Why govt lost students' trust<\/p>\n
By Aleksius Jemadu<\/p>\n
BANDUNG (JP): Armed Forces (ABRI) Commander Gen. Wiranto says
\nhis office is open to dialog with government critics who have
\nrealistic suggestions on how to solve the economic crisis. He
\nalso said the recent student demonstrations were acceptable and
\nwithin the law.<\/p>\n
It is very likely the students will continue their protests
\nuntil they get assurances that the government will make a real
\neffort to put an end to corruption, collusion and nepotism which
\nled the nation into the current crisis.<\/p>\n
The question is why have the students seemingly lost trust in
\nthe formal political process?<\/p>\n
It is political naivete to believe that students' right to air
\ntheir grievances is a gift from the state. In any democratic
\nsociety every citizen should be regarded as a legitimate carrier
\nof demand for political freedom and social justice.<\/p>\n
The reasoning is that a state or political system can only
\nexist and function properly on the basis of people's consent.
\nTherefore, the state cannot be made an end in itself. If state
\nofficials suppress political freedom they actually destroy the
\nsacred mission of the state to enlighten its citizens.<\/p>\n
Student protests only indicate that diversity of opinions and
\npolitical attitudes in a pluralistic society such as ours can
\nnever be denied. Sometimes the government so worries about the
\ndanger of disunity that it tries to standardize everything. The
\ndanger of such an attitude is that genuine political loyalty to
\nformal authority becomes at best artificial.<\/p>\n
As a result, communication between the ruler and the ruled
\nbecomes replete with formalities, leading to an obvious lack of
\nsincerity. It creates a big discrepancy between slogans uttered
\nby government officials and the reality of political life. In
\nsuch a situation a government's credibility in the eyes of the
\npublic can easily decrease.<\/p>\n
Restriction of freedom to express ideas that question or
\noppose government policies is often defended on the grounds that
\nit is essential for the establishment of political stability,
\nwhich is viewed as a common good.<\/p>\n
Seeking a common good, however, should be understood as an
\ninstruction to approach policy-making in a certain spirit, not a
\ndeterminate policy or goal. To say that a state should seek \"the
\ncommon good\" is to say only that political decisions should
\nattend to the interests of its members in a spirit of
\nimpartiality.<\/p>\n
It follows that in a democratic state the claims and
\naspirations of all sections in society should be taken into
\naccount in a just and fair manner before any decision can be
\nmade.<\/p>\n
It is the task of the state or the government to create a
\nconducive atmosphere in which citizens may express their
\naspirations not only through formal channels of democracy but
\nalso through other instruments such as open statements, public
\ndiscussion, seminars and news releases.<\/p>\n
There are several reasons why the government needs to respond
\npositively to the demand for holding discussions with the
\nstudents.<\/p>\n
First, in the eyes of the students and academicians in
\ngeneral, the present political and economic systems contain
\nendemic structural deficiencies.<\/p>\n
Corruption, collusion and nepotism, which are most criticized
\nthrough posters and pamphlets, cannot be eliminated without
\nchanging the basic assumptions on which the government has based
\nits development policies.<\/p>\n
Moreover, public control through formal mechanisms like the
\nHouse of Representatives and political parties seem to be
\npowerless and easily coopted and appeased by the executive power.
\nThis is precisely why students are quite skeptical about the
\ncapacity of the House and political parties to initiate reform.<\/p>\n
Second, students are particularly concerned by the fact that
\nmany government officials at the central level tend to have mixed
\norientations in doing their jobs.<\/p>\n
On one hand, they are so submissive to their superiors to the
\neffect that they depend extensively on direction from above. Some
\nministers, for instance, have been so afraid of making policy
\ninitiatives that they waste time waiting for presidential
\nguidance.<\/p>\n
On the other hand, they would reject any correction from their
\nsubordinates. It should come as no surprise if many government
\nofficials proved to be so loyal to their superiors but at the
\nsame time become increasingly dictatorial over their
\nsubordinates.<\/p>\n
As a result, instead of improving the quality of their service
\nto the people some bureaucrats keep appeasing their superiors.
\nConsequently the aspect of public accountability within
\ngovernment bureaucracies is very weak.<\/p>\n
Third, the government's sincerity in holding dialog with the
\nstudents could have a positive impact on the process of educating
\nthe younger generation. Through dialog students could learn to
\nbecome responsible citizens with a high sensitivity and empathy
\nwith the grass roots.<\/p>\n
The government cannot pretend to know everything about finding
\nsolutions to the nation's problems. Government leaders need to
\nlisten to others no matter how different their ideas may be from
\nstate policies.<\/p>\n
Many items mentioned in the International Monetary Fund reform
\npackage were actually previously suggested by Indonesian
\nintellectuals, but unfortunately the government discounted them.<\/p>\n
Last but not least, if the government argues that reform can
\nonly be introduced gradually, dialog with students could be
\nviewed as an initial step in that direction. It would be
\nunthinkable that the government could agree on the need for
\nreform but refuse to hold dialog with the students.<\/p>\n
We must never forget that the students are also legitimate
\nstakeholders of the future of this nation. Therefore, they have
\nundeniable right to question anything that goes wrong in the
\npolitical system.<\/p>\n
The writer is head of the school of international relations of
\nUniversitas Parahyangan (UNPAR) in Bandung.<\/p>\n
Window: It is political naivete to believe that students' right to
\nair their grievances is a gift from the state. In any democratic
\nsociety every citizen should be regarded as a legitimate carrier
\nof demand for political freedom and social justice.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/why-govt-lost-students-trust-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}