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.