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.