Democratic public service: Key to Indonesian recovery

Edi Suhardi Program Advisor Partnership for Governance Reform in Indonesia Jakarta

The public service in Indonesia has been called many things, including lethargic, unproductive and mired in red tape. An undemocratic and inward-looking public service ends up concentrating power in the public service system as an inevitable consequence, which then leads to endemic corruption. This is precisely the bleak situation that was the precursor to the devastating economic crisis that hit the country in the late 90s.

For more than 30 years, the civil servants were not serving the people but serving the needs of the ruling group. This scheme was institutionalized for 32 years in the form of the Indonesian Civil Servants Corps (KORPRI), with compulsory membership for all public servants. KORPRI, a central government-controlled organization, was effective in maintaining the allegiance of government officials to the ruling party, and ensuring the loyalty of local governments to the central government.

Public service reform is inevitable in the new democratic era under a decentralized system of governance. However, it has faced formidable challenges in revamping both internal systems and adjusting to changed circumstances.

President Megawati before KORPRI members on Dec. 18, 2003 in Lembang remarked that civil servants must be neutral in the 2004 elections. Further, the State Minister for Administrative Reforms also reiterated that the public service will be required to maintain its neutrality in the elections.

The ministry is undertaking reforms to achieve three targets: improved professionalism with a view to greater efficiency and better performance, the enshrined neutrality of the civil service and better welfare for civil servants. However, the achievement of these targets has been facing a number of hurdles, including synchronization in the context of decentralization and regional autonomy, and bickering within central government agencies. The challenges to reform within the public service have mainly originated from the absence of concerted efforts on the part of all the relevant central government agencies to adhere to the reform agenda.

Most reform efforts are politically motivated and exogenously programmed by partisan interests rather than managerially induced and endogenously evolved from within the bureaucracy.

There are at least two contributing factors to the minimal success of reform to date, i.e., no clear direction and lack of proper instruments (laws) to make reform a reality, and the absence of democratic mechanisms. Efforts have been merely focused on internal systems and structural and functional features, and have overlooked the need for democratization. The term "democratization of the public service" is not often heard even though it actually represents the essence of reform.

There is the reason why KORPRI remains intact during the current reform era. KORPRI has been preserved as a political tool by the central government to control local governments. An overhaul of KORPRI is seen as a pragmatic initiative to democratize and stimulate holistic public service reform.

It is long past time for the total reform of the public service in Indonesia. This effort must center on remedying the many ills that have arisen as a result of the autocratic and centralistic regime that ruled for over three decades. What is needed includes the democratization of the public service and the promulgation of a new public service law.

A setting of a new direction in the democratization of the public service will no doubt encounter challenges from both the political and bureaucratic establishments in the process of adapting to changed circumstances.

Democratization is aimed at creating new modi operandi, i.e., facilitating public scrutiny, partnerships with other stakeholders, service-oriented mechanisms and accountable systems. Public servants should be given the freedom to organize themselves on the basis of their needs at local, provincial and national levels.

In the context of decentralization and democratization, the existence of KORPRI as a political tool is obviously no longer relevant. KORPRI needs to undergo total reform to renew its mandate in the new system of governance and redefine its organizational status. Otherwise, KORPRI should be dissolved if its members do not feel the need for its continued existence.

KORPRI at the national level should be redesigned as a federation of locally-based public service organizations. A new decentralized public service association, if deemed necessary, should be established by the officials themselves, and evolved through participatory bottom-up mechanisms to the national level.

A democratic public service, fully people-governed, will prevent institutional influence and pressures from political parties and interest groups at the local and national levels. It will both accommodate the diversity of regional interests, and enhance national stability and unity.

Nonetheless, there are also risks facing the public service and its locally-established associations that should not be underestimated: they could be taken over and exploited by local elites. Further, a new consensus over standard norms and values to ensure the maintenance of nationwide bonds should be campaigned for.

Decentralization does not mean only restructuring the public administration: it also refers to its functions. The capacity of the civil service to manage decentralization and its ability to make good, strategic public policies is the key to the implementation of the reforms. In essence, the public administration is the most important aspect of the decentralization framework (Christine Fletcher, 2003).

A decentralized public service can raise the quality of and access to services that benefit the poor. It allows closer involvement of the representatives of the poor in public policy- making, thereby enhancing its pro-poor nature, its accountability and the sustainability of its outcomes. But decentralization also involves some risks that should not be underestimated: a local government could be subjected to the control of the local elite, regional disparities could deepen, and the central government could disclaim responsibility for the poor. The public sector symbolizes a mixture of central and regional interests.

Local government reforms are now gradually shaping new attitudes in public service management and adapting it more to local interests -- thus affecting the nature of public service in specific regions. This development should be taken into account in reforming the public service in Indonesia. Public service reform should include government downsizing, deregulation, deconcentration, an anticorruption drive and democratization.

Democratization and reform of the public sector should be institutionalized in the policy and regulatory frameworks. All public service-related laws should be reviewed and further amended, reflecting newly reformed and democratic public administration, with a view to producing a consolidated public service law.