Page 120 - BUKU A CENTURY OF PARLIAMENTARY LIFE IN INDONESIA

EFFORT TO REUNITE THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA
(1950 – 1960)

an essential role in many small towns and villag-
es, contributing to the process of transforming
local and traditional loyalties into national and
ideological ones and acting as agents of upward The president had no
social mobility.
real power except to

The state needed a long campaign ahead of the appoint the formators
1955 General Election to build organizational links
between village-level activities and party activi- to manage the cabinet.
ties at the national political level. Indonesian his- The process was part
toriography often presents the early 1950s as the
“difficult years”. Significant issues characterizing of a very complex
Indonesia’s situation at the time included separat- political negotiation.
ist rebellions in many regions, increasing political
tensions between right and left political forces
and the highs and lows of the cabinet.

The president had no real power except to ap-
point formateurs to manage the cabinet. The process was part of a very
complex political negotiation. The 1950s parliamentary democracy go-
vernment system gave Indonesian history its characteristics.

Throughout the history of Indonesia, in its efforts towards building a
democratic state, there have been three forms of “Indonesia”. First, Indo-
nesia as a country that had just gained independence and sovereignty.
Second, Indonesia as a nation-state that was building a path towards
democracy, freedom of the press, and welfare of its citizens, which in-
cluded efforts to advance education and strengthen its courts of law. And
third, the neverending struggle for political power. In this case, the state
became an arena for fighting political interests that limit bureaucratic
professionalism.

Approaching 1952, the Sukiman Cabinet, the second cabinet estab-
lished during the Parliamentary Democracy period, fell after being
hit by the Mutual Security Act (MSA) issue between the Indonesian
government and the United States. This issue was the most decisive
factor in the downfall of the cabinet. Unlike its predecessor, Sukiman’s
cabinet, officially called the coalition cabinet, actually had strong par-
liamentary support.

dpr.go.id 113