Muladi, past and present

Muladi, past and present

Several years ago, when the Soeharto regime was still in
power, I knew Muladi as a champion of human rights and the law
who voiced popular aspirations. I admired his personality which
was reflected in his idealism and writings.

So, when he was appointed minister of justice, I thought he
was the right man for the position. My hope then was that the
legal reform he advocated would begin to be realized. In the era
of Habibie, I thought it would be plain sailing for Muladi to
translate his ideas into reality.

When he began to appear quite frequently on TV in interviews
with reporters or making public statements, I still found him to
be a tough, steel-hearted and disciplined figure who would not
compromise his beliefs but at the same time was also a reasonable
and sensible humanist.

Muladi told one interviewer, a reporter who was trying to fish
information from him, that he was not as stupid as the reporter
thought he was. "I'm a professor," he said.

Unfortunately, power is everything but without power
everything is nothing. It seems that, unknowingly, Muladi has let
himself be drawn into the inner circle of the power of Habibie's
regime, a regime that seems to practice the abuse of power. So,
case after case passed before his nose without any satisfactory
settlement. The lies underlining Ghalibgate, the handling of the
Free Aceh Movement (GAM), the unresolved investigation into
Soeharto and, Baligate, prove that Muladi is not as ferocious now
than when he was outside the powers that be.

In fact, I had my empathy for him when he went to Singapore
for medical treatment. I thought his workload and stress were the
cause of his illness. Then he went to Switzerland with his wife
to trace Soeharto's alleged assets there. We have heard nothing
more about it until now. Muladi promised several times, widely
reported in the mass media, that he would break the news about
the thorough settlement, political or judicial, of the Soeharto
investigation. Unfortunately his promises have remained only
that, promises. At one time, Muladi was heard to make a
spontaneous comment which may have reflected his frustration: "If
this is the case, I'd better return to the UNDIP campus to
teach."

The most recent event which is most disappointing to me and
other members of the public is the announcement of a statement
purportedly by former Bank Bali president Rudy Ramli which
contradicted the information widely circulated in the media. When
Rudy came before honorable members of the House of
Representatives on Sept. 9, in the presence of dozens of
journalists and broadcast live on a private television station to
millions of viewers, Muladi's reputation began to slip.

It is true that as secretary of state he was assigned to read
Ramli's statement, but, as a legal champion, he had to listen to
his own conscience. Was he then under psychological pressure? In
fact, we have a minister of information who could have read the
statement instead.

Well, only Muladi knows the answer. Muladi was right when he
said that the statement made by Rudy before the legislators would
only be legal and possible to be used in court if it was made
before an investigating institution. Does the statement,
therefore, become meaningless? In my opinion, anyone with logical
thinking will say that Rudy Ramli should be trusted. His
testimony was original and was made openly before the honorable
representatives of the people. We should be doubtful instead
about any statement he made before the police or prosecutors.

SUSANTO JOSEPH

Jakarta