House plenary session heats up over Century inquiry proposal

A plenary session's temperature went up a notch following a heated debate among legislators at the House of Representatives over the proposal to form an inquiry committee over the controversial Bank Century bailout.

The debate began when a legislator from the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), Aria Bima, asked two House deputy speakers leading the meeting why the session did not schedule an official reading of a letter proposing an establishment the inquiry committee.

One of the deputy speakers, PDI-P's Pramono Anung, told Aria that the House speakers had yet to conduct an internal meeting among themselves about the letter.

Aria, however, was not satisfied with Pramono's response.

"Excuse me Sir, but the reading of the letter is in the authority of the House secretary general, not that of the speakers," he said.

"Therefore, I suggest we should have a brief break so that the speakers can discuss on this matter with the secretary general," he added.

Another Deputy Speaker, Priyo Budi Santoso from the Golkar Party, said that if the legislators wished so, then the session would take a brief break.

As Priyo was about to drop his hammer to officially declare that the session would go for a brief break, a legislator from the Democratic Party, Ruhut Sitompul, yelled against the decision from his seat.

"We must respect the set schedule, there is no need for a brief break," he said loudly, only to receive jeers from his peers.

Priyo, however, stood his ground and called a brief break.

As of now, the Democratic Party, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's party, is the only party that has yet to sign the petition proposing an inquiry committee into the controversial Bank Century bailout.

The government had initially said that the bail out would only cost Rp 632 billion (US$65 million) but it ended up ballooning to Rp 6.7 trillion.

The government argued that the bailout was necessary to prevent a chain reaction affecting other banks.

Critics, however, say the bank was bailed out not out of desire to protect the economy from the effect of the global financial crisis, but rather as part of a scheme to rescue the savings of high-profile and politically connected depositors.