The pros and cons of the presidential bill

The issue of who is to take over the country's reins if the president and vice president both become incapacitated has been the subject of controversy over the past few weeks. Political analyst J. Soedjati Djiwandono reflects on the issue.

JAKARTA (JP): We have laws on state institutions including the House of Representatives, the People's Consultative Assembly and the Supreme Court. Yet we have no law on the presidency except Assembly (MPR) decree No. VII/1973, which provides for the establishment of a triumvirate consisting of the home affairs minister, the foreign minister and military commander in the event of the incapacitation of both the president and the vice president. The triumvirate is to prepare for the election of a new president within a period of three months.

Such a law is certainly important, but its urgency is questionable. While not impossible, the likelihood of the simultaneous incapacitation of both the president and the vice president is too remote to be given priority in these early days of the reform process.

The custom of certain countries of not allowing their presidents and vice presidents to ever travel on the same aircraft, for example, is to reduce the possibility of such an eventuality.

Moreover, a decree by the Assembly is supposed to be superior to a piece of legislation by the House of Representatives (DPR). It is therefore doubtful if the latter can replace the former.

That is basically the argument, rightly to my mind, made by Harun Alrasid (The Jakarta Post, Feb. 29). However, to suggest that the Assembly decree of 1973 is invalid because the establishment of a triumvirate was "not recognized by the Constitution" is a faulty argument.

Precisely because in certain cases the Constitution does not provide sufficiently clear and detailed guidance, the Assembly determines the necessary regulations on such cases as the simultaneous incapacitation of both the president and vice president.

I agree, again, with him when he writes that it is "entirely up to the Assembly to decide if it wished to amend it using the new formula of speakers of the Assembly, House and Supreme Court." Yet the professor went on to call it a "strange idea". Interestingly, nonetheless, he offered a no less strange alternative, namely, that the Assembly speaker should "handle the matter alone" under such extraordinary circumstances.

I wonder if the political elite in this country really understands the need for reform, and particularly why the constitution needs amending, and what the priorities are.

I have argued on a number of occasions in this paper that I stand not just for amendments, but for a new constitution altogether.

I, for one, find it difficult to follow the thinking of our politicians. There have been earlier efforts in the Assembly to enact a ruling meaning the vice president would not automatically succeed the president in the event of the latter's permanent incapacitation as stipulated by Article 8 of the 1945 Constitution.

In the light of developments in the aftermath of the 1999 general election, one cannot but get the impression that such efforts have been motivated by short-term, narrow political interests, namely, to block vice president Megawati's chances of ever succeeding President Abdurrahman Wahid in the event of his incapacitation.

Anxiety over the possibility, however remote, of President Abdurrahman becoming incapacitated, especially when his seeming health problems are considered, is understandable. But anxiety over the prospect of Vice President Megawati taking over power in the face of such an eventuality, though also understandable, may be exaggerated. To be candid however, I share this anxiety myself on both counts.

To do justice to the vice president, however, certain factors need to be considered. First, it is not easy to be a second fiddle, to be second in command, at any time anywhere in the world. In fact, it's the most difficult job. In such a position, it is never easy for anyone to prove their muscle.

Second, as in the case of the late president Harry S. Truman of the United States, one is often underestimated until, to the surprise of everyone else, one has the opportunity to prove oneself. Third, the office often makes the man. Let's just hope that if the need should arise, that would apply to the vice president. In the final analysis, however, we should be prepared to pay the high price for democracy.