Governing through governance: SBY delivering his promises.
Governing through governance: SBY delivering his promises.
HS Dillon
Jakarta
The business sector has repeatedly reminded the President that
corruption in the government is inhibiting investment, while
civil society has been pressuring him to go after the wrongdoers
wholeheartedly.
In times such as these, we find him calling for a culture of
excellence. How can one reconcile these calls? Lest one be
accused of drawing too hasty a conclusion, let us try to look at
the facts. How far have we really progressed?
On the bright side, the President has bitten the bullet and
raised fuel prices, drastically at that. Though one might quibble
over its timing and the utility of cash transfers as
compensation, that was a feat of leadership. No way could fuel
subsidies be justified: one does not stimulate consumption of a
non-renewable resource, one encourages the quest for alternative
energies instead.
Taxation is not merely a means of revenue generation, but it
also serves as an instrument to help nudge investment into the
right activities. The minor reshuffle holds promise, in that a
number of good people have been inducted into the Cabinet.
However, most of the voters are still unhappy. Why?
Because the voters bought his campaign platform for
fundamental change. They had grown weary of the purported
reformasi, which further enriched the politicians, officials, and
conglomerates, and in disgust turned away from the established
political bosses. They wanted change, and enough of it so as to
enable them to climb out of poverty. They had seen in Susilo
Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) the incarnation of the "Ratu Adil" a
deity with powers to remedy societal ills.
Historians will long ponder what forced the President to
capitulate to the disgraced political bosses. These were the very
people who tried to stop him from getting into "Merdeka Palace";
yet, shamelessly demanded ministerial slots. This was an
enactment of one of Gandhi's seven deadly sins: "politics without
morals".
The personalities they fielded made a mockery of the screening
process supposedly conducted at Cikeas. Thus, the Cabinet lineup
was the first major disappointment for the voters. They thought
that they had rid themselves of these bosses, yet SBY brought
them back in, with added legitimacy. How low can the politicians
go?
Again, to his credit, he has initiated a number of reform
measures. He issued a decree on the acceleration of the
eradication of corruption and established an investigating and
prosecuting task force directly responsible to him. He has also
endorsed a National Action Plan to Fight Corruption over his
term.
This outlines the first comprehensive strategy of a post-
Soeharto government in fighting corruption, prescribing both
preventive as well as repressive measures. All sounds well and
good, why should one complain, then? Alas, in real life it
appears that these initiatives are not being put into action; at
best they are being translated into further instructions.
In the worst case, they are just being forwarded to sub-units
without any strategy or breakdowns into concrete actions. The
task force, too, seems to be losing steam. The two largest cases,
the suspects in the TAC and Bank Mandiri, are rich and
businessmen-cum-politicians, and, as such, appear to be above the
law. The Anticorruption Commission (KPK) holds a lot of promise,
but, inexplicably, it too does not seem to be able to get the
"prime offenders".
The same forces that dissolved the Joint Anticorruption Team,
appear to be thwarting the KPK. Just like in the Human Rights
cases, only civilians are being convicted. This helps convince us
that justice really moves at two speeds: the rich and powerful
get away scot-free.
Impunity, impunity, thou hath caused the ruination of this
country! The President seems to be surrounded on all sides by
those who aided, abetted, and in turn benefited from,
Gen.Soeharto. Indonesia has once again degenerated into a
beambtenstaat, a country being governed for the sake of the
governors. Under such dire circumstances, how can he deliver on
his promises? He should govern through governance.
What actually is good governance? One definition drawn up by
Seppo Tiihonen, a Finnish scholar, is particularly apt: it is a
process, where rules and well-functioning institutions are
applied to manage a nation's affairs in a manner that safeguards
democracy, human rights, good order and human security, and
economy and efficiency follow in the management of a country's
resources.
When governing refers to the constituted policies of state
actors backed by the formal authority to use monopolized coercive
powers, governance is more suggestive of activities backed by
shared goals that may or may not derive from legal and formal
authority.
Can we expect the President to succeed? Yes, of course, but
one has to recognize that good governance does not just suddenly
happen. It needs time and tireless effort, and requires that
civil society and the good corporate citizens also pitch in. He
would have to embark upon this long and winding road by pushing
for a radical, paradigmatic change in the whole concept of
governing: he would need to move his Cabinet from understanding
governing as "sharing of power" to "assisting the President in
delivering the promises made to voters".
Such a shift in paradigm would invariably bring about a "sense
of belonging", enabling the ministers to function as a team --
unlike our dismal performance in Manila. The ministers would
realize that they are not only accountable for their respective
ministries, but also share accountability as a team for the
overall performance of the Cabinet.
In this context, conflict of interest issues would be publicly
addressed and inserted into all standard operating procedures,
such as relevant government-sponsored tender procedures, thereby
enhancing transparency and accountability in the Cabinet's
delivery.
Another strategic issue that SBY will have to resolve is the
sequencing of actions in the implementation of good governance
practices.
Primarily, it should begin by convincing the administration
and population alike, that something can actually be done to
reform the administration. This would best be achieved by setting
examples -- understanding that this does not require a big
bureaucratic effort, but proper political leverage.
Second, it should expand from those examples by implementing
systematic reform for which a number of blueprints have already
been prepared.
Finally, it should use the newly established mechanisms to
prosecute high-profile corruption cases, based on clear,
transparent criteria.
Leadership by example, where all the President's men (and
women) would emulate him in acting and behaving in an exemplary
manner. Not a single person enmeshed in even a "breath of
scandal" would be seen around him. They would be, in
Shakespeare's words "like Caesar's wife", beyond reproach.
Looking at them, the people would be assured that they were in
good hands.
Only by cleaning up the executive's act, by governing through
governance, will the President be able to secure greater
investment, and garner support from civil society. Then, and only
then, will it be written in the annals of our history that SBY
delivered.
The writer is executive director of the Partnership for
Governance Reform in Indonesia.
HS Dillon
Jakarta
The business sector has repeatedly reminded the President that
corruption in the government is inhibiting investment, while
civil society has been pressuring him to go after the wrongdoers
wholeheartedly.
In times such as these, we find him calling for a culture of
excellence. How can one reconcile these calls? Lest one be
accused of drawing too hasty a conclusion, let us try to look at
the facts. How far have we really progressed?
On the bright side, the President has bitten the bullet and
raised fuel prices, drastically at that. Though one might quibble
over its timing and the utility of cash transfers as
compensation, that was a feat of leadership. No way could fuel
subsidies be justified: one does not stimulate consumption of a
non-renewable resource, one encourages the quest for alternative
energies instead.
Taxation is not merely a means of revenue generation, but it
also serves as an instrument to help nudge investment into the
right activities. The minor reshuffle holds promise, in that a
number of good people have been inducted into the Cabinet.
However, most of the voters are still unhappy. Why?
Because the voters bought his campaign platform for
fundamental change. They had grown weary of the purported
reformasi, which further enriched the politicians, officials, and
conglomerates, and in disgust turned away from the established
political bosses. They wanted change, and enough of it so as to
enable them to climb out of poverty. They had seen in Susilo
Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) the incarnation of the "Ratu Adil" a
deity with powers to remedy societal ills.
Historians will long ponder what forced the President to
capitulate to the disgraced political bosses. These were the very
people who tried to stop him from getting into "Merdeka Palace";
yet, shamelessly demanded ministerial slots. This was an
enactment of one of Gandhi's seven deadly sins: "politics without
morals".
The personalities they fielded made a mockery of the screening
process supposedly conducted at Cikeas. Thus, the Cabinet lineup
was the first major disappointment for the voters. They thought
that they had rid themselves of these bosses, yet SBY brought
them back in, with added legitimacy. How low can the politicians
go?
Again, to his credit, he has initiated a number of reform
measures. He issued a decree on the acceleration of the
eradication of corruption and established an investigating and
prosecuting task force directly responsible to him. He has also
endorsed a National Action Plan to Fight Corruption over his
term.
This outlines the first comprehensive strategy of a post-
Soeharto government in fighting corruption, prescribing both
preventive as well as repressive measures. All sounds well and
good, why should one complain, then? Alas, in real life it
appears that these initiatives are not being put into action; at
best they are being translated into further instructions.
In the worst case, they are just being forwarded to sub-units
without any strategy or breakdowns into concrete actions. The
task force, too, seems to be losing steam. The two largest cases,
the suspects in the TAC and Bank Mandiri, are rich and
businessmen-cum-politicians, and, as such, appear to be above the
law. The Anticorruption Commission (KPK) holds a lot of promise,
but, inexplicably, it too does not seem to be able to get the
"prime offenders".
The same forces that dissolved the Joint Anticorruption Team,
appear to be thwarting the KPK. Just like in the Human Rights
cases, only civilians are being convicted. This helps convince us
that justice really moves at two speeds: the rich and powerful
get away scot-free.
Impunity, impunity, thou hath caused the ruination of this
country! The President seems to be surrounded on all sides by
those who aided, abetted, and in turn benefited from,
Gen.Soeharto. Indonesia has once again degenerated into a
beambtenstaat, a country being governed for the sake of the
governors. Under such dire circumstances, how can he deliver on
his promises? He should govern through governance.
What actually is good governance? One definition drawn up by
Seppo Tiihonen, a Finnish scholar, is particularly apt: it is a
process, where rules and well-functioning institutions are
applied to manage a nation's affairs in a manner that safeguards
democracy, human rights, good order and human security, and
economy and efficiency follow in the management of a country's
resources.
When governing refers to the constituted policies of state
actors backed by the formal authority to use monopolized coercive
powers, governance is more suggestive of activities backed by
shared goals that may or may not derive from legal and formal
authority.
Can we expect the President to succeed? Yes, of course, but
one has to recognize that good governance does not just suddenly
happen. It needs time and tireless effort, and requires that
civil society and the good corporate citizens also pitch in. He
would have to embark upon this long and winding road by pushing
for a radical, paradigmatic change in the whole concept of
governing: he would need to move his Cabinet from understanding
governing as "sharing of power" to "assisting the President in
delivering the promises made to voters".
Such a shift in paradigm would invariably bring about a "sense
of belonging", enabling the ministers to function as a team --
unlike our dismal performance in Manila. The ministers would
realize that they are not only accountable for their respective
ministries, but also share accountability as a team for the
overall performance of the Cabinet.
In this context, conflict of interest issues would be publicly
addressed and inserted into all standard operating procedures,
such as relevant government-sponsored tender procedures, thereby
enhancing transparency and accountability in the Cabinet's
delivery.
Another strategic issue that SBY will have to resolve is the
sequencing of actions in the implementation of good governance
practices.
Primarily, it should begin by convincing the administration
and population alike, that something can actually be done to
reform the administration. This would best be achieved by setting
examples -- understanding that this does not require a big
bureaucratic effort, but proper political leverage.
Second, it should expand from those examples by implementing
systematic reform for which a number of blueprints have already
been prepared.
Finally, it should use the newly established mechanisms to
prosecute high-profile corruption cases, based on clear,
transparent criteria.
Leadership by example, where all the President's men (and
women) would emulate him in acting and behaving in an exemplary
manner. Not a single person enmeshed in even a "breath of
scandal" would be seen around him. They would be, in
Shakespeare's words "like Caesar's wife", beyond reproach.
Looking at them, the people would be assured that they were in
good hands.
Only by cleaning up the executive's act, by governing through
governance, will the President be able to secure greater
investment, and garner support from civil society. Then, and only
then, will it be written in the annals of our history that SBY
delivered.
The writer is executive director of the Partnership for
Governance Reform in Indonesia.