Indirect leaders: Reform champions to reckon with

Indirect leaders: Reform champions to reckon with

Edi Suhardi, Programme Advisor, Partnership for
Governance Reform in Indonesia, Jakarta

Experts, writers and politicians alike are disillusioned by
the slow pace of reform, a dividend of true democracy in the
post-Soeharto era. There is no systematic and strategic effort to
reform the overall governance introduced. Measures of reform are
sporadic, reactive to emerging demand and disorganized depending
upon initiatives of reform-minded individuals.

Frustration and pessimism toward the upcoming elections is
also observed. Hopes for progressive socio-economic and political
improvement of the country are waning over time. The elections of
1999 only resulted in a transitional regime, and status-quo
administration without the traits of good leadership.

Absence of inspirational leadership augmented with sluggish
bureaucracy and weak civil society are considered to be
contributing factors to the prolonged socio-economic crisis and
unwavering transitional period of the country. Leadership is sine
qua non of good governance.

Howard Gardner in Leading Minds: An Anatomy of Leadership
defines a leader (as an individual, or set of individuals) who
significantly affects the thoughts, feelings, and/or behavior of
a significant number of individuals. Most acknowledged leaders
are "direct." They address their public face-to-face. But also
there is an unrecognized phenomenon: Indirect leadership. In this
variety of leading, individuals exert impact through the works
that they create.

The current government does not demonstrate the above
characters. Politicians only perform as power holders who exert
their power through a structured administration. The government
fails to nurture a sense of nationalism and downplays its role as
a "solidarity maker".

There is a lack of inspirational leadership in Indonesia, or
leaders who can attend to peoples' hopes and convictions. People
are searching for alternative leadership of any kind. There is a
need for exemplary figures to set standards for good governance.

The ideal form of alternative national leadership is a caucus
that forges equal partnership among champions of reform. All
stakeholders would take part in drawing up the reform agenda.

Such an agenda would be a baseline and framework for
democratic governance, enhancement of national integrity and
stability, promotion of security and promotion of sustainable
economic growth toward equality.

Learning from a recent memorandum of understanding (MOU) on
collaborative Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) and Muhammadiyah efforts to
fight corruption has begun to gather momentum as a moral force
and has been transformed into concrete actions and national
movement. The effort has snowballed and inspired a number of
endeavors, including civil-society-driven movements on clean
politics and "anti-rotten politicians" and the formulation of
religious edicts on anti-corruption efforts from a number of
other religious groups.

Such a precedent can be further institutionalized into a
caucus of champions of reform or "islands of integrity" As
paragons of good governance -- in the middle of the sea of
corruption, cronyism, nepotism and other bad governance practices
-- the forum would be seen as a truly moral safeguard and an
equal partner with the government.

The caucus, a multi-stakeholders forum, would develop a
nation-wide governance reform agenda, which advocated the
perpetual balancing of civil society, state and the market. This
is a new model for leading societal changes that can stimulate
creativity, motivation, and the initiative of the stakeholders.

The champions of reform would be selected from among noted
public figures who had proven their credibility and integrity on
the basis of a set of criteria. They would include
representatives of all stakeholders, from regional leaders of
mass-based organizations Syafii Maarif and K.H. Hasyim Muzadi, to
the private sector, and other interest groups.

Reform-minded representatives from other religious groups,
i.e., Chairman of KWI, PGI, etc. would also sit on the forum.

Other potential members are progressive and reform-minded
local leaders who strive to advance reform in their own
government, which has resulted in palpable outcomes, i.e., policy
reform, institutional change and improved process toward the
articulation of people's interests. They are successful models of
governance reform for the benefit of marginalized groups and the
general public.

Mayor of Ambon, M.J. Papilaja is successful in the
acceleration of conflict recovery and reconstruction. The regent
of Kebumen, Mrs. Rustriningsih has been able to introduce
transparent recruitment and galvanize people's participation.
Mayor of Tarakan, M. Yunus has turned Tarakan into a people-
driven governance. The Regent of Fakfak, Wahidin Puarada has
successfully implemented village autonomy. The regents of Tanah
Datar and Solok in West Sumatra are portrayed as pro-reform
leaders.

These are examples of reform-minded leaders who have been
known to successfully bring about reform of the bureaucracy,
improvement of public services and a more accountable government.
Regional leaders have modeled a new breed of leadership for good
local governance. These leaders can bring their regions and
hopefully the country back from the brink of collapse.

The forum could also include representatives of institutions,
particularly from the private sector.

To make the idea work, a framework for the selection of
champions of reform and an agenda of events for the caucus would
need to be developed and facilitated. Initially, K.H. Hasyim
Muzadi and Syafii Maarif would be best suited as hosts to
organize the caucus and to invite other champions of reform to
join.

The caucus would serve both as a think tank and a venue for
discourse, resource mobilization and cross-fertilization in
formulating the best national reform agenda. It would facilitate
the convergence of ideas and opinions on how governance reform --
of both public and private spheres -- was moving forward.

The caucus would serve as a versatile advisory body for the
government, parliament, civil society and private sector to align
local good governance practices -- both in the public and private
sectors -- with international standards and globally accepted
core principles of good governance. It would echo the needs and
demands of people at large to gain the dividends of reform,
prosperity and equality, and inspire creativity in pushing reform
forward.

One of the critical parts that the champions of reform can
play is to safeguard the 2004 elections and transcend optimism
that the year 2004 will be a year of hope, that presents a major
opportunity to all of us for a major overhaul of this country.

The collective efforts of the champions of reform would be a
glimmer of hope amid the negativity that is present in our
beloved country, reform hopefully will prevail.