Ridwan Max Sijabat, Jakarta – The 1945 Constitution identifies the House of Representatives as a honorable state institution with legislative and budgetary rights as well as a control function. But, in reality, its performance is not as good and popular as its name.
The public has been disappointed by the House's poor performance this year, contributing to its already badly tarnished image.
The legislative body was meant to read 76 bill this year, but has only managed to approve 30, half of them laws on the establishment of new regencies and municipalities. The bills that were approved were not particularly urgent or essential to democratization or the reform movement.
While the establishment of new regions is necessary, it is not urgent as it is correlated with the political recruitment of regional heads through local elections and the disbursement of special and general funds under the Regional Autonomy Law.
The House seems to have no clear vision of how to prioritize the deliberation of bills that benefit a majority of the people and democracy.
The freedom of information, intelligence, and military tribunal bills have been stranded in the House for years, while no one knows when the long-awaited bills on health and the haj will be endorsed.
If the House is aware of the importance of the 2009 general elections, the need for a better party system and the repair of its image should push the deliberation of the political bills to the top of its to-do list.
So far, only the bill on political parties has been approved, while the fate of the bill on general elections remains unclear because of conflicting interests among House factions.
The deliberation of the bills on presidential elections and the composition of the People's Consultative Assembly, the House, the Regional Representatives Council, and the provincial and regency legislatures is scheduled to begin in January.
Ten factions themselves contributed to the slow deliberation of the bills and their contents, with legislators and minority factions reportedly selling their ideologies and fighting for their own interests and their parties.
Minority factions also had difficulties distributing their members to a simultaneous deliberation of five to seven bills and to attend commission hearings with the government.
The establishment of new regions has allegedly been used by legislators to make money, through being brokers in the process, and by certain parties to ensure their members are successful in the subsequent local elections.
Thus, of some 250 bills on the national legislation program for the 2004-2009 period, only 110 have been deliberated and 80 approved. It seems extremely unlikely that the House will reach its target in the next one and a half years.
Most legislators have made a least three overseas trips this year to make comparative studies of bill deliberations, but these trips usually turn out to be not much more than opportunities for sight-seeing.
In terms of budgetary rights, the House has been a rubber stamp for the government on all proposed state budgets. Its commissions have never exercised their rights to ensure the parliament's accountability in all sectors. The recent deliberation of the 2008 budget resulted in no significant changes and the House has set no priorities for what the government should provide over the next fiscal year.
Although the Constitution clearly states that 20 percent of the state budget must be set aside for the education sector, the House has done nothing to press the government to implement the ruling. Even the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle, which has positioned itself as the opposition party, lacks the courage to declare the government guilty of violating the Constitution.
The House has never checked whether the state budget is being spent in accordance with its field allocation and has never followed up the Supreme Audit Agency's annual report on irregularities in all sectors.
The House has conflicting interests in handling national issues such as human rights, illegal logging and corruption. The reopening of the investigations into the 1998 and 1999 shootings at Trisakti University and the Semanggi Cloverleaf has drawn strong opposition from the ruling Golkar and Democratic parties.
The House's working committee have contributed nothing to eliminating illegal logging. The House has failed to press the government and judiciary to bring to justice all those who have stolen money from the country.
The recent recruitment of new members of the General Elections Commission (KPU) and the Anticorruption Commission (KPK) has raised fresh fears that money politics will once again dominate the 2009 elections, while the KPK has little of the courage required to go after corruption cases that involve the House, political parties, or law enforcement officers.
The KPU has indicated it can not work independently and professionally following its recent failure to set the budge for the 2009 election or satisfactorily settle the dispute over the North Maluku gubernatorial election.
The House and President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono have both skipped all ethical and moral considerations in recruiting new KPU members. Neither has the political courage required to drop an elected member facing corruption charges.
Much like its predecessors, the current KPK leadership is unlikely to investigate corruption at the National Police, the Attorney General's Office or the courts, after the House elected Antasari Azhar, a controversial prosecutor will a dubious track record, the lead the commission.
Civil groups have expressed little hope that the KPK under Antasari's leadership will continue its investigation into allegations that Bank Indonesia paid House members Rp 31.5 billion (US$3.3 million) to pass banking laws it found favorable, particularly as the case involves high-profile public officials.
Similarly, a planned inquiry into irregularities surrounding the Bank Indonesia Liquidity Support (BLBI) funds is unlike to result in a fair settlement of the Rp 150-trillion scandal as a large part of the money is believed to have ended up in the hands of certain political parties, and this is why the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle and Golkar have been reluctant to support the proposed inquiry.
Non-governmental organizations have also said the inquiry was proposed by minority parties wanting to appeal to the "hearts" of the public ahead of the legislative election.
Indonesian Corruption Watch has said it is suspicious of the agenda of some parties in the recruitment of new KPU and KPK members.
And now, after successfully securing their own political agenda and a higher monthly take-home-pay of up to Rp 70 million, politicians at the legislative body are seeking better housing with hope they can occupy livable and luxurious apartments upon returning to parliament after the 2009 legislative election.
The House has allocated a huge budget to bulldoze the current official housing complex in Kalibata, South Jakarta, and develop a luxurious apartment block on the land.
But despite all these improvements to their lives in the last nine years, the House and its members have failed to make a significant contribution to the people and the nation.
Many elements in the community and a few legislators have called for reforms in the House's organization and the electoral system so as to elect qualified and dedicated legislators.
Among the key points discussed has been the appointment of the House's secretary general by the House itself, instead of the government as happens now. The secretary general is required to report to and be held accountable to the House.
The Secretariat General itself should recruit more expert staff and researchers, instead of structural staff, to help legislators in doing their daily tasks. The House should also phase out the hierarchy in its leadership so that it needs only a speaker for all legislators
The general election bill being deliberated by the House should mandate the establishment of smaller electoral districts and the use of an open proportional system to get legitimate and qualified legislators to sit in the House for the 2009-2014 period.
If the House has the political will required to set a 5-percent electoral threshold and a 10-percent parliamentary threshold, it will reduce the number of factions and will have a strong power base to ensure a system of checks and balances with the government.
Finally, the House will also avoid becoming a rubber stamp for the executive branch if the Regional Representatives Council is granted the legislative and budgetary rights to uphold a two-room system in the parliament.