Can corruption be wiped out here?

Can corruption be wiped out here?

By Donna K. Woodward

JAKARTA (JP): More and more Indonesians are speaking out
against the corruption -- payoffs, bribery, kickbacks, collusion
-- that is strangling this economy. And yet the payoffs and
kickbacks continue. Why does corruption continue?

On April 30, Rob Goodfellow wrote about the danger of
stereotyping (by Westerners) Indonesian business practices as
corrupt. The very next day, though, Indonesia's Center for the
Study of Development and Democracy released the result of its
survey indicating that "a majority of Indonesians living in big
cities think that corruption is getting worse".

Many expatriates and Indonesians who willingly pay illegal
fees to government officials explain this in terms of the low
salaries of Indonesia's civil servants and police. In fact, some
of those demanding payoffs are often receiving huge amounts, not
to sustain basic needs, but to support a lavish lifestyle that
many of other people would envy.

But those who offer this rationale for their collusion in
corruption have a valid point -- corruption will not be
controlled until the government finds a way to do something about
the salaries of its civil servants.

A police officer who must borrow millions of rupiah to "buy" a
job which has an official salary of Rp 250,000 (US$31) per month,
or a civil servant who is trying to support a family on an
official salary of Rp 400,000 per month, both must find
extracurricular sources of income.

Institutionalized corruption may have this positive effect, in
that wealth is redistributed from those who have more to those
who have less. But is corruption an acceptable alternative to the
country's inadequate wage system? People tolerate corruption,
thinking that it is only about periodic payoffs made to those
whose salaries need augmenting by those who can afford to pay.

But corruption is about more than dirty money. Corruption,
secondarily about greed, is primarily about abuse of official
power (as those who were polled in the survey recognized).

Tolerance of the system wherein a citizen cannot obtain a
passport or a driver's license without paying illegal fees
exacted by those in power eventually leads to tolerance of more
sophisticated, then more chilling, abuses of power. Though not on
a par with physical torture, abuse of authority is a seamless
cloth -- whether to use a position to extort a little money
today, or to detain someone improperly tomorrow, or to use
excessive force against a criminal suspect the following day.
Corruption is, at its roots, about abuse of power.

Corruption is a social disease of the spirit. It takes away
the self-respect and dignity of those who wait like beggars for a
payment. It breeds resentment in those who look for payoffs,
toward those (generally expatriates and Chinese) who have the
money to pay. It generates contempt in those who pay toward those
soliciting payments (usually indigenous government officials),
who seem to have little remaining initiative to get ahead
legitimately.

It thus exacerbates inter-ethnic conflicts. It undermines
confidence in the legal system and in the government. Corruption
makes the nation of Indonesia look to all the world, from
Singapore to New York, like a large bazaar where every official
transaction can be bargained, where every hand is out for a
payoff.

What makes corruption especially odious is not so much the
money involved (though the amounts demanded can be considerable).
It is, in the final instance, that corruption erodes the self-
respect of Indonesia's honest citizens and civil servants.

Can Indonesia really afford to tolerate corruption as an
alternative wealth-redistribution system when the side effects
are so devastating to its ethnic harmony and national morale?
Does anyone dare say "Yes"?

Indonesia's leaders themselves say "No". There is hardly a day
that another high-level government leader does not proclaim that
there must be greater transparency and honesty in Indonesia's
bureaucracy, that illegal fees must be eliminated, that the
government must be clean.

But is this rhetoric or resolve? Does the government really
intend to eliminate corruption? Or is there a fear at the higher
levels of government that to take serious steps against offending
officials could lead to loss of support from officials who
benefit from illegal fees; to mutiny in the military; and to
civil unrest among the lower ranks of civil servants and police?
What would happen if the official who earns only a few hundred
thousand rupiah per month in official wages could not supplement
this by seeking biaya administrasi ("administration cost") or
grease money?

What would happen if those, who over the years had made
contributions (directly or indirectly) to their superiors as a
means of securing promotions, suddenly could not use the position
they have reached to benefit themselves and their families as
expected?

What would happen if even a single minister or one governor
got serious about ending corruption in his or her jurisdiction?
Would the official who seriously undertook effective measures to
stop corruption soon be sabotaged by subordinates or divested of
authority by superiors or worse? How can any official survive,
who interferes with people's opportunities for supplementing
their incomes?

Many government officials may want to end corruption but do
not know how or where to start. Perhaps there is some guilt they
themselves benefited from the system of patronage on their way up
the career ladder and now they hesitate to close the doors of
opportunity which others wait to enter.

Perhaps they are reluctant to interfere with opportunities for
income enhancement by hardworking subordinates, who would be
denied the opportunity for a better life if corruption were
ended.

Perhaps they worry about revolt from the masses of government
workers who could not afford to maintain even a modest lifestyle,
without extra income from illegal sources.

Many government officials may want to perform bureaucratic
surgery on this "cancer" of corruption that is devastating the
nation's spirit, the nation's reputation and the nation's
economy. But given the possible ramifications, can Indonesia
afford to stop corruption? Would we feel compelled to answer "No,
not yet"?

A campaign against corruption is not difficult to begin. In
every local government office that provides official services or
issues documents, permits or licenses, a notice stating the
official fee for each service or document should be displayed.
The notice could list not only the fee, but the required
procedures for obtaining the desired item, any documents required
and other relevant information. No notice, no fee, no exception.
This practice should apply to every official transaction, from
the issuances of identity cards (KTPs) in the smallest village to
approvals for building the country's longest bridge. This would
not be a complex or costly reform to institute and it could start
immediately. The President could easily decree that each governor
arrange for fees-and-procedures notices to be posted by the end
of this month. This would be a small sign to restive students of
the government's commitment to transparency and reform. In fact,
as an academic project and a channel for their political
energies, students in relevant departments could be assigned to
collect and verify information and report on fees and procedures
for official transactions in their districts.

Providing clear information to the public would be a first
step toward eliminating illegal levies and curbing corruption.
More would be needed -- local tribunals of trustworthy
arbitrators to handle allegations of violations and redress
wrongs, a system of numbered official receipts to replace the
charmingly personal receipt books that are now popular with some
officials. But give people a concrete instance of reform-forced
transparency on a local level and the people will soon find ways
to carry reform forward.

Every nation, including the Vatican, has had to deal with the
problem of corruption. Other countries have declared war on the
problem and found ways to reduce corruption substantially, though
not eliminate it perfectly. Do Indonesia's current leaders have
the energy and political courage to bring the country's public
ethics and civil service into the 21st century? Who will sound
the call to action?

The writer, a former American diplomat, is director of PT Far
Horizons.