Indonesia faces justice challenges
Supreme Court Justice Adi Andojo who grabbed headlines last year for blowing the whistle on collusion at the highest law institution will retire on May 1, 1997. Charles Himawan, a professor of law and economics at the University of Indonesia and member of the National Commission on Human Rights took this opportunity to reflect on the target the justice was fighting then.
JAKARTA (JP): The question in regard to Justice Adi Andojo's retirement next week is, will his idealism also retire? Will his struggle to eradicate the alleged corruption within the judiciary system also fade away?
The answer should be negative, because a positive answer would only make Indonesia less competitive in the free market of the next century, a link many development practitioners overlook.
We recall last year that former chief justice Soerjono wrote to President Soeharto recommending that Justice Adi be dismissed amidst an allegation that there was collusion, an euphemism for corruption, within the judiciary system. It seems that President Soeharto wisely postponed the request, since retirement age has nearly caught up with Adi.
Few judges, however, match Adi's ability to look into the matter further, more than just a mere issue of collusion within the judiciary. Many judges have failed to see the close relationship between the issue of corruption and that of economic development -- that corruption greatly slows down a nation's development. Corruption may be difficult to prove through evidence, but it is clearly reflected in the nation's economic development.
If balance of payments and export performance could be used as a yardstick to gauge the pace of the nation's development, then Indonesia would be facing a serious problem. Minister of Industry and Trade Tunky Ariwibowo recently warned of a continuing deficit in the balance of payments as the following table indicates (Kompas, Feb. 22, 1997).
Table A: Indonesia's Balance of Payments (US$ billion)
1994/95 1995/96 1996/97 (estimated) -3.5 -6.9 -8.8
The minister further stated that to offset the deficit, export performance must be improved. In response to his appeal, bureaucrats tried to improve the performance of exports in various fields. They have simplified the procedure by using credit and speeding up custom requirements, but they failed to look at export performance in the field of law, specifically in the judiciary. Indonesia's export performance has been a concern of many development practitioners, particularly if it is compared to the export performance of Indonesia's nearest neighbors, Singapore and Malaysia, as the following table shows.
Table B: Exports (US$ billion) according to Asiaweek
1980 1990 1994 1995 1996 Indonesia 21.9 25.5 37.0 40.1 47.5 Malaysia 12.9 29.4 48.4 65.2 76.4 Singapore 19.3 52.4 88.8 102 124
The above figures clearly reflect a missing link in the export performance of Indonesia in the past decade. In 1980, Indonesia's exports were greater than Malaysia and Singapore's, but since 1990, particularly in the last three years, their exports have greatly surpassed Indonesia's.
Presuming that these three great nations have the same work ethic and development initiative, then Adi's allegation of corruption within the judiciary will shed light on the poor performance of Indonesia's exports, inconsequently because the judiciaries of Malaysia and Singapore are among the most respected courts of law in the world. Malaysia and Singapore are nations that rectify, with fairness and justice, any wrong committed. International buyers feel comfortable in purchasing goods from Malaysia and Singapore, because they are assured of a judiciary system that will uphold their rights in the event that their rights are violated.
This is clearly the missing link between a nation's drive and the reliability of its judiciary. It should be noted that there are many problems that should be resolved before a reliable judiciary can be achieved, i.e. adjusting the quality of life of judges. Whatever the problems are, they should be addressed and be dealt with. They cannot be left hanging and unresolved at the expense of the nation's economic development.
President Soeharto recently, in conjunction with the launching of a book titled The Birth of a Nation and State, warned the nation to implement continuing development with a sense of justice and continuous correction where such correction is needed (Kompas, April 8, 1997).
One correction that is urgently needed is in the judiciary system. Ignoring this warning, many bureaucrats instead feel comfortable about their achievements. The English say that their attitude is "gold-achieving" rather than "gold-seeking". Comparing today's Indonesia with the Indonesia of 1945, some bureaucrats are proud and complacent about what has been accomplished. Great historians say we learn from history not to justify our present shortcomings, but to prepare for the future. This can only be done if judges and other law practitioners, particularly litigation lawyers, can keep feeding the fire that Adi sparked. Justice Adi Andojo may retire, but justice can never retire.