STOPPING SOEHARTO’S CASE VIOLATES SPIRIT OF DEMOCRACY
By Beni Bevly
[This article was published by The Jakarta Post dated January 29, 2008 titled “Arguments on Soeharto.”]
To response to Indonesia President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s (SBY) instruction to end the arguments pertaining to Soeharto case, there are at least two different points of view and how to react.
First, in general, arguments in Indonesia often lead to conflict and political violence. This possibility is likely to happen in Soeharto case, should the current situation is being maintained. From this point of view, as responsible citizens, we must be aware and be sensitive enough for such potential.
Second, on the other side, argument is inherently expected in democratic society. That’s why, the calling from SBY to stop the argument does not mirror the spirit of democracy. As a President who was elected in a democratic system, SBY should explain the possibility of the negative impacts arising from this argument. In contrary, he should not view such argument as a debate that culturally has violated normalcy in politeness norms.
To react to this case, the proper approach is by contacting those who made and published issues. Politicians, analysts, and activists reserve their own opinions, which have caused a lot of stir pertaining to the issues being discussed in the media. The most influential media that have the strongest potential to affect the people’s opinions are TV shows and printed newspapers.
Therefore, it would be more effective for SBY to focus on the problem solving matters as directed to these two groups: the news makers and the purveyors. Of course, this approach should not be directed to cease the multitude of opinions, but instead to requisite that this issue not to be used as a way to provoke the public, which may have the potential to cause violence in the political arena.
_____
*Dr. Beni Bevly holds BA in Political Science, MBA in Marketing, and DBA in Organizational Leadership. He is the founder of Overseas Think Tank for Indonesia.
As an interested outsider I have to agree with each and every word of your post. The situation creates dilemma’s and they should be approached with political wisdom and restraint.
What surprised me over the last ten days however, is that the Indonesian political elite has been paying ( or trying to pay, as in the case of Habibie) visits and tribute to the ailing ex-dictator.
That is not a neutral stand as one might have hoped for, but a partisan one, I’m afraid.
Colson, as Indonesian, I am grateful to have a friend like you who is not Indonesian but very concerned about and interested in Indonesia.
The debate surrounding Soeharto is generally about forgiving him or not. In this case, most people mix them up with law enforcement. They think if Soeharto is forvigen, there will be no action taken pertaining to what he has done in the past.
Here, we need to differentiate between forgiving and enforcing the law. Forgiving is personal, that is no legal bound. If somebody is forgiven, there will be clear of obstructions or obstacles in his mind from guilty feeling. On the other side, even though he is forgiven, yet he cannot run away from the responsibility that bounded by the law.
People need to understand this kind of framework, otherwise other “Soehartos” will be back.
I regret that the Indonesian elites ignore the victims of state violence who suffered premature deaths under Soeharto era. Soeharto is not a just individual in Indonesian politics. He becomes a symbol of totalitarian regime that oppressed the political others. His impunity will give a strong impression that Indonesia will act the same to his subordinates.
Soeharto and his legacy must be brought to justice, now or later. When he’s still alive or later after his death. It is simply inconceivable for a person who has orchestrated the genocide of millions of innocent civilians to be free from punity.
Indonesia must act now if it wants to be considered an advanced society under the so-called Rule of Law. Failure to do so would set an example for future leaders to act the same way, yet enjoy Indonesian-style impunity.
A smile is just a smile. Don’t be fooled by it.
Mutiara Andalas and Jennie, thank you for your comments. There is no political will from the Indonesian government to bring Suharto to justice because this action will affect themselves. If they do so, it means they will bring themselves to justice as well.
Basically, the current regime is still Soeharto’s legacy. Therefore, even though it is reformation era, yet many people do not feel significant change in their daily life.
Soeharto was the biggest corruptor in Indonesia and he deserves justice. More than three decades he and his cronies sucked dry people’s money, and we all know it. So, it’s a stupid question to ask whether or not he should be brought to justice.
This is exactly the case. Soeharto resigned his term, he was not impeached. The people whose careers he oversaw are those who are running the country right now. Bringing his cronies to justice, while desirable, is not feasible. Just who is going to do it? The government isn’t going to shoot itself in the foot.