Connect with us

Southeast Asia

Indonesian Constitution Message on Election Postponement

Published

on

It is provocating to read the legal point of view written by some Indonesian scholars to create legal basis of the delaying of concurrent election in Indonesia . several scholars try to move the flashpoint of the chaotic idea of ​​postponing elections from the narrative of postponing elections for the sake of economic stability and the issue of high levels of satisfaction with the current President to the pendulum of constitutional issues. Some constitutionalist gave advise from the constitutional law lens to stop this polemic by presenting an alternative exit law in the form of constitutional changes, both formal changes as provided in Article 37 of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and through non-formal mechanisms, namely asking the interpretation of the Constitutional Court. in the judicial review of Article 167 paragraph (1) of Law Number 7 of 2017 concerning to Elections against Article 22 E paragraph (1) in conjunction with Article 22 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Where Article a quo confirms that elections are held every five years in conflict with provisions regarding to compelling circumstances as they are currently being faced, namely the Health emergency due to COVID-19.

The alternative given seems to be able to unravel the tangled threads of the polemic of postponing the election constitutionally, but when examined, the ideas offered can collide with the value of constitutionalism in the 1945 Constitution. Therefore, this opinion examines this from the text of the formation and amendment of the 1945 Constitution.

A Republic looks like A monarchy

The 1945 Constitution does not explicitly regulate the mechanism for postponing elections. Nevertheless, that does not mean that it can be interpreted that the delay is allowed or prohibited. Both options have a chance of being considered constitutional. That is why it is pivotal to understand and explore the original intent of why postponing the election is prohibited or allowed.

One of the reasons why postponing the election is seen as inappropriate because the idea of ​​the status quo today contradicts the form of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI). The spirit of the form of a unitary state and a republican form of government must be interpreted in one breath. That is the choice of the founding fathers and mothers to choose the form of a unitary state and a republican form of government.

In the form of a republican government, the process of changing state leaders is carried out openly through an election process and has a fixed term in office limit, not in a closed manner like elections based on descent in the form of a monarchy government. The consequence of the existence of an open power transfer process gave birth to an electoral system that was carried out regularly. So that, The elections are the only legal mechanism and the constitutional way in succession the leadership of a country in the form of a republic particularly Indonesia. So that elections must be held to ensure that the spirit of constitutionalism in the form of republican government is maintained. 

Furthermore, Article 37 paragraph (5) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia mandates that in the mechanism of formal constitutional changes, specifically, the form of the unitary state of the Republic of Indonesia cannot be changed. In other words, pushing the postponement of elections actually leads to the constitutional disobedience to the provisions contained in the constitution itself and leads to changing the form of a monarchy where the ruling state leader does not have a specific time limit.

Betraying the fundamental Agreement on Amendment to the 1945 Constitution.

The history of constitutional changes in the 1999-2002 period has established five basic agreements in the change agenda. The five agreements served as guidelines (agenda setting) when the framer’s constitution changed. The basic agreements drawn up by the Ad Hoc Committee  are: 1) not changing the preamble to the 1945 Constitution, 2) pertaining to the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia, 3) Reinforcing the presidential government system, 4) explanations for the 1945 Constitution containing normative matters will be included. Into articles 5) make changes by adding an addendum.

According to Cheryl Saunders, a constitutional law professor at Melbourne University, these five points are the agenda for changing the constitution (agenda setting), which is accommodated in the amendments to the constitution. Changes to the constitution always have a background, history and purpose. Changes to the Indonesian constitution depart from the historical aspects that occurred and were experienced in the past and the reaction to previous state administration practices. The agreement to amend the 1945 Constitution became the starting point for correcting weaknesses in past state practices.

One of the weak points of past state administration practices is the flexibility of interpretation during the presidential term of office. The former 1945 Constitution, the change in term of office, was multi-interpretative. This situation then opened the opportunity to MPRS Decree Number IX/MPRS/1966 regarding the appointment of President Soekarno as the great leader of the revolution and president for life, and this was repeated when President Suharto sanctified the interpretation of the absence of firm limitations in the presidential term of office so that he reigned for approximately 32 years.

The message can explain why the presidential term is limited to 5 years and can only be re-elected for one term. This provision is intended in the basic agreement to amend the 1945 Constitution, emphasizing the presidential government system. In a country that adheres to a presidential government system, the president has a fixed term in office. A democratic presidential election process is carried out through elections, thus changing the indirect presidential election system (through the MPR) into direct elections. In line with that, Chapter VIIB was created, which contains Article 22 E paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution to guarantee a 5-year cycle in filling the presidential office. Therefore, the postponement of the election betrays the basic agreement in the amendment of the 1945 Constitution and the values ​​of constitutionalism contained therein.

So that the idea of asking the Constitutional Court’s interpretation regarding the constitutionality of postponing the election is irrational, especially if the Constitutional Court Judge considers legal background from the provisions on the limitation of presidential positions and the basic agreement on amendments to the existing 1945 Constitution. Including when the delay is collided with reasons of urgency forcing. So this must refer to the MK’s interpretation of the emergency situation, and it is necessary to examine by proportionality test whether the postponement of the election has legitimate reasons (legitimate aims) and whether the postponement will have a greater positive impact or even harm (maximum minimorum). 

Neglecting the people’s sovereignty over the right to be elected .

The affirmation of Indonesia as a constitutional democracy is firmly enshrined in the provisions of Article 1 paragraph (2) juncto paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution. One of the manifestations of democracy is the distribution of the right to vote. The current idea of ​​postponement reduces the right to be elected. Moreover, the election organizers have been chosen and set the time for the concurrent elections to be held on February 14, 2024.

The government and the political elite should support the work of the election organizers so that they can carry out the simultaneously national and local election processes in the future, instead of presenting new polemics. It is like saying that once the sails expand, the edge never recedes. If this nation is committed to the importance of limiting the term president in office t and has set an election day, then all obstacles and challenges must be faced, not postponing, especially if it delays for reasons that are not significantly essential. 

Southeast Asia

Reclaiming our future

Published

on

The Asia-Pacific region is at a crossroads today – to further breakdown or breakthrough to a greener, better, safer future.

Since the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) was established in 1947, the region has made extraordinary progress, emerging as a pacesetter of global economic growth that has lifted millions out of poverty.

Yet, as ESCAP celebrates its 75th anniversary this year, we find ourselves facing our biggest shared test on the back of cascading and overlapping impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic, raging conflicts and the climate crisis.  

Few have escaped the effects of the pandemic, with 85 million people pushed back into extreme poverty, millions more losing their jobs or livelihoods, and a generation of children and young people missing precious time for education and training.

As the pandemic surges and ebbs across countries, the world continues to face the grim implications of failing to keep the temperature increase below 1.5°C – and of continuing to degrade the natural environment. Throughout 2021 and 2022, countries across Asia and the Pacific were again battered by a relentless sequence of natural disasters, with climate change increasing their frequency and intensity.

More recently, the rapidly evolving crisis in Ukraine will have wide-ranging socioeconomic impacts, with higher prices for fuel and food increasing food insecurity and hunger across the region.

Rapid economic growth in Asia and the Pacific has come at a heavy price, and the convergence of these three crises have exposed the fault lines in a very short time. Unfortunately, those hardest hit are those with the fewest resources to endure the hardship. This disproportionate pressure on the poor and most vulnerable is deepening and widening inequalities in both income and opportunities.

The situation is critical. Many communities are close to tipping points beyond which it will be impossible to recover. But it is not too late.

The region is dynamic and adaptable.

In this richer yet riskier world, we need more crisis-prepared policies to protect our most vulnerable populations and shift the Asia-Pacific region back on course to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals as the target year of 2030 comes closer — our analysis shows that we are already 35 years behind and will only attain the Goals in 2065.

To do so, we must protect people and the planet, exploit digital opportunities, trade and invest together, raise financial resources and manage our debt.

The first task for governments must be to defend the most vulnerable groups – by strengthening health and universal social protection systems. At the same time, governments, civil society and the private sector should be acting to conserve our precious planet and mitigate and adapt to climate change while defending people from the devastation of natural disasters.

For many measures, governments can exploit technological innovations. Human activities are steadily becoming “digital by default.” To turn the digital divide into a digital dividend, governments should encourage more robust and extensive digital infrastructure and improve access along with the necessary education and training to enhance knowledge-intensive internet use.

Much of the investment for services will rely on sustainable economic growth, fueled by equitable international trade and foreign direct investment (FDI). The region is now the largest source and recipient of global FDI flows, which is especially important in a pandemic recovery environment of fiscal tightness.

While trade links have evolved into a complex noodle bowl of bilateral and regional agreements, there is ample scope to further lower trade and investment transaction costs through simplified procedures, digitalization and climate-smart strategies. Such changes are proving to be profitable business strategies. For example, full digital facilitation could cut average trade costs by more than 13 per cent.

Governments can create sufficient fiscal space to allow for greater investment in sustainable development. Additional financial resources can be raised through progressive tax reforms, innovative financing instruments and more effective debt management. Instruments such as green bonds or sustainability bonds, and arranging debt swaps for development, could have the highest impacts on inclusivity and sustainability.

Significant efforts need to be made to anticipate what lies ahead. In everything we do, we must listen to and work with both young and old, fostering intergenerational solidarity. And women must be at the centre of crisis-prepared policy action.

This week the Commission is expected to agree on a common agenda for sustainable development in Asia and the Pacific, pinning the aspirations of the region on moving forward together by learning from and working with each other.

In the past seven-and-a-half decades, ESCAP has been a vital source of know-how and support for the governments and peoples of Asia and the Pacific. We remain ready to serve in the implementation of this common agenda.

To quote United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, “the choices we make, or fail to make today, will shape our future. We will not have this chance again.”

Continue Reading

Southeast Asia

Return of the Marcos and Great-Power Competition

Published

on

PNA photo by Joey O. Razon

Ferdinand Marcos Jr., more commonly known as “Bongbong,” won an outright majority in the recent presidential election in the Philippines. Son and name-bearer of former Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos paved the way for the country’s most notorious political dynasty’s shocking return to power. In the words of Filipino columnist Benjamin Pimentel, “It’s as if Kylo Ren emerged and the Empire is back in power.”

In announcing his desire to work for all people, Ferdinand Marcos Jr. said the world should judge him based on his presidency, not his family’s past.

“To those who voted for Bongbong, and those who did not, it is his promise to be a president for all Filipinos. To seek common ground across political divides, and to work together to unite the nation.” saidVictor Rodriguez, spokesperson for Marcos, in a statement.

However, the pragmatic words seem to have failed to sway the opposition as he faces countless accusations of election irregularities. Their opponents are horrified by Marcos’ brazen attempt to reinvent historical narratives from his family’s era in power. A protest against Marcos was staged by approximately 400 people outside the election commission on 10th May, primarily by students.

Human rights group Karapatan urged Filipinos to reject Marcos’ new presidency, which it sees as a product of lies and disinformation designed “to deodorise the Marcoses’ detestable image”.

HISTORY OF MARCOS: People Power” Uprising

Ferdinand Marcos Jr is not a new name in the Philippines’ political scenario. The “bloodless revolution” of 1986 in the Philippines that ousted the infamous dictator Ferdinand Marcos, was none other than Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s father.

The world leaders at the time praised the mass demonstration after hundreds of thousands marched along EDSA streets to protest a fraudulent election. Through the People Power” Uprising, Filipinos proved that a peaceful uprising can challenge a ruthless dictatorship and overthrow military rule.

Marcos Jr and his family escaped to Hawaii following the rebellion and after his return to the Philippines in 1991, Marcos Jr served in congress and the senate. With his return to the Malacañang Palace in 2022, the world anxiously watches whether history will repeat itself or democracy will prevail as Marcos Jr. relentlessly defends his father’s legacy, refusing to apologise or acknowledge the atrocities, plunder, cronyism, and extravagant living, which resulted in billions of dollars of state wealth disappearing during the dictatorship.

MARCOS JR’S FOREIGN POLICY: Continuity or Change?

Considering his political alignment with Rodrigo Duterte, the outgoing President, who has been exceedingly vocal about his anti-Washington, pro-China stance, it is no secret Marcos Jr. favours Beijing. According to Richard Heydarian, a South China Sea observer and professor of political science, “Ferdinand ‘Bongbong’ Marcos Jr. is the only candidate who has signalled almost perfect continuity with the incumbent populist pro-China president in Malacañang.”

However, Marcos Jr seems to be a President that might play the game more strategically compared to his successor. Among Marcos’s many accolades for his father, one was maintaining a strong security alliance with Washington. Even though, he is politically aligned with Duterte who sought to pivot away from the United States and towards China, Marcos will seek a balancing act. Philippines under Marcos will continue engaging with China, in-line with Duterte’s Pro-China Policy but at the same time will engage, and even bolster a closer tie with the USA, to safeguard Philippines’ sovereignty amidst an aggressively rising China.

When asked if he would ask the American’s help in dealing with China, Marcos Jr said, “No. The problem is between China and us. If the Americans come in, it’s bound to fail because you are putting the two protagonists together.” This statement shows a sense of maturity and solid understanding of the ground realties of the region. Marcos Jr. seems to be the President that keeps his country’s national interest at the very core of all his decisions. He understands how easy it is for a small country to be stuck in the middle of a great-power competition, and that more often and not, it harms the small country’s interests. He envisions Manila as neither heavily dependent on Washington for its security needs nor become a pawn in China’s greater geopolitical ambitions. He wants to have an independent foreign policy, regardless of deepening U.S.-Chinese competition. One that predominantly benefits his country, Philippines.

In contrast to Duterte, Marcos Jr has a very warm and embracing approach towards the USA. Being treaty allies, Marcos Jr refers to their alliance as “a very important one.” He maintained that the alliance “has stood us in good stead for over a hundred years and that will never disappear from the Philippine psyche, the idea and the memory of what the United States did for us and fought with us in the last war.”

Marcos Jr seems to be a realist who understands that in International Politics, states must “engage whenever possible, and contain wherever necessary.” On asked about Chinese assertiveness in the South China Sea, he argued that “Philippines will not cede any one square inch to any country, particularly China, but will continue to engage and work on our national interest.”

To summarise, Marcos will, in all probability, modify Duterte’s foreign policy in a way that maximizes the strategic benefits for the Philippines and avoids confrontation with the USA and China.

Continue Reading

Southeast Asia

President Ho Chi Minh’s reflections about international peace

Published

on

President Ho Chi Minh had a dissimilar way of approaching international peace, and he held a view that the way western nations look into revolution and resurgence, particularly in colonial era, was different from what the people aspired. He took note of developments in colonial societies particularly when Turkish women were protesting against the invasion of Western nations and imperialism, and referred to Indian women protests against British domination way back in 1912. In fact, writing way back in 1918, he stated that the defence of India act was the suppression of genuine domestic grievances because it provided the right to arrest and detain suspected Indians. He was always very supportive of the workers and peasants’ movement across the world.

While congratulating the first Prime Minister of India Jawaharlal Nehru on organising the Asian relations conference, he stated that China and India were the big brothers of Vietnam and the most ancient civilizations.  Writing way back in March 25th 1947, he opined that solidarity will make the three countries the mightiest defenders forwards peace and democracy. He argued that Vietnam was aspiring for unification and independence, and hoped that the Asian countries will come to their support. He stated that it is pertinent for the neighbours to have friendly relations, and alluding to the five principles (Panchsheela) of Nehru-Chau Enlai joint statement, he added that the five major principles which were enlisted in the joint statement between China and India, and Myanmar and China need to be replicated in the larger Asian context.

After the conclusion of the war with French in 1954, he clearly stated that the major challenges for Vietnam was proper implementation of the Geneva accords and sustaining the economy to upgrade the living standards of the people of Vietnam. Responding to a question asked by a journalist related to Geneva accords implementation in Vietnam, he stated that France being a major country and a colonial power, it is pertinent that the ceasefire agreement is implemented fully and this will ensure trust between the signatories. It is also important that scrupulousness in such kind of agreement so as to bring about peace and tranquillity.

He had time and again alluded to the five Panchsheela principles whenever he was giving any interview to the journalists and scholars. He clearly stated that there is need to respect sovereignty and territorial integrity, refrain from violation of each other’s territorial borders, non-interference in internal affairs, equal treatment for mutual benefits and peaceful coexistence. He opined that taking inspiration from India-China agreement, Vietnam would be willing to implement a similar kind of five principles with other countries, primarily Cambodia and Laos. Related to the illegal occupation of Goa by Portugal, he criticized the illegal occupation of Goa by Portuguese and the support that the US has provided to Portugal for continuing illegal occupation.

He talked about solidarity among Asian and African people and stated that for peace to exist the Geneva agreement should be implemented in full. After the first Indochina war, he stated that it is important that the peace as per the provisions of Panchsheela should be implemented at all levels. He has always alluded to Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi while talking about peace, clearly demarcating the role of culture and religion in maintaining peace. He was clearly against western imperialism and occupation of territories by force by any major power. He was also very clear and in one of the letters written on the eve of an interview given to New Delhi people in India, he clearly specified that the situation of world development particularly after the independence of many developing countries was beneficial for the peace movement. He stated that more than 1200 million Asian African people were in the line of peaceful forces and these people were liberated including those in erstwhile Soviet Union and other socialist countries. He lauded the role played by Asian African countries in peace protection and always supported fight against colonialism and Asian people’s solidarity. He was completely against military race, prohibition against nuclear weapons and hydrogen bomb, dismissing aggressive military forces and demolishment of military bases in foreign countries.

His views with regard to arms reduction and working together to reduce the scourge of nuclear bomb were very specific. While responding to the welcome address during the banquet dinner hosted by president of India Rajendra Prasad in 1958, he stated that “the pugnacious forces has been conspiring to push the mankind to the destruction of war. They are ceaselessly fighting to keep and consoled at peace, India made a big contribution. Peaceful forces are more powerful able to prevent the war but the pugnacious forces do not give up their conspiracy to wage their war.” He was really appreciative of any of the peace initiatives undertaken by any country and he has repeatedly thanked international committee which was chaired by India for supervising and controlling Geneva accord implementation in Vietnam.

President Ho Chi Minh was appreciative of the fact that the essence of Buddhism and culture would strengthen the spirit of love towards the country, national solidarity, and bring about cultural essence which will bring closer the eastern and western cultures. He stated that in terms of Buddhism the core philosophy is peace and the construction of the country.

President Ho Chi Minh was specifically influenced by Buddhism and he had stated that the people should practice the life of holy learning and Buddhist simplicity. Even though president Ho Chi Minh did not write and reflected about Buddhism but his life and career were intertwined with the core philosophy of Buddhism. He was very much interested in implementing the idea of peaceful humanity under Buddhism and ushering in Buddhist consciousness in every society. Ho Chi Minh had an idea that the human affection would help in self-improving human ethics and closer bonding with a larger population. Ho Chi Minh’s ideology included mercy, non-egoism, altruism, self-improvement, exercise of moral ethics, and solidarity spirit among masses. The acknowledgement of Buddhism as the core fundamental of life was slowly acknowledged by the Vietnamese people too and as per Ho Chi Minh, he had acquired the Buddhist ideas from family, national tradition, and the Buddhist way for liberating the country.

Taken into cognizance President Ho Chi Minh objective of peace, he was very much concerned with regard to ethics, solidarity, guaranteeing supreme benefits of the nation, bestowing rights and benefits to the people and ingrained self-consciousness which would bring about sincere affectionate, straightforward introspection. This will help in self-criticizing and unifying characters for the larger benefit of the society. He stated that the national solidarity should be in Sync with the international solidarity. In this context it is important to reflect on the Russia Ukraine crisis and he has been very instrumental in referring to Mahatma Gandhi for his approach towards peace and self-suffering. However, Ho Chi Minh was very attached to this concept of abhorrence of repression of the people and was very critical of any kind of imperialism which would subdue people from realising their ambitions and goals. Ukraine crisis also shows a new kind of geopolitics which will define the world order but he was also critical of the fact that international solidarity should be progressive and aspire for a long-lasting peace.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Trending