Law versus reality

The rowdy demonstrations which tens of thousands of university students managed to stage in Jakarta and elsewhere on Wednesday despite elaborate security precautions must have looked to many like a deliberate act of defiance against President B.J. Habibie's five-month old government. After all, the students staged their protests simultaneously in Jakarta and several other big cities scarcely a week after the President signed into law a bill on the freedom of expression.

This new law, though less restrictive than a presidential decree it replaces, nevertheless puts certain limits on street rallies as a means of expression by making them subject to a number of requirements, one of them being that organizers of street demonstrations notify the authorities of their intentions at least three days in advance.

From the very beginning, Habibie's attempts to control an already chaotic situation by putting the lid on unruly protests has met with considerable opposition. That there is a need for him to try to maintain order and stability in this crisis-wracked country is beyond question. But the President, still struggling with problems of credibility and legitimacy five months after his constitutionally debatable installation, has found it hard to manage the country while people simultaneously continue to question his capability to resolve the crisis.

Many would have preferred to have seen him respond to the challenge and calm the situation by initiating the economic, political and social reforms that most analysts regard as necessary to correct the afflictions built up over the past 32 years of misrule that have rendered the county incapable of responding to the emergencies of the present. Instead, the President took the nation by surprise by issuing a decree, called the Decree on the Freedom of Expression, that severely restrained citizens' constitutional rights in this particular respect. To his critics, the measures the seemed half-hearted and ineffectual.

Amid all the furor which the rather absurd decree sparked -- the news media, for example, were required to obtain government approval for their news articles, at least three days before publication -- the government backtracked and withdrew the controversial regulation. In its stead it submitted a bill to the House of Representatives. This was the draft which the House passed in record time after only 20 days of deliberations.

In all fairness, as mentioned above, it must be said that the new law -- officially labeled Law No.9/1998 -- is a good deal more democratic than the decree it replaces. For example, street demonstrations as a form of public expression are allowed and no official permits are required. However, the names of those to be held responsible for maintaining the orderly behavior of participants have to be listed with the authorities.

Many analysts regard such requirements -- reasonable as they may be under "normal", peaceful circumstances -- as impractical to supervise under the currently prevailing crisis conditions. One failing is that the new law appears to be neglect to take into account the circumstance that is likely to encourage more protests: the persistent lack of confidence in Habibie's government, its political agenda, and hence its legislative products. This, is exacerbated by the fact that our present national legislature does not represent the true aspirations of the population, having been elected in the heavily rigged 1997 general election.

Thus it seems that we may soon be witnessing more protests, more friction and more clashes until a fair and honest general election can be held to give the nation a legislature and a government that truly represents the aspirations of the majority of the people.