No losers in the Assembly Annual Session: Amien

No losers in the Assembly Annual Session: Amien

Contrary to people's expectations, the 2002 People's Consultative
Assembly (MPR) Annual Session which took place from Aug. 1 to
Aug. 11, ran smoothly with significant results achieved on 13
contentious Articles of the 1945 Constitution. MPR Speaker Amien
Rais spoke with The Jakarta Post's Soeryo Winoto and gave some
insight as to what was behind his success in leading the session.

Question: How do you feel now that the Assembly's Annual
Session is over with the notable results?

Answer: I am very satisfied, happy and even excited. None of
the gloomy predictions for the session materialized at all. I
have led five Assembly sessions -- The General Session in 1999,
the Special Session in 2001, and three other Annual Sessions --
but the latest Annual Session was the toughest on me.
Why?
The mass media had said that there were different opinions about
the amendment of the 1945 Constitution both in the Assembly and
outside. We knew that opposition from the Indonesian Democratic
Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan) had been demonstrated by their
refusal to support the amendment by collecting more than 100
signatures. Outside the Assembly, a group of retired generals led
by former Vice President Gen. (ret) Try Sutrisno had expressed
their objection to the amendment. They demanded that the MPR
annul the three previous amendments and cancel the fourth
amendment. This was an effort to make the man-made Constitution a
sacred thing. Meanwhile, groups of non-governmental organizations
were demanding a completely new constitution.
Many said that you deserve credit for your achievement in
handling your fellow legislators' vigor in voicing their
interests during the session. Somebody has even said that you
deserved a gold medal for this. What do you think?
What the Assembly did was take the middle path and remained
neutral. The MPR accepted the amendment on one side, but on the
other side, the basic principle of the 1945 Constitution itself
had to be properly preserved and secured. The state ideology of
Pancasila (which is mentioned in the preamble) is well secured,
and the concept of a unitary state -- which is not negotiable --
was not touched. The new constitution will still have 37
articles, 10 paragraphs and 16 chapters. The changes in the
Articles on the presidential system will be put on as an
addendum.

Some said that you were acting more like a statesman, not a
politician, when leading the session. You didn't make any
controversial statements, and acted as an honest broker in the
session. What do you think of those views?

I just took the middle path. If I had allowed all participants
to interrupt, the session would have become a chaotic forum, but
if I had just pounded the gavel, they would have branded me an
authoritarian. I was always in between (the two "opposing"
groups). However, there were times when I had to be very tough.
During the negotiations on the last day, I was very tough and
decided to put it to a vote, (instead of continuing the debate).
I am sure that in leading such an Assembly session, one must be
neutral. Be at the center and the ultra radical and ultra
conservative groups will all be represented. I was very touched
when the parties, with their own "colors", were finally aware
that there were colors which must be an umbrella for all of us:
Red and white, the colors of our national flag.

Soon after the session was closed I got handshakes from almost
all participants, Muslim and non-Muslims, militarymen and
civilians. I could feel their sincerity. We all felt that no one
had lost and the victory was for all. I could feel that all 12
factions with their own political backgrounds finally had a very
similar goal. Deep in their heart there is a commitment that they
will never ever make any effort which may cause the Republic to
be torn apart or fall down. The debate over Article 29, in which
some groups wanted sharia put in, was an example. The discussion
on that matter was ended in a very elegant manner. Things were
very simple. All factions finally accepted the fact that the
debate would never end and would just be a waste of time. And a
return to the previous (existing) Article was seen as the best
compromise.

Even Pak AM Fatwa of the National Mandate Party (PAN) faction
said that the existing Article 29 could be adopted as a
theological statement, not just a political statement.
How do you see the Assembly after the 2002 Annual Session?

There must be evaluation of all decrees produced by the
Assembly, including the provisional Assembly in the era of late
president Sukarno. This current Assembly is heading for its
grave. And, like a dying man, the MPR will issue a testament for
the country. There must be a recommendation for those decrees
that should be eliminated (because they are obsolete) and what
decrees must be retained and developed into laws. The other
agenda in 2003 will be hearing the progress reports from the
President and other high state institutions. In 2004, if the
General Election is held in June, the current MPR will be
practically disbanded.