Sharing India's experience

By G.S. Edwin

JAKARTA (JP): Democracy is peoples' aristocracy. As is the case with every aristocracy, it has its downside, which wrecked Indonesia's brief association with democracy, soon after it gained independence in 1945. Unfortunately, this downside seems to be a possibility even today. But there is no alternative to democracy, despite its imperfections and vulnerability.

The appeal and the natural yearning of mankind for democracy make it a mighty brand equity. Undemocratic governments also hide under its banner. The New Order government was one such pseudo democracy.

Though it may sound jarring today, one must accept that Soeharto's 32 years rule was not an unmixed blessing. He was commended, particularly, by all the western democratic countries, for achieving political stability and making Indonesia an attractive destination for foreign investment. Indeed, the level of economic achievement almost justified Deng Xiaoping's observation, "we can't do without dictatorship. Only we must use it when necessary"

So, to an outside observer it was actually the unchanging, soul-numbing monotony of power that triggered the overthrow of Soeharto in 1998.

Nevertheless, the epochal event, generated a tremendous awakening, call it a political renaissance, if you will, bringing forth volcanic ideas of 1945 vintage, since then dormant. They are: Rulers must change periodically, otherwise, once entrenched in power, they produce political apathy and only facilitate servitude; Governance is moral before it is political; None should plunge into politics to make his fortune.

The primal principle of democracy is the worth and dignity of the individual. Justice is the basis of all societies.

Indonesia must now set up a new paradigm of public discourse and conduct, responsibility and rectitude. Certain ground rules should be observed --

First, democracy stands for equality; but carried too far as a rhetoric, it would paralyze the polity and governance.

Second, the deadliest foe of democracy is liberty frenzied or turning licentious. Clement Atlee, the Labor Prime Minister of England and a great believer of democracy, who granted independence to India, said in despair: "Democracy means governing by discussion; but, it is only effective if you stop people talking too much".

Third, all democratic governments are managed by the combined wisdom and folly of the people, so expectations must be realistic.

Fourth, in a pluralistic country like Indonesia, there should be a conscious endeavor to diffuse political power and responsibility widely and make the number of men engaged in public affairs sufficiently large.

Maybe a road map for Indonesia is desirable to "put first things first". India, perhaps, has some lessons for Indonesia, given some similarities between the two countries.

India has a plethora of minority groups based on religion, language, region, custom, tradition and race.

The Indian Constitution accommodates the bewildering plurality by harmonizing the conflicting interests through an exhaustive enumeration of the various inviolable rights of all Indians.

It also establishes a clear relationship between the governments at the center and the states, and within a state, between a state government and the villages administration.

No basic law defining the political structure can be static if it is to serve a dynamic body politic. So India found it necessary to appoint recently a Constitution Review Commission to review the working of the Constitution and suggest recommendations for change, aiming for better governance.

At this juncture, it would be appropriate for Indonesia to appoint a constitution review commission. The 1945 Constitution would need a revision because of the ease with which it was subverted, meaning it probably lacks checks and balances.

Besides, a high-powered review commission going around the country and inviting people to state their constitutional expectations is bound to create a tremendous synergy at the grass-root level.

It will certainly deepen faith in the Constitution and in the determination of a constitutional rule to secure justice, liberty and equality of opportunities for all.

Indonesia can also note that India has given, through its Constitution, independence from the executive to many bodies, to infuse confidence, strengthen democratic sentiment and create a durable democratic bias.

There is among others the election commission, the minority/human rights commission and the finance commission. There is also specific guarantee of independence of the judiciary.

In Indonesia, if and when a commission produces a revised Constitution, the legislature and the People's Consultative Assembly, may convert itself into a Constituent Assembly, to deliberate over the various provisions in the new Constitution and approve it, helping real democracy to take root.

Otherwise, there could be a political vacuum and a real monster of a government can step in and masquerade as a democracy, again.

It would be a great loss to the world, if Indonesia were to falter for want of public spirited citizens, wise leaders, enlightened statesmanship and a consensus on a grand vision.