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)