The fragile democracies of RP and RI

The fragile democracies of RP and RI

By Joel Pinaroc

MANILA: The Indonesian legislature overwhelmingly voted this
week to begin impeachment proceedings against President
Abdurrahman Wahid. It agreed to convene the People's Consultative
Assembly (MPR), Indonesia's highest legislative body, in August
to decide whether to remove Abdurrahman from office. It is the
MPR that elects Indonesia's president.

Abdurrahman is being impeached after running Indonesia and
reducing it to shambles for only 19 months. The MPR session is a
referendum on Abdurrahman's leadership. Abdurrahman is required
to render a report on his administration, on the basis of which
the assembly will decide whether to remove or retain him.

Unlike the impeachment trial of then President Joseph Estrada
in the Senate last December, the Indonesian impeachment
proceedings are not a long-winded process bound by judicial
procedures.

Whatever the differences in the process, Abdurrahman, like
Estrada, is a democratically elected president, and faces removal
from office before the end of his term. In both cases,
impeachment action sprang from essentially similar causes:
involvement in corruption scandals, erratic leadership and
incompetence.

The Indonesian legislature (DPR) voted for impeachment even
though the solicitor general had cleared Abdurrahman of two
financial scandals. The first involved the siphoning of US$4
million from the state food agency, and the other involved
alleged misuse of a $2-million donation from the Sultan of
Brunei.

The solicitor general found no evidence that Abdurrahman
personally benefited from the transactions. But this did not
prevent Abdurrahman's opponents from getting DPR to vote for
initiating impeachment action. They are holding him responsible
for the chaotic state of affairs in Indonesia.

Abdurrahman has few options left to avoid removal from office.
Indonesia is in turmoil. It is wracked by ethnic and separatist
conflicts. Economic reform has stagnated. The DPR is fractured by
political infighting. Abdurrahman is politically isolated. On the
day parliament voted to begin impeachment proceedings,
Abdurrahman's backers tried to storm parliament.

The President is a Muslim cleric with a large constituency in
East Java where mobs have attacked churches and public places to
protest moves to impeach him in Jakarta.

Unless a compromise formula is found within the next two
months to break the political gridlock, the assembly is poised to
dismiss Abdurrahman and transfer power to his rival, Vice
President Megawati Soekarnoputri.

That Estrada was replaced by a woman vice president, Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo, and that Abdurrahman is likely to be replaced
by Megawati, is pure coincidence. Political dynamics in the
Philippines and Indonesia are different, although both crises
mark trials of their democracies.

Megawati's party, the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle
(PDI Perjuangan) holds the most number of seats in the DPR.
Abdurrahman's party has only 10 percent of the seats. Despite
this, he won the presidency against Megawati by cobbling together
a majority alliance with other parties. But this time,
Abdurrahman, who is partly blind, has lost the support of his
allies in DPR mainly after having a running battle with them and
at one time calling them "a bunch of kindergartens."

Abdurrahman who, like Estrada, has insisted that he is
innocent of the charges and that attempts to remove him are
unconstitutional, has tried to stave off impeachment by
threatening to declare a state of emergency. Such a declaration
would allow him to disband the DPR and call for snap elections.
He abandoned the plan after military leaders, his own security
minister and some members of his Cabinet told him that they would
not support it and that it would spark widespread violence.

The impasse has tempted the military to take a front-line role
as powerbrokers after the generals had taken the backseat
following the resignation of President Suharto two years ago.
Although the Indonesian army has a long record of political
intervention, its pivotal role in withdrawing support from
Abdurrahman illustrates the point that when democratic
institutions are fragile, military intervention is crucial to the
life and death of governments, regardless of whether presidents
are democratically elected.

Essentially, the Philippine people power crisis and the
Indonesian crisis are about changing leaders either through
elaborate impeachment trial or a simpler referendum by the MPR.
Both underline the instability of the older Philippine democracy
and the younger Indonesian democracy.

Their institutional foundations remain fragile.

Philippines Daily Inquirer/Asia News Network