Fighting graft only possible by ending TNI's dual function
Fighting graft only possible by ending TNI's dual function
By Dewi Anggraeni
George Aditjondro of the University of Newcastle, known for
his continuing research on the wealth of the former first family,
teaches sociology of corruption and sociology of post-colonial
liberalism movements. Recently he talked to The Jakarta Post on
current efforts to eradicate corruption.
Question: In your view, what are the most important hurdles for
the new government in fighting corruption, collusion and
nepotism?
Answer: Constraints ... of the political kind. The system that
Soeharto constructed has been very prevalent. The military's dual
function has not been eliminated.
The military served as (former president) Soeharto's oligarchy
to reach into the economy, and hence helped him build his
business empire. Obvious examples are (Soeharto's son) Bambang
Trihatmodjo's satellite business (Satelindo) and his timber
concessions in East Kalimantan. These were founded as a joint
venture with Tri Usaha Bakti, the main business owned by the
military's Yayasan Kartika Eka Paksi and its two business
operators, Tommy Winata and Hagianto Kumala. As recently exposed
in the Indonesian media, Tommy Winata seems to be one of the main
sources of finances for the Army, including its Special Force
(Kopassus), outperforming even the Yayasan Kobame (Red Beret
Corps Foundation), which is Kopassus' charity organization, and
its Kobame Group companies. Tommy has spent even more than the
(Soeharto's daughter) Titiek Prabowo and Hasyim Djojohadikusumo
group of companies.
As long as we do not abolish the military's dual function, and
just hide behind semantic change, such as changing the name of
the Armed Forces (ABRI) to the Indonesian Military (TNI) and the
National Police (POLRI), we will not be able to create the
political climate needed to eradicate corruption. POLRI itself is
apparently deeply involved in corruption.
Corruption can never be eradicated completely, but at the rate
it is going, it will not be able to be even minimized, not
without abolishing the military's dual function.
Second, we need the political will to treat all Indonesian
citizens as equal subjects before the law. Not like what Gus Dur
(President Abdurrahman Wahid) has already done. He interfered in
the investigation by Attorney General Marzuki Darusman in his
efforts to reopen the Soeharto corruption case. Gus Dur has
already promised to give Soeharto amnesty.
This obviously undermines the whole strategy of the attorney
general. We see here a contrast of the practice in Indonesia to
that in South Korea, where two former presidents were taken to
court for allegations of corruption and violations of human
rights. Indonesia comes across as less than able to establish the
rule of law.
Q: So you don't think Gus Dur is seriously attempting to
gradually abolish the military's dual function?
A: I haven't heard a statement to that effect from Gus Dur as
president. We only know the Ciganjur declaration (in November
1998) made by four (civilian) leaders (including Abdurrahman and
Megawati Soekarnoputri), in which they agreed to abolish the dual
function in six years' time.
However, his Vice President, Megawati, in her speech before
the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) said that in principle
she supported the supremacy of civilians over the military. But
as a President and Vice President team, they still have yet to
state their position on the military's dual function. That way
people can judge how serious they are.
Q: It is difficult to envision the dual function being abolished
quickly, considering that deals were made when the President was
forming his Cabinet...
A: That being the case, we need to have a new wave of pro-
reformasi protests, from the people of Indonesia, not just
limited to students. People should be clear about what they
demand from this new government. For me it is a transitional
regime toward full-fledged democracy.
If we look at the present Cabinet for example, we can see that
it was not formed based on the principle of the right persons in
the right places, but on how to reward those who supported Gus
Dur's nomination as president. Ministers were appointed because
they were from certain political parties, or from the military.
The minister of mining and energy for example. This is a very
important portfolio, which has a strong influence on the
government's position vis-a-vis the independence movement in Aceh
and West Papua. The minister might well be an excellent general,
but he represents a dual-function mentality, which assumes that
the military members are such generalists that they can take up
all kinds of positions.
There is a joke, that if you want to become a minister or a
governor, or even a president, go to the Military Academy
(AKABRI). That is the door to all kinds of jobs.
Q: So eradication of the dual function is the first prerequisite
to eradicating corruption? Isn't that a long path, a big task?
A: You have to eradicate the main stumbling block. Even with good
laws, if we are still stuck with the inheritance of the New Order
system, where capital accumulation is the norm of the day, where
the achievements and success of families are judged on whether
they can become government officials, then we will get nowhere.
This is a disguised form of military rule. Officially Indonesia
is not a military dictatorship, unlike Burma (Myanmar), but de
facto, the system puts one group of citizens, those who carry
guns, above another group who do not carry guns. People are not
judged by their capabilities.
The minister of transportation is another example. What is his
experience in the business of transportation?
We are talking about a presidential Cabinet, not a
parliamentary Cabinet, like in Australia where politicians can
get all kinds of positions. In Australia they have the system
where any portfolio can be held by any politician, if his/her
party wins the elections, not because of the person's military
rank.
So eradication of the dual function is a must. But it is not
the only condition.
The second condition regards Gus Dur's statement that
ministers should declare their wealth; this should also apply to
the president and the vice president.
As I mentioned earlier, it is important that Gus Dur make
public the business links of his Harawi Group, how it is
connected to Hasyim's group (Tirtamas), especially with Bank
Papan Sejahtera, and to the Soeriadjaja Group.
This is important, because now that he is no longer the
chairman of (Muslim organization) Nahdlatul Ulama, I am certain
that he has developed his own financial base.
In principle, all government officials and members of the
legislative council have to make public their wealth, and have to
relinquish various positions they might have, such as managing
directors or directors.
If they have shares, those shares have to be put in trust,
meaning they cannot be accessed by executive or legislative
officials, during their tenure.
Q: Are there provisions in our Constitution that cover those
requirements?
A: No, there are no provisions that cover what I have just
stipulated, just like there are no provisions for the military's
dual function, yet we have suffered it for over 30 years, and
have not seen the end of it yet.
If it is not in our Constitution then it is the task of the
MPR to come up with amendments, or it may be the task of the
House to revise and improve the existing anticorruption law.
We can learn from advanced capitalist countries, or liberal
democracies, where the more powerful a person becomes, be it in
the executive or the legislative wing, the more he or she has to
be accountable to the public. I don't mean in their private life,
such as the Bill Clinton case, but so long as the private life
affects public interest.
Here we come to the definition of corruption. The definition
of corruption is sacrificing public interest for private gains,
by violating the law and by impoverishing the national budget. At
present, this is easy to do when one has a government position.
Back to government officials and ministers making their wealth
public, it should apply to (House of Representatives speaker and
former state secretary) Akbar Tandjung for example, with his
family company, Marison Nusantara Group, which is a co-
shareholder with the Salim Group, not only in Indomilk, but also
in several chemical distribution companies and palm oil
companies.
This kind of openness and accountability should be introduced
by Gus Dur. And if there is a need for new laws, it should be the
task of the minister of law and legislation to draft them and
submit them to the House or the Assembly. The structure and
mechanism is already in place, it just needs to be implemented.
If you ask me, Gus Dur should not rule just by exhortation, which
is the other extreme to Soeharto's ruling by presidential
instructions.
As long as we stick to the 1945 Constitution, we should look
at Article 13, where it explains that what distinguishes a
democratic state from a fascist state is the budgetary right.
Making decisions which may affect the people's funds should not
be left to the executive branch alone, but should be approved by
the House.
Eradication of corruption should not be the task only of the
attorney general, but also of the minister of law and
legislation. They may work in tandem with the existing
anticorruption bodies in Indonesia, as well as with individuals
such as myself.
We should look into the ways of the Soeharto and the Habibie
regimes, how the two families were able to accumulate a lot of
wealth for themselves and their cronies, such as the (former
ministers) Ginandjar and Hartarto families, by manipulating the
law in such a away that the practice seemed legal. We need to
subject the structure to a complete overhaul.
We should replace what I call "ad-hocracy" with real democracy.
Q: Speaking of family business interests, you mentioned in your
previous interview Bambang's business interests in Aceh. Can you
elaborate?
A: Bambang and the co-shareholders of Bimantara, such as Indra
Rukmana, Mohamad Tahir and Peter Gontha, are the main
shareholders of a Singapore-based company called Osprey Maritime
Ltd. which went public in Singapore in 1997. Since it was a
continuation of a company that Bambang had already set up in the
1980s, a company by the name of PT Samudera Petroleum, he thereby
inherited Samudra Petrindo's 20-year contract with PT Arun (a
joint-venture of Mobil Oil and Pertamina based in Aceh), to
transport liquid natural gas from Qatar to the United States.
Osprey Maritime is now transporting 25 percent of the world's
LNG trade. Even before Osprey went public, PT Samudera Petrindo
had already won a 20-year contract, which expires in 2006,
between PT Arun and the government of South Korea.
Based on that 20-year contract, they were able to buy tankers
from Gutters-Larsen of Norway, then in 1998 they signed a new
contract with Mobil Oil and the Qatar government to transport LNG
mined in Qatar to the U.S. With the same company they were able
to grab the Turkish market.
So if the emir of Qatar says that Qatar supports Indonesia's
claim on Aceh, you cannot dissociate that from the business links
of Qatar, Mobil Oil, Osprey Maritime, because the Qatar gas
fields, the Ras Laffan, are very much dependent on Mobil Oil. It
is Mobil Oil who opens and explores the fields. Without the
tankers from Osprey Maritime, the fields will lay operationless,
hence not convertible to hard cash.
Q: All that has been done without contributing to the revenue of
the Aceh regional government?
A: Based on the Constitution, all oil and mineral derived revenue
belongs to the central government.
Q: Is there any significance in Gus Dur's choice of countries to
visit in the Middle East?
A: Yes. Gus Dur chose the most American-related countries, which
are also the most western and modernized countries. He did not
choose Iraq, for instance, where he used to study. These are also
countries that are the most exposed to Soeharto capital. Qatar
has business links with Bambang, Jordan has business links with
Hasyim.
Q: So you don't think the new government has enough political
will to solve the Aceh problem?
A: What the government did for the Acehnese was give them
promises, and just when the Acehnese began to feel hopeful, it
pulled the rug out from under their feet.
In reality the new government has excellent capabilities to
appear democratic, and to expand public participation, but only
to a certain limit. That is, don't touch the military, and don't
touch the Soeharto family.
In that sense, I find this government to be a watered-down
Soeharto regime.
Two basic tenets are still held: uncontrolled accumulation of
wealth by the elite, with the protection and participation of the
military.
The writer is a free-lance journalist and novelist based in
Melbourne.