Page 113 - Demo

96Islam, Democracy and Human Rights in Contemporary IndonesiaWhen the Constituent was dissolved, Natsir had joined thePRRI in the interior of Sumatra. Yet, in a speech reported on PRRIradio, he criticized the dissolution of the Constituent and regardedit to be a %u201ccoup perampasan kekuasaan%u201d (power robbery) launchedby Soekarno. He insisted that Soekarno%u2019s real intention was not toimplement the constitution as it was, but to gain %u201cabsolute power%u201dby using the Constitution 1945 as a %u201cmask%u201d. There are two articleswritten by Natsir in response to the political changes after thedissolution of the Constituent, the first entitled %u201cShowdown%u201d andthe second %u201cCuo Sangi in%u201d. The former criticizes Soekarno%u2019sdissolution of the Constituent by regarding it as a %u201cdictatorialattitude%u201d. The second criticizes Soekarno, who was regarded asdriving the Parliament of the Republic of Indonesia to become like%u201cCuo Sangi in%u201d, a pseudo-representative body under the Japanesemilitary government during the colonial period.As an Islamic politician who viewed Islam as in line withmodern constitutionalism and democracy, Natsir represents oneof the figures deeply concerned about the development of ademocratic system in Indonesia, both during the Old Order(1959-1965) and the New Order (1966 to date). Natsir believedthat, although democracy constitutes a weakness, because itmay easily slip into being engineered by the ruling elites andcan change to become an oligarchy, as determined by RobertMichels, no better alternative had yet been found. Heacknowledges that democracy is a difficult system: slow, longwinded and unheroic. However, its strength is that it enablesrevolutionary changes to occur peacefully without bloodshed.Democratic values are universal, although their application hasto take into consideration the historical and culturalexpediencies of a nation. Nevertheless, one cannot simply