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.