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.