Disseminate power to the provinces

Tue, 16 Nov 1999, 00:00 WIB | Source: JP

By David Keller

JAKARTA (JP): The inherent pluralistic culture found in
Indonesia from the past to the present, can infer that the
enlightening processes of western democracy has, without fail,
determined New Order democracy obsolete.

This especially, since the dawning of the Abdurrahman Wahid
government and the complex task of reinforcing "national unity".
A concept not new as Indonesia was built on nationalistic fervor
which was needed to repel the Dutch colonialists dating
back to the early 1900s.

However, in this current political environment, the concept of
"national unity" is needed for a very different purpose, that
is to reinforce nationhood and to prevent fragmentation,
"balkanization", of the state from becoming a reality.

"National unity" enclosed in globalization, has been redefined
in a realm of internal socioeconomic and political failures of
policies imposed expansively for all provinces, rather than
specifically for each province.

Hence, the accentuation of Indonesian disunity. The resultant
problems in contrast with the global community, highlight that,
the embryonic Indonesian democratic fundamentals do not support
the western characteristics of democracy of predominately
accountability and transparency.

Therefore, the clashes of differing cultural democracies
causes internal and external conflicts and the unpredictable
nature of these conflicts is what gives Indonesia its volatility
and fragility in the global context.

This fragility is especially so, considering the reactive
nature of world money markets in response to the internal
domestic affairs of any state in the world.

Evolving from this precariousness are culturally defined lines
of division of ethnicity, religion, traditional land-ownership,
as well as socioeconomic and political status. Resulting from
these lines of division -- especially during the money and power
offices of ex-presidents Soeharto and Habibie -- was and/or is
the emergence of regional separatist thinking, resulting from
self-seeking nation-building failures of the centralized Jakarta
power bases.

These disparities were and are inevitable, because of
the politicalization of identities within the provinces resulting
from injustices of a humanitarian, economic and political nature.

In a sense, the bubble of cultural identities previously
enclosed in an unsatisfactory perception of centralized
solidarity has burst, with the objective to respond to injustice.

As reform and the road to justice is a construct measured
against the hegemony of western democratic practices, then
democracy in Indonesia and in other countries of the world are in
transition toward democracy aligned with supranational laws, that
supersede what some nationals decree as an infringement to
sovereignty.

This thought can be applied to the provinces, as policy
formation from Jakarta was/is seen as unjust and an infringement
upon cultural/human rights sovereignty within the provinces.

The rationale being, for "national unity" to work, it is
preferred to have discontent targeted at provincial power bases
because problems such as unworkable policies, are emitted from a
local source.

This does not put at risk the nation as a whole because
Jakarta would act as a mediator rather than the instigator of
policies ill-suited to the provinces.

From this perspective, provincial government policy and the
provincial state ministers are held accountable to public opinion
from within the provinces and this renders the national
government in Jakarta impartial because it is not implicated in
policy formation by state administrations.

Therefore, greater provincial autonomy gives empowerment to
the local people since they are in closer proximity to the heart
of decision making. For example, Banda Aceh with greater
autonomy, would, through sheer opportunism, be more responsive to
the needs of the Acehnese. In turn, condemnation directed toward
Jakarta regarding contentious issues would be reduced.

Therefore, applying greater autonomy means administering the
concept of federalism.

Federalist nation states of the world are numerous and include
countries such as Brazil, Argentina, Canada, the United States,
Australia, India, Germany and Russia. To be a federalist state --
in this case Indonesia -- means applying and/or revising the
principles of Constitutional law, decentralization, territorial
democracy and direct lines of communication that incorporates the
provinces.

Constitutional law determines how power is to be divided or
shared by mutual agreement and this aids in decentralization,
with the view that national legislation and administration are
constructs from provincial legislation and administration.

The provincial states must then engage in territorial
democracy by ensuring that all groups and interests are
represented and have a power base of their own.

However, just as particular Jakarta national interests have
not been accepted because of diversity, provincial interests will
also encounter difficulties because of the knowledge that what
works for one group within a province may not necessarily work
for another group.

This is relevant considering that the inter-provincial
transmigration of peoples and their culture throughout the
Indonesian archipelago creates drifting power bases.

This infers that Indonesia may require the formation of new
provinces to accommodate the diversity of groups within existing
provinces. Of course, if the existing provincial government is
effective in engaging all groups then further fragmentation of
the provinces is unnecessary.

Finally, to reinforce empowerment are lines of communication
of not only a structural nature such as access to information
technologies, but also by ensuring that those persons or
institutions which make up the power bases create channels for
consultation so that public opinion can be absorbed for
virtuous policy formation.

Entering the new millennium, optimism in present conditions
must be at the fore as Abdurrahman Wahid and the Cabinet of
"national unity" has a mandate to develop national unity by
applying federalism or federalist-like principles.

This may see the end of calls for separation and violent
physical conflict as the expectant economic and political justice
should lessen socioeconomic and political disparities, thus
limiting conflict to dialogue only.

Therefore, a shift in the mode of conflict resolution by
applying provincial civilian rule of law, as opposed to national
law, can change the course of public opinion to a direction that
is nearer to the core of "provincial unity" therefore, aiding
"national unity".

This is because the existence of a foundation for separatist
thinking is limited because there is increased inclination to
reach mutual agreement, hence a reduction in polarization of
thought.

The effectiveness to depolarize extreme views depends on a
major factor which evolves from the article by J. Soedjati
Djiwandono Time to face up to changing times (The Jakarta Post,
Nov 9), which highlighted critical points about the ill discourse
created when "national unity" overrides humanity, equality and
justice for all.

In other words, if the road to "national unity" does not
entail humanity, equality and justice for all, in all provinces,
then the question raised by those oppressed to call for
separation from the nation state -- or province -- is justified
as a simple humanistic reaction.

Therefore, to restore positive public opinion in national
government for the sake of "national unity", sustained bottom-up
policy approaches must occur to appease the proletariat.

In a sense, the first step has been initiated with the
formation of an accepted Cabinet.

The difficult question remains as to which powers should be
given to the provinces for "provincial unity" and which powers
and policies should hover above the provinces, to reinforce
"national unity" and Jakarta.

The powers and policies for "national unity" should be
unprejudiced and equitable and therefore, non-contentious, so
that homogenized provincial understanding results.

The powers and policies for "provincial unity" should be those
that can create a level of homogenization within the province,
entailing flexibility to ensure that provincial differences can
be expressed and not repressed.

Unfortunately, different levels of "development", means
different rates of democratic infusion which affects relations
because of policies imposed expansively.

Resulting from this are contrasts with political thought.
Jakarta is striving to confide in supranational laws to be
recognized globally as a Good International Citizen (GIC), whilst
also balancing the unbalancing provincial problems.

Applying this domestically, the outer-lying provinces of
Indonesia are in various stages of development, hence, contrasts
exist with uniform Jakarta policy.

Knowing where the contrasts are, one can then determine which
powers and policies Jakarta and the provinces should be in
control of. The notions of humanity, equity and justice for all
and a professional military to protect national borders are
exceptions to applying non-uniform policy.

The former, to uphold basic human rights, the latter to
protect national interests.

Principally, the upholding of human rights balances Jakarta
and any other nation state with the global community. Confidence
in Jakarta on human rights, from provinces such as Aceh, South
Maluku and Irian Jaya, would in no doubt return, and the grass
roots of society would endeavor to become -- in the same line as
a GIC -- a GPC or "Good Provincial Citizen" and calls for
referendums would end.

Therefore, the populace from each province can be empowered by
Jakarta via allocating those federalist powers to the provincial
capitals that help in development and prosperity in accordance
with their own human and natural resources.

In association, safe in the knowledge that the national system
supports human rights, then and only then, will the belief in
"national unity" take root. A platform of this kind is needed for
Indonesia's future.

The writer is an Australian graduate in Australia-Asia
relations, currently working at the Center for Social and
Cultural Studies at the Indonesian Institute of Sciences.

Window: ...greater provincial autonomy gives empowerment to the local
people since they are in closer proximity to the heart of
decision making. For example, Banda Aceh with greater autonomy,
would, through sheer opportunism, be more responsive to the needs
of the Acehnese.

View JSON | Print