Doubts mar regional autonomy project

Doubts mar regional autonomy project

The government will implement the long awaited pilot project
for regional autonomy soon. Noted sociologist Kastorius Sinaga
discusses the reservations and hesitation displayed by certain
officials in implementing it.

JAKARTA (JP): Like the Philippines, India and Thailand, which
have successfully promoted a more decentralized governmental
system, Indonesia is to launch an experiment on the strengthening
of regional autonomy next week.

This experiment will be carried out in 26 regencies throughout
the country. But the state remains a powerful symbol and the
bureaucracy is still perceived as a "political arena" because
this is what actions and policies have dictated thus far.

Three fundamental reasons contribute to the doubts about the
success of the project. The first is the perception of autonomy
itself. The word autonomy means possessing the right to self-
government. So, the emphasis on self-government is clear.
However, certain Jakarta officials seem to perceive autonomy only
as a process of turning over the handling of some affairs by the
central government to regional authority.

The central government has tended only to hand over
administrative matters, while keeping a grip on each region's
potential source of income. The defect here lies in the
"unevenness" of authority being transferred, between the handing
over administration to the regions, and the providing of
sufficient funds, quality personnel and adequate infrastructure
for them to handle their new responsibilities. In a sense,
Jakarta remains the one who enjoys the lunch, while the regions
still serve as its cooks and dishwashers.

The second doubt is related to the guiding principle of this
experiment. Law No. 5, 1974, which serves as a legal basis for
autonomy, though it tangibly exists has failed to provide clear
guidance to regional authorities. One can liken the vagueness of
this principle to the one used to define Indonesia's press:
"free" and "responsible". In reality, this guidance tends to
confuse rather than clarify the goal since they do not explain
where the limits of freedom really are. Regional governments may
only guess as to where their responsibilities are really supposed
to lie.

Based on common sense, and according to the emphasis on the
people's sovereignty in our system of government, a regional head
must obviously be responsible to the inhabitants of his local
administrative area. This means that the Provincial Legislative
Council, as the local institution representing the people, must
be the place where the actions of the region's executives are
assessed and put into practice.

However, common sense is not always a guarantee of what will
happen. The problem remains that there is still a lack of clear
boundaries in Law No. 5 in terms of authority and political
function, between the regional head as the local executive and
the regional council as the local legislature. Consequently, the
tendency has been to see the regional government as the
integration of these two elements, underlined by the phrase, in
the "spirit and climate of harmony and partnership". This means
that the two institutions will either exist or collapse together.

This kind of system was designed to avoid the development of
dual leadership, but what has happened is that leadership
functions have become concentrated only in the executive branch.
Bureaucratic terminology has mirrored this tendency as well, such
as in the standard job title, "Bupati Kepala Daerah Tingkat II"
or Regent Regional Head Level, which is akin to a three-in-one
description in that it assigns several functions to one person.
The regent, for example, is both the representative of the
central government and the regional head. The regent is the
ultimate authority in the region and the coordinator of its
development programs. The regent, therefore, is not bound by the
regional legislature and the legislature does not have the
authority to ask the regent to submit to its review.

If the strengthening of regional autonomy is primarily a
technical exercise involving the re-assignment of some
administrative matters, and does not involve any political
changes in the strengthening of local authority, such as through
improving the position and authority of the regional legislature,
then this experiment is really only a cosmetic one, much like
giving an old car a new coat of paint. The structure and power
relationships within each region and between the regions and the
center remained unchanged. This pilot project may have added an
extra level to the structure of our regional administrations, but
is has not provided any assistance in strengthening its
foundations.

The third doubt refers to some fundamental problems in our
bureaucratic culture. For example, overly paternalistic attitudes
continue to be quite common in the ways of thinking and acting of
our civil servants. Bureaucrats usually only feel confident to
act if there has already been a hint to do so from above, and
they rarely rely on their own sense of initiative. It is common
knowledge that many officials are accustomed to and quite skilled
at manipulating data and facts to emphasize successes in their
reports in order to keep their superior happy.

In daily life, our bureaucracy seems omnipotent and it remains
unfamiliar to the idea of public accountability which is the
common foundation for bureaucracies in developed countries. The
duties and functions of a bureaucracy are not seen from the
vantage point of being a public trust which must be protected,
but as an individual privilege which should be taken advantages
of and enjoyed for as long as possible. Therefore, if we want to
create autonomy as it was defined originally, meaning "possessing
the rights of self-government", then all of these doubts must be
eliminated. Otherwise, the autonomy which is to be developed will
not be genuine or responsive, but capricious and untrustworthy.

The writer is lecturer in the Social Sciences Postgraduate
Program at the University of Indonesia, Jakarta, and consultant
for the Word Bank. The views expressed here are entirely his own.