President Habibie's legitimacy

President Habibie's legitimacy

The article MPR should convene to pick new president by Yusuf
Wanandi, May 29, arouses several questions and astonished me
regarding President B.J. Habibie's credibility and popularity. I
have no connection with B.J. Habibie except that he has been
elected President of Indonesia.

The writer is very biased. It is as if he has a personal
dislike for the president. Is it really true that the President
has no base power at all? As chairman of the Muslim Intellectual
Organization of Indonesia, there is no doubt he has the support
of it's members. I wonder what proof Yusuf Wanandi possesses to
be able to state that the president is a controversial figure and
he is opposed by many groups in Indonesia, and that the military
leaders are not happy with his presidency. He goes on to say that
Indonesia's elite does not support him and that he is also not
trusted by the financial market, etc.

Yusuf Wanandi's negative comments emanate solely from his
arrogance. What authority does he have to mention these negative
elaborations? The Armed Forces' chief, Gen. Wiranto, has pledged
full support for President Habibie. Congratulations and
recognitions from foreign countries are pouring in. Without
giving time for the President and his cabinet to prove
themselves, it is very absurd and eye-brow raising for Yusuf
Wanandi to conclude that the government cannot overcome the
present difficulties.

The growing support for the government from various quarters
of the Indonesian community speaks for itself regarding the
credibility and legitimacy of the President and his cabinet.
Hubert Neiss of the IMF said recently that the present cabinet
comprises capable persons and figures of integrity.

As to the options proposed by the writer, they are totally out
of question. The appointment of B.J. Habibie as new president is
legal and legitimate according to article 8 of the 1945
Constitution. That Habibie did not make his oath in front of the
People's Consultative Assembly does not necessarily make his
appointment illegitimate. Due to the emergency situation at that
time, it was impossible for the Assembly to convene, but the oath
was taken by the chairman of the Supreme Court in the presence of
all vice chairmen.

In this case, the primary condition for transfer of the
presidency was fulfilled. The second option proposed by Yusuf
Wanandi is unconstitutional because it contravenes article 7 of
the 1945 Constitution, where the president and vice president are
elected for a term of five years.

I must say that Yusuf Wanandi's article is quite disheartening
to me. Judging from it's contents, I am not surprised the article
has been published in the International Herald Tribune because
most foreign journalists are addicted to negative stories about
developing countries such as ours.

From Yusuf Wanandi, as chairman of the Supervisory Board of
the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, may I have
the pleasure of hearing the story of the student demonstrations
at your office some time ago?

MUHD. RAMZY HASIBUAN

Jakarta