The beginning of the end

The beginning of the end

When the Indonesian Military (TNI) mooted the idea for a
"Return to the 1945 Constitution" on Tuesday, it immediately
revived our memories of that fateful day in 1959, when then
president Sukarno pronounced those very same words that brought
the country back to its original basic law. Whether history is
about to repeat itself depends on one's interpretation of the
events surrounding the famous July 5, 1959 decree by Sukarno.

Most existing history textbooks still tell us that Sukarno
took that crucial decision because circumstances left him with no
other option. The nation, then ruled by a provisional
constitution that adopted the parliamentary system, was mired in
crisis which had virtually crippled the government, while
discontent in the regions culminated in armed rebellions in some
provinces. Many historians today still view the 1959 dekrit as
Indonesia's salvation from anarchy and the brink of collapse.

Another, newer interpretations of the 1959 events suggests
that Sukarno's move marked the beginning of the end of the
democratization process that the nation had been going through
since the 1945 proclamation of independence. The dekrit was
simply a tool that gave the legitimacy for Sukarno, whom hitherto
had been nothing more than a figurehead, to wrest power from the
parliament.

The dekrit ended the parliamentary system that had been in
place since 1950, and returned Indonesia to a presidential system
of government. Of course, Sukarno could not have done it alone.
The Army happily collaborated with him, but in return, it earned
additional political powers for itself.

To many revisionists, the "Return to the 1945 Constitution" in
1959 dealt the fatal blow to the democratization and nation-
building processes of the young republic, and plunged Indonesia
into two successive dictatorships for the next 39 years. It also
marked the official entry of the military into the political
arena, something that we still have to live with today.

The 37-article 1945 Constitution, drawn up in haste by our
founding fathers in the wake of the independence proclamation,
left many issues so vague that they were open to interpretation.
The interpretation of those in power essentially prevailed.

Sukarno exploited the 1945 Constitution to turn himself into a
legitimate dictator until 1966. Soeharto, who emerged from the
heavily politicized Army, used the basic law more effectively if
not ruthlessly, which allowed him to stay in power until he was
forced to resign in 1998 by a popular uprising.

Notice how neither Sukarno nor Soeharto were ever interested
in amending or replacing the 1945 Constitution. They even turned
it into a holy script. That's because the Constitution was
dictator-friendly, although that was never the intention of our
founding fathers when they drafted the basic law.

One can read many things into TNI's decision to moot the idea
of a "Return to the 1945 Constitution" right on the eve of the
annual meeting of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) which
starts today. We leave it to the experts to speculate about the
motive behind the TNI's move, but some people may find the
proposal appealing as an option, given that the nation is now
facing a possible constitutional crisis.

The most crucial agenda in this year's MPR meeting is to
finalize the constitutional amendments that started in 1999. It
is imperative that the MPR completes its task this year so that
the nation can elect its political leaders and government in the
2004 election under a new and more democratic system.

But as the MPR is about to complete its task with the fourth
package of amendments, it is understandable that more
disagreements are emerging as political groups, including the
TNI, realize the implications on their own political standing
beyond 2004.

Although the MPR gathering this time may not seem as exciting
as in previous years, its decisions are crucial in deciding the
future and shape of this nation. For many political groups, the
real battle is in the next few days.

If the MPR cannot reach an agreement, then the nation would
definitely find itself in a constitutional crisis that would
jeopardize the chances of the 2004 election ever taking place.
TNI's proposal for a "Return to the 1945 Constitution" could then
become one of the only few options available to Indonesia.

But given Indonesia's bitter history with the 1945
Constitution, returning to the dictator-friendly basic law comes
with a very high risk that all MPR members might want to ponder.
While the idea of an independent commission to prepare a new
basic law or amend the existing constitution is still the most
ideal path for Indonesia, the MPR has a duty to complete its task
of completing the amendment process.

Whatever shortcomings one finds in the four packages of
amendments to the 1945 Constitution, they still stand a better
chance then the original text in sparing Indonesia from being
plunged back into darkness once again. Going by history, if that
were to happen, it would take us three to four decades to get rid
of future dictators.

The outcome of this year's MPR meeting is therefore critical
because it could either mark the beginning of the end of the
democratic process that began in 1998, or the beginning of the
end of the authoritarian system that began in 1959.

The decision rests with the MPR members. Let's hope they make
the right choice.