New values vs old

In the present age of reform, Indonesians have to be prepared for the unavoidable struggle between old and new values. This trend is a matter of natural consequences because standing face to face in the wind of social change today are prodemocracy people and the remnants of the fallen authoritarian regime of president Soeharto. They dominate today's ruling elite.

The latest example of the tug-of-war between the two values took place recently when the General Elections Commission, the independence of which is a new element in Indonesia's political life, voted in favor of banning government officials from campaigning on behalf of parties contesting the June polls.

Although President B.J. Habibie, who has the last say on the matter, has not made any comment, there were strong reactions among government officials, who are also activists of Golkar Party.

The combative voices were anticipated since the officials, who fall in the category mentioned by the commission's ruling, include not only governors, regents, mayors and their deputies but most importantly Cabinet ministers.

So for Golkar officials, who were the soldiers of the New Order regime's dirty war against the people, any ruling which puts an end to their manipulative tricks could mean defeat even before the war starts because it is here where their secret power lies.

On the other hand, by making the inspiring decision, the commission has acted as a true people's body, whose integrity is higher than the existing official legislative council which represents only government-sanctioned political groupings. The commission has voiced the aspirations of poor Indonesians, people who are fed up with the Golkar's foul techniques.

The people, whose dreams of democracy were stifled for too long, are weary with the party's political manipulations. People still see red when reminded of how, in the past, Golkar reacted with illogical self-justification every time the public protested its premature electoral campaign activities, especially those involving Cabinet ministers.

For rational people, Golkar statements are the same old much- ado-about-nothing-logic because they have always been about manipulation and imposition of fear. In facing a general election, Golkar had an art of getting votes and campaign funds from the cronies and tycoons it fattened.

Some officials also reacted by sarcastically advising the commission to respect the supremacy of the law. This is rich, coming as it does from an organization that has been on the wrong side law for the three last decades.

The commission has complete authority in this ruling because it has been given every right to decide the rules of the game for all contesting parties.

Finally, amid the controversy of the campaign ruling for officials, it seems that Habibie -- who decided last week to prohibit five Cabinet ministers and the attorney general from campaigning -- views the problem seriously, as can be seen by his sudden announcement yesterday that it would be the Supreme Court's job to decide.

The President, realizing that his government is considered illegitimate by many, may have decided to let the Supreme Court have the final decision and in this way avoid the possibility of making any move that could prove fatal to his political future.

It is now up to the Supreme Court -- the credibility of which has been compromised in the past after it was accused of dancing to the executive branch's tune -- to decide whether it will once again function as the last bastion of the law or issue a suicidal decree which will be hazardous to the reform movement.

It is not too late for the country's highest judicial body to bear in mind that the nation is now at a crossroads and there is no U-turn toward dictatorship.