Why change of presidents has never been smooth

JAKARTA (JP): Presidential succession in the country has never been smooth as past presidents failed to address the aspirations of their people, observers say.

Political observer Arbi Sanit of the University of Indonesia said former Indonesian presidents tended to become oligarchic in ruling the country and pushed aside people's interests.

"The country's former presidents have only been good at the beginning of their tenure. The longer they held power, the worse their handling of state institutions became in order to protect their interests," Arbi told The Jakarta Post on Saturday.

Their oligarchic control was evident in certain acts, such as corruption, collusion and nepotism (KKN), according to Arbi, who used to support former president Abdurrahman Wahid.

Separately, Mochtar Pabottingi of the National Institute of Sciences (LIPI) said that if past presidents had worked in a respectable manner by avoiding corruption and autocratic rule, they might have seen out their terms gracefully.

Like Abdurrahman, his predecessors Sukarno, Soeharto and B.J. Habibie were forced to step down in disgrace before they finished their tenures.

Sukarno, the first Indonesian president and father of the incumbent President, Megawati Soekarnoputri, was forced to resign after a bloody abortive coup blamed on the Indonesian Communist Party on Sept. 30, 1965. He was then replaced by Soeharto, a military man, who was in power for 32 years.

Soeharto was forced to step down in 1998 following the Trisakti incident in which four students were killed and which triggered three days of nationwide riots.

Habibie assumed power after Soeharto -- whom he called his political teacher -- at a time when Indonesia was experiencing its worst economic crisis. His controversial tenure came to an end after only 521 days when the People's Consultative Assembly rejected his accountability report.

Abdurrahman was the first president to be elected democratically. He, however, was removed by the Assembly after only 21 months in the post.

Arbi, however, blamed the country's Constitution for the country's bleak history, saying the Constitution does not set regulations to settle problems when the executive and legislative branches are in dispute.

He said that amending the Constitution was a must so that it could prevent the People's Consultative Assembly, which should encourage a president to improve his/her performance, from toppling the president.

Arbi also said the country was facing a leadership crisis resulting from the fact that every succession must be supported by the military.

"Politicians keep inviting the military to intervene in the political arena. It, of course, will affect a civilian government in ruling the country, as it must compromise in many things to suit the military," Arbi said.

Meanwhile, Pabottingi said that the downfall of all former presidents began when they violated the Constitution, which spawned a people's movement to topple them.

"As an example, our first president Sukarno made his mistake when he declared himself president for life. Of course it was against the Constitution."

As for Abdurrahman, Pabottingi said it was the allegation of corruption that brought him down.

"Misdemeanors by our presidents only show that Indonesian politics still promotes an authoritarian platform and has yet to find a democratic platform which sides with the people," he said.

Mochtar also said that behind political competition, there was the military, which played a pivotal role in the replacement of all Indonesian presidents. (tso)