Regional autonomy: A double standard in motion?<\/p>\n
Santi WE Soekanto
\nThe Jakarta Post
\nJakarta<\/p>\n
When 2002 dawns, Indonesia will mark the first anniversary of
\nthe implementation of the regional autonomy policy. Dubbed by
\nmany last year as the world's largest experiment in
\ndecentralization of power, the policy has turned out to be a
\nsharp wedge, splitting scholars and bureaucrats apart.<\/p>\n
Many scholars remain adamant that decentralization is not only
\nneeded to ensure better delivery of services and goods than that
\ncarried out by the central government, but also that it helps
\ncurb the national disintegration threat brought out by years of
\nheavy centralization of powers.<\/p>\n
The second group -- the most notable member of which is
\nPresident Megawati Soekarnoputri -- thinks that the very policy
\nis a threat to national integration.<\/p>\n
Sudarsono Hardjosoekarto, Megawati's officer in charge of the
\nplanned revision of Law No. 22\/2000 on regional autonomy and Law
\nNo. 25\/2000 on fiscal balance, said "the shift from the old
\nstructural efficiency model to the democratic one has been too
\nfast, excessive and bombastic."<\/p>\n
The policy ought to be reviewed because it might threaten the
\nsurvival of Indonesia as a unitary state, he asserted. "We are
\ndeeply concerned about the loss of hierarchy between provinces
\nand regencies or mayoralties, the arrogance of resources-rich
\nregions and their egotism and racist policies.<\/p>\n
"Under the current regional autonomy law, rich regions could
\neasily demand separation from Indonesia. Therefore, besides
\namending the autonomy law, we will also ask the regions to review
\nrules they have issued in line with the implementation of
\nautonomy," Sudarsono said.<\/p>\n
Ironically, Sudarsono's list of complaints is exactly the same
\nas those aired last year by both critics and proponents of the
\nautonomy policy -- to which then president Abdurrahman Wahid
\nturned a deaf ear. The policy was launched anyway.<\/p>\n
Scholars, such as Ryaas Rasyid and Andi Mallarangeng, who were
\nresponsible for the drafting of the laws, were the first to point
\nout possible pitfalls because of poor government preparations.<\/p>\n
Understandably Ryaas was also the first to be upset at the
\ngovernment's insistence on revision of the laws, citing it as
\nproof of a tug-of-war for power between Jakarta and the regional
\nadministration. "The central government is unwilling to support
\nthe program because it would only lessen its power on locals," he
\ncharged.<\/p>\n
Experts have, over the past year, analyzed the merits and
\ndemerits of the current autonomy policy, but what has yet to be
\ndiscussed more thoroughly includes a double standard applied by
\nthe central government so far.<\/p>\n
The previous administration treated the policy as a panacea to
\nvarious problems in all regions, including threats of separatism,
\ndespite the evident poor preparations and absence of adequate
\nlegal infrastructure. There was also carelessness on the part of
\nAbdurrahman Wahid, indeed, because there were at least 20
\ngovernment decrees, 13 presidential instructions, 6 ministerial
\ndecrees, as well as dozens of regional decrees on regional
\nautonomy, many of which contradicted one another.<\/p>\n
Then, when the West Sumatra administration and legislative
\ncouncil decided to take over PT Semen Padang following the
\ngovernment's plan to sell a majority of shares to a foreign
\ncompany, critics were ready to label the case as proof of the
\nautonomy policy rushing headlong into chaos.<\/p>\n
It is in relation to such cases that Megawati now believes
\nthat "the shift to a democratic efficiency model" has taken place
\ntoo excessively and plans to curb it by revising the laws.<\/p>\n
But when it comes to regions where threats of disintegration
\nare indeed present, why doesn't Megawati consider reviewing the
\nspecial autonomy policy she is implementing there? Both Aceh and
\nIrian Jaya have rejected the special autonomy policy drawn up for
\nthem. Why? Because it is not the cure for the multitude of
\nproblems reigning in the restive regions, as Megawati would have
\nliked Indonesians to believe.<\/p>\n
Megawati has stated, through her officials, that revising the
\nlaws does not constitute a wish to return Indonesia to a
\ncentralized power. However, her administration forcefully
\noverrode objections by regents across the country and proceeded
\nwith the revision plan.<\/p>\n
Granted, Megawati was never happy with the autonomy policy,
\neven when she was Wahid's deputy, and could not have had the
\npower to block its passage on January 1, 2001. Her stance on the
\nmatter today, however, reminds many of the way Wahid bulldozed
\nobjections to his policies during his period in office.<\/p>\n
The autonomy policy is an experiment in democratization. But
\nbecause it has fallen victim to the rapid shift of Jakarta's
\nstance over the past year, the policy is also a costly exercise.
\nPeople say aptly, "policy change is power-holder change."<\/p>\n
A sample of flaws in the implementation of the laws include
\nthose laws that have placed the Indonesian environment in danger.
\nIn Irian Jaya and East Kalimantan, regency administrations have
\nissued bylaws that have allowed them to overexploit forests to
\nboost revenues.<\/p>\n
The increasing export of logs from Irian Jaya this year,
\ndespite the infringement of the law, stood out as a good example.
\nMillions of cubic meters of logs have been shipped out of the
\nprovince unchecked by the central government, despite having
\nissued in October 2000 a ban on the export of logs.<\/p>\n
Another example of the flaws in the autonomy policy is the
\nrecently reported leakage of 40 percent of the general allocation
\nfund (DAU) for regions. A legislator revealed that a portion of
\nthe funds had been used by officials to purchase personal items,
\nincluding luxury cars.<\/p>\n
Another example is a survey in North Sumatra, East Java, East
\nKalimantan, South Sulawesi and West Nusa Tenggara that found that
\nno proper attention had been given to improving the quality of
\npublic services, one of the objectives of decentralization.<\/p>\n
Yet another example of glitches in the implementation of the
\nautonomy policy includes the squabble between Jakarta and Bekasi
\nover the location of a sanitary landfill, and the quarrel between
\nJakarta and Tangerang over aspects of revenue management of
\nSoekarno-Hatta Airport.<\/p>\n
Writing for detik.com, Indra J. Piliang, a researcher at the
\nCentre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), pointed
\nout that only one of nine winners of the Friedrich Naumann
\nStiftung (FNS) Radio Program Awards 2001 wrote about autonomy
\npolicy in an optimistic tone.<\/p>\n
The odd-one-out winner described the joy with which residents
\nof Rote Island and Ndao Island in East Nusa Tenggara received
\ntheir imminent separation from the regency of Kupang. The
\nremaining eight winners wrote only about problems hampering the
\nimplementation of the policy in West Sumatra, South Sulawesi,
\nEast Java and other regions.<\/p>\n
Scholars have outdone one another in coming up with
\nsuggestions on how to improve the autonomy policy. Transparency
\nand monitoring, says one scholar, is crucial because like many
\ncountries with a fledgling decentralized system, Indonesia has
\npoor public control mechanisms. This scholar says that no
\nautonomy policy will proceed well unless there is greater public
\nparticipation in the decision-making process.<\/p>\n
Another has proposed a long list of tasks before the autonomy
\npolicy could be effective, including an amendment to the 1945
\nConstitution. Piliang says this step is crucial as the document
\ninfluences all regulations and rulings under it.<\/p>\n
"Political conflicts in this country all derive from flaws in
\nthe Constitution," he argues. He also proposes the establishment
\nof an anticorruption body, the establishment of the judiciary as
\nan independent institution, a streamlining of the bureaucracy,
\ndissemination of information and knowledge, and the establishment
\nof an independent mass media.<\/p>\n
In short, the application of good governance principles.<\/p>\n
Those of an argumentative disposition can now debate whether
\nthe autonomy policy needs good governance to succeed or vice
\nversa.<\/p>\n
When, one year ago, Indonesia launched the huge undertaking
\ndespite poor preparations, some people described it as building a
\nship while sailing and predicted that some drowning would take
\nplace.<\/p>\n
Who will prove the doomsayers wrong?<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/regional-autonomy-a-double-standard-in-motion-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }