TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - There is a big hole in the law known as the MD3 that regulates the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR), House of Representatives (DPR), Regional Representatives Council (DPD) and the Regional House of Representatives (DPRD), pertaining to the inauguration of a newly elected president. Article 34 cites three scenarios but does specifically mention the number of MPR leaders who must attend the event to render it legitimate.
According to Saldi Isra, law professor at Andalas University in Padang, West Sumatra, this legal loophole can be used by the opposition political parties as a weapon to obstruct the inauguration of an elected president. "If one reads the construction of the constitution, that article can be read from many perspectives," Saldi told Tempo reporter Rusman Paraqbueq in Jakarta last week.
What would be the criteria for a legitimate inauguration?
If the swearing-in ceremony is held in the presence of an MPR or a DPR plenary session, witnessed by leaders of the MPR and the Supreme Court, as regulated in Article 9, Chapter 1 of the 1945 Constitution through the MD3 law and the MPR Rules of Conduct.
Must all members of the MPR attend the inauguration?
The law does not require a quorum, only that it should be a plenary session, because no decisions need to be made. The MPR leadership only reads the decree of the General Elections Commission, then takes the president's oath.
Should the MPR leadership comprise the speaker and his four deputies?
Nothing specific is mentioned on whether all of the five or just one should attend. That is why Article 9 of the Constitution has provided a number of alternatives.
In the MD3 Law, all five MPR leaders must be present.
That is correct but it's not in the Constitution. If the plenary session fails to take place because of the absence of only one leader, then the Constitutional Court's assessment of this issue is vital.
Should the outgoing president attend?
It is not regulated in the Constitution, just the ethical issues.
Could there be a power vacuum if the inauguration fails to take place?
Clearly, there will be no president, but the Constitution does not say anything about this eventuality. I figure it can be done within the October 20 time, for example by consulting the Constitutional Court or if the president himself issues a decree.
Could the army take over?
Not at all because it's not in the Constitution. (*)
Read the full interview in this week's edition of Tempo English Magazine
