Apa gunanya merayakan 80 tahun Sumpah Pemuda bagi 52,1 juta buruh dan satu juta keluarga nelayan yang masih menerima upah kurang dari dua dollar AS per hari, bagi 13,7 juta kepala keluarga petani dengan lahan kurang dari 0,5 hektar, bagi 9.427.600 orang penganggur terbuka?
Jadi, apa gunanya Sumpah Pemuda bagi 52,1 juta buruh plus 68,5 juta petani (13,7 juta KK x 5 orang) plus lima juta nelayan (satu juta KK x 5 orang) = 125,6 juta orang ditambah 9.427.600 penganggur terbuka, di mana sebanyak 4.516.100 adalah lulusan SMA, SMK, program diploma, dan universitas. Mereka berpendapatan kurang dari 2 dollar AS per hari?
Secara sosial-ekonomi, mereka adalah warga negara Indonesia kelas dua. Partisipasi politik mereka disepelekan, hanya diperlukan untuk memilih calon presiden/wakil presiden dari partai politik dan independen (seyogianya dikabulkan Mahkamah Konstitusi agar 171 juta warganegara pemilih memiliki hak untuk dipilih sebagai calon presiden 2009 nanti dan seterusnya) serta anggota DPR/DPD/DPRD I/ DPRD II pada tahun 2009.
Diskriminasi sosial-ekonomi
Bila ada 125,6 juta orang ditambah 9.427.600 penganggur sebagai warga negara kelas II, lalu siapa warga negara kelas I secara sosial-ekonomi dan politik? Sepanjang empat tahun terakhir (2002-2006) 40 persen warga negara kelas II hanya menguasai pendapatan nasional sekitar 20,92 persen (2002), 20,57 persen (2003), 20,80 persen (2004), 18,81 persen (2005) dan 19,75 persen (2006), sedangkan 20 persen warga negara kelas satu menguasai pendapatan nasional sekitar 42,19 persen (2002), 42,33 persen (2003), 42,07 persen (2004), 44,78 persen (2005) dan 42,15 (2006) dari Income Distribution by Classification World Bank, BPS, 2002-2006.
Tentu ada segelintir puncaknya, misalnya untuk 40 konglomerat nilai kekayaan mereka 40,1 miliar dollar AS atau rata-rata 1 miliar dollar AS (Forbes Asia 2007, dan Tempo 18 Mei 2008), termasuk Wakil Presiden Jusuf Kalla di urutan ke-30 dengan kekayaan 230 juta dollar AS; Wakil Ketua MPR Aksa Mahmud 340 juta dollar AS. Dan, yang ada di puncak adalah keluarga Aburizal Bakrie (Menko Kesejahteraan Rakyat) sebesar 5,4 miliar dollar AS. Bahkan, Globe Asia (Mei 2008) menobatkannya terkaya nomor satu di Asia Tenggara dengan nilai 9,2 miliar dollar AS, jauh di atas Robert Kuok (Malaysia), 7,6 miliar dollar AS dan Ng Teng Pong (Singapura), 6,7 miliar dollar AS.
Kemiskinan akut dan ketimpangan sosial-ekonomi (antarpenduduk, daerah, Jawa versus Luar Jawa, serta sektoral) atau diskriminasi sosial-ekonomi. Inilah yang membelah dua wajah Indonesia, wajah 220.963.634 penduduk (BPS, 2004) di wilayah seluas 1.860.359,67 kilometer persegi. Kita memiliki manusia terkaya di Asia Tenggara tetapi juga dihantui kematian tragis empat anak berusia di bawah lima tahun atau balita penderita gizi buruk di Kabupaten Lebak, Banten (Kompas, 5/2).
Kata Muhammad Yunus, peraih Nobel Perdamaian 2006 sebagai perintis Bank Grameen di Banglades, ”Separuh penduduk dunia (tiga miliar jiwa) hidup dengan 2 dollar AS per hari. Lebih dari satu miliar dari mereka hidup dari pendapatan kurang dari 1 dollar AS per hari. Ini bukan formula perdamaian.” Berarti diskriminasi sosial-ekonomi di Indonesia sekarang juga bukan formula perdamaian.
Sumpah Pemuda
Diskriminasi sosial-ekonomi itu terjadi karena Sumpah Pemuda hanya dimaknai sekadar bertanah air Indonesia, berbangsa Indonesia, dan berbahasa Indonesia. Sekadar merasa bersatu secara kolektif dari sekelompok manusia sebagai sebuah keluarga besar (Gustavo de las Casas, Foreign Policy, 2008). Bila Sumpah Pemuda dimaknai ala kadarnya, nama Indonesia dapat saja lenyap seperti sebelum sebutan antropologis tahun 1850, ketika JR Logan memerlukan sebuah nama untuk menyebut penduduk serta kepulauan yang membentang antara benua Australia dan Asia.
Indonesia bukan sekadar kata, tetapi kumpulan makna dan cita-cita yang dipilih dengan kesadaran historis. Dari Kebangkitan Nasional, Sumpah Pemuda, Proklamasi dengan Pembukaan UUD 1945, setidaknya ada tiga makna tak terpisahkan yang merupakan upaya abadi manusia yang dikukuhkan founding mothers and fathers kita, yaitu emansipasi sosial dan emansipasi individual.
Makna praktis-visioner Indonesia itu berupa: Pertama, pembebasan nasional; Kedua, pembebasan sosial; Ketiga, pembebasan individual.
Makna pembebasan nasional dipertanyakan hari ini bila aset strategis sumber daya alam kita tak bermanfaat untuk kesejahteraan rakyat, sebagian besar hanya memperkaya korporasi global yang beroperasi di Indonesia, Untuk apa pembebasan nasional bila tidak diikuti pembebasan sosial dan individual, bila tidak menjamin setidaknya lima hak dasar warga negara (hak sipil, politik, ekonomi, sosial, dan budaya), bukankah lebih baik bangsa-bangsa pembentuk Indonesia berpisah, menciptakan demokrasi dan kesejahteraannya sendiri-sendiri?
Pilihan strategis untuk melakukan nasionalisasi selektif dan pajak progresif merupakan upaya menciptakan Indonesia tanpa kemiskinan, meminimalkan diskriminasi sosial-ekonomi yang membelah wajah Indonesia. Diskriminasi sosial-ekonomi itu pula yang menyumbang hancurnya solidaritas nasional di Indonesia: 69,5 persen (lemah), 27,0 persen (kuat), 3,5 persen (tidak tahu) karena tak ada toleransi antargolongan (kaya-miskin): 73,1 persen (lemah), 23,7 persen (kuat), 3,2 persen (tidak tahu) dari Jajak Pendapat Kompas 21-23 Mei 2008.
Regenerasi kepemimpinan nasional 2009 dan 2014, terutama kepada kaum muda-progresif, nanti hendaknya memberi makna Sumpah Pemuda sebagai pembebasan nasional, pembebasan sosial, dan pembebasan individual. Bila tidak, benarlah ucapan Bung Hatta, ”Revolusi kita menang dalam menegakkan negara baru, dalam menghidupkan kepribadian bangsa. Tetapi, revolusi kita kalah dalam melaksanakan cita-cita sosialnya.”
M Fadjroel RachmanKetua Lembaga Pengkajian Demokrasi dan Negara Kesejahteraan (Pedoman Indonesia)
T his interview with Miguel d’Escoto, the President-elect of the U.N. General Assembly, was conducted in 1985 when d’Escoto was foreign minister for the Nicaraguan government of Daniel Ortega. At the time the relationship between the Reagan administration and the Ortega government was very strained, as there were suspicions (later confirmed) that the U.S. backed the revolutionary Contras against Ortega. D’Escoto himself was a figure of controversy within the church. A MaryKnoll priest, he had been told by the Vatican to cease celebrating Mass because of his political activities. Ortega served as president from 1985-1990, and was elected again in 2006. Among Ortega’s current supporters is Cardinal Miguel Obando Bravo, who has commended Ortega for his efforts to outlaw abortion. The cardinal was once a strong critic of the Ortega government.
On Oct. 19, 1985, Miguel d'Escoto Brockman, a Maryknoll priest now serving as Foreign Minister of Nicaragua, spoke with me in his room at the United Nations Plaza Hotel in New York City. He had accompanied President Daniel Ortega Saavedra to the 40th anniversary session of the United Nations, where on Oct. 21 Mr. Ortega addressed the General Assembly.
The son of a Nicaraguan Ambassador to the United States, Father d'Escoto was born in Hollywood, Calif. He attended Maryknoll College in Glen Ellyn, Ill., spent a year in the novitiate and then studied theology at the Maryknoll Seminary in New York before being ordained in 1961. Immediately after ordination, he received an M.S. from the Columbia University School of Journalism.
As is well known, Pope John Paul II has long desired that Father d'Escoto relinquish his Government post, in accord with the new code of canon law. Because Father d'Escoto did not meet the deadline indicated by the Vatican in this matter, he has been required to relinquish, instead, the exercise of his priesthood until such time as he complies with canon law.
He discusses that issue in this interview, as well as the state of the church in Nicaragua, the recent suspension of civil liberties there and other issues touching on relations between the United States and Nicaragua.
You have lived for some years in the United States, I understand, and therefore you have the experience of living in the cultures of both North and Central America. Why is it that the statements of the Nicaraguan Government seem, from a North American point of view, to be so obsessed with the United States?
Well, more than any other country in continental Latin America, we have suffered the consequences of U.S. official interventionism. We have been invaded, we have been occupied time and time again. We suffered the imposition of one of the most hideous regimes in the history of Latin America for close to half a century, and we are at this present time experiencing a war that is characterized, even by people in the U.S. Congress, as not only illegal, but also immoral, and that has resulted in the systematic murder, kidnapping and torture of thousands upon thousands of our fellow citizens. I think we have reason to be concerned about the United States.
As a matter of fact, I many times wonder what the reaction of the United States would be if it were to find itself in our situation. For that to be a possibility, there would have to be a country that is as least a thousand times more powerful than the United States. Of course, there is no such country. But I wonder what would happen if there were a country a hundred times larger in territorial size (which is the least important thing), and thousands of times more powerful economically and politically, and if that country were to be clearly committed to the overthrow and the destruction of American society! What would be the reaction?
You spoke about immorality and illegality. That word “illegality" reminds me of the action in the World Court at the moment. May I ask, how did you conceive that idea? Was it your idea, in fact, to sue the United States in the World Court?
From the beginning of the application of Mr. Reagan's policy against the Nicaraguan revolution, it was quite clear to me that there was an illegality. But the United States has never been characterized by respect for law, in spite of the image that it likes to project internationally and within the United States. I think the fundamental principle is to do as much as you can possibly get away with. But you always try to keep a facade.
I had thought about going to the court, but never too seriously until the invasion of Grenada. But it was not the fact of the invasion that moved me to propose seriously to the President that we go to the court. It was that I decided to monitor American reaction to the invasion of Grenada, as presented mainly in editorials and op-ed pieces in the basic, leading newspapers across the country. I was concerned to see-there were a few notable and important exceptions-that the majority were willing to accept the fact of the invasion. They would formulate their argument in the following manner. They would say: "Surely, if one were to evaluate the decision to invade Grenada from the point of view of international law, this is an action outside the norms. But then again, international law has become obsolete"--I am summarizing. "Why? Because the interrelation between nations is increasing more and more, and as a result of this, one must redefine the principle of nonintervention. "
This is really what they were saying, the vast majority. That's what I saw reflected in the United States. Well, where does that leave the small countries of the world?
Then, during an afternoon walk with the President, I said: "Daniel, you know I seldom lose sleep about anything. But I am thinking and thinking that this is really something. With international law, there can be war; but without it, for sure there will be nothing but war." We have to have more than only law. We have to have justice also, and a new international economic order, and other things besides. But there can be no greater damage to international peace and security than the destruction of the international legal order. So I said: "I think, Daniel, we have to go to the World Court. I am very concerned; I am very afraid. What I see happening cannot be taken just as a Reagan move, because look at what he has done and look at the reaction."
The other thing that concerned me was that international public opinion kept rather quiet. I mean, President Reagan comes out and says the most flagrant things. For example, he says publicly, for the world to hear, that he believes in the right of the United States to utilize covert action, which is the euphemism to signify activities to destabilize or overthrow another government. He says that he believes in the right of the United States to utilize covert actions against another nation whenever, in the mind of the President of the United States, that serves the interests of the United States. And everyone keeps quiet!
About freedom of the church, another subject I wanted to raise with you: What is your view of the causes of the tension between the Nicaraguan hierarchy and the Government? Do you have better relations with some bishops than with others? It is well known that there is tension between Monsenor Obando y Bravo [Cardinal Miguel Obando y Bravo, Archbishop of Managua] and the Government.
Well, it is a sad fact, but something that is a part of history, and undeniable: The church has never ever, as church, in our history in Latin America at least-and in the whole world, I think-supported profound changes in society that are being promoted precisely to benefit the majority of the people. On the contrary, the church historically-and this is sad-has defended the maintenance of the most un-Christian status quo by fomenting something that can only be characterized as sin, because the church has preached resignation in the face of exploitation and injustice. This is in total contradiction to Christ's mandate that we should be a leavening agent in society, a transforming agent. To transform what into what? Selfishness into brotherly concern for one another.
The Lord's words, "The poor you shall have always with you," are manipulated to justify a political quietism, which again is sinful. No wonder the church was characterized until not too long ago-even in the Rockefeller Report when Mr. Nixon became President-as one of the fundamental pillars of the maintenance of the system, together with the military.
How has this happened in practice? Well, just look at the time when we were trying to become independent from Spain. The Holy Father was Pope Pius VII-at that time he was living not in Rome, but in France. He received the emissary from Spain, heard one side of the story and wrote in the name of Christ to his dear children in the Lord, and ordered us to submit to the Spanish Crown and desist from trying to become independent. In the name of God. What abuse!
And you know what happened? We were on the verge of the biggest schism in the history of Christianity. For years we did not have bishops in Latin America, until Muzi finally came on his mission to Chile, you remember. [The Muzi Mission, 1823-25, by Giovanni Muzi, Bishop of Citta di Castello and first papal representative to the Americas. He came with faculties to name and consecrate bishops in the new Spanish American republics without further recourse to Rome.]
You know, Our Lord says He came to bring fire to the earth and that He wanted this fire to be enkindled-the fire of His transforming love, to push forward to new heights of brotherhood. But many of us church people have acted like frustrated firemen, putting out the fire. We question change, any change. Ffffftttt [sound and gesture of a fireman managing a firehose]. Dangerous, you know. So put it out with the hose.
It's not surprising that, in Nicaragua, where we are embarked at this time, also, on a profound change, you see a church whose leaders--like the rest of us priests--have been formed in a reactionary and anti-Communist tradition when it comes to social doctrine, and especially those who make it to higher echelons of authority within the church. Not all, of course, but a great majority are of that bent. I always say to newspeople that it is not worth commenting on, because if you tell me that there is a revolution somewhere and the church is against it, I will say, "What else is new?" I mean, what would be newsworthy is to tell me that the church is for it. So in Nicaragua the new thing is, and the question is: How come so much of the church is in favor of it [the revolution]? How come so many of the priests, even of the bishops?
Now, that was a question I wanted to ask: How many of the bishops?
I do not like to speak for the bishops, but I can tell you that, in my very serious opinion, the fundamental problems are in Managua and a couple of other dioceses, and that the rest of the bishops understand the situation quite well. Now, we have a difficulty in Nicaragua. You see, some of our bishops are not Nicaraguans. From our point of view as Christians, we should not even consider whether or not someone is Nicaraguan. But what is sad is that the local bishops really make the nonnationals feel that they are not Nicaraguans--although they have given their lives in our country because they came as missionaries and have been there a long time, 30 years or whatever. So they are intimidated, in the face of people like Monsenor Obando. I mention his name, because this is a fact.
As far as I know, we get the impression in this country that the Nicaraguan bishops speak as a unified bloc, under the leadership of Monsenor Obando y Bravo.
I have myself clearly established in many cases that at least some of the bishops knew nothing about these documents that have come out. They saw them only when they returned to the country, had never even read them, no draft being presented to them, or anything of that kind. Sometimes they are signed only by Monsenor Bosco Vivas, who is Auxiliary Bishop of Managua and acts as secretary to the bishops' conference. Oh, yes, that happens.
They have some kind of lamentable principle that any Christian should find hard to accept: They will not say something about a certain issue unless everyone says it. How can that be? That is, if one decides to keep quiet on something that another feels morally obliged to say something about, this other will not say it because there is an agreement not to say anything unless everyone agrees to it. We can't say that to our Lord on the day when we come to Him: "I kept quiet because the others didn't speak."
You are saying that the bishops, or some of them, are not speaking up as they ought.
They are not speaking up. They say it is very difficult; they are intimidated by Monsenor Obando. But of course in the final analysis the responsibility does not end with Monsenor Obando. There is an authority higher than his that has a very important responsibility in this whole issue.
Let me ask you another question about the freedom of the church. That was how we started this part of the discussion, and then I asked you about the bishops. How do you think the church will be affected by President Ortega's recent announcement about the suspension of civil liberties in Nicaragua? Will the Cardinal be prohibited from traveling around the country, as is said in some newspapers here?
No one is prohibited from traveling anywhere. There is no restriction on the mobility of people from one place to another.
What about a prohibition on his assemblies?
There is a prohibition on assemblies, but it must be clearly understood what is meant by that. It does not mean, for example, that if a political party wants to have an assembly tomorrow, it cannot have it. What it means is that now, because of certain things that are happening, they have to ask for permission, and they will get it. Now, let us say there is going to be a procession. They ask for it, and they will get it. But you can be sure that they will be told, again, that it has to be a religious procession, and not an occasion for political parties (and all those with whom the Cardinal is especially identified) to use the church. An abusive utilization especially of the Cardinal, to project him as a symbol--this really has been the role that the Central Intelligence Agency has assigned to Cardinal Obando. I’m sorry to say it, but I will say it here. This is his role, and it is not surprising that he got a medal from the C.I.A. Who is Constantine Menges?
Excuse me?
Who is Constantine Menges? The director of the C.I.A. in Latin America, or he was. Along with Michael Novak and other people, he created this Institute on Religion and Democracy. For what purpose? It has been amply written up in the United States. It is clearly a C.I.A.-front organization, and the first medal they gave was to Cardinal Obando. For what? He is regarded as their most valuable asset in Central America, and in Nicaragua in particular. Has he knowingly accepted this role? Is he being used? Well, a person does not make a long trip to get a medal without having investigated previously why they are giving him such an honor, and who it is that is giving him the honor.
The thing is this. Nicaragua will always have freedom of conscience, freedom of religion. Nicaragua is truly committed, not hypocritically committed, like Mr. Reagan, to democracy. We fought to overthrow a regime that was sponsored by the United States, because we could never have democracy under that regime. We are building our democracy. But even the most important of all human rights, which is the right to life, can have exceptions. Catholic morality accepts the principle that one can kill in self-defense, and talks about "just war." The U.S. Government throws its arms up to the skies in horror because of the limitation of rights in Nicaragua. But this is done precisely to defend our most basic right, which is to sovereignty and the life of our people. We will not allow the use of liberties that never existed in Nicaragua before, but that now exist because of the revolution, to reverse the revolutionary process-in the way, for example, that freedom of the press in Chile was used in EI Mercurio to do in President Allende [Salvador Allende Gossens, the democratically elected Marxist President of Chile, overthrown in a bloody coup in September 1973].
No one who is doing the proper type of activity has anything to fear, and as a matter of fact there is no properly religious activity that is in any way, shape or form going to be limited. But, of course, what we are talking about is not only not a religious activity, it is an activity that I myself--not the Government of Nicaragua, but I myself--call treasonous activity. And history will condemn the church, and the Cardinal-and not only the Cardinal, but many of the bishops-for having kept what I call a silence of complicity in the face of the aggression of the strongest and richest nation in the world against our people. Even the American bishops have said a few things against it. But what have the Nicaraguan bishops said? Nothing to condemn it, and a few things-some of them-to support it. I have spoken to certain bishops, and I have said: "Don't you see what you are doing to the church? Don't you see how you are hurting the church?" All they have acknowledged to me that that’s right. They do not know what to do because this other man won't move.
I am speaking more than I have ever spoken. But some bishops have acknowledged to me that they are very concerned about the future of the church. They are guilty of high treason by becoming accomplices of a foreign power in its efforts to destabilize and to overthrow our Government. And how are they manifesting this behavior now? At this point in time by going against the draft. What would the United States do if it were being attacked by another country and the church came out against the draft?
They say that the draft is to defend a party. Now they know that in Nicaragua we had elections that were broad based, and with great participation, for the first time in history. Every political party that wanted to participate could participate, and in fact seven participated. Unlike elections in other parts of Latin America, there were no candidates in jail, and no one was prohibited from becoming a candidate. It was a direct vote, by the people. So we had elections, and we have a Government that is the result of those elections. President Reagan has acknowledged that he is trying to overthrow that Government, and then the bishops have the gall to say that the army, in defending our Government, a system that was voted in democratically by the people, is being used to defend a party. You know, this is extremely damaging to the church. Anyway, the church may have betrayed the people, but we must defend the wishes of the people, and we must defend them legally, through the established Government, and we must not allow the church to blemish further the name of Christianity and abuse the cross of Christ to spread imperialistic ideals, political ideas that would have Nicaragua become submitted again to United States dictates. This was the position of the bishops during the colonial days, and that is why for many, many years there were no bishops after independence. They were total lackeys.
Let me put the question in another way. Some American bishops, as you say, have tried to speak out against U. S. interference in Nicaragua. But the deprivation of civil liberties—or whatever you want to call this statement by President Ortega on Tuesday, Oct. 15, 1985-makes it more difficult for U.S. bishops to defend Nicaragua's right to self-determination.
We don't want the American bishops to defend Nicaragua. We don't need the American bishops or anyone to defend us. We are more than able to defend ourselves. I would ask the American bishops to defend themselves and their own souls. The hands of every American are bloodied with the blood of innocent Nicaraguan people. The American Catholic Church is very big. It is also American. It is an accomplice, unless it protests. These are crimes in which every American citizen is implicated because this is--or isn't it?--a democracy. Is not everyone co-responsible?
What would happen if a few American bishops really wanted to put an end to these crimes that their country is committing in their name? If they decided to take some dramatic sort of action until the policies ended, and appealed to the rest of the American Catholics and community of believers to protest? They can do it. Especially since this President of the United States has the nerve to say that he does what he does to defend the most sacred values of our Judeo-Christian tradition. He is now the spokesperson, the defender of God. And he is allowed to play that role. He sprinkles all his speeches-I have heard him many times-with references to the Pope, and "God bless you" here and "God bless you" there, and he gets away with it. Let him take full responsibility for his actions but not implicate God, much less give an appearance that he is doing all this to defend persecuted Christians.
Some of the U. S. bishops might say, "We are trying to protest, but we have to do it through means of political discourse, and the suppression of civil rights in Nicaragua makes it more difficult for us."
Through means of political discourse? How did the prophets protest? No one is trying. Our Lord would say, "Close, but no cigar." They should protest. And one is better than none, and then maybe others will follow. But not only bishops.
How do you feel, as Foreign Minister, about the fact that this pronouncement by President Ortega about the suppression of civil liberties was made just before you and he came up to the United Nations? Do you find that an embarrassment? It seems from a political point of view such an odd moment to have made that pronouncement.
We are not in a propaganda campaign. Circumstances are there that oblige us to move. Others, more Madison Avenue-oriented, would have said: "Go to the United Nations, give a great exhibition, and then come back and do it." After all, that is the way some other Latin American countries have done things. No, we do things when we have to do them, and we have nothing to be embarrassed about.
Let me shift over to the matter of your Christian ministry. Is that an acceptable topic?
Any topic.
Do you feel you are exercising your priesthood in your present work?
I think so, in a unique, strange, unsought kind of way--a way that I never envisioned because it had never occurred to me.·Basically, as a priest, I must try to excel always in those virtues. that should be the virtues of a man, and especially of a man who is a Christian, because I am first a man, and a Christian, and then by the grace of God also a priest. Now, the specifically priestly functions, the sacramental ones, have been deprived me by wishes of the Holy Father-not by my Society, and not by my bishop in Nicaragua, who would not do that.
Who is your bishop in Nicaragua?
Ruben L6pez Ard6n, who is the Bishop of Esteli. He is the bishop with whom I have been associated in Nicaragua, and with whom I have most cordial, fraternal relations.
And the same with your Maryknoll superior?
By the grace of God I have never had any but the best relations with all my superiors. Now we very much wanted to speak to Rome--because this thing [the order to leave the Government post] came from Rome-and Rome ended up saying there was nothing to speak about, that the law was the law, and it must be complied with.
Well, if it comes to that, and with all due respect to canon law--which I do in fact respect and mean never to disrespect--if it comes to the law being the law, I have to establish a priority. And the law of God has to come before canon law. I find that I would be in radical violation of the law of God, which is basically to love my neighbor, if, in the situation where my country finds itself, I were to comply with canon law and leave this post, which I never sought, never wanted ... even now. They talk about the "honor." Where is the honor? It's work. To me there's no difference-and I say this before God, because it's true-between being a doorman or being a foreign minister. It's service.
I was asked at a certain point in time: "Would you help us do this? We need to establish decent and honorable and just relations with the international community. We need people to help us because of the conditions in Nicaragua, and the availability of human resources. We are among the privileged·few who have had an opportunity for some degree of formal education, and everyone has to pitch in. And to be a bridge of understanding between your nation and others is a very noble and also, in a sense, priestly work."
I am not in a parish, but I never have been in a parish since I was ordained. I do not know why this post should be less priestly than my work in Orbis Books [a Catholic publishing house run by Maryknoll in New York].
Is that what you did before?
I founded Orbis Books. I began it, and I was director of communications at Maryknoll, and before that in Chile I was giving technical assistance.
So, it's very, very sad. But even my bishop was angry when I opened up the subject once (not that I was saying that I was going to leave my post). He told me how much it would hurt the church and the people. That is what matters, because we are transitory. The Lord may call us-we do not know when, today, in a minute. And so my idea is this: If I were to leave my post in order to have the satisfaction of saying Mass, I could not have that satisfaction as a matter of fact.
Because you feel you could not celebrate the Mass?
No, I would be in sin. I would be a traitor. And there has never been anything more important to me in my whole life, since I was a young man, than the Holy Sacrifice.
From 1985, an interview with a retired priest and current president of the U.N. General Assembly
Do you look forward to resuming your sacramental priesthood someday?
Yes, but I am perhaps living that Mass now, with the pain, even more than if I did not have this difficulty. It is like the case of other priests who have been kept from saying Mass because they are in jail, for example. It is precisely in my fundamental commitment to living the Mass that I accept this prohibition from celebrating the Holy Sacrifice. Our Lord says, "Do this in commemoration of me." He did not mean that we repeat the words only, because we are not parrots, but that we repeat those words as human beings; that is to say, that we take on the inner dispositions that He had when He said, "This is my body and this is my blood." We make those inner dispositions our own, and then we say the words, because we speak as human beings, conveying what we feel. So, to live the Mass is to have that inner disposition of availability to God, including the giving of your life for the service of the people, and to ask to be strengthened in your love for the cross and the acceptance of the cross in whatever shape or form God decides you should carry it.
Thomas H. Stahel is a former associate editor of America.
KOMPAS/SOELASTRI SOEKIRNO / Kompas Images Industri kecil pembuatan tempe di Kelurahan Sirnagalih, Kecamatan Neglasari, Kota Tangerang, berdenyut lagi sejak harga kedelai turun menjadi Rp 5.800 sampai Rp 6.000 per kilogram. Seorang perajin, Senin (20/10), menata tempe setengah jadi.
Selasa, 21 Oktober 2008 | 00:18 WIB
Sarie Febriane
Matahari baru saja tergelincir. Aktivitas hidup manusia tentunya sedang giat-giatnya berlangsung. Namun, tidak di sentra perajin penganan rakyat ini. Produksi sudah selesai. Meski matahari tengah terik-teriknya, mendung bergayut di wajah para pejuang tahu dan tempe ini.
”Beginilah, biasanya magrib baru selesai. Sekarang lohor saja sudah kelar,” kata Wardi (48), sembari menyikat tahang, wadah kayu penampung bubur tahu.
Wardi, pria asal Pekalongan Jawa Tengah, itu adalah satu dari ratusan perajin tahu dan tempe skala mikro dan kecil di Kelurahan Tegal Parang, Jakarta Selatan. Meski harga kedelai tengah turun dan subsidi dari pemerintah masih berjalan, gairah usaha mereka tampak jelas melesu.
Penurunan harga dan subsidi kedelai tak juga mengoreksi iklim usaha mikro para perajin tahu dan tempe menjadi lebih bergairah. Kapasitas produksi kian merosot. Padahal, segala akrobat telah dilakukan. Minyak tanah diganti kayu bakar. Listrik dihemat. Buruh harian dikurangi.
Senang dengan turunnya harga kedelai? Wardi tersenyum tipis. Tanpa mengeluh, dia menjawab. ”Harus disyukuri, masih bisa produksi. Masih sisa empat pegawai dari delapan orang yang pernah ada,” ucap Wardi.
Pengurus Prima Koperasi Tahu Tempe Indonesia (Primkopti) Swakerta Jakarta Barat Handoko Mulyo menerangkan, saat ini harga kedelai di pasaran sebesar Rp 5.800-Rp 6.200 per kilogram. Turun sekitar Rp 1.000 per kg dari sebelumnya Rp 6.500-Rp 7.500 per kg.
Dulu, ketika kedelai masih di kisaran Rp 480.000 per kuintal (awal tahun 2008), Wardi mampu mengolah 2 kuintal kedelai per hari. Namun, ketika harga kedelai meroket hingga mencapai lebih dari Rp 700.000 per kuintal, Wardi dan ratusan pedagang lain kolaps. Demonstrasi digelar. Kebijakan dadakan dibuat. Kedelai disubsidi Rp 1.000 per kg dan akan berakhir pada pengujung tahun 2008 ini.
Untuk wilayah Jakarta saja dibutuhkan sedikitnya 5.000 ton kedelai setiap minggu. Ribuan ton kedelai itu diolah menjadi tahu dan tempe oleh sekitar 4.500 perajin di Ibu Kota ini.
Saat ini perajin menebus kedelai subsidi di harga Rp 500.000 per kuintal. Namun, kapasitas produksi para perajin tahu dan tempe hingga saat ini sudah merosot lebih dari 50 persen. Wardi, misalnya, kini hanya sanggup mengolah 80 kg kedelai setiap hari.
Lain lagi nasib Suwarno (48). Di tengah kondisi suram itu, tempat usaha tahunya—yang sudah dirintis 25 tahun—habis terbakar dua pekan lalu. Salah satu penyebabnya, kayu bakar yang menumpuk di pabriknya menyempurnakan ”pembakaran” tersebut.
”Kami ganti kayu bakar karena minyak tanah sudah tidak terjangkau. Pakai gas mimpi sajalah. Kayu bakar pun kami beli, tidak gratis,” kata Surani (35), adik ipar Suwarno. Tak dapat dipastikan kapan usaha Suwarno dapat berdiri lagi.
Siasat wong cilik
Sebagai gambaran, selain kedelai, komponen produksi tahu setiap kelompok perajin adalah kayu bakar Rp 700.000 per satu mobil bak. Sewa diesel untuk menggiling kedelai Rp 40.000 per kuintal. Solar Rp 6.500 per liter, sewa tempat kisaran Rp 450.000 per bulan, listrik Rp 250.000 per bulan per kelompok. Upah pegawai rata-rata Rp 15.000 per orang.
Dengan demikian, subsidi kedelai seolah seperti gula-gula sesaat bagi para perajin untuk bertahan. Sementara beban komponen produksi lainnya dipanggul mereka sepenuhnya. Dengan segala kecerdikan bersiasat khas wong cilik.
Soal solar, misalnya. Para perajin kini terpaksa membeli solar di atas harga resmi. Penyebabnya, petugas di stasiun pengisian bahan bakar untuk umum menolak perajin tahu dan tempe yang hendak membeli solar dengan jeriken. ”Harus ada izin. Macam-macam syaratnya. Kami mentok,” kata Sutarno (37), perajin tahu lainnya.
Akhirnya, para perajin saat ini titip beli pada truk atau bus yang mengisi solar (Rp 5.500 per liter) di SPBU. Baru kemudian, perajin menyedot solar dari tangki BBM bus atau truk tersebut. Dengan cara ini, solar terpaksa ditebus perajin seharga Rp 6.500 per liter.
Bagi Cahyoto (49), perajin tempe di Jalan N, Haji Ung, Kelurahan Utan Panjang, Jakarta Pusat, iklim usaha para perajin akan membaik lebih signifikan jika harga kedelai turun di kisaran Rp 3.000 per kg. Setidaknya, harga itu untuk kompensasi ongkos komponen produksi lainnya yang sudah sulit disiasati begitu rupa.
Cukup untuk makan
Meski kondisi belum menjanjikan, dibayangi rasa waswas, para pejuang tahu dan tempe ini tetaplah bersyukur. Begitu juga yang dirasakan para perajin tempe di Kelurahan Sirnagalih, Kecamatan Neglasari, dan Kelurahan Koang Jaya di Kecamatan Karawaci, keduanya di Kota Tangerang. Mereka merasa, setidaknya bisa bernapas lagi setelah sempat tercekik saat harga kedelai meroket tanpa ampun.
Perajin tempe, Riadi dan Tarmuji, misalnya, mengaku masih bisa meraih untung tipis dengan memproduksi 40 kg kedelai menjadi 320 lonjor tempe. Ukuran cukup bagi para perajin tahu dan tempe ini adalah, ”Cukup untuk bayar pegawai, listrik, dan makan sekeluarga,” kata Kartono, perajin tempe asal Pemalang yang menjadi ketua kelompok perajin tempe di Koang Jaya.
Kendati harga kedelai mulai turun, para perajin khawatir harga akan naik lagi. Terlebih, Amerika Serikat—negara asal kedelai yang mereka olah—tengah krisis finansial.
Di tengah kondisi yang dibayangi ketidakpastian ini, setidaknya masih ada satu hal yang pasti. Tiada lain, kesetiaan para perajin, yang masih terus tekun memproduksi penganan sumber protein rakyat paling terjangkau saat ini.
”Bikin tempe adalah takdir saya,” kata Robin (61), perajin tempe di Tegal Parang, sejak 40 tahun lalu. (NEL/TRI)
KOMPAS/SYAHNAN RANGKUTI / Kompas Images Anjloknya harga sawit sampai Rp 300 per kilogram dari harga sebelumnya mencapai Rp 2.000 per kg telah membuat petani, terutama petani swadaya (yang tidak memiliki kerja sama dengan perkebunan besar BUMN maupun swasta), babak belur.
Jumat, 17 Oktober 2008 | 03:00 WIB
Syahnan Rangkuti
Bahori (23) masih bisa tersenyum. Walau senyum itu kecut. Sesekali ia juga tertawa, tetapi ketawa itu pun sumbang. Ketika dijumpai di areal kebun kelapa sawit miliknya, ia baru saja menjual hasil panen tandan buah segar sawit sebanyak 1 ton.
Selasa, menjelang senja, ia sendiri saja di tengah kebunnya seluas 2 hektar di Desa Sialang Jaya, Kecamatan Rambah, Kabupaten Rokan Hulu, Riau—sekitar 200 kilometer dari Pekanbaru.
Dengan harga tandan buah segar (TBS) sekarang ini yang hanya Rp 300 per kilogram, ayah seorang bayi itu tentunya mendapat penghasilan Rp 300.000. Tetapi, tunggu dulu. Hitungan matematis itu belum putus. Bahori harus mengeluarkan uang Rp 50.000 untuk upah melangsir (membawa TBS dari kebunnya ke pinggir jalan besar dengan menggunakan kendaraan berpenggerak empat roda). Dia juga harus mengeluarkan uang Rp 300.000 untuk membayar upah tiga pekerja harian masing-masing Rp 100.000 untuk memanen selama dua hari. ”Saya nombok Rp 50.000. Namun, apa boleh buat. Saya memilih untuk tetap memanen karena kata orang, kalau tidak dipanen, nanti pohon sawit rusak dan tidak mau berbuah lagi,” kata Bahori.
Untuk menutup utang, Bahori kembali ke profesi lama, yaitu menjadi buruh di kebun orang lain. Sepanjang Selasa itu dia bekerja di kebun orang. Upahnya Rp 60.000 sehari. Alhasil, setelah membayar utang Rp 50.000, penghasilan bersihnya hari itu hanya Rp 10.000.
Syaifudin yang memiliki kebun seluas 5 hektar juga senasib dengan Bahori. Hari itu ia mempekerjakan enam orang untuk panen sebanyak 2 ton. Padahal, masih ada 2 ton lagi TBS siap panen.
”Biarlah 2 ton lagi itu tetap dipohonnya sampai panen dua minggu lagi. Mana tau harga bisa membaik. Kalau pohonnya mau rusak, biarlah. Asal jangan seluruhnya,” kata Syaifudin.
Syaifudin mengatakan, ia mendapat uang Rp 600.000 dari panen sebanyak 2 ton. Namun uang itu langsung dipotong Rp 240.000 untuk upah empat buruh angkut TBS ke tempat penumpukan dan Rp 140.000 lagi untuk upah dua pendodos (pemetik buah dari pohon). Pendapatannya masih berkurang lagi karena harus membayar upah melangsir dengan mobil Rp 100.000. Artinya, penghasilan bersih hari itu sebesar Rp 120.000 untuk hasil panen sebanyak 2 ton.
”Sebelum harga anjlok, biasanya saya mendapat uang minimal Rp 4 juta dari sekali panen. Dalam satu bulan panen dua kali atau Rp 8 juta sebulan. Sekarang ini hitung saja pendapatan saya,” kata Syaifudin.
Tentang upah melangsir yang mahal lebih disebabkan buruknya kondisi jalan ke perkebunan petani.
Tidak mengherankan bila biaya untuk mengangkut satu ton TBS dari kebun ke pinggir jalan yang berjarak sekitar 1 kilometer, petani harus membayar Rp 50.000 atau Rp 50 per kilogram.
Di sebuah desa eks transmigrasi, biaya transportasi bahkan mencapai Rp 200 per kilogram atau Rp 200.000 per ton. Hal itu disebabkan jalan hancur dan jaraknya lebih dari 5 kilometer.
Namun tidak semua jalan ke perkebunan petani di Rokan Hulu, begitu buruk. Di sebuah tempat tidak jauh dari kota Pasirpengarayan, ibu kota Kabupaten Rokan Hulu, jalan menuju perkebunan seorang kuat di Rokan Hulu ternyata diaspal hotmiks dengan lebar 12 meter.
Cerita manis pemilik kebun sawit di Riau tersebut saat ini sudah berubah menjadi cerita duka. Harga TBS Rp 300 per kilogram, menurut Ardiman Daulay, Ketua Asosiasi Petani Kelapa Sawit Indonesia (Apkasindo) Cabang Rokan Hulu, sama seperti kondisi 12 tahun lalu saat menjelang krisis moneter melanda Indonesia tahun 1997. ”Dulu sebelum krismon, harga sawit memang Rp 300 per kilogram, tetapi harga-harga barang masih jauh lebih murah dibandingkan sekarang. Waktu itu harga beras masih ada yang Rp 1.000 per kilogram. Pada saat krismon dahulu, petani kami justru menikmati hasil karena harga sawit naik menjadi Rp 800 sampai Rp 1.000 per kilogram. Sekarang ini petani sawit yang mengalami krisis,” kata Daulay yang memiliki 2.500 anggota dengan lahan 118.000 hektar.
Menurut Daulay, bukan hanya petani yang mengalami krisis. Pedagang pengumpul mengalami nasib sama. Kusno, seorang tauke sawit (sebutan untuk pedagang pengumpul), sudah meminta keringanan kepada Bank BRI setempat untuk menunda pembayaran cicilan utangnya.
Sebelum harga anjlok, Kusno meminjamkan uang kepada petani, nilainya Rp 200 juta. Ini biasa dilakukan toke sawit agar petani mau menjual buah kepada mereka. Seluruh uang berasal dari pinjaman di Bank BRI. Sekarang ini seluruh piutang Kusno tidak dapat ditagih, karena petani peminjam tidak mampu membayar. ”Kalau BRI tidak bersedia menunda cicilan, rumah Kusno akan segera disita bank,” ujar Daulay.
Menurut Daulay, petani dari Desa Tandun sampai mencoba bunuh diri, meminum obat serangga, karena dililit utang Rp 200 juta di bank dan tidak dapat membayar. Untungnya, niat bunuh diri cepat ketahuan keluarganya dan si petani dapat diselamatkan.
Krisis sawit seperti musim kemarau yang merontokkan segala sesuatu. Empat hari lalu, empat sepeda motor ditarik dealer karena petani menunggak cicilan. Lalu, dua pabrik kelapa sawit di Rokan Hulu, yaitu di Desa I, Ujung Batu, dan Petapahan, terpaksa pula ditutup karena cadangan CPO pabrik belum terjual.
Krisis keuangan global kali ini, eksesnya ternyata menjalar tanpa ampun kepada petani kecil. Sayangnya, 80 persen dari 2.500 anggota Apkasindo Rokan Hulu merupakan petani kecil dengan lahan rata-rata 2 hektar.
”Yang kami harapkan, pemerintah mau minta perbankan menunda pembayaran cicilan petani. Kalau tidak, akan lebih banyak petani sawit yang stres atau gila,” kata Daulay.
Gejolak moneter yang melanda Amerika Serikat tidak saja mengguncang sendi-sendi ekonomi AS, tetapi menimbulkan kepanikan global.
Kepanikan itu tecermin pada kekacauan bursa saham, harga saham bertumbangan, para pialang mengalami shock, investor dilanda kepanikan, nasabah menyerbu bank, nilai tukar mata uang anjlok, kucuran dana pembangunan tersendat, transaksi perdagangan dihentikan, otoritas pemerintah kehilangan akal, dan urat nadi perekonomian global terancam bangkrut.
Krisis keuangan global ”menampar” golongan menengah-atas, yang terbiasa hidup di ”surga moneter”: barang mewah, gaya hidup berkilau, bisnis berlian, pakaian dan mobil mewah. Namun, karena gejolak moneter diramalkan akan lama, ”tamparan” juga akan dirasakan kelas menengah dan kaum miskin, yang hidupnya bergantung pada fluktuasi moneter.
Orbit-orbit moneter
Gejolak moneter di AS dan mengguncang dunia merupakan konsekuensi logis sistem perekonomian ”pasar bebas” dan ideologi (neo)liberalisme. Sistem pasar bebas dengan minimalisme pengendalian negara setidaknya menghasilkan empat watak kultural ekonomi: 1) orbital, berupa perputaran ekonomi moneter yang mengglobal; 2) virtual, dengan sektor moneter yang bersifat maya; 3) viral, dengan penjalaran efek ekonomi yang cepat bak virus; dan 4) banal, dengan sistem ekonomi yang merayakan konsumerisme remeh-temeh.
Jean Baudrillard dalam Fatal Strategies (1990) menggambarkan kondisi kultural ekonomi macam itu melalui metafora kosmologi ”orbit” (orbital). Sistem moneter layaknya sebuah orbit, yaitu garis edar mata uang yang berputar mengelilingi ”sektor riil” sebagai titik pusat orbit, tetapi terpisah darinya. Bisnis keuangan berlangsung di sektor moneter, tanpa bersentuhan dengan sektor riil. Triliunan dollar AS diperjualbelikan dan dipermainkan di pasar modal, tetapi hanya sebagian di antaranya diputar di sektor riil.
Dalam sistem ekonomi itu, peran mata uang terlalu besar, mendeterminasi fluktuasi ekonomi. Sementara sistem moneter sendiri kini bersifat virtual, dengan sistem virtual money dan perputaran kian cepat dan real time. Hazel Henderson dalam Paradigms in Progress: Life Beyond Economics (1991) menyebutkan, percepatan sistem moneter meningkatkan ketidakpastian, indeterminasi, dan turbulensi ekonomi, yang rentan terhadap risiko krisis, kemacetan, bahkan kehancuran.
Kondisi kesalingterhubungkan dan kesalingtergantungan global telah menciptakan budaya ekonomi global sebagai ”jejaring terbuka” (open network)—layaknya jejaring internet—yang rawan terhadap serangan virus spekulasi dan kemacetan. Serangan virus (kemacetan likuiditas) di sebuah tempat (seperti AS) dengan cepat menjalar ke seluruh jejaring global tanpa ada yang tersisa. Inilah ”efek kupu-kupu” (butterfly effect) dalam jaringan chaos sistem ekonomi pasar bebas yang rentan.
Celakanya, sistem ekonomi moneter itu amat bergantung pada ”sistem konsumsi”, khususnya konsumsi barang mewah dan banal, sebagai ”alibi” agar modal terus berputar dan berakumulasi. Sistem ekonomi merayakan gaya hidup konsumerisme yang bersifat banal: kemewahan, lifestyle shopping, dan hiperkomoditi. Sebaliknya, segala kemewahan itu bergantung pada kondisi moneter karena produk mewah diproduksi melalui utang bank. Inilah ”lingkaran setan” ekonomi moneter.
Etika kebebasan pasar
Gejolak moneter tidak saja mengguncang fondasi ekonomi global, tetapi mengangkat kembali masalah ”etika kapitalisme”. Bencana krisis moneter adalah buah tindak ekonomi yang terlepas dari etika sosial. Padahal, tindak ekonomi seharusnya dilandasi etika sosial karena terkait masalah hak, kebebasan, keutamaan (virtue), kepercayaan (trust), dan tanggung jawab. Dalam kondisi krisis, pengabaian etika sosial kian dirasakan efeknya.
Etika liberalisme ekonomi, khususnya di AS, menurut Paul Tillich dalam The Courage to Be (1980), dicirikan oleh etika ”keberanian bereksperimen” dan ”berspekulasi”. Setiap individu bebas bereksperimen dan berspekulasi tentang apa pun; siap menghadapi segala ”risiko”, ”kegagalan”, ”krisis” dan ”bencana” (katastrofe), dan kegagalan tak menyurutkan ”keberanian” (courage). Inilah etika ”keberanian individualistik-liberal”.
Namun, dalam sistem ”ekonomi jejaring” (network economy), di mana pelaku ekonomi saling terhubung dan bergantung secara global, etika ”keberanian spekulasi” individual saja tidak cukup, harus disertai etika ”keberanian bertanggung jawab” secara sosial (courage of responsibility). Ironisnya, dalam sistem jejaring ekonomi liberal, orang lebih mudah melempar tanggung jawab karena minimnya etika sosial dan kebersamaan, seperti ditunjukkan Direktur Lehman Brothers Richard Fuld.
Ekonomi yang telah bertransformasi menjadi semacam ”dromonomik” (dromonomics), yaitu ”sistem ekonomi gerak cepat” (dromos = berlari kencang) dan ”megalonomik” (megalonomics), yaitu ”ekonomi serba raksasa” menggiring pada situasi di mana kecepatan dan ”keraksasaan” telah di luar kendali manusia, yang menyebabkan orang kehilangan kontrol akibat kelengahan, data yang keliru, umpan balik terlambat, informasi tak memadai, atau respons terlalu lambat.
Institusi ekonomi yang merayakan ”keutamaan individualistik” mengabaikan ”aneka keutamaan sosial”, seperti tanggung jawab, kebersamaan, dan keadilan sosial. Alasdair MacIntyre dalam After Vurtue (1999) mengatakan, institusi tanpa keutamaan sosial akan keropos, korup, dan rentan penghancuran diri sendiri (self-destruction). Di sana mudah disembunyikan kesalahan, kebodohan, dan kegagalannya di balik ”kambing hitam jaringan” yang telanjur rusak pula.
Kosmologi ”tangan Tuhan”
Lunturnya keutamaan, tanggung jawab, dan keadilan sosial juga ditunjukkan oleh otoritas pemerintah ini dalam menangani badai krisis moneter yang menerpa bangsa. Otoritas pemerintah yang dilanda kepanikan lebih fokus mengurusi efek-efek makro(kosmos)-ekonomi, dengan mengeluarkan aneka kebijakan jangka pendek, seperti penurunan suku bunga, intervensi likuiditas, peningkatan ekspor, dan pembatasan pinjaman.
Penanganan krisis moneter belum menyentuh strategi jangka panjang, khususnya dampak krisis moneter terhadap sektor riil, terutama sektor ekonomi rakyat. Untuk itu, amat mendesak upaya intensif, berkelanjutan, dan ”futuristik” untuk mendiskusikan prediksi ekonomi jangka panjang, penyusunan ”skenario sosial” masa depan, pengembangan strategi ekonomi dan industri berkelanjutan, rekayasa sosial-politik terpadu, serta langkah-langkah antisipasi komprehensif.
Ironisnya, di tengah ancaman krisis panjang, energi elite bangsa tersedot untuk rapat, komunikasi, dan kampanye terkait pemilu. Efek ancaman krisis tenggelam oleh hiruk-pikuk pembentukan partai, pencalonan capres-cawapres, dan penggalangan konstituen. Upaya elite bangsa tidak sebanding dengan besarnya ancaman krisis. Dengan membuat seperangkat ”langkah” antisipatif, pemerintah merasa sudah menyelesaikan tugasnya.
Pemerintah dan elite bangsa tampaknya percaya kosmologi, ”Tangan-tangan Tuhan” (invisible hand) dengan kemurahan, kasih sayang, dan keagungannya akan menyelamatkan bangsa dari krisis moneter. Padahal, kosmologi ketuhanan justru mengajarkan kesungguhan, keterlibatan penuh, keseriusan, intensivitas, konsistensi, kecerdasan, perencanaan matang, dan kemampuan antisipasi masa depan merupakan kunci perubahan nasib bangsa, di samping kekuatan doa.
Yasraf Amir PiliangKetua Forum Studi Kebudayaan (FSK) FSRD-Institut Teknologi Bandung
KOMPAS/SRI REJEKI / Kompas Images Kelompok penyinden membawakan tembang-tembang Jawa di depan rumah makan Pecel Solo di Jalan Dr Supomo, Solo, Selasa (7/10). Dalam mengamen, mereka menggunakan siter, gendang, serta gong.
Kamis, 9 Oktober 2008 | 03:00 WIB
Oleh Sri Rejeki
”Kowe nangis yo? Wis ojo nangis,” hibur Kamiyem (50) kepada Sriyatun (40) yang tiba-tiba merebak air matanya saat mengingat setiap hari harus tidur berjejal dengan sesama pengamen musik tradisional.
"Enggak, aku enggak nangis. Aku ini pilek,” kata Sriyatun mencari alasan sambil mengalihkan wajahnya dari tatapan orang-orang di sekitarnya.
Sebelumnya, sambil sesekali melempar senyum, Sriyatun menceritakan kisah hidupnya kepada Kompas. Sriyatun, perempuan asal Ngawi, Jawa Timur, sudah sekitar 20 tahun menjadi pesinden keliling, termasuk di Kota Solo, Jawa Tengah. Empat tahun terakhir, ia bersama empat rekannya, Pawirorejo (83), Kamiyem, Marjuki (60), dan Zainah (80), menjadi ”musisi” tetap yang mangkal di depan rumah makan Pecel Solo di Jalan Dr Supomo, Solo.
Sekilas pandang saja, kelompok tua-tua ini menjadi bagian wajah Solo dan tradisi Jawa yang ngelangut dan antik itu.
Penghasilan kelimanya dengan mengamen sejak pukul 10.00 sampai pukul 15.00 atau 16.00 dirasakan lumayan. Dalam sehari setidaknya masing-masing bisa membawa pulang Rp 20.000.
Dengan makan siang disediakan oleh rumah makan Pecel Solo, menurut Sriyatun, setiap hari ia bisa menyisihkan Rp 7.000 setelah mengeluarkan uang untuk makan dan kebutuhan sehari-hari lainnya. ”Jika uang sudah terkumpul cukup banyak, saya bawa pulang. Uangnya untuk jajan anak, bayar sekolah, dan ongkos bolak-balik ke kampung dari Solo,” kata Sriyatun di tengah petikan suara siter dan lantunan rekannya menyinden.
Saat pengunjung rumah makan sangat ramai dan murah hati, masing-masing bisa membawa Rp 75.000 dalam sehari, seperti saat Lebaran kemarin.
Menjadi pesinden awalnya ”kecelakaan” bagi Sriyatun. Ia sebelumnya buruh tani tebu. Lalu, ia diajak temannya ke Jakarta. ”Eee ... bukan kerja di Jakarta, malah diajak jadi sinden keliling di Pacitan. Pernah juga saya mengamen di Ngawi. Tapi, di sana sepi. Jadi, kami pindah ke Solo,” ujar Sriyatun yang kini fasih mendendangkan tembang Jawa Caping Gunung, Ali-ali, dan banyak lagi lagu yang mengiris hati.
Hal serupa dialami Marjuki. Sudah 40 tahun ia mengamen. Keahliannya bermain gendang. Agar mengirit biaya, ia dan rekan-rekannya sesama pengamen musik tradisional dari Ngawi menyewa sebuah kamar kos di Kampung Pringgading, Kelurahan Stabelan, Kecamatan Banjarsari, Kota Solo. Kamar kos berukuran 5 x 4 meter itu tidak jarang ditempati 14 orang sekaligus, paling sedikit 4-6 orang.
Biaya sewanya, menurut Sriyatun, Rp 1.500 per hari dan hanya dibayarkan bila menginap di kamar itu. ”Teman-teman dari Ngawi berasal dari Brangkal, Geneng, Munggut, dan Dungprau. Kami semua sudah seperti saudara, saling bantu bila ada kesulitan. Tapi, soal utang, ya, tetap harus bayar,” katanya.
Rekan-rekannya sesama pengamen musik tradisional mangkal di rumah makan di Sumber, Loji Wetan, dan Gading. Bagi Marjuki, mengamen menjadi pekerjaan paling menjanjikan. Marjuki pandai menabuh gendang setelah rajin memerhatikan orang bermain gendang. Sebelum mengenal dunia musik, ia adalah petani singkong dengan penghasilan tak menentu. ”Belum tentu setahun sekali bisa panen. Kalau mengamen begini, sehari saya bisa dapat penghasilan yang cukup buat beli sekeranjang telo,” kata Marjuki.
Demikian pula dengan Kamiyem. Ibu rumah tangga ini belajar menyinden saat bergabung dengan perkumpulan ibu-ibu PKK di kampung tempat tinggalnya di Joyotakan, Solo. Saat ketiga anaknya masih kecil, ia menyambi membuat keset. Pernah pula ia berjualan pecel, bakmi, dan lotis untuk menambah penghasilan keluarga.
”Ada seorang kenalan yang kemudian mengajak saya mengamen. Katanya hasilnya lumayan untuk tambah-tambah membayar uang sekolah anak,” kata Kamiyem, ibu tiga anak.
Bagi Kamiyem yang tidak pernah mengecap bangku sekolah, melakoni diri sebagai pesinden jalanan memberi hasil yang cukup lumayan buat ekonomi keluarganya. Dalam kondisi tak memiliki keterampilan khusus, Kamiyem juga tak punya banyak pilihan menjalani profesi yang diinginkannya.
”Saya tidak punya keterampilan apa-apa. Tidak punya ijazah. Mau kerja di pabrik sudah tidak ada yang mau pakai tenaga saya karena sudah tua,” papar Kamiyem dalam balutan kebaya brokat hijau dan kain batik lengkap dengan konde di kepala.
Pawirorejo awalnya pembuat siter. Lama-kelamaan ayah enam anak ini malah menjadi pengajar instrumen siter. ”Lha saya juga tidak tahu, banyak orang bule datang ke sini minta diajari main siter,” kata Pawirorejo. Kerja di proyek bangunan seperti saat muda tak mungkin lagi, sedangkan pesanan siter sebulan paling 3-4 buah.
”Harga siter saya itu Rp 500.000-Rp 800.000,” kata lelaki tua yang tinggal di Kampung Sambeng, Kelurahan Mangkubumen, Solo, itu.
Sriyatun dan teman-teman sepuhnya itu niscaya tak sekadar mencari sesuap nasi. Mereka menghibur para pencinta pecel di rumah makan itu sembari memperpanjang usia tradisi sastra dan karawitan Jawa....
JAKARTA, SENIN- Seorang tokoh nasional mengajak seluruh bangsa ini untuk instrospeksi diri, terutama para pimpinan pemegang kekuasaan negeri ini.
"Mari kita lakukan refleksi dan tundukkan kepala kita bagi 21 orang di Pasuruan, yang rela kehilangan nyawa untuk berebut Rp 30.000,- di negeri yang kaya raya ini," ujarnya Senin (15/9) malam.
"Marilah bertanya apa yang salah pada para pemimpin politik negeri ini hingga rakyat kita begitu miskin, meski Indonesia telah merdeka 63 tahun lalu," ujarnya.
Menurut dia, terlalu banyak kekayaan alam negeri ini yang disia-siakan pemanfaatannya. Terlalu banyak kekayaan negeri ini yang diberikan pada bangsa asing, sebagai akibat kelemahan para pemimpin dalam mengelola sumber daya alam. (MAM)
Dalam salah satu cerpennya, Surga Anak-Anak, novelis nobelis Mesir, Najib Mahfûz, menggambarkan bagaimana agama yang gagap menghadirkan dirinya dalam masyarakat modern. Rasa gagap ini berakhir tragis: agama digugat oleh anak-anak.
Agama—yang diwakili oleh sang ayah—belingsatan: seolah-olah mampu, padahal tak berdaya mempertanggungjawabkan kekuasaannya.
Karena kehabisan kata-kata, sang ayah berusaha menunda persoalan: ”Engkau masih kecil, sayang; nanti kalau kau sudah besar, engkau akan mengerti …” atau ”Tidakkah kau sabar, sayangku, menunggu sampai engkau besar?”
Seandainya sang anak mengikuti nasihat ayahnya, pengertian agama macam apa yang sedang menanti saat anak menjadi dewasa? Pengertian agama yang bikin sang ayah panik atau pengertian yang bisa membebaskan sang anak dari garis batas yang ditarik atas nama agama? Pengertian agama yang diajarkan di kelas dan mimbar-mimbar atau pengertian agama yang didapatkan lewat praktik kehidupan? Wallahualam!
Sayang bagi sang ayah: jawaban-jawaban semi-standar yang diberikan sang ayah pada waktu itu tidak memuaskan si kecil. Apalah artinya bagi si kecil jawaban sang ayah atas pertanyaan-pertanyaan tentang Allah (”Lalu Allah itu siapa, ayah?”, ”Allah itu hidup di mana, ayah?”), tentang nabi, tentang kematian (Mengapa kita tidak terus tinggal di dunia saja?), tentang moral, kalau semuanya itu tidak menjadi pendorong bagi sang anak untuk bersahabat dengan siapa saja?
Oleh karena itu, sang anak bersikeras dengan jawabannya sendiri—bukan jawaban yang sudah terlembaga, melainkan jenis jawaban praktis: ”Pokoknya saya ingin terus-menerus bersama Nadiya! […] Juga pada pelajaran agama”. Inilah suara sang anak, suara sang ayah yang dititipkan pada sang anak, suara penulis cerpen, dan barang kali juga suara kita para pembaca cerpen itu. Barang kali ini juga suara agama!
Regim dalam diri
Itulah gambaran agama yang menyerah pada (terkadang malah memperebutkan) lembaga-lembaga modern (dalam kasus ini lembaga pendidikan modern). Birokrasi masyarakat modern yang semestinya dikritisi terus-menerus supaya mempunyai daya refleksivitas justru sering kali diperebutkan karena lembaga-lembaga itu memang cocok untuk mereproduksi kekuasaannya terus-menerus. Hasilnya? Saya sebut tragis karena agama mengira bahwa agama berhasil menghadirkan dirinya dalam sistem masyarakat modern, padahal cara kehadirannya seperti itu bukannya tanpa masalah. Spesialisasi masyarakat modern dengan halus menjadi legitimasi ampuh untuk memisahkan anak-anak.
Dari dialog dalam Surga Anak-Anak kita menangkap adanya sejenis regim yang membuat orang sulit meninjau ulang kekuatan agama yang kita butuhkan pada zaman ini. Regim itu tidak berada di sana, melainkan di sini, tidak berada dalam kitab, tetapi diinskrikpsikan dalam pikiran kita. Regim inilah yang membuat sang ayah—seperti saya katakan di atas—tiba-tiba belingsatan menghadapi berbagai pertanyaan sang anak.
Regimlah yang memiliki kekuatan mengekslusikan, kekuatan membuat garis demarkasi pada berbagai level kehidupan. Islam dan Kristen hanyalah salah satu contoh hasil dari eksklusi produksi regim tersebut.
Regim apakah gerangan ini? Kalau Marx mengatakan, begitu lahir kita sudah berada dalam hubungan sosial yang tak adil, di sini kita bisa mengatakan bahwa begitu lahir kita sudah berada dalam hubungan sosial yang terkotak-kotak oleh regim itu.
Itulah regim yang sedang ditinjau ulang dalam cerpen Mahfudz tadi agar ia menampakkan dirinya dan demikian juga agar wilayah kehidupan manusia yang direpresi oleh regim itu terdengar jeritannya. Dengan cara inilah, menurut hemat saya, sastra berfungsi untuk terus-menerus menemukan kembali kekuatan spiritualnya dan mencoba melakukan fiksionalisasi bentuk-bentuk yang dibutuhkan oleh kekuatan spiritual tersebut. Jadi, spiritualitas adalah nama bagi sejenis pembebasan manusia. Selama ini, spiritualitas ini dikaitkan dengan lingkungan keagamaan. Namun, seperti akan kita lihat, mengaitkan spiritualitas hanya dalam lingkungan keagamaan juga bisa menjadi sejenis monopoli.
Mengingat besarnya potensi regim ini dalam menciptakan kekuasaan yang tiranis, tidak mengherankan Mahûz menempatkan persoalan akidah menjadi satu di antara tiga alasan mengapa dia menciptakan karya-karyanya.
Dua persoalan lainnya adalah politik (al-siyâsa) dan seks (al-jins). Tiga tema inilah, menurut pengakuannya, tidak pernah absen dalam karya-karyanya. Pendapatnya ini pasti bukanlah sebuah preskripsi untuk menulis karya sastra.
Pendapat ini lahir dari seorang Mahfûz yang hidup dalam suatu masyarakat di mana masalah seks, politik, dan akidah menjadi instrumen paling ampuh untuk mengatur gerak-gerik individu baik dalam rumah maupun di luar rumah.
Dunia seks, politik, dan akidah dibahas sedemikian rupa supaya dunia ini bisa menampakkan sisi-sisi lainnya (seperti afrodisia, power, spirit) dan tidak semata-mata menampakkan regim yang mengatur belaka.
Di antara karya paling menarik yang mengangkat tema seks-politik-akidah secara bersamaan tentu saja adalah Trilogi-nya yang ditulis pada tahun 1956 dan 1957. Dalam karya ini kita bisa menyaksikan bagaimana keluarga (pelembagaan seks), negara (pelembagaan kekuasaan politik), dan agama (pelembaga akidah-spiritual) saling tumpang-tindih memperebutkan individu-individu untuk menjadi obyek pengaturan.
Dalam novel ini kita melihat berbagai jenis spiritualitas, seperti spiritualitas ”bisu” yang dihayati oleh orang-orang tertindas dan kalah seperti ibu rumah tangga maupun spiritualitas artikulatif sebagaimana terdengar di kalangan orang-orang terpelajar yang mempunyai kompetensi untuk menyuarakannya dalam masyarakat.
Diwakili oleh tokoh Aminah, dalam spiritualitas jenis pertama secara sepintas kita mengira bahwa orang jenis ini hanya patuh secara buta menjalankan perintah-perintah agama sebagaimana direpresentasikan dalam diri sang suami Ahmad Abdul Jawâd.
Ternyata tidak. Mereka mempunyai caranya sendiri untuk ”membangkang”, untuk mengatasi berbagai kontradiksi perintah. Spiritualitas ini mirip dengan yang ada di lingkungan Katolik di mana banyak orang berdevosi pada Bunda Maria.
Jenis spiritualitas yang lebih artikulatif diwakili oleh Kamâl. Dalam jenis ini, spiritualitas tidak hanya terkait dengan agama. Seperti saya sebut di atas, karena keluarga, politik, dan agama saling tumpang-tindih dalam membangun regim, spiritualitas dalam agama bersuara senada dengan suara pembebasan dalam keluarga dan politik. Setiap bidang seakan memiliki spiritualitasnya masing-masing.
Jadi sastra bisa menjadi bentuk bahasa untuk menyuarakan spiritualitas dalam arti bahwa sastra membiarkan kekuatan spiritual terus bergerak dari ancaman regim dalam berbagai bentuknya. Lewat salah satu aforisme dalam autobiografinya, Mahfûz menggarisbawahi aspek dinamis spiritualitas ini dengan: ”Shaikh Abd-Rabbih al-Ta’ih berkata: ’Orang-orang datang pada saya dan mengatakan bahwa mereka memutuskan untuk terus diam sampai akhirnya mereka menemukan makna kehidupan’. Saya berkata pada mereka: ’Teruslah bergerak tanpa henti karena makna kehidupan ini tersembunyi dalam gerak’”.
Sastra imanensi manusia
Berangkat dari cerpen Surga Anak-Anak yang mengambil tema pendidikan agama dalam masyarakat modern dan dilanjutkan pengamatan singkat atas sejumlah karya Mahfûz, saya bisa menyimpulkan bahwa sastra mempunyai kekuatan spiritualitas justru karena sastra menyuarakan imanensi manusia (batas-batas kemanusiaan) dan bukannya melantunkan ”suara dari langit”.
Spiritualitas berkaitan dengan suara manusia yang terus-menerus mencari dan mencari yang lain. Malah, nuansa spiritual tidak mesti terkait langsung dengan agama. Dalam konteks ini sastra malah mempunyai caranya sendiri untuk mendefinisikan dan meredifinisikan apa itu ”spiritualitas”.
Berkaitan dengan ini tidak mengherankan kalau Umberto Eco dalam artikelnya ”The Sacred Is Not Just a Fashion” menyoroti spiritualitas (dia memilih istilah The Sacred) di wilayah-wilayah yang oleh kebanyakan orang disebut wilayah- wilayah sekuler. Pengalaman akan Yang Kudus atau spiritual tidak mesti merupakan pengalaman di wilayah yang selama ini disebut religius atau keagamaan oleh suatu regim seperti saya jelaskan di atas.
Maksudnya, spiritualitas atau pengalaman akan The Sacred cenderung menamai dirinya sendiri, tidak diimposisi oleh suatu regim dari luar. Kekuatan menamai sendiri inilah yang kita butuhkan dari bentuk tulisan yang kita sebut sastra.
Oleh karena itu, dengan tenang Eco juga bicara tentang secular mystics. Peringatan Eco ini pasti menarik dipertimbangkan di masyarakat kita di mana pembedaan biner, sekuler/religius masih bisa menjadi senjata ampuh untuk apa saja.
ST SUNARDI Pengajar Program Magister Ilmu Religi dan Budaya Universitas Sanata Dharma, Yogyakarta
Cave Junction, Oregon - On July 23, legendary activist 72 year old Joan Norman was killed in a head on car collision on Highway 199 near the California border. Joan is dearly loved and revered by many; the news of her passing sends shockwaves through Southern Oregon and far beyond. Forest activists, friends, and family are now planning a solidarity forest defense action in her honor on August 2, 2005.
The "Biscuit Fire Recovery Project" began logging old-growth reserves just above the nationally designated Wild & Scenic Illinois River in the Siskiyou Wild Rivers Area on March 7 of this year. The image of Joan Norman seated below the American Flag in her lawn chair just before her first arrest on the Green Bridge has reached news racks nationwide. Stories of her courageous acts of resistance and conviction have touched tens of thousands of people.
"I don't know what else to do to stop the log trucks, so I am sitting down again," Joan said during her second arrest on March 14. Refusing compromise or bail payment, Joan voluntarily spent several weeks in jail in protest of illegal logging. While inside, she worked tirelessly to empower other inmates by offering legal resources and personal support. Joan was arrested over 100 times in her life; standing up for civil, social and environmental causes, and never had a lawyer until the Biscuit campaign. She will be dearly missed, as will her ever-present enthusiasm and her no-nonsense, powerful style.
Recently, Joan was asked if she was ever afraid to go to jail. Her response to that question echoes loudly through our minds today: "NO! No... I would rather go out in a blaze, defending the world I love. I will be on the front lines someday and my soul will know the time to go, and I will just leave. I will make that decision. Knowing this, I am not afraid. I am more afraid that my grandchildren will think I did not try hard enough to leave them a legacy of peace, and world worth living in. I don't want them to know the beauty of trees by looking at a book. I want them to be able to walk among 800-year-old trees and know that is our destiny. That is where we have to get back to."
Joan had a contagious resolve and humble nobility that challenged those around her to take a stand for what they hold most dear, becoming a national icon of the forest defense movement. She personified the dignified heroism of those who act selflessly in defense of the fundamental values most American's share; but rarely act on.
Her daughter, Sue Norman Jones, said "Joan would like to be remembered actively, not passively".
Asked what her message to the world was last march regarding the effort to stop the Forest Service's largest logging project in modern history, the Biscuit, Joan said, "Tell them to get some fire in their bellies and come to this gate of paradise and help us defend it. Tell them to come. I will be here."
Joan is survived by four children: Susan, Timothy, Terry and Annie, her friend and companion Bob Youdan, four grandchildren, one great-grandchild, nieces, nephews and her extended environmental activist family.
Information about the upcoming action to honor Joan Norman will be available at www.o2collective.org. An interactive memorial is planned for Joan on Sunday, July 31st at 3:00 PM at the Forks State Park, south of Cave Junction, just off hwy 199. Friends can bring food, pictures, songs and writings, and are invited to participate in celebrating Joan's remarkable life and her legacy. Donations can be made to the Joan Norman Memorial Fund at Home Valley Bank in Cave Junction.
MORE ABOUT JOAN:
"I have been arrested over 100 times standing against injustice. Why, I went with the freedom riders to the south. I went to Alabama to stop the lynchings and let the people be free. I went to Montgomery, Selma and Birmingham. I started out with members of a church. I met Martin Luther King, Jr. The thing we wanted to stand up to then was the destruction of the diversity of people in this nation. The slavery, racism, and violence toward people of color. The thing we are fighting today is much the same only we are trying to defend the diversity of the whole world, of life on earth. We need all of it to not just survive, but to thrive as a peaceful, loving people."
After that, Joan joined Vietnam War protests, she said, "I saw the genocide against the people of Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos and I jumped in, with both feet. I was at the Nevada test site protests. I stood beside the true hero's of this country. I stood by them at Fort Benning to protest the School of the America's, the place where international terrorists, death squads are trained."
"I was at the WTO protests in Seattle in 1999, I went to Washington DC to stop the G8 and the WTO takeover of the world. I have been in the streets with the best of them. I have lived for 30 years in a community of freedom riders. I lived in a motor home for 12 years and traveled to where I was needed. I had my own kitchen, my own first aid station, my few books and my passion for freedom and justice."
When asked how she got into environmental activism, Joan tells how her Grandson was responsible:
"He said "Grandma, it's so beautiful and amazing in the forest, you have to come with me so I can show you". So, I went with him. It was hard for my old bones and joints. He was so excited to be showing me this pure, beautiful world he had found. Excited that someone in his family would go with him. It was hard to go up the steep paths, but I did. And what he showed me was just so amazing. I saw it the first time through the eyes of a child. We should all go into the forest with young children. They see it like it is meant to be seen. With the innocence of a being still connected to the earth. They see it the way humans lived it for thousands of years.
I cannot explain in words what my grandson taught me. I can only say that you cannot read about nature and wild places, you have to go there. And, once you do, no threat of jail will keep you from preserving it. The wild places are the last place on earth that we have to remember our heritage and show us our legacy. We need to stand up and protect these places. This is why, at this time of my life, after all I have tried to defend, I am a forest defender.
When arrested last March 7 trying to block the Silver Creek Logging company's access to what activists maintain is an illegal old growth logging sale on Fiddler Mountain, Joan said, "they came and removed me from the bridge I was blocking by carrying me in my chair to the edge of the sheriff's vehicle. They put me down there and thought I would stay put. Then the officers went off to arrest someone else. I got up and moved my chair back to my space. My sovereign space. An officer yelled, "Hey you're not supposed to do that! Get back over where I put you." I just laughed. People have been trying to get me to be where they put me all my life. I have a right to stand up against evil and I will."
* Most of Joan Norman's quotes have been taken from a June 2005 interview with Ellen O'Shea that appeared in "Z" magazine. You can see the whole interview and more about Joan on Portland Indymedia.com
* To learn more about Joan Norman's last campaign, the ongoing effort to stop the Forest Service's largest logging project in modern history, the Biscuit, go to o2collective.org, kswild.org or siskiyou.org
Daftar gaji dan tunjangan Pejabat Negara dan Anggota DPRsebelum disesuaikan dengan anggaran kenaikan APBN 2006
Dikirim oleh : nn Pada tanggal : 16-11-2005, 17:26 Inilah daftar gaji dan tunjangan yang diterima anggota DPR per bulan. Data ini dikeluarkan oleh bagian anggaran tertanggal 22 februari 2005.
Fasilitas anggota DPR RI, 2004-2009
A. Gaji pokok dan tunjangan 1. Rp 4.200.000/bulan 2. tunjangan a. Jabatan Rp 9.700.000/ bulan b. Uang paket Rp 2.000.000/bulan c. Beras Rp 30.090/jiwa/bulan d. Keluarga: suami/istri (10% X Gaji pokok Rp 420.000/bln) anak (25 X Gaji pokok Rp 84.000/jiwa/bulan) e. Khusus pph, pasal 21 Rp 2.699.813
B.penerimaan lain-lain 1. Tunjangan kehormatan Rp 3.720.000/bulan 2. Komunikasi intensif Rp 4.140.000/bulan 3. Bantuan langganan listrik dan telepon Rp 4.000.000 4. Pansus Rp 2.000.000/undang-undang per paket 5. Asisten anggota (1 orang Rp 2.250.000/bulan) 6. Fasilitas kredit mobil Rp 70.000.000/orang/per periode
C.Biaya perjalanan 1. Piket pulang pergi sesuai daerah tujuan masing-masing 2. Uang harian: a. Daerah tingkat I Rp 500.000/hari b. Derah tingkat II Rp 400.000/hari 3. Uang representasi: a. Daerah Tingkat I Rp 400.000 b. Daerah Tingkat II Rp 300.000 (keterangan: lamanya perjalanan sesuai program kerja, dan sebanyak-banyaknya 7 hari untuk kunjungan kerja per orangan, dan 5 hari untuk kunjungan kerja tim komisi/gabungan komisi)
D. Rumah jabatan 1. Anggaran pemeliharaan - RJA Kalibata, Jakarta Selatan Rp 3.000.000/rumah/tahun - RJA Ulujami, Jakarta Barat Rp 5.000.000/rumah/tahun 2. Perlengkapan rumah lengkap
E. Perawatan kesehatan uang duka dan biaya pemakaman 1. Biaya pengobatan (oleh PT Askes) - Anggota DPR, suami/anak kandung/istri dan atau anak angkat dari anggota yang bersangkutan. - Jangkauan pelayanan nasional: > Di provider diseluruh Indonesia yang ditunjuk termasuk provider ekslusif untuk rawat jalan dan rawat inap.
2. Uang duka : -wafat (3 bulan X gaji) -tewas (6 bulan x gaji) 3. Biaya pemakaman Rp 1.050.000/orang
F. Pensiunan 1. Uang pensiun (60% x gaji pokok) Rp 2.520.000/bulan 2. Tunjangan beras Rp 30.090/jiwa/bulan
--------
Daftar penghasilan pejabat negara per bulan, yang dikeluarkan bagian anggaran keuangan tertanggal 28 Januari 2005.
Presiden: Gaji pokok Rp 30.240.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 32.500.000 Total Rp 62.740.000.
Wakil Presiden: Gaji Pokok Rp 20.160.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 22.000.000 Total Rp 42.160.000
Ketua DPR: Gaji pokok Rp 5.040.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 18.900.000 Uang paket Rp 2.000.000 Komunikasi Intensif Rp 4.968.000 Total Rp 30.908.000
Ketua Mahkamah Agung (MA): Gaji pokok Rp 5.040.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 18.900.000 Uang paket Rp 450.000 Total Rp 24.390.000
Ketua Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan (BPK): Gaji pokok Rp 5.040.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 18.900.000 Total Rp 23.940.000
Wakil Ketua DPR: Gaji pokok Rp 4.620.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 15.600.000 Uang paket Rp 2.000.000 Komunikasi Intensif Rp 4.554.000 Total Rp 26.774.000
Wakil Ketua MA: Gaji pokok Rp 4.620.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 15.600.000 Uang paket Rp 450.0000 Total Rp 20.670.000
Wakil Ketua BPK: Gaji pokok Rp 4.620.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 15.600.000 Total Rp 20.220.000
Ketua Muda MA: Gaji pokok Rp 4.410.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 10.100.000 Uang paket Rp 450.000 Total Rp 14.960.000
Anggota DPR sebagai Ketua Komisi atau Badan: Gaji pokok Rp 4.200.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 9.700.000 Uang paket Rp 2.000.000 Tunjangan kehormatan Rp 4.460.000 Komunikasi Intensif Rp 4.140.000 Bantuan listrik Rp 4.000.000 Total Rp 28.500.000
Anggota DPR sebagai Wakil Ketua Komisi atau Badan: Gaji pokok Rp 4.200.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 9.700.000 Uang paket Rp 2.000.000 Tunjangan kehormatan Rp 4.300.000 Komunikasi Intensif Rp 4.410.000 Bantuan listrik Rp 4.000.000 Total Rp 28.340.000
Anggota DPR sebagai Anggota Komisi atau Badan: Gaji pokok Rp 4.200.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 9.700.000 Uang paket Rp 2.000.000 Tunjangan kehormatan Rp 3.720.000 Komunikasi Intensif Rp 4.410.000 Bantuan listrik Rp 4.000.000 Total Rp 27.760.000
Anggota MA: Gaji pokok Rp 4.200.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 9.700.000 Uang paket Rp 450.000 Total Rp 14.350.000
Anggota BPK Gaji pokok Rp 4.200.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 9.700.000 Total Rp 13.900.000
Menteri Negara, Jaksa Agung, Panglima TNI dan pejabat lain yang setingkat atau disetarakan dengan Menteri Keuangan: Gaji pokok Rp 5.040.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 13.608.000 Total Rp 18.648.000
Kepala Daerah Provinsi: Gaji pokok Rp 3.000.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 5.400.000 Total Rp 8.400.000
Wakil Kepala Daerah Provinsi: Gaji pokok Rp 2.400.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 4.320.000 Total Rp 6.720.000
Kepala Daerah Kabupaten/kota: Tunjangan pokok Rp 2.100.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 3.780.000 Total Rp 5.880.000
Wakil Kepala Daerah Gaji pokok Rp 1.800.000 Tunjangan jabatan Rp 3.240.000 Total Rp 5.040.000
Daftar ini dikeluarkan oleh Bagian Anggaran Departemen Keuangan, ditandatangi pada tanggal 28 januari 2005 sebelum disesuaikan dengan anggaran kenaikan APBN 2006
The gospel is nothing other than the "dangerous memory" of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, which has interupted history, revealing the pattern of violance and injustice at work in the systems of our world and inspiring the solidarity with victims through the memory of their suffering toward a future of hope. J.B. Metz
