Public input in bill's deliberation

The tug-of-war between the government and the House of Representatives Commission V deliberating the bill on the Free Trade Zone (FTZ) on Batam island has reached a draw. No compromise was reached, as each side insisted their respective proposals were right.

Minister of Justice and Human Rights Yusril Ihza Mahendra, said that there was significant disparity between the government and the House over several articles, so both sides agreed to drop the bill (The Jakarta Post, Sept. 14). On the contrary, in the House's plenary meeting on Sept. 14, the bill was passed by the House, without the government's endorsement (the Post, Sept, 15).

To a great many people, this kind of act shows how "arrogant" the House is. However, both sides are far from practicing good governance, a term which has become a daily political slogan.

For such an important bill, which will determine future certainty in business, especially on Batam -- and, as with other bill deliberations -- public input should have been sought.

The bill, which is said to have been hanging in the balance since 2001, could have been prepared better with public input, especially in the discussion of controversial articles.

This country has many brilliant economists that could have contributed, why weren't their opinions called for?

Everyone knows that community or public participation is a principle of good governance. Together with transparency and accountability, they are part of democracy. Ignoring these principles is to invite criticism, particularly in terms of controversial articles.

The House should be transparent in its activities, if it does not want to invite suspicion. It had agreed with the government to drop the deliberation, so why was the bill endorsed? Such a turn around -- to a certain extent -- could make the public wonder whether the House members tasked to deliberate the bill were bribed.

The government, on the other hand, has nothing to lose because under article 20 of the 1945 Constitution, the endorsement of a law must be agreed upon by both the House and the government, meaning it is not binding, and most importantly, it is unconstitutional as Yusril said (the Post, Sept. 16).

M. RUSDI Jakarta