Foreign consultants could help fight corruption

Foreign consultants could help fight corruption

Ziad Salim, Contributor, Mataram, NTB

Indonesia, under the reign of Soeharto, was often described as
"kleptocracy", meaning, a system of government where stealing
(of public money) was common. The "alleged" thieves ranged from
agents of the government to various business groups known
collectively as "conglomerates" or cronies of those in the
government. Even former president B.J. Habibie recently noted
(and he should know) that stealing was rampant but only in or
through one channel, i.e., the government (executive branch).

Now, according to Habibie, the stealing is being done through
multiple channels. The average man on the street even knows that
all too well.

Now, they say, stealing is also done by another branch, with
new-found political muscle resulting from the collapse of the
executive power under Soeharto, combined with the side effects of
political reform, as well as at the regional level since greater
autonomy has been given to leaders outside of Jakarta.

Of course, in addition to these two newly kleptocratic groups,
people in the third branch of government have been known to be
busy receiving bribes, kickbacks and other forms of under-the-
table payments -- thereby often letting the guilty go free or
reducing the sentences of those found guilty.

These phenomena make Indonesia eligible for a membership in a
new type of government called "corruptocracy". In other words, it
has finally "graduated" to a "higher" level of "-cracy": From
"kleptocracy" to "corruptocracy", a system where the engine of
government is oiled almost entirely by corruption at nearly every
levels through illegal fees, bribes, kickbacks and stealing of
public funds of every kind. In some ways we associate a
kleptocracy with a system where stealing is done by a few, but
when it is done by so many at every level, it seems appropriate
to refer to it as a corruptocracy.

Furthermore, in this corruptocracy, those who seek public
office do so not necessarily to serve the public, but purely as a
means to line their own pockets. They are unashamed of the
practice (even though most are religious people who believe in
God and His principles against stealing) because many also
mistakenly believe that they are entitled by some divine right to
such positions.

Every transaction facilitated by these people costs money that
seldom ends up in the government coffers; you can literally buy
yourself in or out of anything (X amount of rupiah for this
position and y amount to get out of that jam); the judicial
system is formally open, but operates in parallel with a
bargaining system where a jail sentence can be averted, a long
one shortened and, as one example makes clear a hundred dollars
was enough to set a mega corruptor free from his prison cell, and
he has not been found since.

Even though there was the recent creation of the KPK
(Corruption Eradication Commission), no one seriously believes
that corruption will be eliminated in Indonesia any time soon.

So what to do?

If the enemy is "us", then to seriously tackle the problem of
corruption, bring "them" in to help! But, who is "them?" People
who are not corrupt and do not come from a place where corruption
is a key facet of the culture. (Remember when Soeharto wanted to
crack down on rampant corruption in the Customs and Excise
offices, he brought in the Swiss surveyor company, Societe
Generale de Surveillance or SGS, and it worked, at least for a
while). This is what Indonesia should do with corruption: Hire
foreign consultants, protect them under the law, put them in the
corruption watch agency and give them teeth.

It is ironic that just an hour from Jakarta (the capital of
the world's biggest corruptocracy) lies Singapore, which ranks in
the top five as the least corrupt system in the world (and it
wasn't so a mere 40 years ago). One of its most celebrated
(notorious?) approaches to eliminating public nuisances (from gum
chewing to graffiti and other petty crimes) consist of fines and
public humiliation.

To fight corruption, Singapore also equalizes the public and
private pay scale and the full force of the law is brought to
bear on all corruptors. Unfortunately, none of the above would
work in Indonesia: In this country, the biggest corruptors have
always been the richest and high government officials, in other
words, those that no most would think no longer need more money.

One ingredient that has been missing in the fight against
corruption in Indonesia is leadership or a leader, one
incorruptible leader, a la Lee Kwan Yew, if you wish, who focused
on that blight, fought it and changed the culture of his people
in the process (proving that a nasty little bit of culture can be
changed if a strong leader is determined enough). Indonesia needs
a leader who is committed to the struggle and has a vision for a
corruption-free country, say in 20 years (or a la Mahathir's "20-
20 vision" for a developed Malaysia in the year 2020) who can and
is willing to hammer this message out each and every day, while
at the same time setting a clear example of a modest lifestyle (a
la Gandhi?).

In other words, a leader who is as tough as Lee, as visionary
as Mahathir and lives a simple life (alas, no one can live a la
Gandhi). Since this is too much to ask in Indonesia, even from
the current crop of presidential hopefuls, the fight for a
corruption free Indonesia is indeed still a long, long way off.

In the mean time, there is one little social theory that has
not been tried which is worth a try as a last resort and was once
done in New York, of all places, a city not known as a squeaky
clean city, by a known corruption fighter, Mayor Rudolph
Giuliani. Conveniently, he just published his memoir,
incidentally, titled Leadership, highlighting the above-mentioned
first missing ingredient in the fight against corruption in
Indonesia.

Tucked somewhere inside its many pages is a precious little
"theory" used by Giuliani to combat violence in the city called
the "broken window theory". The assumption of this theory is that
big crimes come from small and petty crimes and the logic is two-
fold: A potential criminal riding into town, seeing all the
broken and unfixed windows due to vandalism will assume no one is
watching and no one cares, hence he (as most crimes are committed
by a "he") thinks it is easy picking for a crime; seeing such
small acts of crimes go unnoticed by law enforcement officers, he
decides that bigger crimes will go unnoticed too.

To reverse the cycle, according to the theory, the law
enforcement officers must catch the offenders of even the
smallest infringement (such as one who spits in the street or who
writes graffiti on walls of public buildings, etc). The good
mayor claimed that crimes of all kinds dropped dramatically in
New York after the adoption of that "broken window theory".

Unfortunately, the theory still begs the question too: Where
can we find the good and honest Indonesian cop to enforce the
law? You will not find one, so we must bring them in from another
country. Indonesia could even hire former Mayor Giuliani and/or
someone like him as a top consultant to advise the government on
how to apply the theory to the problem of corruption in
Indonesia. After all, Indonesia has recently hired a man who
failed to sell himself to the American electorate (former
presidential candidate Bob Dole) to lobby for (or "sell")
Indonesia to the American people and policymakers.

So why not try to hire someone with a proven record of
success. If Indonesia fails to wipe out or even slow down
corruption in the next five years, deep cynicism will set in
among everyone, any remaining sense of a community will be gone
as everyone will be merely looking out for himself. In turn, the
international (business and other) communities will lose any last
bit of confidence and trust they have in Indonesia.

The writer served with several international development
organizations but is now retired. He holds a Ph. D. in social
science from North America.