Lessons in the past of a new constitution

By Lambert Giebels

This is the second of two articles on the inception of Indonesian Constitution.

BREDA, The Netherlands (JP): The 1945 Constitution embodies some elements of fascism and needs to be revised to meet public demands for political reform.

The kind of fascism in the Constitution can be interpreted in fascism's original form, symbolized by the fasces (the ancient Roman symbol of authority: a bundle of rods tied around an ax). The ax symbolizes the principle of leadership, embodied in the all-powerful president, while the rods are the corporative organs of state. The People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) is made up of members of the House of Representatives (DPR), "augmented by representatives of the territories and social groups". The DPR is now dominated by Golkar, a combination of functionary groups.

Finally, a typically Indonesian element can be found in the full name of the MPR: Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat. Hidden in the word permusyawaratan is the time-honored tradition from Indonesian villages musyawarah untuk mufakat, or deliberation to reach a consensus.

Sukarno, a fervent advocate of this consensus principle, was afraid that the 50 percent-plus-one principle of Western democracy would lead to a tyranny of the majority.

Therefore, deliberation is sought until general agreement is reached. If such a consensus cannot be reached, it is considered a defeat in Indonesian culture. Should taking a certain decision be urgently required, voting will take place in the MPR and the DPR. Preference is given to the withdrawal of a proposal, however.

The presidential system under the Constitution was proposed by Sutan Sjahrir, a social democrat. Under the Constitution, the Central Indonesian National Committee (KNIP) advises the president if the MPR has yet to be formed. In October 1945, Sjahrir saw to it that KNIP was reshaped into a parliament consisting of representatives of the political parties, and that the cabinet and ministers became responsible to it. After this intervention, he himself became the prime minister of a new cabinet. This reorganization from a presidential to a parliamentary system was maintained until 1950.

After the transfer of sovereignty on Dec. 27, 1949, the Netherlands imposed a federal constitution on Indonesia. This constitution laid the foundation for a United States of Indonesia, which was to be tied to the Kingdom of the Netherlands through a union. This constitution lasted for only eight months. The republicans considered a federal system, consisting of 16 member states, as a disguised form of a tactic to divide and rule. Soon, one after another, member states joined the republic. On Aug. 17, Sukarno proclaimed a united state of Indonesia. Soon after, a centralist state was formed where power emanated from Jakarta and decentralization was hardly heard of.

The new constitution of 1950 annulled the federal system but maintained a parliamentary system. However, a disintegration of the country's parties totally destabilized the political situation in the 1950s. Cabinets often lasted only a few months. Sukarno, reduced to a ceremonial figure by the constitution (like the president of the German federal state), took charge. On July 5, 1959, he announced the adoption of Guided Democracy and restored the 1945 Constitution.

During 1966 and 1967, Sukarno was pushed out of the presidency by Soeharto. Two of Sukarno's legacies have, however, been kept up until today: Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution.

It is likely that in the near future, a committee will be appointed and assigned to propose constitutional amendments for deliberation in the MPR. Besides student leaders, elderly figures from the 1945 generation involved in the struggle for independence should be appointed to such a committee. No doubt, Moslem leaders will be included as well.

Issues concerning the drafting of the original constitution will no doubt return. Many students seem to want a multiparty democratic system, based on the Western model. The elderly, remembering the failures of the 1950s, may very well argue for the corporatism expounded in the existing Constitution.

It is not impossible that Moslem leaders in the committee may want to breathe new life into the statements on Islam in the Jakarta Charter.

Another possibility could be that somebody might use the old idea of a Greater Indonesia as an argument to continue the integration of East Timor.

Representatives from outside Java may bring the old federal system forward again, maintaining that a federal Indonesia would be the right answer to separatist movements, such as those in Aceh and Irian Jaya.

For the future of Indonesia, two other issues are of no less importance. The first is whether the country can finally succeed in finding ways to realize the fifth principle in Sukarno's version of Pancasila: social justice. The realization of social justice, as it has taken place in Western democracies, means part of the yield of economic growth is returned to the people. Should Indonesia address this in its development, it would be genuine reform indeed.

The second issue has become a hot topic again after the recent riots, in which small-scale Chinese-Indonesian shop owners became the most targeted. The 1945 Constitution has denied full-scale citizenship to the millions of ethnic Chinese who were born and bred in Indonesia.

What will be the result constitutional reform? If the MPR, in its decision-making process, adheres to the musyawarah (consensus) principle, the result might be a convergence of these many ideas.

The writer is a Dutch historian who is now in the process of writing a biography on the life of Indonesia's first president, Sukarno, to be published by the end of next year.