Constitutional Amendments Mess: Sore Looser

Hey – I’m back!!! Y’all must’ve read the papers these days. A number of ‘eminent’ figures questioned the validity of the recently amended constitution essentially based on two arguments. First, the (original) 1945 constitution is still in force because it has not been repealed by the MPR (when it amended that constitution). Second, the constitution’s amendments are not binding because they have not been published in the State Gazette. Among those who made these arguments are Gus Dur – if you must know our former President, and one Amin Aryoso of PDIP who chaired some of the MPR’s committees, sessions that amended the 1945 constitution.

Who are they kidding? Us or themselves? One can find in most (if not all) civic education books – including those for primary schools – that the 1945 Constitution has been amended. Four times in fact, staggered between 2000-2004. Surely everyone with high school education knows that when one amends a document, part of the original remains. Hence the terms ‘amendment’, as oppose to cancellation, [repeal] or any other synonyms. It is beyond reproach that a former President, who was serving his term when some of the amendments we made, fail to understand this.

Now that we have that stupid argument out of the way, it is obvious that their problems are the content of the amendments. What’s wrong with them anyway? Of course they’re not perfect some (including yours truly) have spent countless days trying to put some sense to those bastards who’re debating them. But these bastards have no right complaining about it because they are sitting on the damn committees and sessions. They’re the one who should be hanged if the constitution sucks.

‘Tis true that the constitution is far from perfect. But we know there isn’t such a thing as a perfect constitution. Ask the Americans who’re still debating whether or not fag burning is protected speech. But there are many important issues that have been enshrined in the constitution. An easy example is a through list of human rights, which some have said is offers among the best ‘protection’ compare to most other countries.

But the major problem of our (amended) constitution is very few actually understands the impact of those clauses in our daily life. Including (or should I say particularly) among the parliamentarians who amended the constitution. An example: looking at how the constitution was worded, it’s damn difficult to argue for capital punishment.

Let me move on to the more technical yet equally important – at least to me. It is true that all of the amendments were not published in the State Gazette until early 2006. What effect does this has on the constitution’s validity– some may ask what the hell is this gazette anyway....

Bear with me. Y’all are assumed to know the law, ie. you cannot argue your ignorance of the law to let you out of trouble. Very ambitious doctrine, I know. That’s why all laws have to be enacted by publishing it in an official state publication, such as the State Gazette for this law to be binding on y’all. So, if you don’t know the law then you have to pay for your own ignorance. In theory then if a law is not published you’re not bound by it. Fair enough right?

Now let me ask you: if a law has to be gazetted, then a constitution must be too because it is much more important and is the basis of all laws. Simple logic right yet sooo fundamental...

‘Houston we have a problem’. Does this mean the amendments to 1945 constitution are not binding between 2001-2004 (when they are passed) and 2006 (when they are published). Unfortunately yes, if we are to be consistent with the theory. I can’t accept the argument of the amendments’ proponent that the gazetting is only ‘administrative’ and that the amendments have been effective since they’re passed by MPR. What infuriate me most is that this also comes from the Chief of the Constitutional Court (separate story).

This will mean that the state can hide behind this administrative argument and not publish all laws! Hell no! So that you know, even when gazetting is required for a law to be enacted it is still difficult to access the gazette.

We (or rather the government) must admit that they messed up. They should’ve published the amendments as soon as they were passed. Some formal apology would be good too. Fyi, the (original) 1945 constitution was published in the State Gazette in 1946 – if I’m not mistaken among the first ones published there. This is when the country is still at war.

We need not worry about Gus Dur & Co at the expense on some fundamental issue (at least to me). While publication is late, everybody has been using the document anyway, including those claiming its invalidity. We have seen one or two election, so many law passed and strike down by the Constitutional Court, new institutions set up, etc.. etc.. Who in the right mind wants to undone all these and create one big mess that we surely won’t recover from?

If Gus Dur & Co wants to, let’s send them to Timbuktu. As I said, what’s the problem Gus? Still pissed because you’re impeached? You know that because of your impeachment, the amended constitution had made it more difficult to impeach a sitting president. Indicted by the DPR on limited causes, proven before the Constitutional Court etc and sanctioned by the MPR. You should applaud the amendments then. Unless you want to impeach SBY the way you were impeached. Sore looser!