Indonesian Politics (History, Issue, culture etc)

Madokafc

Experienced member
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
5,227
Reactions
9,083
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
Well, i am open this thread to talking about Indonesian Politics, in which actually quite complex and need more comprehensive knowledge to understanding the issue, psychology and culture of Indonesian people and related them to modern Indonesia politics.
 

Madokafc

Experienced member
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
5,227
Reactions
9,083
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
One of the biggest controversy in Indonesia politics till today is the impeachment of the fourth President, Abdurrahman Wahid.


To prevent the MPR Special Session from taking place, Wahid then enacted a Decree disbanding the MPR on 23 July despite had no power to do so. In defiance against Wahid's decree, the MPR continued the Special Session and unanimously voted to impeach Wahid. The same session also saw the MPR voted to affirm Megawati succession to the presidency, effectively replacing him. Wahid continued to insist that he was the president and stayed for some days in the Presidential Palace, but eventually left the residence on 25 July for a trip overseas to the United States for health treatments.


On 20 July, Amien declared that the MPR Special Session will be brought forward to 23 July. TNI, having had a bad relationship with Wahid through his tenure as president, stationed 40,000 troops in Jakarta and placed tanks with their turrets pointing at the Presidential Palace in a show off forces. The bad relationship between Wahid and Parliament along with the Army had brought Wahid presidentship to the end.

 

Indos

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
1,222
Reactions
1,545
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
The impeachment IMO is due to the relatively young Indonesian democracy. It is more like how Egyptian opposition tried to change their government after MB won the first election. Every body still in demonstration mentality which suggest that any government can still be toppled through demonstration regardless it is a product of a fair election or not if they dont like the way the President/Gov do.

After the empeachment of Gus Dur, people realize that it was a wrong thing to do and then parliament change the constitution and allow direct Presidential election to happen in order to strengthen the executive (government).

This is why 2004 Presidential election becomes the first direct Presidential election in Indonesia. Indonesia also becomes full Presidential system after that election. So we dont follow our colonialist political system, we can change the system if we see the changes are important to make for better and effective political system.
 
Last edited:

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
7,952
Reactions
22 15,965
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
Well, i am open this thread to talking about Indonesian Politics, in which actually quite complex and need more comprehensive knowledge to understanding the issue, psychology and culture of Indonesian people and related them to modern Indonesia politics.

One of my favourite subjects :D

When I was in Singapore, Indonesian politics is something followed closely.

The impeachment IMO is due to the relatively young Indonesian democracy. It is more like how Egyptian opposition tried to change their government after MB won the first election. Every body still in demonstration mentality which suggest that any government can still be toppled through demonstration regardless it is a product of a fair election or not if they dont like the way the President/Gov do.

After the empeachment of Gus Dur, people realize that it was a wrong thing to do and then parliament change the constitution and allow direct Presidential election to happen in order to strengthen the executive (government).

This is why 2004 Presidential election becomes the first direct Presidential election in Indonesia. Indonesia also becomes full Presidential system after that election. So we dont follow our colonialist political system, we can change the system if we see the changes are important to make for better and effective political system.

In hindsight, Habibie should have had longer term. What do you think?

BTW, can you explain to me how parliament changed the constitution for this matter? Was it direct article change? Or its done through amendment?

It involved a vote I would imagine, so its simple 50% majority for it or something like 2/3rd or 3/4th vote needed given constitution is very high threshold of change.

I agree that direct executive election is best way depending on the executive's exclusive powers.
 

Indos

Contributor
Think Tank Analyst
Messages
1,222
Reactions
1,545
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
One of my favourite subjects :D

When I was in Singapore, Indonesian politics is something followed closely.



In hindsight, Habibie should have had longer term. What do you think?

BTW, can you explain to me how parliament changed the constitution for this matter? Was it direct article change? Or its done through amendment?

It involved a vote I would imagine, so its simple 50% majority for it or something like 2/3rd or 3/4th vote needed given constitution is very high threshold of change.

I agree that direct executive election is best way depending on the executive's exclusive powers.

Yup, Habibie should become our President at least for 10 years but this is only a dream of Indonesian intellectual base group. He is an Islamist and could be said as a leader of Islamist in Indonesia during Soeharto regime period. He established ICMI, an elite Islamist group who become quite powerful since 1990. Many nationalist leaders (PDI-P) could be seen as doesnt like him to continue the power, particularly during crucial period of 1999-2004 where many constitutional changes happened.

He could be a President if we have a direct Presidential election in 1999 though, considering he is also very popular within our grass root community. His Golkar party is not as popular as PDI-P although still can be number two at 1999 parliament election. During 1999-2004, elites are more powerful than common people due to parliament system that we have adopted since 1955 (1959-1999 is entirely a dictatorial regime though, but the written system is still parliamentary although we name PM as President).

During 1998-1999, Habibie just wanted to lead the transformation of Indonesia and decide not to set up new political party or use Golkar as vehicle to continue his power post 1999 parliament election. It is necessary to bring stability and both people and elites (Islamist, Nationalist Religious, Nationalist Secular, Military) support during crucial 1998-1999 period where demonstration from the leftish student (FORKOT) tried to sabotage the reformation movement due to fear of Islamist possible raising power post 1999 election.

I would say Indonesian prominent leaders are wise enough to not against nation long term interest. This is true during Soekarno fall down and Soeharto fall down since the leaders, AlhamduliLLAH, always follow the will of the people. Both Soekarno and Soeharto would be difficult to topple during their regimes if leaders at lower levels of our political power like parliament and cabinet dont go against them.

The reason of Soeharto resigning is due to the earlier resigns of many of his important ministers and also parliament members support for student movements despite both people in that two institutions are elected by Soeharto with Golkar as the main power in both administration and parliament. Golkar is also a main political backing of Soeharto since the start of new order together with Armed Force (mainly Army).

Something like this is quite rare in Arab nations (except in Tunisia) where their leaders prefer to bomb and kills their own population and destroy the economy and infrastructure in order for them to stay in power. Current politics also suggest similar tendency with the willingness of Prabowo to be Jokowi defense minister in order to make more stable government and conducive political situation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yup, I think it needs about 60-70 percent MPR support (parliament members + some civilians representative) to change constitution. The changes can be successful IMO is due to the influence of intellectuals and the political atmosphere at that time to have new democratic Indonesia.


Here you can see in more detail. I take it from Wiki page :


Constitutional amendments​

The Indonesian political system before and after the constitutional amendments

Suharto, who officially became president in 1968, refused to countenance any changes to the Constitution despite the fact that even Sukarno had viewed it as a provisional document.[6] In 1983, the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) passed a decree stipulating the need for a nationwide referendum to be held before any amendments were made to the Constitution. This led to a 1985 law requiring such a referendum to have a 90% turnout and for any changes to be approved by a 90% vote. Then in 1997, the activist Sri Bintang Pamungkas and two colleagues were arrested and jailed for publishing a proposed modified version of the 1945 Constitution.[7]

With the fall of Suharto and the New Order regime in 1998, the 1983 decree and 1985 law were rescinded and the way was clear to amend the Constitution to make it more democratic. This was done in four stages at sessions of the MPR in 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002. As a result, the original Constitution has grown from 37 articles to 73, of which only 11% remain unchanged from the original constitution.[8]

The most important of the changes were:[9][10]


  • Limiting presidents to two terms of office
  • Establishing a Regional Representative Council (DPD), which together with the DPR makes up an entirely elected MPR.
  • Purifying and empowering presidential system of government, instead of a semi presidential one.
  • Stipulating democratic, direct elections for the president, instead of the president being elected by the MPR
  • Reorganizing the mechanism of horizontal relation among state organs, instead of giving the highest constitutional position to the People's Assembly.
  • Abolishing the Supreme Advisory Council[11]
  • Mandating direct, general, free, secret, honest, and fair elections for the House of Representatives and regional legislatures
  • Establishing a Constitutional Court for guarding and defending the constitutional system as set forth in the constitution.
  • Establishing a Judicial Commission
  • The addition of ten entirely new articles concerning human rights.

Among the above changes, the establishment of Constitutional Court is regarded as a successful innovation in Indonesia constitutional system. The court was established in 2003 by 9 justices head by Professor Jimly Asshiddiqie,a prominent scholar from the University of Indonesia. There are five jurisdictions of the court, i.e. (i) constitutional review of law, (ii) disputes of constitutional jurisdiction between state institutions, (iii) disputes on electoral results, (iv) dissolution of political parties, and (v) impeachment of the president/vice-president. The other icon of success in Indonesian reform is the establishment of the Corruption Eradication Commission which independently fights against corruption and grafts. Corruption in Indonesia is regarded an extraordinary crime.

 
Last edited:

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
7,952
Reactions
22 15,965
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
Something like this is quite rare in Arab nations (except in Tunisia) where their leaders prefer to bomb and kills their own population and destroy the economy and infrastructure in order for them to stay in power. Current politics also suggest similar thing with the willingness of Prabowo to be Jokowi defense minister in order to make more stable government and conducive political situation.

Yes this is true, but large part also comes from sheer size of Indonesia and federal weight built up in institutions (even if you have seized it in absolute way at very top like Suharto).


Nearly all Arab countries (and most African countries too) are all much smaller population and are run as fiefdoms institutionally. They simply do not have Indonesia's inbuilt credible inertia of the checks and balances.

Indonesia is approaching 300 million people. Largest population in Arab world is Egypt, its about 1/3rd of that...and most arab countries are far smaller population...concentrated in a few towns and cities (given desert landscape etc).

In this way Indonesia is similar to India too...there is huge inertia underlying so you cannot have such intensity overnight for some uprising/revolution or coup etc that pushes very intense waves of action (compared to population).

Indonesia itself learned the danger of that during Sukarno period when he engaged + emboldened the communist factions and the massive problem that become later when TNI simply could not tolerate the situation, put sukarno in a box and opened up sustained violent action across the board (after that coup attempt...which is still something of grey understanding in details). Eventually Sukarno was replaced altogether.
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
7,952
Reactions
22 15,965
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
Also @HeyPaula1963 & @Jaka45 keep in mind that @Indos, regardless of his views, is polite, civil, and active member of the community who fully endorses Pancasila & democracy.

Please do not make a habit of asking cornering questions, assuming his answers, and then bullying him when he replies. His stances are nuanced, even if they aren't mainstream and he deserves to be free of the harassment that made us leave the old forum.

I agree. @Indos has presented his views quite well (his basis regarding personal vs public and also why it is wrong for the state to intervene punishment wise in personal matters given the large conundrum and grandiose imperfection of doing so when actions are say all-party voluntary-basis..."Shirk" is just one, but aptly put by him).

His contention is that punishments ought to be what is stipulated by a Sharia code (I am assuming criminal law only)...I have questions for him if he operate on moral/religious basis or majoritarian basis. Then maybe proceed to basis of severity requisite to crime etc.

People actually may also not know just how much of criminal law (punishment wise) in most countries (even staunchest secular ones today) traces back to religious basis, given religion was and arguably is the fountainhead of morality and its interpretation.

I would like to continue some of this discussion (queries etc with indos, and maybe it turns into something like a debate lets see),..esp regarding line and definition between criminal law and civil law applicability....is this decided depending on both (or all) parties in an action(s) being voluntary (thus civil realm) and thus an involuntary realm (regarding perpetration on one or more parties) is where criminal law applies? Or some other delineation? I believe this is the basis of what Indos is trying to get at when he says nothing should be compelled (w.r.t Islam).

I would suggest @#comcom can move the appropriate posts, say from #59 to #81 to this thread (and maybe pin it if relevant) as that thread (I quote you from) is about Indonesian Law Enforcement rather than Indonesian Law itself (which is political realm so fits here better I feel). The chronological order of posts will be preserved by post moving so should be no issue.

I also have some questions on the origins of Sharia (if people are knowledgeable and inclined to discuss).

Is every bit of sharia, Fiqh etc strictly traced to Quran and Hadith? Do they cover all crime known/present today in current world. If not, how would (or could) a Sharia system expand?

Some of the answers here I have already formed a basis and understanding on btw, I would just like to see how some others approach and answer this to take conversation forward.

Let me also tag @Saiyan0321 @Saithan @Joe Shearer if they are interested to participate or read.
 

Joe Shearer

Contributor
Moderator
Professional
Advisor
Messages
870
Reactions
1 1,127
Nation of residence
India
Nation of origin
India
I agree. @Indos has presented his views quite well (his basis regarding personal vs public and also why it is wrong for the state to intervene punishment wise in personal matters given the large conundrum and grandiose imperfection of doing so when actions are say all-party voluntary-basis..."Shirk" is just one, but aptly put by him).

His contention is that punishments ought to be what is stipulated by a Sharia code (I am assuming criminal law only)...I have questions for him if he operate on moral/religious basis or majoritarian basis. Then maybe proceed to basis of severity requisite to crime etc.

People actually may also not know just how much of criminal law (punishment wise) in most countries (even staunchest secular ones today) traces back to religious basis, given religion was and arguably is the fountainhead of morality and its interpretation.

I would like to continue some of this discussion (queries etc with indos, and maybe it turns into something like a debate lets see),..esp regarding line and definition between criminal law and civil law applicability....is this decided depending on both (or all) parties in an action(s) being voluntary (thus civil realm) and thus an involuntary realm (regarding perpetration on one or more parties) is where criminal law applies? Or some other delineation? I believe this is the basis of what Indos is trying to get at when he says nothing should be compelled (w.r.t Islam).

I would suggest @#comcom can move the appropriate posts, say from #59 to #81 to this thread (and maybe pin it if relevant) as that thread (I quote you from) is about Indonesian Law Enforcement rather than Indonesian Law itself (which is political realm so fits here better I feel). The chronological order of posts will be preserved by post moving so should be no issue.

I also have some questions on the origins of Sharia (if people are knowledgeable and inclined to discuss).

Is every bit of sharia, Fiqh etc strictly traced to Quran and Hadith? Do they cover all crime known/present today in current world. If not, how would (or could) a Sharia system expand?

Some of the answers here I have already formed a basis and understanding on btw, I would just like to see how some others approach and answer this to take conversation forward.

Let me also tag @Saiyan0321 @Saithan @Joe Shearer if they are interested to participate or read.
Above my paygrade, but @Saiyan0321 and his new-found associate, Usman Sadozai, would make a significant difference if the former cared to join in, and the latter could be persuaded to join.
 

whatintarnation

Committed member
Messages
190
Reactions
244
Nation of residence
Saudi Arabia
Nation of origin
Indonesia


quite interesting but i didnt find any related news about this
There's no way in hell this is true, we literally just reiterated our support for Palestine back in September.

 

trishna_amrta

Experienced member
Messages
1,606
Reactions
1,921
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia

whatintarnation

Committed member
Messages
190
Reactions
244
Nation of residence
Saudi Arabia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
Unfortunately today (this month to be exact) is December. What if it is true?
I don't think we'll just stop supporting a state we've supported since 1945.

Palestine deserves better.

But if it's true, just imagine the backlash. I reckon that if the government did, there will be more people joining radical groups and shit.
 

Eyeinthesky

Member
Messages
7
Reactions
14
There's no way in hell this is true, we literally just reiterated our support for Palestine back in September.


That Amir Tsarfati is as credible as Alex Jones InfoWars, or Kim Kardashian boobs & ass if you preferred a simpler analogy.

Me either, just take that tweet with a grain of salt
 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
7,952
Reactions
22 15,965
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
There is no reason I see Indonesia and Malaysia continue non-recognition of Israel.

The issue is literally on other side of world.

Countries need to think in nationalist terms first (what is their best interests for them), not this religion-identity thing across countries. That just open up lot of can of worms, as to where that start and ends to be consistent on it.

Is Indonesia or any muslim majority country going to drop recognition of PRC because of uighur treatment?...and leave all the advantages to having a recognition/relationship with PRC (esp because of its economy) behind?

If not, why not? Why Israel singled out specifically (esp given it literally has muslim arabs in its democratic parliament who themselves voice concerns all the time regarding palestine issues)?

It all need not mean you stop bringing up concern on the issue as you want to... past the political recognition + basic relations set up.

South East Asian muslim majority countries are so different in their cultural, historical and national set up past to anything you find say between indus to nile and then across sahara. Yet one part of identity triumphs the others to extreme extent of geopolitical +foreign relations realm...to follow the leader kind of thing in this very different stretch of the world? Not even going to bring up basic Indonesia population size and it should be the leader, rather than follow some group of much tinier but loud-mouth countries.

/rant
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom