'What have we achieved on reform?'<\/p>\n
The Jakarta Post, Jakarta<\/p>\n
Reform was supposed to mean a welcome goodbye to all that was
\nwrong with this country.<\/p>\n
With students as its foot soldiers, and swept in on the high
\nhopes of a public that was beaten down and left morally bruised
\nby the unbending dictates of the New Order regime, the call for
\nreform promised a new, better Indonesia.<\/p>\n
It would be a place where people would be free to speak their
\nminds, the great divide between the haves and have-nots would be
\nbroken down and there would be an end to the Soeharto-era
\nscourges of corruption, an almost untouchable military, as well
\nas the patronizing stance that the bigwigs in Jakarta knew best
\nfor the \"backward\" denizens of the provinces.<\/p>\n
Today, four years on, it's time to ask: Has the reform agenda
\ndelivered?<\/p>\n
Corruption is so commonplace that it's the norm, not the
\nexception. Military officers and unscrupulous officials play a
\nwaiting game when they are called to account for their past
\nmisdeeds and the government of Megawati Soekarnoputri is giving
\nevery indication it is disinclined to push the reform objectives
\nthrough, even displaying a Soeharto-esque high-handed prickliness
\nto the most constructive of criticism.<\/p>\n
We asked politicians, security officials and members of the
\npublic what they think has been accomplished -- and what still
\nmust be done.<\/p>\n
Amiludin, 24, a high school graduate who works as a street
\nhawker:<\/p>\n
Reform, in my opinion, is useless. The movement sparked by the
\nstudent activists four years ago came to nothing as it was
\nnothing more than rhetorical rubbish.<\/p>\n
I should say, frankly, that the government never reaches down
\nto the grassroots level. They can speak about us but never speak
\nfor us, the poor and downtrodden.<\/p>\n
One thing for sure is that they only think of how to beat
\ntheir political competitors in a bid to hang on to power.<\/p>\n
In the reform era, the ordinary people's lives are getting
\ntougher. For instance, the Jakarta administration is evicting the
\nstreet vendors. But what for? Do the authorities give them better
\njobs afterward? Not at all, just grief and misery.<\/p>\n
Well, I felt it was better when Soeharto's New Order ruled the
\ncountry despite his corrupt government. It was relatively easier
\nto earn a simple living. It was also a little safer as the whole
\nnation was under control due to his repressive approach.<\/p>\n
I don't care about how long a government serves. The most
\ncrucial thing is the government's action, instead of its
\nrhetorical statements!<\/p>\n
If you asked me to rate the situation, I think I'd give it a
\nbig, round zero. That's fair, I think.<\/p>\n
Muslim Muzakir, a fruit trader in Kramat Jati wholesale market
\nin East Jakarta:<\/p>\n
Economically, I've gotten nothing from the reform process as I
\nhave not seen any significant economic recovery since the process
\nstarted four years ago.<\/p>\n
But there is something positive which I feel as a trader. The
\nKramat Jati traders, including myself, for example, can complain
\nto the City Council if we have problems with the city
\nadministration or market management. This was unlikely to happen
\nduring the Soeharto era.<\/p>\n
About the current political situation, I think that many
\npeople are still confused about the situation as it is a
\ntransitional era. It is normal if there are people who are
\nimpatient in facing the situation.<\/p>\n
But I think the process should continue. I hope that the
\nleaders begin to realize that it is time to think about the fate
\nof the people who have suffered due to this reform process. An
\nextreme movement like a revolution is not necessary as it would
\nonly cause people more misery.<\/p>\n
Azas Tigor Nainggolan, chairman of the Jakarta Residents'
\nForum (FAKTA):<\/p>\n
I suggest a cultural revolution as a way of coping with the
\nfailure of the current reform process. A physical revolution
\nwould cost the public too much. People would suffer more.<\/p>\n
The failure of the reform movement was caused by many people
\nfrom the New Order of the dictator Soeharto and new people who
\nonly took advantage to further their own interests.<\/p>\n
People should be aware of the existence of liars in the
\nlegislatures and governments.<\/p>\n
Samudra Sukardi, businessman, a director of Abacus, a
\nsubsidiary of Garuda which handles online reservations, and
\nbrother of State Minister of State Enterprises Laksamana Sukardi:<\/p>\n
Reform is a change from the status quo to the dream situation
\nthat we expected. This change should be managed. Just like
\n(people) moving into a new house, the government mustn't get
\ndistracted by the euphoria.<\/p>\n
They have to arrange all the \"furniture\", which ones should be
\nput into the house first, whether it's the bed, the chairs or
\nsomething. They should think not only about the future condition
\nbut also the present situation.<\/p>\n
For me, reform is definitely beneficial. People can express
\ntheir opinion more freely, no limits, and no fear. They are even
\nmore freely expressing their opinions in media like newspapers.<\/p>\n
The government should pay attention not only to economic
\ngrowth, but it is more important to examine the distribution of
\nwelfare. The increase or decrease of economic growth is just a
\nnumber, only the national product. The government should focus on
\npeople's buying power.<\/p>\n
Wahyu Susilo, humanist and coordinator of the Consortium for
\nMigrant Workers Advocacy (Kopbumi):<\/p>\n
We have yet to form a consolidated democracy. We are still in
\ntransition and the word (reform) remains jargon for now.<\/p>\n
I only enjoyed the spacious elbow room given during B.J.
\nHabibie and Abdurrahman \"Gus Dur\" Wahid's administrations for
\nactivists and non-governmental organizations to work and the
\n\"relative\" press freedom. But nothing else.<\/p>\n
I feel that Habibie and Gus Dur's time gave the people high
\nhopes for a better democracy. But the current Megawati
\nSoekarnoputri administration is leading us back to the past
\nregime. The military has been given the chance to consolidate and
\nanti-civilian movements have reemerged.<\/p>\n
As an example, Megawati, with her Indonesian Democratic Party
\nfor Struggle (PDI Perjuangan), has backed a motion against the
\namendment of the 1945 Constitution, although the public believe
\nthe amendment is one of the instruments we need during this
\ntransition era to achieve a better democracy.<\/p>\n
What differs now, from the condition four years ago, is that
\nthe state today acknowledges the people's civil and political
\nrights.<\/p>\n
The sad thing is that people have failed to translate what
\ndemocracy is. They take it as the chance to be different from
\nothers. Take, as an example, the comments from legislators on
\nMegawati's plan to attend East Timor's independence day.
\nEverybody says irrational things, as long as they are different
\nto others. They forget that being logical is part of democracy.<\/p>\n
I also see that the old forces still exist and that the
\npolitical parties, although there is no longer a limit on their
\nnumber, are still dominated by old-fashioned ways of thinking on
\nreligion, orthodox nationalism or (founding president) Sukarno-
\nism. There has yet to be a party with an inspiring vision.<\/p>\n
What makes us stagnant is that the state has failed to redeem
\nthe people's faith in justice and humanity, let alone social and
\neconomic welfare for all.<\/p>\n
There is a way: transitional justice, which is currently
\nvoiced by the students. The transitional process in South Africa
\nwas relatively smooth, where the state succeeded in expunging the
\npeople's hatred against the past racist regime, while not erasing
\nthe history. That way, people learn not to repeat past mistakes
\nin the future.<\/p>\n
Indonesian people are still in the phase of releasing their
\nanger and hatred against the past regime, but the state has
\noffered a mechanism, such as a commission for truth and
\nreconciliation, to calm their restlessness.<\/p>\n
If the state still ignores the momentum we created four years
\nago, then I support the students' call to get rid of the one
\ngeneration of leadership and let the idealists, who have yet to
\nbe touched by the old regime, take the lead.<\/p>\n
Comr. Agus Irianto, subprecinct chief in Tebet, Jakarta:<\/p>\n
The most notable part of reform for police officers nationwide
\nin Indonesia has been that we are now identified independently as
\npolice officers, and not part of the Indonesian Armed Forces
\n(ABRI) or part of the Indonesian Military (TNI).<\/p>\n
The military is there to fight wars, but the job of the police
\nis to fight crime. Before, the hands of the police were tied
\nwhen, for instance, crimes involved military officers. Now, our
\nhands are a bit freer, to some extent at least.<\/p>\n
Due to reform and separation from the military, every move the
\npolice makes is scrutinized by the public.<\/p>\n
This is sometimes bad, since people can be extremely
\njudgmental on how we do our work.<\/p>\n
They sometimes cannot understand how extremely strenuous and
\ntough our jobs are, under what kind of public and media pressure
\nwe work, particularly considering our low wages. People brand us
\ncorrupt and inefficient, but they cannot imagine what working for
\n36 hours at a stretch without sleep can be like.<\/p>\n
It's only when big police arrests are made that they hail us
\nfor a day and then forget about it.<\/p>\n
In Japan, they have this public safety commission, which
\nbridges the communication gap between police officers and the
\ngeneral public.<\/p>\n
Members of the commission are neither bureaucrats nor
\npoliticians, just ordinary people. They get to meet the police
\nchief once a week and tell him all the problems and complaints
\npeople have toward the police. The police chief notes this down
\nand tries to make amends. They should at least start something
\nlike that, even on a small scale, in Indonesia.<\/p>\n
Lt. Gen. Agus Widjojo, deputy speaker of the Indonesian
\nMilitary (TNI)\/National Police faction in the People's
\nConsultative Assembly (MPR):<\/p>\n
As a soldier, I must be ready to carry out all the state's
\npolicies, which includes the repositioning of the TNI's roles and
\nfunctions, during this transition period. We must understand that
\nall changes are efforts to place the military as part of the
\ncountry's national system.<\/p>\n
Even though, as a soldier, I realize that I'm not in the
\ncapacity to determine whether the current situation is better or
\nworse than the past four years, I think it will be more
\ncomfortable for us should the people of this country believe and
\ntrust in us as their guardian.<\/p>\n
The people's trust and belief are necessary for us to carry
\nout our duties because we, as soldiers, never want to hurt them
\nintentionally.<\/p>\n
I do understand that this transition period is difficult for
\nall of us, as we must fight to be a more democratic and modern
\ncountry so that we can stand equally with other countries in the
\nworld. Of course, during this time, we cannot avoid changes that
\nreflect on the past situation to reach our goal.<\/p>\n
During the last four years, TNI has also faced strong
\nopposition and condemnation from the public. But all these things
\nhave not affected our efforts to be the country's instrument of
\ndefense, as we believe that all TNI's tasks, both in the past and
\nin the future, are always part of the government system.<\/p>\n
No matter how difficult this situation is for us, I guess it
\nshould not be the reason for this country to return to the New
\nOrder's centralized system. Once we have committed ourselves to
\nbe a more democratic and modern country, we must carry out all
\nefforts to maintain it. Therefore, I ask all Indonesians to join
\nhands and work together as one nation.<\/p>\n
Anas Urbaningrum, former chairman of the Islamic Students
\nAssociation, member of the General Elections Commission (KPU):<\/p>\n
To put it simply, in its fourth year the reform movement has
\nyet to find a definite direction. The ideal goals expected by
\nstudent movements to replace the (New Order) regime have not yet
\nmaterialized. There have only been a few changes of personnel.
\nThere is only a shift in political configuration, but the
\nattitude of the old regime remains.<\/p>\n
I think there are changes in some aspects, but they are not
\nvery clear. The system is changing, but the \"taste\" remains the
\nsame. I don't know exactly, if four years are too short for our
\nexpectations. Or, perhaps, the reform movement itself is too
\nslow.<\/p>\n
Possibly, the situation is caused by: First, the system
\nbuilding is still in process. What happens today is very
\nimportant to create a new playing field. A new regime needs a new
\nplaying field that is well organized. The process has not
\nfinished.<\/p>\n
Second, I think the reform movement requires a transformation
\nin attitude and mentality. But, unfortunately, this
\ntransformation has not yet taken place. There is a shift in the
\npolitical configuration, but the way of thinking, the paradigm,
\nor mentality, won't change overnight.<\/p>\n
Third, this nation has failed to take a definite stance about
\nthe last regime. What the government perceives of Soeharto's last
\ndays is not clear. If it is not clear, I think it consumes the
\nnation's energy for debate. It definitely halts the reform
\nmovement.<\/p>\n
Arie Wibowo, former secretary-general of the Student Executive
\nBody (BEM) at the University of Indonesia, a student organization
\nthat fought in the reform movement; he is currently working at a
\nprivate company selling industrial equipment:<\/p>\n
The only positive thing we achieved from the reform movement
\nwas freedom of expression. Otherwise, I don't see change for the
\nbetter in other aspects of life. The price of goods and services
\nhave soared, while the people's income remains steady, which
\nleads to the reduction of people's purchasing power. Corruption
\nremains rampant, aggravated by weak enforcement of the law.<\/p>\n
Politicians must be held responsible for the sluggish pace of
\nreform. They merely pursue their own interests, disregarding
\nwider national interests, as is clearly shown by members of the
\nPeople's Consultative Assembly in their efforts to amend the
\nConstitution.<\/p>\n
However, despite the fact the fate of the reform movement
\nremains uncertain, it is not wise to look back to the New Order
\nera, even though it provided a more stable and prosperous
\nsociety.<\/p>\n
The stable and prosperous society under the New Order regime
\nwas deceptive, as it was achieved at the expense of human rights.<\/p>\n
Like it or not, we should push forward to sail through this
\nmovement to arrive at a stable and prosperous society in the
\nfuture. This is a transitional period; whether we go through this
\nor not depends on us.<\/p>\n
Tumbu Saraswati, lawyer, PDI Perjuangan legislator: I think
\nthe call for reform in 1998 has been adopted in the amendment to
\nthe Constitution.<\/p>\n
For example, the amendment has limited the presidential term
\nto two periods. This limitation has prevented a lifelong
\npresidency.<\/p>\n
There are many things that have been changed through
\nconstitutional reform. I think constitutional reform would be the
\nstarting point for the entire reform process.<\/p>\n
Unfortunately, reform has yet to touch law enforcement in this
\ncountry. Law enforcement remains a vicious circle. But we have to
\nstart now. We have already had good regulations. The proposed
\nestablishment of a judicial commission tasked to supervise the
\nlegal system is expected to boost law enforcement here.<\/p>\n
Frans Seda, former minister of finance, PDI Perjuangan
\nadviser:<\/p>\n
We have to evaluate the reform movement, which has lasted for
\nfour years. We need to assess if the reform movement has brought
\na positive outcome.<\/p>\n
I think the reform movement has not been successful enough.
\nThis is not the first time we, as a nation, have launched a
\nreform movement. The first reform movement was when we struggled
\nfor independence. The second one was when founding president
\nSukarno introduced 'Guided Democracy'.<\/p>\n
The third reform movement was when former president Soeharto
\nbrought in the New Order government, and now we are in the fourth
\nperiod of reform.<\/p>\n
In the first three reform movements, the nation could unite on
\na clear platform. But, in the present reform movement, the nation
\nis being led into internal friction.<\/p>\n
During the struggle for independence, the nation was united to
\nexpel the aggressor and establish a country. Sukarno appeared and
\nbrought a national front with clear concepts. Soeharto also
\nappeared with a clear platform of development with the support of
\nall elements.<\/p>\n
Now what? This is the weakness of the current reform movement.
\nThere is no support. There is no clear platform, only national
\nfriction.<\/p>\n
In my life, I have never experienced national friction like it
\nis now. We have be introspective and look within ourselves. We
\nhave to unite and form a clear platform. Unfortunately, the
\nreform movement has now gone in another direction.<\/p>\n
Erna Ratnaningsih, a lawyer with the Jakarta Legal Aid
\nInstitute (LBH):<\/p>\n
The reform movement has yet to touch the legal institutions in
\nthe country. Corrupt judges, lawyers and police are all still
\nthere, just like four years ago.<\/p>\n
I agree that a revolution could be an option for improving the
\nlegal situation, as the government is not serious in upholding
\nand restoring the law.<\/p>\n
Frans Hendra Winata, lawyer, member of the National Law
\nCommission:<\/p>\n
I don't think the reform movement has brought significant
\nimprovement to the country, particularly in law enforcement. It
\nis only a case of the government paying lip service.<\/p>\n
Some things are even getting worse compared to the Soeharto
\nera. At the moment, we are all hearing reports about widespread
\nbribery among law enforcers. Actually, this is nothing new. But
\ntoday, they do it more openly and the amount of cash involved is
\nmuch bigger, amounting to billions of rupiah.<\/p>\n
However, I have to admit there has been an improvement in
\ntransparency and press freedom, which supports law enforcement as
\na major element of the reform movement.<\/p>\n
It will take time to bring about reform. Maybe it will take a
\ngeneration. However, we all must realize that we must lay a firm
\nfoundation during the first five years so as to put the movement
\non the right track.<\/p>\n
Turiman, a teacher from state elementary school SD Pejagalan
\n07 in North Jakarta:<\/p>\n
In my personal opinion, reform has been all about lip service
\nand far from the public's expectations. Many officials talk about
\nreformasi but in reality they are still resistant to criticism
\nand unwilling to be open-minded.<\/p>\n
The country's economy is getting worse as our foreign debts
\ncontinue to increase, reaching a level which will be hard to
\nshoulder in the future. Meanwhile, in politics, the legislators
\nare only good for bickering and feathering their own nests,
\nforgetting all about the plight of the public.<\/p>\n
The main problem lies with law enforcement. The law must be
\nenforced so that corrupt officials are dealt with strictly. No
\nmore bribery.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/what-have-we-achieved-on-reform-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}