Scholars join opposition to constitutional amendment
Kurniawan Hari, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta
A group of scholars have urged the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) to stop the current process of constitutional amendment, arguing that the series of amendments implemented by the ad hoc committee for amendment of the Constitution (PAH I) had been out of proportion.
"In order to avoid constitutional problems in our administrative system, we would urge Assembly members to stop the current amendment process," said the scholars' spokesman, Sadjarwo, during a meeting with House deputy speaker Soetardjo Soerjogoeritno here on Monday.
The scholars included constitutional expert Sri Soemantri, Usep Ranawijaya, Budi Harsono, A.S. Tambunan and Sri Mulyono Herlambang.
Pro-reform activists have also criticized the amendments which, according to them, are full of political compromises among the big political parties.
The activists have also called for the establishment of an independent commission to replace the ad hoc committee so as to ensure that constitutional amendments are free from the effects of the power struggle among the country's elite.
The call has been ignored as it has no legal foundation. Under the law as it stands, only MPR members have the right to amend the country's Constitution.
Since January 2002, the 48 members of the ad hoc committee have been focusing on amending articles relating to religion, education, composition of the Assembly, and economic affairs.
The fourth amendment was scheduled to be the last in a series of amendments to the Constitution.
The scholars pointed at the third amendment last year which, according to them, had altered the administrative system initiated by the founding fathers.
The original version of Article 1 (2) of the 1945 Constitution reads: "Sovereignty resides with the people and is given effect by the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR)". The article was amended in October last year so as to now read as follows: "Sovereignty resides with the people and is given effect based on the Constitution."
The scholars claimed that the amendment contradicted the preamble of the 1945 Constitution which says that Indonesia adopts "democracy which is guided by the inner wisdom of unanimity arising out of deliberation among representatives".
"Legally, the amendment had caused confusion as regards the form and sovereignty of the state. The principal difficulty was the that MPR no longer held the people's sovereignty," Sadjarwo added.
A further impact of the amendment was that it negated the existence of the Unitary Republic of Indonesia, he added.
The rejection by the scholars was surprising as the amendment was aimed to establishing a bicameral system in which the Assembly would no longer be a permanent institution but rather would survive as a joint session of the House and the regional representatives' council (DPD), which is to be set up later.
Soetardjo of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan) said he fully supported the concerns.
Responding to the adverse comments, PAH I secretary Ali Masykur Musa said the rejection had been caused by a misunderstanding.
"I think the committee has to clarify this issue. If it is not then I think that the people will think that their aspirations are not being accommodated," Ali told the press.
Ali, who also chairs the National Awakening Party (PKB) faction in the House, admitted that around 200 legislators had also urged the PAH I members to stop the amendment process.
Ali, however, said that officially his committee had never received any complaints from legislators in the House of Representatives (DPR).
He also invited any groups in the society to share their views on the amendment process.
"Now is the opportune time for the people to convey their opinions to the Assembly," he added.
Ali said that currently fellow legislators were collecting input from the public on the draft of the fourth amendment.