The Government Decides To Postpone The Discussion Of The HIP Bill With The Indonesian Parliament

JAKARTA - The Coordinating Minister for Political, Legal and Security Affairs (Menko Polhukam) Mahfud MD said that the government decided to postpone the discussion of the Pancasila Ideology Policy Bill (RUU HIP).

The government, said Mahfud, asked the DPR to have more dialogue and absorb more aspirations from the public regarding the draft law.

"So the government did not send a presidential surpres, did not send a presidential letter for the discussion. That is the procedural aspect," Mahfud told reporters in Jakarta, Tuesday, June 16.

The former Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court (MK) stated that Jokowi firmly rejected the discussion of the HIP Bill and was of the opinion that TAP MPRS Number XXV / MPRS / 1966 was still binding. "It doesn't need to be questioned anymore," he said.

The government considers that the legal formulation of Pancasila is the one that was ratified on August 18, 1945 by the Preparatory Committee for Indonesian Independence (PPKI) and is contained in the legal preamble of the 1945 Constitution.

Later, the government will send a notification to the DPR RI through official procedural channels.

"That's why the Menkumham are invited to come here later who will officially inform them in accordance with the procedures regulated by the laws and regulations that we ask the DPR to postpone the discussion, it will be Menkumham who will officially inform (to the DPR)," he explained.

Minister of Law and Human Rights (Menkumham) Yasonna Laoly who accompanied Menkopolhukam emphasized that President Joko Widodo would not send a presidential surpres to discuss the draft legislation which was the initiative of the DPR RI.

"We from the provisional government have been asked while the President has not sent a supres. We hope the DPR will try to receive input," said Yasonna, adding that the government had 30 days to formally convey its position.

Previously, the HIP Bill which was now being discussed at the DPR RI Legislation Body was now in polemic. Many parties have questioned the draft proposed by the DPR and discussed with the government.

The Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI), for example, through its edict highlighted several things such as the exclusion of TAP MPRS Number 25 / MPRS / 1966 of 1966 concerning the Prohibition of Communism / Marxism-Leninism in the draft law.

"We deserve to suspect that the Drafters of the HIP Bill are elements who want to revive the understanding and the Indonesian Communist Party. Therefore, it should be investigated by the authorities," said MUI, as quoted from the announcement of the Central MUI and MUI throughout the Indonesian provinces.

In addition, elements in the draft law are considered to be obscure and deviate from the meaning of Pancasila. One of them is in the Trisila and Ekasila sections which are considered as an effort to divide Pancasila.

This is contained in Article 7 of the HIP Bill which reads:

Paragraph (1) The main characteristics of Pancasila are justice and social welfare with a family spirit which is a combination of the principles of divinity, humanity, unity, democracy / political and economic democracy in one unit.

Paragraph (2) The main characteristics of Pancasila are in the form of trisila, namely: socio-nationalism, socio-democracy, as well as cultural divinity.

Paragraph (3) Trisila as referred to in paragraph (2) is crystallized in ekasila, namely mutual cooperation.

In its announcement, MUI said that squeezing Pancasila into Trisila and Ekasila was an attempt to obscure the meaning of Pancasila. "And covertly wanting to cripple the existence of the first precept," they wrote.

Apart from MUI, several observers considered the discussion of this draft law should be stopped. According to researcher of the Forum for the Concerned Parliamentary Community (Formappi), Lucius Karus said, the DPR initiative bill seemed to want to be completed sooner than other bills included in the 2020 Priority Prolegnas list.

This raises questions for him. What is the urgent situation that makes the DPR want to discuss and pass this law in the midst of the COVID-19 crisis?

"The class of urgency of this bill by the DPR and the government is the same as the Job Creation Bill. The difference is that if the work creation is proposed by the government, the HIP bill is an initiative of the DPR," Lucius told VOI, Monday, June 15.

He further compared the Job Creation Bill and the HIP Bill. He said, despite all the controversy, the Job Creation Bill could be considered important as the government's effort to meet the needs of the community and boost the national economy during this period.

This is very different from the HIP Bill which was proposed by the DPR. "It is very difficult to explain the urgency in meeting people's needs," he said.

According to him, this bill seems to be setting something ideal, containing ideas and guidelines related to the implementation of Pancasila.

The Pancasila course is needed, he said. However, making it a law can actually be a new problem.

"There is nothing wrong with the elaboration, but what is the importance of making it into a single law in itself? That description should be included in the explanation of all laws made by the DPR to explain the principles for making laws based on Pancasila," he said.

Lucius also looked oddly at the draft legislation that had emerged from council members. According to him, this actually proves how confused the parliament is in reading the needs of the people which should be their job.

"When they prioritize the bill which is directed more towards state administrators and also only explains Pancasila, then there must be something strange in our palemen," he said.

Executive Director of Indonesia Political Review, Ujang Komarudin, also thought it would be better if the discussion of this draft law was canceled. Apart from not having any urgency in society, the HIP Bill is considered to be able to heat up the current political atmosphere.

"If it is enforced, it could be that many components of society will move to reject the HIP Bill. If it really goes down, it will be crowded," he said.

Moreover, the Draft Law on HIP is considered to have touched a sensitive issue in this country, "The issue of the rise of the PKI," he concluded.