Corrupt, lazy, but loyal<\/p>\n
How would you characterize a typical government worker in
\nIndonesia? If Minister of Home Affairs Hari Sabarno has his way,
\na typical civil servant would be loyal to the cause of the
\nunitary state (however the minister defines \"loyal\"), but would
\nstill be corrupt. You can throw in lazy for good measure, to
\ncomplete the picture.<\/p>\n
Hari is taking the government's fixation with NKRI, the
\nIndonesian acronym for the Unitary State of the Republic of
\nIndonesia, to new heights by requiring a new loyalty test for all
\ncivil servants, including those in central and regional
\nadministrations, beginning next month.<\/p>\n
Forget fighting corruption, supposedly the chief objective of
\nthis government when it was elected back in 1999; let alone
\nimproving efficiency. The greatest danger to this nation, at
\nleast according to Hari, is the poor loyalty of civil servants to
\nthe cause of the unitary state.<\/p>\n
With a single stroke of his pen, he has relegated the fight
\nagainst corruption in the bureaucracy from the top of the
\nnational agenda, and replaced it with his own mission.<\/p>\n
As far as the minister is concerned, civil servants can be as
\ncorrupt as possible. They can even plunder the nation's wealth to
\nthe point of bringing this nation to the brink of economic
\ncollapse as they did in 1998 (of course, in collaboration with
\nthe powers that be), so long as they are proven by his office to
\nbe loyal to NKRI.<\/p>\n
The idea of carrying out a loyalty test was broached early
\nthis month when the minister learned that some government workers
\nin Aceh province had been supporting the separatist cause of the
\nFree Aceh Movement (GAM).<\/p>\n
As part of Jakarta's campaign to crush GAM to its roots, the
\ngovernment has decided to weed out separatist or disloyal people
\nfrom its own ranks by announcing the test.<\/p>\n
But barely a week after disclosing his controversial plan,
\nHari, an Army general by background, decided to go one step
\nfurther: He wants all civil servants nationwide to take the test.<\/p>\n
Calling his plan \"re-registration\", he made it clear that this
\nwould involve more than civil servants renewing their documents,
\nbut also interviews to determine whether or not they were loyal
\nto NKRI.<\/p>\n
The ease with which he expanded the scheme -- there was little
\npublic opposition -- raises concern that he might also extend
\nthis loyalty test requirement to every citizen in the country.<\/p>\n
Presumably, he would employ psychologists and experts to help
\nhis office draft the questions that would detect one's loyalty to
\nthe state. He seemed so assured that his office would be able to
\nnet those who are not loyal, as he put it, \"from their answers\".<\/p>\n
While we have no problem with the government's wish to remove
\ndisloyal elements from the bureaucracy, we strongly object to the
\napproach, which essentially puts the burden of proof of loyalty
\non every civil servant. This approach essentially tells us that
\nevery civil servant's loyalty is in question until he or she
\nproves the contrary. (This, however, would be a novel approach to
\neradicating the rampant corruption in the bureaucracy.)<\/p>\n
We also object to the idea of screening because the nation has
\nbeen down this road before, and is still deeply traumatized by
\nit.<\/p>\n
The Soeharto regime introduced all kinds of screening during
\nits 32-year repressive rule as a way of controlling and
\nterrorizing the people. We had screening to weed out communists,
\nwhich went on long after the communist party was outlawed and
\ncrushed in 1965; we had screening for good behavior; screening
\nfor bersih lingkungan, which essentially meant that you and your
\nextended family were not \"tainted\", as defined by the powers that
\nbe; there also was screening for your loyalty to the state
\nideology, Pancasila.<\/p>\n
These screenings were mandatory, not only for civil servants,
\nas many were expanded to other professions, including
\npoliticians, teachers, journalists, even young people intending
\nto study abroad. Very often, papers proving that you had passed
\nthese tests were required when applying for passports, ID cards
\nand other documents.<\/p>\n
Our concern goes beyond the time and expense, not to mention
\nthe frustration, that we had to go through in taking these tests
\nand getting these papers. There were always middlemen who offered
\ntheir services for a fee. Undoubtedly, Hari's new screening test
\nproposal will produce a new batch of middlemen.<\/p>\n
Past screenings led to rampant abuses that killed lives,
\nlivelihoods and careers. Given this recent history, there is a
\nlikelihood that Hari's loyalty test would lead to renewed abuses
\nand a violation of people's basic rights.<\/p>\n
Our biggest concern is on the definition of \"loyalty\" to the
\nNKRI cause: Who gets to define it?<\/p>\n
With a general election just around the corner, there is
\nconcern that loyalty to the state would be defined more in terms
\nof loyalty to the powers that be -- just as in the Soeharto years
\n-- and not loyalty to the people they are supposed to serve.<\/p>\n
Given that rampant corruption, both within the bureaucracy and
\noutside it, is the single-greatest problem this country faces
\ntoday, should that not be the chief criterion used to define
\none's loyalty to the unity and integrity of this country?<\/p>\n
With Hari Sabarno's loyalty test seemingly unstoppable, we
\npropose that he expand it to make sure that all civil servants
\nare clean (ie. not corrupt) and hard-working, as well as loyal.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/corrupt-lazy-but-loyal-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}