Understanding the Gentlemen Agreement in the Formulation of Pancasila

Pancasila is the philosophical basis of the Indonesian state, which comprises five principles: belief in one God, just and civilized humanity, unity of Indonesia, democracy led by the wisdom of deliberations, and social justice for all Indonesians. The formulation of Pancasila has a long and complex history, and one important aspect of it is the so-called “gentlemen agreement” or “perjanjian laki-laki”.

The term “gentlemen agreement” is not unique to Indonesia, but it highlights a specific form of informal agreement between influential figures who do not want to engage in formal negotiations or contract signing. In the case of the formulation of Pancasila, the gentlemen agreement played a crucial role in 1945 when Indonesia declared its independence from Dutch colonial rule.

When the Indonesian National Committee (Komite Nasional Indonesia Pusat or KNIP) met in Jakarta from August to September 1945 to draft the constitution of the new republic, the issue of the state ideology arose. The KNIP was divided into several factions, each promoting its own version of the national ideology. Some proposed a religious-based ideology, while others advocated for a more secular and nationalist one. The issue was so divisive that the KNIP was on the brink of collapse.

To avoid this deadlock, a group of influential figures, including Soekarno, Mohammad Hatta, and Ki Hadjar Dewantara, initiated the gentlemen agreement. They met in a private house in Jakarta and agreed to formulate Pancasila based on the principles of the Islam religion (monotheism, humanity, justice, and prosperity) and the Javanese tradition of social harmony (gotong-royong or mutual cooperation).

The gentlemen agreement was not legally binding, but it had a significant impact on the subsequent drafting and approval of the constitution. Soekarno and Hatta used Pancasila as the basis for the constitution, and it became the official state ideology. The gentlemen agreement was also instrumental in building consensus among diverse groups and promoting national unity.

However, the gentlemen agreement also faced criticism from some quarters. Some argued that it gave too much power to a select few and excluded other influential figures from the decision-making process. Others questioned the validity of using religion and tradition as the basis for a secular and pluralist state.

In conclusion, the gentlemen agreement played a crucial role in the formulation of Pancasila as the state ideology of Indonesia. It illustrates how informal agreements and personal networks can influence important decisions in politics and society. However, it also raises questions about the transparency and inclusivity of the decision-making process. As Indonesia moves forward, it is essential to reflect on how to balance tradition, religion, democracy, and pluralism in the formulation of the national identity and aspirations.