Whose representatives?

The race for the November presidential election will likely intensify after the General Elections Commission finishes counting the votes this week or next. Since neither of the two front-runners has won enough votes to secure the presidency outright, the focus will turn to the 65 seats for "functional groups" in the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR). What happens with these 65 representative votes could well be the decisive factor in November.

Next on the KPU's main agenda will be to decide how the 65 seats are distributed. They are given to representatives of societal groups, including religious councils, women's organizations, professional associations and business groups. The representatives are chosen by their respective groups, with the endorsement of the House of Representatives, and final approval by the president.

Their presence in the MPR is mandated by the 1945 Constitution to ensure that every group in society is represented in the state's highest decision-making body. It is all fine and good concerning their involvement in drawing up the State Policy Guidelines; their presence ensures the interests of their groups are taken into account. But when it comes to electing the president, especially in the close race assured in November's election, there is the moral question: Who will they really represent when they vote?

The groups are already well-represented by the political parties. Some, in fact, may be grossly overrepresented. The ulema selected for MPR seats, for example, will join several others who have taken up political careers. Some journalists also won MPR seats in last month's elections, as did many scholars, teachers, artists, lawyers and entrepreneurs. Workers, with three labor parties representing them in last month's elections, still failed to secure any representation.

As the swirling debate on the presidential election clearly shows, members of the functional groups are split on the issue. One group of ulema supports the nomination of incumbent B.J. Habibie, but another has expressed support for Megawati Soekarnoputri. Some journalists, scholars and lawyers were elected in last month's elections to represent Habibie's Golkar, and others for Megawati's Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan). There is no way of telling, or God forbid, forcing the 65 functional representatives in the MPR to vote for one or the other candidate if their own groups are divided on this issue.

The presence of the representatives in the MPR is one of the anomalies of our Constitution. Its intention -- that the highest state organ in the country encompasses every group in society -- is noble. It may even have served its purpose when the nation was in its infancy, and political parties at the time were deemed as not representing all groups in society.

But, as history has shown, this noble intention was abused by Soeharto, who personally selected the representatives to ensure that he was unanimously elected president six times in the past 32 years. With Habibie clearly trailing Megawati after last month's elections, there is the danger that he, too, will follow the lead of his political mentor, vetting candidates for the functional representatives to bolster his own position. After all, he will have the final say in their selection. Looking at last month's election results, one can be sure that Habibie will be counting on the support of the 65 representatives to have any realistic chance of beating Megawati.

Given that we have yet to amend the 1945 Constitution, the nation will have to follow the prescribed election procedures, including selecting the functional representatives. But there is one way in which these selected representatives could help promote our fledging democracy: They should abstain when called on to vote in November. If they follow their conscience, this is exactly what they are expected to do. A pledge to abstain made before they are sworn in to office would help to put to rest the debate, and probably an ugly fight, over how they should vote.

We already find ourselves with too many kingmaker wanna-bes jostling for position in the run-up to November. The minority political factions, which include the military, are showing signs that they want to land as many concessions as possible in return for their support for the candidates.

While the presence of the functional representatives in the MPR is probably justifiable or at least constitutional, they cannot be used to tip the balance in a democratic race. Like the 38 seats allocated to the military, the seats for the functional groups are not elected offices. They should not be used to foil the people's will, which has already been clearly expressed in the June elections.