• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Monthly Political and Economic Analysis the house divided Vol. I, No. 7, November 2004 Editor’s Note Learning From The 1 Tragedy in Thailand:10 The House Divided: Quo Vadis The Asean The Conflict Between 3 Way? The National and People’s Coalition in Modest Lifestyle versus The Parliament Corruption 14 The United Indonesia Report on Discussion: Cabinet: The Structure and 17 The End of Coalition7 Composition of The with the People? New Cabinet: Challenges, Hopes, and Reality P O L I T I C S THE HOUSE DIVIDED: THE CONFLICT BETWEEN THE NATIONAL AND PEOPLE’S COALITION IN THE PARLIAMENT ndonesians are still celebrating the success of the 2004 General Elections and the establishment of the new cabinet. However, I the celebration is disturbed with the dispute among members of the parliament (DPR), which is divided into two coalitions, the People’s Coalition supporting Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and the National Coalition as the opposition. The disagreement in the parliament was foreseeable the moment the National Coalition was established back in September to support the candidacy of the incumbent Megawati Sukarnoputri, as five major and medium-sized parties joined forces to support Megawati in the presidential election. The two coalitions are now fighting for positions in the DPR commission leadership. It has been more than one month since members of the parliament were sworn in on October 1, 2004. However, not much has been accomplished by the DPR, because the commissions have not yet been confirmed. In fact, the creation of the commissions itself was the main trigger to the dispute between the two coalitions. The factions from the People’s Coalition component parties: Democrat Party (PD), National Mandate Party (PAN), United Development Party (PPP), Justice Prosperity Party (PKS), and the merged faction of Democracy Star Pioneer parties (F-BPD) had been boycotting the meetings in the DPR due to the inconsistency of the parliament speakers. In a consultation meeting on October 19, 2004, 10 out of 11 factions had agreed to appoint commission leadership proportionally and not through voting. However, the DPR leaders later decided to appoint the commission leadership through voting.1 To anticipate the boycott of parties in the People’s Coalition, the National Coalition parties: Golkar, the Indonesian Democratic Party - Struggle (PDI-P), the National Awakening Party (PKB), the Peace and Prosperity Party (PDS), and the Reform Star Party (PBR) have decided to slightly change the order in the DPR. The National Coalition considers that several chapters on decision-making, especially the quorum requirements should be changed. With the absence of parties from the People’s Coalition, the remaining parliamentary factions from the National Coalition resumed the plenary meeting to determine the leadership of commissions in the DPR. As a ___________________________________ 1 Tempo, November 1 – 7, 2004 Vol. I, No. 7, November 2004 | PostScript 3 result, DPR members from the National Coalition dominate the commission leadership.2 DPR Commissipoon Leadership Determined in the Plenary Meeting, October 28, 2004 COMMISSION NAME FACTION I THEO L SAMBUAGA GOLKAR II FERRY MURSYDAN B GOLKAR III TERAS NARANG PDI-P IV MINDO SIANIPAR PDI-P V SOFYAN MILE GOLKAR VI KHOFIFAH INDAR PARAWANSA PKB VII AGUSMAN EFFENDI GOLKAR VIII YUSUF MUHAMMAD PKB IX GOENAWAN SLAMET PDI-P X HERI ACHMADI PDI-P XI PASKAH SUZETTA GOLKAR The composition of the commission leadership has raised criticism from factions that did not attend the meeting. The parties from the People’s Coalition delivered a motion of no confidence to the DPR speakers and refused to accept the decision made by the DPR. In its declaration, the PPP faction stated that it disagreed with the decision of the DPR plenary meeting, which has violated the order of the DPR. Deputy Chairman of the PPP faction, Lukman Hakim Saifuddin stated that the decision made on the plenary meeting was illegal, and the faction will not attend any plenary meetings. Ahmad Farhan Hamid from the PAN faction shared the same opinion, saying that the result of the plenary meting was illegal, because the speakers had agreed to postpone the meeting. However, the DPR speaker, Agung Laksono, claimed that the commissions created in the plenary meeting is legitimate and is able to carry out its duties to hold hearings with their partners in the executive branch. As a result, the parties in the People’s Coalition have created their own version of commission leaderships. Irwan Prayitno from the PKS, stated that it would create “competing commissions” as part of the commission group. In a press conference at the DPR Building, the PKS faction announced that it did not acknowledged the commission leadership announced by the DPR. ___________________________________ 2 Tempo, November 1 – 7, 2004 4 PostScript | Vol. I, No. 7, November 2004 Commission Leadership set up by the People’s Coalition. COMMISSION NAME FACTION I DJOKO SUSILO PAN II RYAAS RASYID BPD III LUKMAN HAKIM PPP IV SUSMONO PKS V AZRUL AZWAR PPP VI DIDIK J. RACHBINI PAN VII IDRIS LUTFIE PKS VIII KH AZIDIN PD IX SUKARDI HARUN PPP X ANGELINA SONDAKH PD XI IRZAN TANDJUNG PD The dispute in the DPR has stretched to the executive branch, as the conflicting coalitions have tried to influence it to side with each of them in the conflict. The National Coalition has intensively approached the president, military commanders and the ministers to become their working partners. They have begun inviting ministers to attend meetings and informal functions. In response to this situation, State Secretary Minister Yusril Izha Mahendra stated the government would temporarily cease relations with the DPR until the internal conflict is resolved. This statement was announced after President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono met with Chief Justice in the Constitutional Court Jimly Asshiddiqie at the Presidential Palace on November 1, 2004. The government hopes that the DPR would settle the dispute before the government decides to resume partnership with the DPR, stated Yusril.3 President SBY remarked that the political problem between the DPR and the government is an adjustment between state institutions as a consequence of the Amendment of the 1945 Constitution.4 Meanwhile, Jimly stated that the internal conflict in the DPR must be settled by the DPR itself. The Constitutional Court will not interfere in the internal dispute of other high state bodies, added Jimly. The internal conflict in the DPR is disadvantageous for the public and creates a hurdle for the parliament to settle problems related to the constitution. The dispute is destructive for the existence of democracy in the country and has generated conservatism. The conflict is a foolish act of the DPR as they should be more concerned in solving problems from the past, rather than fighting for leadership positions. If the DPR were ___________________________________ 3 Kompas, November 2, 2004 4 Kompas, November 3, 2004 Vol. I, No. 7, November 2004 | PostScript 5 unable to solve the internal conflict, then the government system would be affected, and could lead to a constitutional crisis. Head of Research and Development at PDI-P, Kwik Kian Gie, stated that the conflict in the DPR has impaired the image of the DPR. The members of parliament are acting like political animals and not as honorable statesmen, added Kwik. Meanwhile, political observer from the University of Indonesia, Maswadi Rauf, stated that the people should just ignore the DPR because the internal conflict between the National Coalition and the People’s Coalition is proof that the DPR no longer works for the people. However, Maswadi is convinced that reconciliation between the two conflicting parties is still possible. The DPR is a place to solve various problems, and it should be able to solve its own problems, added Maswadi. DPR member from the Golkar Party Faction, Ade Komaruddin, and from the PKS faction, Irwan Prayitno, shared this opinion, saying that the DPR will not be able to fight for the public interest effectively if it continues to be caught up in internal issues. 5 Fortunately, the dispute between coalitions in the legislative body did not interfere with the executive branch. President SBY has been able to neutralize the situation by meeting directly with DPR Speaker Agung Laksono for a consultation meeting. SBY hopes that the DPR would resolve the conflict so that it can resume its function to monitor the government. The steps taken by SBY should be noted, as it is able to reduce the tension between the two bodies. Meanwhile, an observer at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Indra J. Piliang, stated that the internal conflict in the DPR could be beneficial for SBY. With the DPR’s disability to complete the deliberation on the constitution, SBY would have an opportunity to innovate without having to consult with the parliament. Therefore, SBY would not have to worry, because the cynics are now directed to the parliament and not the administration. * * * Many people are disappointed with what is being demonstrated by the parliament. Members of the DPR, both in the National Coalition and the People’s Coalition, are only concerned about their own personal interest, without paying any attention to the mounting problems of the country. The dogged position and the lack of concerns towards others will not solve the internal conflict. Furthermore, the creation of a ‘competing’ commission will only worsen the situation and aggravate the polarization in the DPR. It is embarrassing to see the honorable elected officials engaged in such a dishonorable attitude. If SBY and the cabinet are being evaluated after their first 100 days in office, then the DPR should also be evaluated in its first 100 days and see what it has achieved during that period of time. It is likely that the DPR will not achieve much during this time, because they are too busy fighting for their status.

Load more

  5

Copy Link