Autonomy law revision: Defining governors' role

Autonomy law revision: Defining governors' role

Gustaf Tamo Mbapa, Legislative Watch Body (For-MAPPI), Jakarta,
gustaftamo@astaga.com

The decentralization policy of 1999 had the main objective of
relieving the central government of unnecessary burdens in
handling domestic affairs, so that it would have the opportunity
to study, comprehend and respond to global trends and benefit
from these developments.

At the same time, the central government was expected to be
more capable of concentrating on the formulation of national
macro-policies of a strategic nature.

Also, through the decentralization of government authority to
the regions, a significant process of empowerment of local
communities was expected to take place.

Their initiative and creativity was expected to be spurred,
thereby further strengthening their ability to resolve various
domestic issues.

Decentralization as a symbol of the central government's trust
in regional administrations would naturally restore the dignity
and esteem of the local communities.

Since the enforcement of the regional autonomy law in January
2000, regency administrations often consider themselves to be the
most qualified to run their own areas, so that the position of
governor has tended to become very insignificant.

Governors in the New Order era were highly respected and had
the most decisive role in distributing projects to the regions,
often with regard to their respective political interests.

The obedience shown by regents to governors during that period
was due to the great authority the governors had in the sphere of
public administration and politics.

However, one concrete problem since the coming into force of
Law No. 22/1999 on regional autonomy has been the relationship
between provincial and regency/municipal administrations.

The law contains no clear definition of the function of
provincial administrations. This makes the existence of
provincial governments devoid of any function.

One example involves the formulation of regional development
programs and strategic plans for regional development.

In drawing up the programs and also regional budgets, as a
consequence of this law, regency and municipal administrations
often disregard provincial administrations.

Therefore, even as provinces are drafting such plans or
budgets, municipal or regency administrations have compiled their
own without referring to those of the provincial administration.
This has a fatal effect on development.

In the absence of any specifications about the role and
function of provincial administrations in the implementation of
regional autonomy, autonomous regency or municipal
administrations sever any accountability to the provincial
authorities.

They even seem to have no more connection with the central
government. Many circles thus feel the necessity of revising the
regional autonomy law.

The lack of a common perception among regents/mayors in the
realization of regional autonomy obscures the role of governors.
In fact, in the structure of public administration, governors
play a supervisory, monitoring and facilitating role. This
problem arises because into the second year of regional autonomy,
how the coordination between governors and regents/mayors should
be conducted has yet to be regulated.

According to Minister of Home Affairs Hari Sabarno,
regents/mayors have misinterpreted the meaning of "no hierarchy
between heads of first-level regions and heads of second-level
regions", as stipulated in Law No.22/1999. With this
misunderstanding, regents/mayors no longer see the presence of
governors and provincial administrations. It is a mistake. The
absence of hierarchy is actually in terms of politics. It means
that the election of somebody as a regent/mayor is not owing to
the recommendation of a governor.

Nonetheless, the government structure must administratively
maintain a hierarchical relationship. To this end, a revision of
the regional administration law is needed. But the changes should
not be a total alteration and a return to centralization. The
basic philosophy, i.e. decentralization, must still be strictly
followed.

The amendments to the law would regulate the scope of
authority in such a way that no conflict will emerge between
regions. In addition, a revised autonomy law needs to regulate
the ties between regional heads and regional legislatures, the
improvement of regional finances and the arrangement of regional
personnel.

In practice, the greater percentage of most of the
regency/municipal finances is derived from central government
aid, in the form of both general allocation funds (DAU) and
special allocation funds (DAK). In this way, the relationship
between regencies/municipalities and provincial administrations,
as well as the central government, is interdependent rather then
independent.

Central Java Governor Mardiyanto voiced this same view.
According to him, the present behavior of regents/mayors who
consider coordination with governors unimportant is not entirely
their fault. The issue has arisen because the system is not well
defined. As a result, regional autonomy proceeds individually
based on the perceptions of relevant regions.

To prevent a recurrence of the misperceptions by
regents/mayors of the authority of governors in carrying out the
function of supervision, coordination and monitoring, the
revision of the regional autonomy law should clearly define this
authority and how it is exercised. The authority involves among
other things the operational aspects of central government funds
allocated through DAU and DAK.

The standardization of evaluation criteria for the performance
of governors should also be more accountable and the governors'
achievements measurable, so that the public can participate in
evaluating the governors' performance for their five years in
office.