Happy Anniversary, Tempo
Readers’ aspiration on the future of Tempo digital and inputs regarding legislation corruptions in the House of Representatives.
Happy Anniversary, Tempo
THANK you, Tempo’s March 8-14, 2021 issue published the Tempo 50 Years On Special Report about what’s behind the scene in Tempo’s editorial room. Tempo seems to have written such a report three times for its loyal readers. Previously it was entitled Dapur Tempo.
By reading the report from Tempo’s workplace, readers share the feeling of having to go through a tough and exhausting time to prepare an article in Tempo. As a loyal reader, I feel I became closer and love Tempo more. For the celebration of Tempo’s 50th anniversary, my suggestion is how about distributing or selling Tempo’s commemorative birthday T-shirts to its faithful readers?
More importantly, the printed edition of Tempo magazine should be maintained. The generation of my age has a better grasp of Tempo’s hard copies. There is some nostalgia and intense feeling while holding and smelling a new magazine. Nothing can be a substitute for this sentiment.
Moreover, people as old as my age feel confused and inconvenient to read a digitally published magazine. Let the Koran Tempo daily migrate to the digital platform. Bravo Tempo and congratulations on your 50th anniversary from your loyal reader in a far-off region. Hopefully Tempo will make further progress and be successful.
Temanggung, Central Java.
Thank you for your loyal support for us. We hope you will always stay healthy and prosperous. As for the production of T-shirts, we will discuss and announce it in the magazine when it is ready—Ed.
Preventing Legislation Corruption
LAW making in the course of 2020 was among the important notes to be addressed soon. A classic problem has again emerged in the compilation of the 2021 National Legislation Program (Prolegnas). The 33 bills on the list have not been passed. This problem becomes a stumbling block to policymakers if legal products are supposed to be improved.
There are wo important notes in the legislation process in 2020 that should be promptly dealt with. Quantitatively, the legislation products enacted did not reach half of the bills listed in the 2020 Prolegnas. Qualitatively, the minimum involvement of the public in the legislation process became an issue that has to be straightened out in 2021 and subsequent years. Otherwise, the process of law making will tend to be repressive in nature.
In 2020, the House of Representatives (DPR) could only pass 13 laws. Five of them were ratifications of international agreements between Indonesia and several countries. Besides, there was an amendment of law in the cluster of judicial powers, which was Law No. 7/2020 on the third amendment to law No. 24/2003 on the Constitutional Court.
Of the 14 legislation products, only three belonged to the list of 37 bills in the 2020 Prolegnas Amendment Priority, which were Law No. 3/2020 on mineral and coal mining (Minerba), Law No. 10/2020 on stamp duty, and Law No. 11/2020 on job creation. It means that the legislation process went without referring to the list of priority bills already compiled.
The problem that arose when policymakers determined the scale of priority can be found in the amendment to the Minerba Law and formulation of the Job Creation Law. The two laws should not have been hastily passed amid the Covid-19 pandemic. It is because several articles were still considered problematic and only favored certain groups. In addition, conflict of interests allegedly occurred in the passage of both laws.
The inequitable priority of interests in the contents of some legislation products like the Minerba Law and the Job Creation Law can be prevented through the involvement of society. By this, the government can accommodate the various demands of different individuals as well as social groups. It also limits the room for the government to make its own interpretations with the potential to favor only certain groups.
Mahfud Md. in The Legal Policy in Indonesia (2009) has maintained that legal products of responsive character is noticeable in its participative process of formulation, in the sense of drawing the participation of social groups as well as individuals in society. However, in today’s legislation process, what happens is even the reverse, which is conservative or repressive.
Limited information access and the formulation of laws that only involves a certain group of people will open the room for the corruption of legislation. This is one of the reasons for the failure to achieve the aim of law making, which should serve the interests and needs of society while adhering to the provisions on the formulation legal products.
In order to avoid the negative impacts, several ways can be adopted to produce responsive legal products. One of them is to compile an annual priority Prolegnas list based on the most urgent public needs. It is just useless if dozens of bills are planned to be deliberated but the process is not effective and the target number cannot be achieved. It is better for the Prolegnas to list only several crucial bills but they are debated in a more focused and substantive manner.
Hemi Lavour Febrinandez