Influential children: The debate continues

Influential children: The debate continues

JAKARTA (JP): The current debate over the business activities
of the children of senior government officials has spawned
theories about what really lies behind the controversy.

According to one political analyst, the debate is linked to
the prospect of President Soeharto relinquishing power in 1998,
while the son of once-powerful former state intelligence chief
Yoga Sugomo says officials' children are merely "intermediate
targets".

The issue is no longer as simple as whether or not the
children of senior officials should be allowed to go into
business, says Suhardiman, chairman of the SOKSI, a powerful mass
organization closely linked with Golkar, the ruling political
group.

"The critics, in launching the debate, have longer-term
objectives, especially in view of the imminent national
leadership succession," he said in Semarang, Central Java, on
Sunday.

"I'm sure this and other controversies will continue to roll
in between now and 1998," said the former Army general who is
known for his controversial political ideas and analysis.

"They will continue to create a situation pitting the people
against the government to promote the idea that the government is
not clean," Suhardiman said.

Meanwhile, Bambang Riyadi Sugomo, Yoga's son and a successful
businessman, was quoted in an interview published in yesterday's
edition of Forum magazine as saying that critics of the
businesses of officials' children had other objectives in mind.

"In my opinion, (the children of officials) are simply
intermediate targets, to divert people's attention," he said.

Bambang is quoted as saying that the controversy served as a
smoke screen to hide some of the more pressing problems in
Indonesia that remain unresolved, such as the establishment of
anti-trust laws.

Asked whether he thought the business activities of officials'
children should be controlled, he responded: "No, what more do
you want. There regulations are there. They don't ban the
children of officials from becoming entrepreneurs. If they try to
ban us, I will object, although I'm now the offspring of a former
official.

Monopoly

"What should be resolved is the legislation against monopoly,
on the protection of small entrepreneurs. Why can't they finish
those?

"Because they cannot resolve the big problems, they are
trying to create a diversion. Why aren't they attacking the
conglomerates instead?"

The controversy over the business activities of the children
of senior government officials began last week, when a number of
legislators raised the issue during a hearing with Attorney
General Singgih. They asked Singgih whether there was a
regulation that banned officials' children from going into
business, and whether he thought some form of control was
necessary.

Government officials have responded that no such regulation is
necessary, but have stressed that entrepreneurs should not abuse
the positions of their parents.

Afan Gaffar, a political analyst at Gadjah Mada University in
Yogyakarta, said yesterday the debate was another indication of
the weaknesses of the Indonesian political system, which, he
said, does not encourage frank and open discussion of certain
politically-sensitive issues.

Afan said he believed that those who raised the issue were not
approaching the question simply from the point of view of legal
formalities. They were also looking at the ethical dimensions, he
said.

"These children have never had any prior business experience.
But when their parents hold senior positions, they became
entrepreneurs. Not only that, their businesses skyrocket so fast
that their presence is strongly felt by the people. Of course
this raises questions," he said.

The political system in Indonesia had not allowed for an open
discussion about "who gets what, how and when", Afan said.

One example, he said, was the granting of the contract to
build an integrated transport terminal in Manggarai, South
Jakarta, when the traffic conditions in the capital were already
very congested.

In the absence of transparency, there were always questions
that went unanswered, Afan said, such as why the contract was
awarded to a particular entrepreneur, how they planned to finance
the big project, how some people had no difficulty in obtaining
huge bank loans while others were refused them.

According to Afan, the lack of transparency opens the way for
collusion between government officials and entrepreneurs and the
existing control mechanisms are too weak to prevent it. (har/emb)