New dawn of legislative dictatorship nearing

New dawn of legislative dictatorship nearing

Muhammad Nafik, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

This year witnessed perhaps the worst political conflict to
plague Indonesia in decades, culminating in president Abdurrahman
'Gus Dur' Wahid's removal in July by the People's Consultative
Assembly (MPR).

The relatively peaceful transfer of power brought high hopes
that his successor Megawati Soekarnoputri would deal swiftly with
the nation's problems. However, those hopes seemed to fade over
the following months amid continued legal and security
uncertainties.

Gus Dur was charged with incompetence and involvement in the
theft of Rp 35 billion from the National Logistics Agency (Bulog)
and the embezzlement of a US$2 million donation from Brunei's
Sultan Hasanah Bolkiah. Despite the absence of a legal verdict
establishing his innocence or guilt, the MPR deposed him to
satisfy its own political interests. His ousting was a setback
for democracy as it was based on political hostility and revenge
rather than genuine efforts to foster a democratic system.

It signaled the political dominance of the House of
Representatives and the MPR over the president. Legislative
dictatorship was never an issue during the 32-year autocratic
rule of Soeharto, who stepped down in May 1998 following anti-
government protests and mass riots. It also encouraged lawmakers
to become arrogant and ignorant of the people's aspirations.

The House "intervenes" in the allocation of executive
positions, such as through the appointment and dismissal of top
military and police chiefs, the central bank governor and his
deputies, as well as ambassadors.
During Wahid's presidency, institutional conflicts between the
president and the legislature became the order of the day. An
example was the House's rejection of then president Gus Dur's
decision to sack Gen. Surojo Bimantoro as the National Police
chief.

The 1945 Constitution, which contains substantial loopholes
and ambiguities, justifies an authoritarian legislative body.
That was why Soeharto ruled the country with an iron fist -- to
keep the legislature at bay. Until Indonesia creates a new
constitution the current legislative dictatorship will be here to
stay.

Antonius Suyata, head of the National Ombudsman Commission,
says the legislative dominance creates a so-called "powerful
supervisor", while at the same time lawmakers neglect their main
duty of enacting laws because they are largely focused on
watching the government.

If not controlled, he said, the legislature's dominance would
open opportunities for law makers to practice wide-scale
corruption, while the government remained corrupt. "In the
future, it will be harder to overcome this problem because
controlling the legislative body is much more difficult than
controlling the executive," Suyata added.

The House ignored public criticism over its attention to
insubstantial issues that many thought had nothing to do with
efforts to lift the country out of its crises. As an example, the
MPR Annual Session early last month delayed judgment on several
substantial issues, notably postponing final debate on
constitutional reforms, including whether there was a need to
hold a second round of a direct presidential election in 2004 if
no single candidate managed to win more than 50 percent of the
vote. Even worse, the nine-day forum that cost Rp 18.5 billion
ended with a physical quarrel among legislators struggling for
power.

Analysts say the nation's core problem lies with its dubiously
democratic system of presidential elections. The surprise
ascension of Gus Dur to power in 1999 following the country's
most recent general election, despite his low levels of public
support, was a clear example of the doubts surrounding the
democratic credentials of Indonesia's political system. In a
normal democracy, Megawati would have been declared president in
1999 after her Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI
Perjuangan) won almost 36 percent of the vote. And she should not
necessarily have deposed her predecessor, Gus Dur, by allowing
bitter political quarrels to heighten this year.

Interestingly, these conflicts were rooted in an unsubstantial
power struggle rather than in differences over ideology or
visions for rebuilding the nation during a transitional period of
governance. The Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI) in its
year-end report questioned "the ethical and moral responsibility
of civilian leaders -- who control executive, legislative and
judicial institutions -- for dealing with the people's hardship".

LIPI highlighted the civilian leadership crisis in the House
and MPR, in which legislators were frequently involved in
"politicizing" the government's performance, while at the same
time failing to question their own achievements. Their failure
last month to substantially reform the 1945 Constitution was
clear evidence of this weakness.

The suspension of constitutional reforms, particularly
regarding the articles on presidential elections, clearly
indicated that politicians were still unable to rid themselves of
their own vested interests, the LIPI said. It also reflected the
"conservatism" among political parties, which could influence
politicians to maintain the outdated constitution, it added.

The House's anti-corruption credentials were further called
into question when it failed to establish a special committee to
investigate another Bulog scandal, this one concerning Rp 40
billion and allegedly involving House speaker Akbar Tandjung, who
is also Golkar chairman. Although the House has voted to press
forward with the proposal for a further debate at a plenary
session in January, there was no guarantee that such an inquiry
committee would be approved. In responding to public anger,
legislators were not as fierce as they had been when dealing with
the first Bulog scandal that led to the ouster of Gus Dur.

The people also expressed doubts over the House's seriousness
in getting to the bottom of the deadly Trisakti and Semanggi
incidents, believed to be the immediate trigger for mass riots
that forced Soeharto to quit suddenly on May 21, 1998.

The extent of current legislators' sincerity in fighting for
the public interest as a whole should also take account of their
approvals of the government's proposals to raise tariffs for
essential services such as telephone, water, electricity and
transport, amid the economic crisis.