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.