersome legal umbrella vis-a-vis latest developments in this reform era.

The Constitution was indeed formulated within a brief period. But the republic's founders, particularly Sukarno and Mohamad Hatta, had been seriously considering its contents since at least 1926, through deep reflection in exile.

Therefore, Bung Karno who on Aug. 18, 1945 declared UUD 1945 a provisional constitution, decreed a return to the first Constitution, with the support of almost the entire population and the military on July 5, 1959. This was because the 1950 Constitution, which followed parliamentary democracy, failed to guarantee a stable democratic government. The Cabinet was quickly toppled in a matter of months and rebellions arose in various parts of the country.

The article by Denny states, among other things, that the annual session of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) in 2001 ended in a "deadlock", because two crucial articles of the UUD 1945 to be amended which deal with power arrangements were not finished, and that, the presence of interest group representatives "is not normal, and is even against the system of democracy."

The U.S.-educated Denny also wrote, "It is true that the MPR must represent existing groups in society, but if this is operationally manifested through the special forum of the interest group faction, the application is totally mistaken."

The postponed amendment of article 2 on the structure of MPR membership and the resolution regarding the second stage of the election of the president and vice president, in the case of no candidates securing the required votes in the first stage, was not a failure or even a deadlock.

It was a policy adopted as a normal practice for a constitutional amendment, which in any country should be done with great care, not to mention the power arrangement involved. This delay reflects the spirit of "democracy guided by wisdom of consultation/representation" as mentioned in the Constitution's preamble.

In the German Constitution, such amendments can be added only when the entire population has expressed a desire for it, rather than just by an institution like the MPR, i.e. Bundesversamlung (comprising Bundestag or parliament and Bundesraat or federal council). In the U.S. Constitution, amendments can be a lengthy process, they must be approved by a 67 percent vote in both houses of Congress, and ratified by 75 percent of the 50 state legislatures within seven years of the original proposal.

The view that the interest group faction in the MPR contradicts democracy raises the question: "Which democracy?" Systems of democracy are different everywhere. All models claim to be democratic -- whether they are from the U.S., Britain, France, Japan, Canada, Iran, Russia or the various countries in Latin American.

Some of the models can guarantee stable democratic governments like those in North America and West Europe, while others have created very unstable governments such as in Latin America.

The presence of the interest group faction in the MPR as an interpretation of the definition of the MPR as an institution representing the entire population is, to Denny, a total mistake.

Denny might have only quoted part of Article 2 of UUD 1945 by writing that the MPR must represent all groups. The basic concept of a typically Indonesian supreme institution, which in Article 2 paragraph (1) of UUD 1945 reads: "The MPR shall comprise members of the House of Representatives, combined with representatives from regions and groups pursuant to provisions stipulated by law," is elucidated as follows: "It is intended that all the people, all groups and all regions will be represented in the Assembly so that the Assembly can be truly considered a manifestation of the population."

The composition of these three elements in the MPR to represent all the people, regions and groups was the idea of the republic's founders. They apparently wanted to avoid any repetition of the West's political history until the outbreak of World War II.

In practice, the political parties could not rid themselves of the influence of major investors, economic authorities and syndicate interests. In the practice of legislation, such interests carried a lot of clout.

The interests of what the founders called "groups", like cooperative bodies, labor unions and other collective associations lacking the power of capital, were ignored. It appears that their visionary view remains relevant to political life in the post-modern era.

The interest group representatives including that of cooperatives, workers, teachers, farmers, fishermen, isolated tribes, veterans, ulemas, journalists, women and the military/police, are frequently neglected.

Therefore, our founding fathers deemed it necessary to have these groups represented in the state institution, authorized to formulate and amend the constitution, draw up the state policy guidelines and elect the president. But the interest groups were not to be involved in the legislation process and other practical politics, like general elections, budgeting and direct supervision of public administration.

In the New Order era, the interest group faction was abused by those in power to dominate the MPR with delegates totaling 100 of the assembly's 500 appointed members.

In its extreme form, a daughter of the military commander, children of the president and wives of officials were included in the faction, because all faction members were part of Golkar -- a political force then playing a political role but denying its political party status.

In this reform period, interest group faction members come from organizations, which select their representatives for further approval by the general elections committee and appointment by the president.

Although their recruitment method is now better than in the previous era, it still needs improvement. One way is to have candidates selected by the House. Yet the participation of the disadvantaged groups in the political process of the state, as expressed by the founding fathers, is very wise, and should be accommodated by the MPR.

The delayed decision concerning the MPR structure was based on the sense of responsibility to history. Likewise, Britain has preserved its House of Lords and Canada its appointed members of the Sovereign of Canada in addition to the House of Commons in both countries.