The Demand For The Dissolution Of The DPR, Is It Possible?

YOGYAKARTA - A wave of disappointment with the House of Representatives (DPR) emerged after receiving a housing allowance budget of IDR 50 million per month for each of its members. This fantastic value is considered contrary to the economic conditions of the people who are facing various difficulties.

No doubt netizens are busy calling for the DPR to be disbanded as a form of public disappointment that feels further and further away from its deputy people. The call on social media has developed into a demonstration in front of the DPR Building, Jakarta, which led to clashes with security forces.

The question is, can the DPR really be disbanded? Or is the call just an expression of public disappointment with council members?

To answer the questions above, we need to understand the role of the DPR. In the 1945 Constitution, the DPR has three main functions, namely legislation, budget, and supervision. This function becomes the foundation of the principle of check and balance which is the hallmark of a democratic country. Without the DPR, all power as well as supervision will be concentrated in the hands of the President.

Indonesia's history noted that the absence of an effective parliament only gave birth to concentrations of power. During the era of Sukarno and the New Order under Suharto, parliament was only a complement to the formality.

When power is centered on the President, democracy is practically paralyzed. This is in line with the statement of UI's Professor of Constitutional Law, Jimly Asshiddiqie, who emphasized that without parliament, democracy is just a name, while power falls into one potentially absolute hand.

Therefore, disbanding the DPR is actually the same as turning off the function of people's representation and paving the way for authoritarianism.

Looking at history, the discourse on disbanding legislative institutions is nothing new in Indonesia. In 1959, President Soekarno issued a Presidential Decree that dissolved the Constitute Council for failing to draft a new basic law.

President Abdurrahman Wahid or Gus Dur has also tried similar steps by issuing a decree to freeze the DPR, MPR, and dissolve certain political parties. However, it was stated that it did not work through the special session of the MPR.

Both events show that steps to dissolve legislative institutions are always accompanied by huge political consequences.

After the 1998 reform, Indonesia made amendments to the 1945 Constitution to strengthen the position of the DPR. One of the important changes is in Article 7C which states that the President cannot freeze and/or dissolve the House of Representatives. This provision was born as a shield so that the legislative body is no longer under the shadow of the executive.

Thus, legally, the President cannot dissolve the DPR. The only way to remove the DPR is to re-change the constitution through the amendment mechanism of the 1945 Constitution. However, this procedure is almost impossible, because it requires the approval of the MPR, most of which come from the DPR itself.

According to political observer Sugiyanto (SGY), other alternatives can be made through elections. If the people no longer choose legislative candidates, then the DPR will not be formed. However, this scenario is also unlikely, considering that democracy always opens up space for political participation.

SGY added that it does not rule out the possibility of non-law roads such as revolutions. In theory, such movements could change the entire state order, including removing the House of Representatives. However, this road poses a great risk of creating political instability, economic crisis, and even social chaos. Apart from breaking the law, revolution has no democratic legitimacy.

"Regarding the term except for revolution?, indeed in theory, revolution or coup can replace the entire state order, including disbanding the DPR. However, this road clearly has the potential to be destructive, violate the law, has no democratic legitimacy, and has a great risk of creating political instability and economic damage, "said SGY, in a written statement, Sunday, August 24.

SGY assessed that public disappointment with the DPR was reasonable, especially seeing the luxurious lifestyle of its members, the weakness of supervision, to policies that were often counterproductive. However, the solution is not to dissolve this institution, but to reform. Reform can be carried out through democratic mechanisms, from elections, revision of internal rules, to strengthening the supervisory function by the community.

In democracy, the people have the most powerful weapon, namely voice. Through elections, the public can choose representatives who are considered more worthy and get rid of those who are unable to carry out their mandate. If people's voices are consistently directed at change, the DPR can transform into an institution that truly represents public aspirations.