Corruption a societal malaise

By Santo Koesoebjono

ROTTERDAM (JP): Political reform in a country does not mean that all political figures should be discarded and replaced, even if drastic change is required to regain both domestic and international trust.

If all political figures were to be simultaneously removed, a country's administrative structure would collapse. Besides, it would be quite difficult to untangle the vast political networks that have been established, making it a large task to eradicate the influence of many political figures.

The large majority of the country's political, economic, cultural and scientific elite are men and women from the Soeharto regime. It may be that only children less than five years old in this group are free from corruption.

Government policies and actions can continue to impact society many years after their implementation -- long after a new government has taken over the reigns of power. Finding the individuals responsible for these actions is thus like searching for a needle in a haystack.

Recent history has shown that countries struggling for dramatic governmental reform rarely saw significant change in its bureaucratic personnel, even when highly desired.

The fall of communist regimes in Central and Eastern Europe, as well as in Central Asia, for example, had little impact on individuals holding top positions under the former governments. To date, most of the governments in those areas are still manned by officials of the former regimes.

It is even more saddening that these same high officials are now holding top positions in privatized state companies and functioning in the capitalistic free market economy.

In Latin America, top officials of the military regimes of the 1970s and 1980s who killed and tortured thousands of dissidents during their hold on power are now walking freely in society and holding official positions. They have swung, like weather vanes, with the winds of change. Such is the case in Indonesia.

Why is it so unrealistic to carry out total political reform? Most of Indonesia's government officials today were part of the networks of cronies and sycophants built up during the heyday of Soeharto's regime.

These networks are quite widespread. They are not only limited to the central government and politico-economic elite of Jakarta, but are spread throughout the archipelago and in diplomatic circles overseas. These networks also extend to the private sector, where many retired officials look to graze once they are dropped from their governmental post.

Similar retirement setups can be seen in Japan. Japanese companies call such ex-officials "gifts from heaven" since they have preestablished networks inside the bureaucracy.

It is far from simple to dismiss all government officials from the old regime in order to create a better government -- not to mention the problem of finding a sufficient number of "clean" and capable people to replace them.

The new government is forced to make do with the services of officials who were in place under the former president.

In its early years, the New Order government also used the services of officials working for president Sukarno. One of these officials even reached the rank of vice president.

The government, and all other organizations for that matter, have to live with the fact that people who were part of the corrupt, collusive and nepotistic system during the former regime will continue to play a role in the current and possibly future administrations. All efforts to discard these officials would be in vain and wasteful.

If the new government wished to gain a degree of public credibility and trust through reform and good governance, it needs to get rid of the worst cronies and sycophants in its ranks as quickly as possible.

Those less stained by the old corrupt system need to be retained, though not in key and sensitive positions. They would be required to change their attitude and adapt to the new system. Of course, this may be wishful thinking since most have worked under a corrupt system for years.

Another problem in trying to remove corrupt officials is the fact that the country's younger generations have already been indoctrinated to the necessities of corrupt practices to make life easier. They, too, have created their own networks among their peers.

It is difficult to know just how much the corrupt practices of our older generations have affected their children.

All the same, corruption is accepted as a societal norm -- a new culture that evolved during the New Order administration.

The free market system and huge capital inflows strongly contributed to the development of corrupt practices. People began to worship money at the cost of other societal values and norms.

Naturally, corruption is a disease that does not necessarily infect everyone. There are many people who are immune to such practices. Unfortunately, such people are a minority in society, particularly in the inner circles of Jakarta and other large cities.

The tragedy here is that corruption, collusion and nepotism will take a long time to eradicate since such practices have become so rampant. Even after these generations who find such a system normal die of old age, they will have transferred their ideas, norms and working methods to their descendants.

Corrupt practices could even be looked upon by future generations as the successful methods that brought them family wealth and influence. Hopefully, our younger generations will not be as greedy, rude and self-centered as their forebears. Recent events have hopefully opened their eyes to the bad effects of corruption and will make them more alert and critical toward the new government.

Widespread corruption prohibits the weeding out of all officials who have fallen to such practices. As their privileges shrink and as some are removed, these officials will continue to cling to each other through their networks.

Moreover, a clean sweep all the way down to the level of the lurah (village head) would destroy the country's administrative backbone. Reform and replacements must be brought in gradually, using a top-down or bottom-up approach.

Changing top officials would have a larger impact since they enjoy a wider range of political power throughout the country. Better behavior from their replacements could also be used as a model for lower ranking officials and the public.

The problem is that there may not be a sufficient number of capable people willing to take the challenge to replace them.

Moreover, firing top officials does not automatically break their power base since they have many anak buah (subordinates) throughout the country.

Reform could also start from the bottom, like in Kediri, East Java, where all lurah in the entire regency were forced to resign due to their alleged abuse of power.

Replacement from the bottom might be easier since qualified candidates would be more available to replace the dismissed officials. Nonetheless, the impact of such a method would be limited.

It would be better to implement both approaches, keeping in mind that the bureaucracy still works in a top-down method, from the central government to the district level.

A complete dismissal of all key government officials is simply not possible. When recently confronted with corrupt practices within the attorney general's office in the Netherlands, the Dutch justice minister said she could not afford to fire all of the office's personnel. Right she was. Otherwise, the system would have collapsed and crime would gain an upper hand.

The best way would be to utilize experienced officials from the former regime when needed, while trying to contain corrupt practices and keep them from sensitive political and financial affairs.

Building a clean political system after more than three decades of corruption is bound to take time. Whatever the method of change, the new government must show the people that it is serious in its commitment to clean up the system. Such a signal must be made soon, otherwise corrupt practices are bound to continue again as soon as society looks the other way.

The writer is an economist and demographer of the EUR-Asian Institute in Rotterdam, the Netherlands.