Wed, 23 Sep 1998

MPR body commits to clean governance

JAKARTA (JP): Factions in the Ad Hoc Committee II of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) have all endorsed the draft special decree on the eradication of corruption, collusion and nepotism.

The chairman, Widodo A.S., said the committee realized that former president Soeharto's 32-year rule was marked by rampant corruption, collusion and nepotism, and said "such practices must be ended so the next government can start with a clean slate."

"All factions are of the same opinion that all forms of corruption, collusion and nepotism must be eradicated and that the next government must be free from such practices," he said here on Tuesday.

The draft decree was proposed by the Indonesian Democratic Party (PDI) faction and has won the support of the other factions in the committee, he said.

"All (five MPR) factions have been accommodating public aspirations in this era of reform and acknowledge that such practices have caused the people to suffer," he said, adding that the issue of clean governance would be addressed in a special decree.

Ekky Syachruddin of the Golkar faction said that all state institutions, including the House of Representatives (DPR), the Supreme Court and the Supreme Audit Agency should improve supervisory systems in order to help eliminate corruption.

Widodo said the committee has also agreed to a proposed decree on human rights protection. "Such a decree is urgently needed because of rampant violations of human rights in the past," he said.

He said his committee had agreed to revoke the current State Policy Guidelines and replace them with what he called the Guidelines of Development Reform. The latter, he said, would prevail from the MPR special session beginning on Nov. 10 until the next General Session of the MPR in December 1999.

"The new document is expected to be far thinner than the current guidelines and will outline a one year program of reform in political, economic and cultural spheres," he said.

Golkar's Fadel Muhammad said his faction would propose that the new guidelines include details of a new economic system under which indigenous businesspeople are granted special privileges.

Meanwhile, a meeting of the Assembly's Ad Hoc Committee I ended in deadlock after a discussion of draft decrees on former president Soeharto's accountability and on the investigation into his wealth and his family's fortune.

The Armed Forces (ABRI), Golkar and Regional Representatives factions were against the draft decrees on the two matters proposed by the PDI and United Development Party (PPP) factions.

It was the second time the committee's meetings have ended in deadlock. The first was when the committee failed to reach agreement on a draft decree proposing the separation of the MPR and DPR's leadership on Monday.

Golkar, ABRI and the Regional Representatives factions agreed that Soeharto should be made to provide an account of his two- months in office from March 11 until May 21, 1998, but said it would be enough for Soeharto to write a speech to be read out by President B.J. Habibie during the special session.

However, Ismunandar of the PDI faction said Soeharto himself should deliver his accountability speech.

He said that Soeharto should be held responsible for incidents that occurred between March 11 and May 21.

Incidents during that period include the shooting of four Trisakti University students on May 14, the subsequent wave of riots that engulfed the country, and the week-long student occupation of the MPR/DPR building in the same month.

He said the MPR should also pass a decree ordering Habibie's government to investigate the wealth of Soeharto, his cronies and all officials suspected of involvement in corrupt activities during Soeharto's 32-year administration.

Chozin Chumaidy of the PPP faction said that Soeharto should deliver an accountability speech during the special session because it was required by the 1945 Constitution.

He said his faction was of the opinion that Soeharto's resignation was unconstitutional because it did not take place before a MPR session or the Supreme Court. (rms)