IAW Proposes Single National Governance System to Overcome Border Fragmentation

Jakarta – Indonesian Audit Watch (IAW) has proposed the development of a National Border Economic Governance System (NBEGS) as a unified national governance framework to integrate all goods clearance processes at Indonesia’s economic gateways. The system is not intended to be a new institution that takes over the authority of ministries and agencies, but rather a connector for data, decision-making, risk, services, supervision, and accountability among the institutions involved in border management.

“NBEGS is not meant to become a new institution. It is a national governance design that connects processes, data, risks, services, supervision, and accountability of all institutions involved in the movement of goods,” said IAW Founder Secretary Iskandar Sitorus on Wednesday.

According to Iskandar, the need for such a system can be seen in the arrival process of a single container at an Indonesian port. One container may require assessment by Customs, examination of trade regulations, fulfilment of technical standards, quarantine risk assessment, and even environmental or health inspections. In the currently fragmented system, each institution runs its own process. This situation means businesses potentially have to submit the same information repeatedly, and when goods are held, it is often difficult to determine which agency is currently processing them.

Under the proposal, NBEGS would be built on several key principles. The first is ‘single submission’, where businesses need only submit one set of data that can be used by various agencies according to their authority. The second is the ‘once-only principle’, meaning the state should not request the same information repeatedly if the data has already been legally provided and can be exchanged. The third is ‘risk-based intervention’, focusing inspections on transactions, goods, companies, transport means, or networks that pose a risk. Another principle is the separation of powers within the administration, where the party that creates a risk profile should not also be the one conducting inspections, setting levies, handling objections, and evaluating its own decisions. This design is necessary to ensure that integration does not turn into a concentration of power, allowing each institution to retain its sectoral authority while ensuring decisions and processes are connected and accountable within a single governance framework.