Soeharto's exit debated by lawyers
Soeharto's exit debated by lawyers
JAKARTA (JP): Constitutional law expert Yusril Ihza Mahendra
insisted that Soeharto's resignation and transfer of power to
B.J. Habibie was in line with the 1945 Constitution, but other
observers begged to differ.
Yusril also said the transfer was in accordance with People's
Consultative Assembly (MPR) Decree no. 7/1973 which regulates the
transfer of power in the event of the president becoming
incapacitated.
"Everything was well prepared so the transfer of power was
valid," he said. "It is acceptable that Habibie took his
presidential oath at the State Palace because of the emergency
situation."
The decree states, among other things, that before a vice
president can be sworn in as president, he should take an oath
before the House of Representatives. If it is not possible for
the House to convene a session, the vice president must take his
oath before the Supreme Court.
Habibie was sworn in before Chief Justice Sarwata and other
judges from the Supreme Court.
Yusril conceded that Habibie should have been sworn in at a
House plenary session, but argued that "the House could not hold
a plenary session because the parliament building was being
occupied by students."
Satya Arinanto, secretary of the constitutional law department
in the University of Indonesia Faculty of Law, said he was not
sure whether swearing Habibie into office outside of a House
plenary session was legally acceptable.
"It seems valid but it is also controversial. Is it really
true that the House of Representatives (DPR) could not hold a
plenary session because the building was being occupied by
demonstrating students?" he said.
He also suggested that the MPR immediately convene a special
session in response to growing student rejection of Habibie's
appointment. The session was also needed to decide how long
Habibie would spend in office, to elect a new vice president, and
to discuss any possible changes to the current representation in
the MPR and DPR, he said.
Constitutional law expert Harun Alrasid separately said that
the MPR retained the authority to decide whether a special
session was necessary, in accordance with Chapter 8 of the
Constitution.
"If the MPR, or the President, or both, call for a special
session of the MPR, then one should be assembled," he said of the
1,000 member Upper House, which has to convene at least once
every five year to prepare and endorse the State Policy
Guidelines, and to elect a president and vice president. It also
listens to a speech of accountability which must be made by the
president at the end of his or her term in office.
Harun dismissed the student rejection of Habibie, saying that
they and the general public should the new President a chance to
prove his ability to lead the country.
"Students should be satisfied with Soeharto's resignation and
give Habibie support to help defuse the crisis and restore
normality after the recent rioting and unrest," he said.
Separately, legal expert Dimyati Hartono, who is also a leader
of the National Reform Movement, a loose association of pro-
reform activists, said Habibie's appointment was not valid.
He also called on the Assembly to hold a special session to
elect a new president and vice president.
"The transfer of power is invalid not only because of the
students' rejection, but because it was conducted outside a House
plenary session," he said.
An alliance of non-governmental organizations also said
Habibie's appointment had no legal, political or moral basis.
The transfer of power was against the constitution which meant
that Habibie was only an acting president, they said in a
statement.
The statement was jointly signed by the Circle for
Participatory Social Management (CPSM), the Independent
Electioneering Monitoring Committee (KIPP), the Commission for
Missing Persons and Victims of Violence (Kontras), the Indonesian
Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI) and the Jakarta Legal Aid Institute.
The statement also called for Soeharto to explain the reasons
for his resignation before a House session. (rms)