"SBY INTERVENSI KPK. SUDAH BENAR ANIES TAK JADIKAN AHY CAWAPRES"

But if you are not evil, if you didn't commit that crime, then that is what you call injustice. At that time, when Anies and AHY were declared, the conversation was that the declaration was a declaration of Anies's defeat; at the same time, it was a declaration of the Democrats 'victory. The ticket from five years ago, the torn-up 2019 ticket , implies and assumes that politics is static. Politics in 2023-2024 is the same as politics in 2019, that's

problematic in terms of political logic , right? I have been waiting for this moment to speak with this friend of mine. There are many reasons why I had to use the word "waiting" for years, even perhaps before he faced a process that until now remains a question for many people. I am joined by my friend, Anas Urbaningrum. Mas, I have truly been waiting for a long time. This is called "Konco Lawas"(Old Friends). Old friends, so the wait has

to be a bit long. Where should I start so the conversation is enjoyable? Well, uh, perhaps many people already know, but it’s okay for me to clarify . Mas Anas just got out of prison for a case that is legally final. A corruption case like that in court. But until now, because I know the process, I keep wondering was it really like that? I have, what you might call it, invited many people here to talk about it while he was still in prison, since

he only got out a few months ago. And today I want to talk a lot about it because, honestly, Mas, I really want to ask: did you commit that crime? Even though I said earlier that, based on what I know—because I know the people involved, I followed the process quite closely, being here near Saefuddin— well, you know. And one of the witnesses once worked for me here, and there are records of it. I want to confirm that. At first, I thought I

would start with the party, the Nusantara Awakening Party. Awakening. Initially, I thought I would start there. But I am starting with what happened to you, Mas. Because, honestly, I was shaken when you were arrested, as your friend, as someone who believed in you. We are from the same generation. True. And at that time, when you were arrested, especially for a corruption case, many people said that our

generation had fallen, and I was part of it. Yes. So, a question like this, Mas. Did you commit that crime? If I had done it, I would never have stated something that is actually not very pleasant to say. But for me, that was an affirmation, an affirmation in body and soul, in this world and the hereafter, of my conviction. That is what people call the Monas oath. Yes.

Yes. And for me, that is a conviction in body and soul, until whenever, regarding what was charged, what was prosecuted, and what was sentenced. The verdict is indeed legally final, but it is not final in terms of justice. Justice means that which is based on the actual facts of the event. Well, because of that I am open, uh, it hasn't come from my mouth yet. But I want to emphasize, number one, because the legal process has concluded, but

the process of justice has not, uh, we can very openly have a debate, dialogue , or open discussion at any time to examine it from A to Z, the events, all the backgrounds surrounding it, so the public then knows from A to Z, yes. Meaning, this is an intellectual forum, yes, it won't affect the legal process that. has also finished. has finished. right.

one, and second. complemented by, yes, this spiritual approach. Because for me , yes, absolute justice is God's justice. And if it's God's justice, of course, uh, the benchmark is religion. My religion that I believe in, if we want to carry out a, quote-unquote, spiritual wager based on conviction. That is what I call a mubahalah invitation, an oath of imprecation. Who is at fault in that matter, yes? Well, those who prosecute, if those who

investigate are sure, right. those who prosecute if they are sure, those who judge if they are sure. I myself as a party, I am sure. Let's have a mubahalah oath. It's that simple, right ? Why is it simple? Because those who investigate, okay, those who prosecute, those who judge, their social position is clean, right. Right? Now, those investigated, prosecuted, and sentenced are socially and legally dirty, right, they are wrong.

Yes. If a dirty person invites a clean person, well, the clean person can easily. Okay, let's go, I'm ready. That's roughly it, right? Yes, there is indeed no legal mechanism for this, but this is a mechanism that for me confirms the matter of conviction. So, if Mr. Akbar becomes the organizer for this mubahalah, I am very, very ready at any time. Those two things for me are an affirmation that people who are

punished are not necessarily guilty. And I find that also in other cases, other affairs, yes. other people. People who are not punished, or people who are not legally processed, or people who avoid legal processing are not necessarily innocent. Isn't that so ? Yes. The story goes. So for me, it's as simple as that, but the point, in my opinion, is that. when in power, this

is a moral lesson, yes, a moral lesson for this nation. Those in power should never use their power to manipulate the law, making the law a tool to finish off or strike at their political opponents or political rivals. Because that is not a legal civilization, not a democratic civilization. Sir, that is, if the world is like that, it's barbaric, I think. Yes. Uh, I will elaborate on that because honestly, while you are

speaking like this, I am organizing my thoughts, my feelings. Because once again, as I said, I have somewhat involved myself psychologically in that process. It hurts me, Sir. That is why I ask, my first question is, is it Anas whom I cherish? Is it Anas whom I respect? Is it Anas who provided several, uh, political spaces for me, especially when in the Democratic Party back then, as people say, but until today as you sit here, I have never

found that you committed that crime. But this is a forum, I have to ask like this and, uh, without intending to return to the process, in the end, your trial was full of, uh, legal material and ended up being about a car. And, uh , Yulianis said this thing was already clear. I mentioned a name, the main witness who once worked with me here. Together we built everything here, she said. So, okay, You have gone through it, Mas. And honestly, I am surprised

you could go through it. At this part I ask, who on earth are you to then be so patient in facing and going through all of this? If you were guilty, if you committed a crime, in my opinion, you wouldn't be strong enough to go through it. But if you are innocent and truly believe you are innocent, that you didn't commit that crime, then you will be strong. Why? Because you know exactly who you are and who the people processing you are. And you know very

well that what is being destroyed, if the context is politics, is your political image. A political image is something profane, isn't it? It is a worldly affair. Worldly affairs, in religious terms, are just a game, right ? But the essence of human life is not a game. Instead, the essence of human life is very existential. What is the basis? The basis is your self-conviction of who you are. Isn't that right? So it's as simple as that

—how I view myself, understand myself , and place myself in events full of chaos. And full of pressure; please go ahead, legal pressure, political pressure, public opinion pressure, being chopped up, so to speak. But I know who I am. I know what I did and what I did not do. So, yeah, just go through it, right? Uh, yeah, yeah, it seems simple, but in many people's memories, including mine, it remains an extraordinary strength. Mas, perhaps

this sounds like flattery, but in my opinion—I've said it from the start —I might not be strong enough for that. Why? Because you were at the peak . Even some of our friends, like Din, even said, "Oh, yes, it seems Anas was heading toward the peak as planned by many people, or discussed and/or thought of by many, because you were at , uh, a phase or house where that was possible, named the Democratic Party, the party currently in power." But then

you were cut down. I take responsibility for the word "cut down." Oh. Okay. It has happened. It has. Okay . Let's move on to what you already started earlier. Y-Yes. That, uh, well, politically it could be said that it was perceived as a good position, at the top. But if I define myself at that time politically, I was at the stage of starting to learn in the world of practical politics in a party. And I wanted my learning process

to also coincide with the learning process of a party that was still young . A young party that needed institutionalization. Institutionalization, the basic meaning of which is making the party's internal system work. Not individuals who stand out, but a system that, uh, works well. That is why from the beginning one of the things I talked about was meritocracy in the party. Meritocracy is the path or way or method for the

party to work based on the proper principles of democracy. Because in meritocracy there is competence, right, there is commitment, there is credibility, there is achievement, there is achievement that is exalted, that is elevated as an important part. Not ascriptive ties. Whose child you are, whose friend you are, what group, what is your shirt, what is your hair like, right, like that. That's an old tradition, right, an old tradition,

like a kingdom-style joke, right, but it's still present. That is what is called political feudalism or neofeudalism. Now, as I began learning that, I wanted it to be simultaneous with the party's process of institutionalizing as a modern party. But indeed, that is where, uh, I met what is called a wall, right, and that is the reality. It is like that and in my opinion, that issue is still relevant even now in the reality of our

party politics, yes. Yes, we will get to that. Uh, Mas Anes, I will enter into what you have already started earlier using the words do not use the strength of power to harm people's hearts, people's minds, even people's lives, like that. On this part, I have two questions for you. Actually, many have probably asked this, but I want to ask again why did you have to be cut down? And the second one, actually, this is what makes me suddenly remember

our moment in the lobby at our office in the DPR back then. Why did you have to move forward at that time when you knew you were not wanted as the chairman of the Democratic Party by President SBY at that time? Two questions. Please, Mas, explain to us. Yes, it is actually difficult to answer that because especially, uh, in terms of the current time, I consider the current time too valuable, yes, to, uh, look back and remember

times that, uh, were, yes, painful, like that. But, uh, okay. Simply put, uh, why must one be cut down, yes? The conclusion is that, uh, this plant, yes , if it keeps growing, it will, uh, become an independent plant. Its perception cannot be controlled, yes, and, uh, it will be just that. taking, taking away a party that is perceived as, quote-unquote, "political property of an individual or family," into a party that is, uh, uh, modern, a party

that is, uh, global. It’s that simple in my opinion. But this is actually a matter of perception because clearly I could not have taken the party away. The party will remain as a party that was, uh, conceived and developed according to its original mission. Because I heard the mission of this party from the original founders, right ? The original founders truly wanted to make this party a modern one, a party

that is, what do you call it, uh, internally managed democratically, right? A centrist party, a party that, uh, embraces diversity, a party with a progressive forward-thinking mindset, not a party bound by or for certain individuals. That is what I heard. Yes, I am one of the founders even though I am not recorded among those 99. Yes. Because they weren't the official original 99, but the founders were certainly more than that 99. It

is that simple in my view, but, uh, I want to stop there regarding this matter, okay? Because as I said earlier , I consider my time now too valuable to, uh, talk about things in the past. But I want to convey that, yes, that bitter lesson truly must not happen to anyone else again. Let it end with Anas , just that bitter and painful episode regarding those unpleasant dynamics, so that for our generation, my generation and the next, uh, we don't encounter

such things anymore. So if you are competing in politics, be a gentleman, face each other directly and openly; lose if you lose, win if you win, right ? Don't, uh, play behind people's backs or play pretend, right? Then, uh, use other tools which happen to be called power for, uh, political interests. And that message, in my opinion, I am not directing it at anyone, but the message is a historical message for us all so that our politics in the future can be

healthier. That is all. Uh, I certainly must respect your stance and perhaps your hope in saying that your time is too valuable to return to that. We must respect that. Many people might talk about, "ah, this is about a case," or whatever, but they don't understand what you went through minute by minute behind the prison walls at Sukamiskin there. People don't see the mechanism of the process that led to you being there. But what I mean is this, Mas

Anas, why did I bring this up? Heh. Because it seems, especially since I am on the outside—hopefully I will never be there—that the price this nation has to pay for various events like what you experienced hasn't been adequately noted by us. It is still happening, perhaps on a different scale, right? Heh. Perhaps in smaller events, right? But the point is, in this part, what I want

to convey is that it seems we have not learned enough from it. Events on different scales are still occurring, and we seem unwilling to learn or put an end to them in the name of the power we are trying to achieve. That is the reason I am discussing this , Mas Anas. Yes. Yes. Indeed, putting an end to such things and such practices is not easy, is it? Because when power operates by its own logic, that logic

of power then sometimes invites the interest and intention to use that power for, well, greater power, further power , or longer-lasting power. Now, to expand, enlarge, or prolong power, there are many tools available, right? So, those who are tempted to use improper tools, that is what becomes the challenge. That is what I mean by it not being easy. So if things that

are similar or alike are still found on a different or smaller scale, then that is indeed one of the major challenges in our exercise of nation-building within the corridors of democracy. You must have had plenty of time to read, think, and perhaps write as well. I don't know if you were preparing a book while you were there, and if it will be published so we can enjoy it. I have heard that there is something, but for me,

I do have some notes. There is. Okay. Now, what I want to convey is what I want to ask. How many years in total were you inside, Mas? Nine, right ? 9 years and 3 months. So almost months two terms. Yes. Yes, two normal terms, either two terms in the DPR or two terms in the executive branch. That is not what I want to dig into, but what I mean is

this. You were a victim of an unhealthy party mechanism or process, and you fell. So then, you must have many notes and time to think. When you came out of Sukamiskin, Bandung, and saw the reality, we aren't talking about PKN yet. Has anything changed in our political behavior? Some things have changed, but I see that many things haven't, because if evaluated simply, our political transformation is more structural, for one. Secondly, it

relies on, or focuses on, the circulation of elites. So what moves is politics at the structural level. For example, the parties, the winning parties change, and new parties emerge. Then in the context of central-regional relations, for instance, there is the creation of new autonomous regions, and elite circulation is regulated, for example, two terms and then replaced, likewise at the regional level. So the elites change, and election winners

shift. But I see that the democratic political tradition moves relatively slowly. Now, surely this hasn't reached the symptoms of democratic involution. It hasn't reached that point, right? God forbid. We must ensure, uh, that such things don't happen. However, it's been too slow, in my opinion, in building new traditions; new ways of working in democracy, new visions and perspectives on the relationship between the state and society, the

relationship between parties and the people, and even internal party affairs —what are they managing the party as? Is a party the property of the people's struggle or the political property of an individual or family? That remains quite blurred and is still not clear in practice. So, it can be said that while structurally and regarding elite circulation things are moving, the new democratic traditions once envisioned by the youth of '97, '98, and '99 have

not, uh, found much reality, or have yet to find, uh, reality today. I don't think it's excessive for me to ask you, Mas, about the party you once led and then, in quotes, imprisoned you. What do you imagine about the Democratic Party today? I must, I must clear this up. I have never, uh, felt I had any issues with the Democratic Party, yes. Yes. I have also never had any issues with the cadres of the Democratic Party , but the fact that I had a, uh, fierce

political friction that, uh, had a legal aroma to it. Because there, I believe power was at work, uh, with certain people involved. Yes. Right? Well, I heard, I heard, uh—this doesn't mean, uh, intruding into someone's private affairs—but I heard , uh, grievances from many friends, including those inside, right? I don't want to go into detail, but I then, uh, answered them with a joke. "It was better in my day, wasn't it?" Something

like that. Right? And, and that is somewhat confirmed now. I also heard grievances after roughly 9 years, right , uh, taking a position that I think, in the democratic tradition, is good, yes. Taking the position as the opposition, yes. Opposition to the Jokowi administration , I mean. Yes. Opposition to the Jokowi administration, of course. And done relatively earnestly, yes.

In a TSM way, you know, structured, systematic, and massive; this is a term we took from the Constitutional Court, right? Why am I taking it from the Court? Because the Constitutional Court is currently at the peak of its popularity, right? Don't smile, don't smile—it's true, it's popular. I'm not smiling; the popularity of the Court is high, but if, in politics, its electability might be

a bit down. But, uh, coincidentally, the Court is not, uh, participating in the election, right? Maybe it's involved in other matters, I suppose. With a position like that. Then, because of one event, one event, uh, essentially, that, uh, let's say, not being chosen, not becoming the chosen man, right? Then, uh, taking a different path, right? Taking a different path. I see it's quite awkward; it's quite awkward. I'll give

a small but symbolic example. I've seen in several places, for instance, large billboards saying, "Democrats with Prabowo." Right. Ah, there it displays, uh, of course, the photo of Mr. Prabowo and the Chairman of the Democratic Party. There is no photo of Mr. Gibran as the Vice Presidential candidate there. That billboard is simple, right? But in my opinion, it explains something complicated there, that there is a heavy psychological atmosphere in

actually taking that position. It's not just politically heavy, but also heavy to convey, uh, what, the core issues that have been taken all this time, the position of the issues, right, were offensive issues—change, change, change, right. Now, how can one speak about change there? It's so difficult, roughly speaking. And that from from friends who confided, well, I am not allowed to mention who those friends are, right. But the point is

there is there is turbulence, uh, turbulence of thought and psychology at the grassroots level. What's up with that? What's up with that? What's up with that? Well, that is actually one example, too, that when a political decision is taken, that political decision, as long as it is taken by an elitist mechanism, then this carriage can be left in disarray, right. If the long carriage is not the main consideration in political

decision-making, right. This carriage is in a difficult, uh, position. Well, I I want to stop there. It cannot be continued. I am just, uh, taking a small example to also, uh, exercise our politics generally, that indeed, uh, the direction of a party's political choice is, uh, not easy to carry out consistently. Correct. to be consistent . Correct. The main guide for a modern party is actually its political manifesto and platform, right. Now, if

you switch tracks immediately, then the political manifesto and platform are put aside. What remains is sentimentalism, right. and of course, political considerations that are somewhat pragmatic, right. So, my point is that this is not a challenge for, uh , one or two parties, but in my opinion , it is a challenge for our parties as a whole. how to place, let's just say, ideology, manifesto, platform, right, uh, programs and issues that are

consistently discussed, are you faithful to that or not. On this part, what exactly does Mas Anas want to say? Because, indeed, including in my forum, I have several times brought up the positioning of the Democratic Party. In my opinion, it is still worth asking you, and who knows, you might want to speak about many things because this is your party. Back then the position, I mean like this, sorry, let me finish.

the position, uh, of the Democrats back when they were still with Mas Anies with the issue of change, there were indeed many protests at that time. Why wasn't there a picture of, uh, Anies there when they were only displaying the Chairman of the Democratic Party? You just said the picture is of Mr. Prabowo with the Chairman of the Democratic Party, without Gibran. Okay, we get the message. But then we have to ask, what is actually on the mind of

the Democratic Party, the party you once led, Mas? Well, at that time with Mr. Anies, there was an incident where billboards featuring Mr. Anies were taken down. Meaning Mr. Anies was already featured on the billboards. The Democrats were like that. Well, it's a bit different now. A bit different now. Well, in my opinion, yes , uh. There is a gap, a gap between the line of thought of the elites and the

line of thought and aspirations at the grassroots, which have been formed over quite a long time, roughly 8 to 9 years , because they were socialized, internalized, and lived. At the grassroots. But then, uh, what is it? The locomotive turned, and psychologically, the thoughts at the grassroots, well, it’s actually as simple as that to see it. But indeed, uh, I am an observer here.

Hm. An observer. At that time, I heard a conversation that essentially went like this. This was in another party, yes, that I heard, and also, uh, not just another party, but other parties in that prospective coalition. At that time, if the Anies-AHY ticket was declared. The discussion was that the declaration was a declaration of Anies' defeat, and at the same time, a declaration of the Democrats 'victory. Because in that conversation, yes, the

Anies-AHY ticket had no prospect of winning the presidential election. But for the Democrats, if AHY became the vice-presidential candidate, the Democrats could benefit from the coattail effect of the presidential election, thus saving their legislative performance. Yes. The second point is that it was a follow-up political investment for AHY to appear on a stage bigger than the DKI regional election stage before. The DKI regional election

stage had, you know, a significant electoral effect. An effect of visibility, you know, an effect of electability. A significant image effect. H Imagine if he then got the spotlight, uh. What is it? The wider camera spotlight from the presidential election stage, that is a victory. That’s why the definition from this chat was: a declaration of Anies' defeat, but a declaration of the

Democrats 'victory. Now, that is what I think gave birth to the other pair. Anies-Muhaimin. Isn't that right? It seems it was realized quite quickly by Anies, perhaps. Yes, it's possible that such conversations were not only by Anies, but, uh, what do you call it, the inner circle there. That is a conversation that, in my opinion, is logical. Logical. But the ultimate question of this part, Mas. Because I cannot step

out of the Anas Urbaningrum and Democratic Party frame, even though at the end of our conversation we will head to PKN, the sentiment outside is, "Turns out the Democrats are still just the same, even after you jailed me." Why did I ask earlier, what are your thoughts on the Democratic Party now? Yes, actually I certainly hope that this Democratic Party becomes the Democratic Party as it was conceived and built by its founders, as the party

I mentioned earlier: a modern, centrist , nationalist, religious party with progressive ideas, managed with modern organizational principles, not owned by a certain family, not the political property of certain people. That is roughly the line of thinking. Yes, of course, I hope for that. Likewise, we have high hopes that all parties in Indonesia can develop as authentic democratic forces, isn't that roughly it?

Mas. There is one question I am not sure you want to answer, but I am trying my luck. Will you answer it? Everyone wants to hear directly from you about the process we were discussing earlier. That you were criminalized by SBY. Your people, some of whom are sitting here, say that openly. Even Pasek Suardik spoke about it in great detail right here with me. Okay. I respect your stance saying my time is too valuable to return to that

point. But this is a learning process for the nation. Mas, you already said earlier that it shouldn't happen again. For any child of the nation to be like Anas, let it be just Anas. Now, on that part, we need honesty as children of the nation. What is actually happening? So then, back to the question, is it your thought that it really was SBY who criminalized you? I have, well, I don't want to tell it at length, but there is surely my friend Akbar Faisal remembers

the Jeddah speech yes. Okay. That Jeddah speech in my opinion, was God's guidance, a way for angels to show that the speech was naked, an interventionist speech, right ? It means he couldn't hold it, he couldn't wait to give that speech. More or less, well, it's not exact, but more or less one of the quoted sentences was if Anas is wrong, say he is wrong. This , uh SBY at that time told the KPK to immediately reach a conclusive decision

. Yes, if wrong, say it is wrong. If not wrong , I want to know why it is not wrong. Ah, more or less like that. Not exactly . But more or less like that. What is your interpretation if our minds are healthy and sane, what is the interpretation? Unless it is an intervention or an open request, right? Even without an open request, it would have moved forward, right? But that, in my opinion, was history's way of

showing it. But for me, once again, let that be a historical moment in politics and law that will not be repeated in the future. It is okay that it happened to me, it already happened, right? But in the future, it should not happen again like that. Because, well, because I want to tell a little story, just a little. If I, if I, uh By defining myself as I mentioned earlier, it’s not that I am strong, but I have to force myself to be strong. But, um,

imagine for example, if that happened, it happened to me, it happened to, um, Bro Akbar Faisal who has small children , right, and then for 10 years, um, You don't, you don't have enough time, the opportunity, to interact with your children, right, um, you can't act as a normal father, it must, um, be felt. I imagine how that happens to other people, because I felt it. So for example, my youngest child is now a girl, she’s already in university,

started her first semester. But from about 7 or 8 years old until I got out recently, I couldn't act as, you know, as a normal father. Imagine that happening to someone else. I don't dare to imagine that, you know. That is a very difficult situation. But if you are evil, you are a criminal, right, it is fair for you to receive that. But if you are not evil, you did not commit that crime, then that is called injustice. It’s roughly as simple as

that. But again, I don’t want to send this message to anyone, but I want to convey this as some kind of what? Truth of the heart, you know. A kind of heart's truth that, um, the unjust or injustice is destructive. If you have the power to uphold what is just, uphold justice. Do not divert it for unjust matters. Just because, for example, you don't like someone, you are in power and you don't like me. Oh, Anas has different thoughts. This is

dangerous. You then think, "Ah, let's just harm Anas." Or conversely, I, I have the power. Oh, this Akbar is really something. He often criticizes me. He keeps bothering me. He’s disrupting the future I’m preparing for someone. For example, um, I have these tools, so I crush you. That’s not cool, is it? That is what I mean, Mas. Why does this conversation become important for us all? For our younger generation

watching this, there are many, um, fragments of events that if brought to the present and we don't anticipate them, they could happen. At that time, SBY was president, where people say the position or power of the president can do anything, as happened in your case. Earlier, you mentioned the verbatim communication between SBY as president and one of the parties elsewhere, right . Second, political parties. How internal party democratization must be

strengthened so it doesn't go in the wrong direction. I feel quite qualified to speak on this because I am a founder , the first General Chairman of the Democratic Party Youth. Sounds cool, right? Okay, the third thing is uh, what about civil society? We have already gone through what is known as the '98 reform. Lately, in this forum, I've been asking many of my guests, trying to capture recent events. Why

did we even do the reform in '98? Back to you, the reason I'm really pushing into these parts is so that this can become a mirror for us, including for those who are currently in power. Ojo ...what is that Javanese term, Mas? Ojo . Ojo adigang adigung adiguno, something like that. It's hard when a Bugis person tries to use Javanese, right? Well. But I mean, Mas, I apologize for potentially using you as a mirror for

that, but you seem to have passed the stage of strength, or whatever strong term describes how you've endured this. I'll bring us back to the track of our conversation, since that's where we started. So, um lastly, regarding the Democratic Party and SBY. Do you have no intention of meeting him, and what would you say to Mr. SBY if you did meet him, Mas Anas? I, uh, want to enjoy Sukowati meatballs first. Didn't you already yesterday?

No, no, no, it didn't happen yet because afterwards uh, I traveled around to many other regions. So yes, Sukowati meatballs first; that's part of the reconstruction of, what do you call it, the reconstruction of small experiences around there. But the point is, for me, that past event is over, and I consider any space in my heart too valuable to hold hatred or grudges against anyone. Okay. These words of mine are hated by

some of my friends. I know. Yes, frankly, these words of mine are hated by some of my friends. Like, what's with that? Why be like that? But for me, well, I'm sorry, that is my principle. Let what happened not be a personal event, in my opinion, but an event from which wisdom and lessons can be drawn for this nation. Because, if studied seriously, that event really does hold great wisdom for this nation

if we are willing to learn. Because if it happens again, and again, on different scales, then we really are a foolish nation that refuses to learn, right? True. Agreed. That's why I'm talking about this and, what do you call it, constantly pressing you on that. Because, as I said before, I'm not entirely sure many people could go through what you have done. So, Mas Anas, I apologize.

And like I said, I'm not targeting anyone or calling anyone out; if names must be mentioned, it's only to make the events easier to understand, but there is no personal attention, tendency, or pretense. Because for me, in this personal context, it’s all finished. Uh, the bitterness, the hardship, and all that. Okay. But let this, uh, become a monument that, hopefully, can be a lesson. That’s the only benefit,

right? Uh, it’s like fertilizer. Fertilizer is just like that for plants . Hopefully, that fertilizer makes this nation's plants grow, yeah. Yeah, fertilizer is considered, uh, what, its status or rank is bad, right? And that badness, for me in this context, is just profane. In, uh, a more transcendent context, I have my own belief that regarding myself, Regarding myself, and regarding others,

it’s like that. We know, right? We know, if you want to audit us, please go ahead, from A to Z, who everyone is in Indonesia, we know it all. In the political elite circles in Jakarta, we know what everyone's true stature is. We know each other. We know what's inside, so go ahead and audit it, and then compare it. If that’s done, we won’t feel inferior , sorry to say. Yeah.

If we are compared, we never feel inferior, right? I was going to ask this earlier, but it seems I didn't. You don't need an apology from someone, and in this case, SBY. But it seems you are saying my time is too valuable to hate. Yes. Uh, it’s too expensive, the price, for, uh, myself, for my heart. And in my opinion, when someone contemplates clearly at the right time, I think, uh, their reason, awareness, and conscience

will work. In my view, just let that work. Okay, if so, then we enter the phase of Anas Urbaningrum today. Your friends, while you were still in prison there, prepared a house; I understood the process, they are my friends too. Our friends, yes, PAS, Geri, just all of them, everyone. Uh, Ucok and the others founded the Nusantara Awakening Party, and as Pase promised me, "When Mas Anas gets out, we will hand this party over to him."

Because he said, an Anas Urbaningrum can have his body punished, but his thoughts and beliefs can never be punished, can never be imprisoned. That was what they said to me, and now it has been handed over to you. Today you are the general chairman, but the reality is also that our political situation says if you don't have this and that, well, just keep on dreaming. So, okay, that is a reality. But I want to ask Anas Urbaningrum. What will you

do with your party, as I described earlier? Yes, I must, uh, say I, uh, respect and highly appreciate, uh, the brotherhood, friendship, and loyalty of those friends, those companions, right? So, because of that, when I was free and then asked to be there, I couldn't repay it except by joining them, you know, and responding to that brotherhood's loyalty by being present there. If it were a purely personal

choice, Bro, I would want to take a break for a year or two. A break from the hustle and bustle, political affairs, organizational matters; just a pause to refresh, you know. But the situation did not allow for that, and I had to fairly respond to that brotherhood, friendship, and loyalty by being present with them. And I am truly aware that the challenges are very heavy. The situation is full of difficulties and hardships. It’s

like playing soccer. Playing soccer on a muddy field after the rain, you know. But because this is a new party, the players cannot afford to buy shoes yet. Something like that, yes. But this is a challenge. For me, the most important thing is the design of this party, as a party I imagine can be a part of, and even a guardian of, the future of our genuine democracy. Not just an outer ornament of a democracy that, inside, is not actually a democracy. We saw

some time ago, for example, this is a small reflection. There was an old poem by Gus Mus, right? That old poem was actually born from the political landscape of the New Order, but then it was reread by Gus Mus. That poem was old, but the public felt it was something relevant. It felt like today's events. Well, roughly it was relevant and felt close, you know.

So, that is an old poem but it connects with the new prose. The prose of the new situation. My point is that there must be a willingness to always speak, discuss, and build a narrative about the importance of a party that is truly linear between its ideas and its practices. As a democratic institution, a party's ideas must be democratic ideas. Its practices must also be democratic practices, and it must have the courage to fight for those

democratic principles within national discourse. Actually, it’s that simple . Yes, it’s that simple. PKN was built that simply, and this is certainly not a party built for short-term goals. We are not planting beans, rice, or corn that are harvested in less than 4 months, but we are planting at least coconuts, or even teak trees. Which depicts our distant future. Okay, an explanation that I think can be

heard and will strengthen your cadres throughout Indonesia, Mas Anas. But I want to ask about what is happening today, called the Presidential Election . Why do you not have a stance? Or more precisely, have not yet taken a stance. I mean, by not supporting one of the presidential candidates, I heard that you will take a stance in the second round if there is a second round, although I know and we hear that there is one candidate who is pushing for a

single round. Okay. Isn't the political logic like this, wouldn't taking a stance now allow you to enjoy the coattail effects, which would be quite decent, knowing you are a part of it? Especially if they win, you could perhaps talk or negotiate for one or two cabinet seats, or maybe an ambassadorship, or something like that. I want to know what PKN's scenario and strategy is regarding your stance on this presidential election?

Well, what you just mentioned is indeed a common conversation in political negotiations. Uh. Actually, what we want to build is a new tradition. A new tradition. Number one, frankly speaking. Frankly, actually, when PKN was designated as a political party participating in the election, then PKN filed a petition to the Constitutional Court as a valid participating political party, right?

And then we have a constitutional umbrella stating that those entitled to nominate presidential and vice-presidential candidates are political parties or coalitions of political parties. The definition implies participating political parties . Now, as a participating political party, we should be allowed to nominate ourselves, as, right? Yes.

As a political subject in the presidential election. But the Constitutional Court's decision essentially deemed that PKN does not have legal standing. Well, not having legal standing is, of course, related to the rule that the presidential and legislative elections are held simultaneously, and the 2024 presidential election uses the old ticket from the 2019 election results, right?

That ticket, if I may be honest, is a torn-up ticket. A ticket from 5 years ago, a torn-up ticket, using the 2019 ticket assumes that politics is static, that 2023-2024 politics is the same as 2019 politics; that's problematic, from a political logic perspective, it's very problematic. And that is why I think this rule must be reviewed. This is one thing. Second, I am touring for consolidation, right? And cadres in the

regions have different aspirations. There are regions where the favorite is , uh, Anies, for example. There are regions where the favorite is Ganjar, there are regions where the favorite is Prabowo, and that is linked to their own struggles for the legislative elections in their respective districts . Of course, I must listen to this, listen to these aspirations. Because this is part of the most basic steps to build a party. Right? That's the second

point. Third, if we want to place ideas as a respectable part of political considerations, then it is actually logical for a party like PKN, which cannot be a political subject in the presidential nomination, to wait for the debates on ideas among these presidential candidates to... to be seen in their entirety, right? Not just looking at the figures, right? Because a figure is just an outward appearance, right?

Yes. What needs to be seen are the ideas on how they intend to treat Indonesia in the next 5 years. That is an important consideration in determining who to choose, who should be supported by the party. Well, this event is just about to start even though it has already begun. Right? But my point is that the episode to elaborate on ideas for managing Indonesia for at least the next 5 years is only just beginning officially. So,

if this kind of timeframe is a consideration before making a choice, I think that is a new way of thinking that we can offer. Okay. How can we know the ideas yet, meanwhile we don't have a ticket, PKN doesn't have a 2019 ticket. Yes, be patient. Mr. Jokowi said, "ojo kesusu," right? Don't be in a rush. Whatever your interpretation of that is. But I mean, these ideas need to be looked at, right

? They need to be dissected thoroughly, in East Javanese, "dionceki" properly, so we really know. That way, we consider these ideas and thoughts important. I think that is a healthy part that must be considered before we make a choice. So, that choice could be in the first round or it could be in the second round. There are indeed those who think it will be finished in one round. Is it possible? Politics is not math, it might be

possible, but uh PK's reading is well, as far as I see, the possibility for one round is tougher than two rounds. So the possibility of two rounds is much greater than one round. Yes. And PKN will likely take a stance at that phase later. At this point, PKN, once again, once again, if you want the first round, it's not too late either.

Okay. There is still time. There is still time, right? The second round is certainly not too late either. Especially since the second round is no longer related to the legislative election. Yes, that is. Yes, I am sure there are viewers who will be angry at me if I don't ask. Yes , if in the second round later, where will you go? But the answer is already known, anyway. Still waiting here for now. I respect my guest by not

answering even before being asked. Mas, thank you. Best regards to the kids and your wife at home. Thank you. Thank you. This is uh, what do you call it? Paying off our longing in installments, right. This is only a few percent, right? Longing cannot possibly be paid in full. In one conversation. Correct. Of course. Uh, the person I am asking and hope to be present is the one you mentioned, Anas personally,

capable of overcoming himself. So, who I am facing is Anas in another format, named the hopes that still remain for us to bring to life together. What truly brings us to life is courage and hope. I If we have no courage and no hope, it means you are choosing the path of death. So we must keep courage and hope alive. And that is, uh, what characterizes people like us who were

forged in the struggle of the activist world. You could be killed, you could be, what is it called? You might be politically mutilated. But if you still have courage and hope, that is where your life remains. And I am sure, uh, that is where we are. Okay, Mas. Once again, thank you. Success for all your agendas. Amen. Amen. Amen. As I said earlier, this is not just about Anas. He has answered for himself

, "I am finished. If this is taken into the personal realm, I am able to handle it." And I follow that line by presenting a conversation where the possibilities that could happen, that have happened to him, could happen to other children of the nation if we do not rush to improve our state mechanisms and, in this case, the mechanisms, uh, and existing political decisions. There is one part in politics that is very dangerous, called

power. And when we mistreat it, many other Anas-like figures will fall, who could possibly lead us to a better life . So for that, let's talk and let's take a stand. I prepared this forum, so thank you for watching this program.