Whither the Special Session of MPR?

Whither the Special Session of MPR?

J. Soedjati Djiwandono

JAKARTA (JP): In a way, People's Consultative Assembly (MPR)
sessions throughout former president Soeharto's New Order regime
resembled Javanese shadow shows. Most people attending already
knew the plot, some even in great detail. Yet they still turned
up to find out how the story was going to be told by the
particular dalang (puppeteer, story teller). That's where the fun
lay.

There, however, the similarity ended -- for the dalang
remained the same, namely, Soeharto. There was hardly any fun in
his "show", and people participated in the whole process,
particularly in the general elections, mostly because they had no
choice.

With regard to the coming Special Session of the MPR, however,
it is not clear what the story is all about, or if one has been
written at all. And there may be more than one dalang. So how the
story will be told is part of the mystery of the Special Session.

It may not be apt, however, to compare this year's Special
Session of the MPR with that of the Provisional People's
Consultative Assembly (MPRS) in early 1967. They are the only two
Special Sessions of the supreme governing body in the Indonesian
political system based on the 1945 Constitution. The latter was
convened when the late president Sukarno was still in power,
although whether his power was real is questionable.

Of greater importance is that the dalang was the newly
emerging leader in the person of general, later acting president,
and then president, Soeharto. He was the man calling the shots.

Now that Soeharto has resigned, the coming MPR Special Session
is a result of an agreement between President B.J. Habibie and
the MPR's leaders. The Special Session of the MPRS had president
Sukarno's accountability report as the main item on its agenda.

He was held responsible for the Gestapu affair -- an abortive
coup attempt by the now defunct Indonesian Communist Party on
Sept. 30, 1965.

In hindsight it looks contrary to reason that president
Sukarno should have been held responsible for what was regarded
as a coup attempt, by definition an act directed against him. But
putting logic aside, Sukarno's accountability report was
rejected. He was to remain president, yet Soeharto was appointed
acting president, and the following year full president,
replacing Sukarno.

Taking the Special Session of the MPRS as a precedent,
logically the coming Special Session of the MPR should first of
all demand former president Soeharto's accountability report.
Indeed, there has been no coup attempt or anything similar to the
Gestapu affair. But the monetary and economic crisis has revealed
how badly the country's political system functioned under
Soeharto because of his manipulation through collusion,
corruption, nepotism and cronyism. This spurred the accelerated
movement for reform that finally led to Soeharto's resignation.

It has, overall, been a crisis no less epoch-making than the
Gestapu affair.

Soeharto's accountability would not be enough, however. As
president, together with Habibie as vice president, he was the
result of his own manipulation of the MPR, the political parties,
and the general elections. Thus not only his presidency, but the
entire New Order system has turned out to be lacking in
legitimacy.

And not only Soeharto, but all the sociopolitical forces --
Golkar, the United Development Party (PP), the Indonesian
Democratic Party (PDI) of Surjadi (now Budi Hardjono), and the
Armed Forces (ABRI), and thus the MPR itself, which unanimously
elected Soeharto as president and Habibie as vice president
unopposed -- are all responsible for the malfunctioning of the
political system.

Therein lies the justification, and the legitimacy of the
Special Session of the MPR. A new mandate of the people is
required, and thus a fresh general election that will form a new
MPR, elect a new president and a new vice president, and thus a
new government that will be more representative of the people.

Short of that, the justification and legitimacy of the Special
Session will depend on whether it results in decisions imbued
with the political will to implement total and comprehensive
reform of the political system as demanded by the people. Only
then will it truly embody the aspirations of the people.