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.