[sangkancil] BT: Interview w/Dewi Fortuna Anwar (re Suharto, Habibie++) (fwd)


To Sang Kancil <sangkancil@malaysia.net>
From "M.G.G. Pillai" <pillai@mgg.pc.my>
Date Wed, 2 Jun 1999 06:46:32 +0800 (MYT)
cc SK <sk@malaysia.net>
Delivered-To mailing list sangkancil@malaysia.net
Mailing-List contact sangkancil-help@malaysia.net; run by ezmlm



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: 01 Jun 1999 02:50:41
From: plovers@gn.apc.org
Reply-To: "Conference act.indonesia" <indonesia-act@igc.org>
To: Recipients of indonesia-act <indonesia-act@igc.org>
Subject: BT: Interview w/Dewi Fortuna Anwar (re Suharto, Habibie++)

From: Tapol <plovers@gn.apc.org>
Subject: BT: Interview w/Dewi Fortuna Anwar (re Suharto, Habibie++)

Received from Joyo

Business Times [Singapore]
1 Jun 1999 
   
Handling a political hot potato

Top Indonesian presidential adviser Dewi Fortuna Anwar discusses how gingerly 
Jakarta has to deal with former president Suharto's alleged corruption 

>From Yang Razali Kassim in Jakarta 


Q: The case of former president Suharto's wealth has become a major issue in 
the electoral campaign. Doubts have been raised about the seriousness of the 
government in resolving it. How serious is President Habibie about pursuing 
investigations? 

   'The most important thing is not whether we put Suharto in jail or not, 
but to see that justice is done. And I'm fully supportive of that. And that 
is to ensure that future leaders will not like to stay in power, that no one 
is above the law -- Indonesian presidential adviser Dewi Fortuna Anwar

A: He has to pursue the investigations. He has to make his accountability 
speech on how he deals with the various decrees that have been delivered by 
the special assembly of the MPR (People's Consultative Assembly). One of the 
decrees specifically mentions the investigations of Suharto and his family. 

Q: So you would personally want to see President Habibie pursue the 
allegations made in Time magazine? 

A: Yes. We hope that the other countries in which Suharto and his family are 
reported to have amassed their fortune will be cooperative in assisting us in 
pursuing the investigations. 

Q: Do you think the allegations made by Time have any basis? 

A: Well, there is no smoke without fire. As President Habibie himself said on 
TVRI, Time is a distinguished international magazine and it is unlikely that 
it would risk its credibility to publish a story that has no basis. 

Q: What does that mean? 

A: President Habibie views the Time article as a serious thing, and as an 
important starting point to further investigation. 

Q: But the opposition is saying that President Habibie has been slow in 
acting on KKN (corruption, collusion and nepotism) and they have doubts about 
him acting on Suharto . . . 

A: Well, it's just a matter of timing. He has said that we should concentrate 
on the general election now. But that does not mean that the investigations 
should stop. Clearly, there are problems about finding evidence. We hope that 
the Time people will be willing to reveal their sources. 

Q: The indications so far? 

A: The attorney-general has met some of the reporters of Time. But clearly, 
we cannot simply say that Suharto transferred a certain amount of money from 
Switzerland to Austria. We have to know what is the account number in 
Switzerland and Austria, under whose name -- that kind of thing. 

Q: The problem, some of the political party leaders say, is that President 
Habibie has to be seen to be pro-active in doing all these, but that he has 
not been seen as doing so . . . 

A: I agree, I agree. I think there is also concern that Suharto's power is 
well entrenched after all these years, and at the same time we have to worry 
about the general election, on which the future of our country depends. But 
there are also problems of security. The president has been saying that if we 
pursue investigations of Suharto very vigorously now and, say, put him under 
house arrest as a suspect now, and so on, there could be attempts to divert 
attention from that . . . 

Q: By whom? 

A: By the forces of Suharto. And the diversion of attention could endanger 
the elections, the general election itself. One should not take it for 
granted that Suharto has no power at all. I don't think one should be naive 
in thinking that once you chop off the top, the roots will all be finished. 
The most important thing at the moment is to ensure that the general election 
is a success. After that the president will have a number of months before he 
makes his accountability speech (to the MPR in November). 

Q: He is preparing hard for his accountability speech? 

A: He has to. 

Q: I'd like to go back to the perceived lack of resolve. When you talk about 
electioneering and electoral politics, President Habibie can actually score a 
lot of points by being tough on Suharto at this time. So why isn't he doing 
it? 

A: Well, firstly, he does not like to resort to cheap popularity; it is a 
popular thing to do, but which actually means that he has to be very careful 
in how he pursues the investigations. Because Suharto has always been very 
smart. The deals, the wheelings and dealings, are not properly proven yet. 
The government would be in even more trouble if it brings a half-baked case 
to court and suddenly the case is dismissed by the court. The 
attorney-general does have to work very carefully here to ensure that once 
there is a case, it has to be water-tight. 

Q: OK, but having said that, let me be a bit more pointed here. The 
perception is that President Habibie himself may be hiding from something . . 
. 

A: Well, the perception is always that. Because it is seen as a weak chink in 
President Habibie's armour. Because when people talk about status-quo and 
being pro-reformasi, most of his policies -- politics, the economy, 
decentralisation, East Timor, the legal system -- they all have been 
reformist. This is the one issue where he is considered to be vulnerable. 
Well, I don't think that one could hide the fact that Habibie would probably 
find it hard to put Suharto on trial, because of the close personal relations 
. . . 

Q: Sorry, you're saying it will be difficult? 

A: I think it will be difficult for President Habibie, and it will probably 
be difficult for Megawati (of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle) 
and it will probably be difficult for Abdurrahman Wahid (of Nahdlatul Ulama, 
NU). Megawati will also feel uncomfortable because Suharto never put her 
father (Indonesia's first president, the late Sukarno) on trial. But it 
doesn't mean that Habibie will shirk from putting Suharto on trial. The 
political decision later -- of whether he should be given amnesty or not -- 
has to be made, not just by the president but by the MPR. But I feel quite 
confident that the president will tackle this issue. 

Q: What about accusations by some that the president may also be tainted by 
KKN (accusations of corruption, collusion and nepotism)? 

A: He has said that his books are open. He welcomes investigations. I don't 
think he will try to hide anything. 

Q: You mentioned that even Gus Dur would be unhappy about putting Suharto on 
trial. How? 

A: Oh, he's very close to Suharto. In fact, he has said that he would not be 
in favour of putting Suharto in jail, or even on trial because, he said, 
don't forget -- what we are now, what we have achieved, is due a lot to 
Suharto. Even Amien Rais says that the most important thing for him is to put 
Suharto on trial, and after that to forgive him. So the most important thing 
is not whether we put Suharto in jail or not, but to see that justice is 
done. And I'm fully supportive of that. And that is to ensure that future 
leaders will not like to stay in power, that no one is above the law. 

Q: Sorry, if I may ask again -- what concrete steps are being taken by the 
president? 

A: Well, the president himself is already doing it, but I don't think the 
president should be directly involved too much in it. One should remember 
that Indonesia is trying to develop a system here where the executive should 
not interfere too much in the judicial system. It's really up to the 
attorney-general to get his act together, to put up a case that will be 
received by the courts . . . 

Q: What about the alleged tape recording of the conversation between the 
president and the attorney-general in which they're said to have discussed 
taking a soft line on Suharto? 

A: The president never said that it wasn't his conversation; it's valid. Yes, 
he admitted it. He kept on talking about it many times in cabinet. But 
there's not one sentence in the tape that said that Habibie wasn't serious 
about prosecuting Suharto. He was talking about the many hours of 
questioning, that three hours should be enough because of Suharto's age. The 
same courtesy is given to people who are being prosecuted but who are old. 

Q: What other courtesies? 

A: Whatever the sentiments against Pak Harto, I think one should allow him 
legal advice, on the basis of presumption of innocence. We should allow him 
to defend himself. The court should be independent. Otherwise we can create a 
bad precedent where political incumbents could put their opponents in jail. I 
don't want to name any countries in particular. But you can draw parallels 
already. That is what we don't want to do. We don't want political problems 
to be solved in criminal courts like that. Criminal courts should be used to 
judge criminal acts; civil courts, to judge violations of civil laws. But one 
should not use the courts as a means for political revenge. The law should 
not take one side or another. 

Q: With this issue still hanging, is President Habibie confidentof winning 
the presidential election? 

A: Yes, but I don't think it's very important to him. He is the sole 
candidate from Golkar. But the next president is not up to the political 
parties but to the MPR. We do not know the composition of the MPR until votes 
are counted. And if you ask me, honestly -- of course, privately -- I would 
like him to win again. But even if he doesn't, it's not terribly tragic. It's 
not the most important thing. 

Q: For whom? 

A: For Indonesia. Because the most important thing for Indonesia is a 
democratic society. We should not pin too much hope on only one personality. 
It should not really matter who becomes president. The most important thing 
is that the Indonesian people are committed to carrying out difficult 
political reforms, economic reforms, legal reforms. And that we should never 
allow the future president of Indonesia to become a cause of war . . . 

Q: You are echoing his views? 

A: Yes, I am echoing his views. As he said, if he is not elected, it's fine 
with him. He said that whoever wins the presidency through a democratic 
election, it would be an honour for him to hand over to the 
democratically-elected president. As I said, we should go beyond 
personalities. Personalities are still important. The man behind the gun, 
that is still important. But for a developing country that is still in a 
transition period, we should really pay much more attention to building the 
system. 

Q: Is it possible for a situation to emerge in which Pak Harto is put under 
house arrest before November, when the MPR convenes? 

A: There is a possibility. If the attorney-general is working hard enough, he 
should be able to get enough evidence to show that there is a criminal case, 
and name Pak Harto as a suspect. He can then put Pak Harto under house 
arrest, or whatever. 

Q: If that happens, could it lead to, as many fear, others being dragged in 
-- such as the military, the children, President Habibie himself? 

A: Yes, I don't think Pak Harto will allow himself to take the responsibility 
for all the mistakes alone. Yah, that is certainly a possibility. 

Q: As a presidential adviser, you are prepared to see President Habibie also 
being questioned on all these things? 

A: Oh, yes, sure, if you are talking about democracy and the supremacy of the 
law. That's my feeling. Otherwise there will be one law for the powerful and 
one law for the weak. But the question is whether the Indonesian people are 
prepared to face it -- that it (the issue of Mr Suharto) is not a court case, 
that it is a political decision. That's why I said that decision has to be 
made by the MPR, or the DPR. It is for the DPR to say, for example, that we 
need to look at the future. 

The writer is BT's regional analysis editor 
 


**************************************************
Paul Barber
TAPOL, the Indonesia Human Rights Campaign,
25 Plovers Way, Alton Hampshire GU34 2JJ
Tel/Fax: 1420 80153
Email: plovers@gn.apc.org
Internet: www.gn.apc.org/tapol 
Defending victims of oppression in Indonesia, 
East Timor, West Papua and Aceh, 1973-1998

25 Years...and still going strong! 
**************************************************



Partial thread listing: