Killing corruption to aid nation

Killing corruption to aid nation

The allegation of corruption in the Ministry of Transportation
has made recent headlines. Law expert Charles Himawan looks at
the issue from a broader perspective.

JAKARTA (JP): Cynical observers have described Indonesia's
progress as "development with an envelope", stuffed with money,
or "devlope", short for development hand in hand with corruption.

In an unprecedented move, President Soeharto recently called
on the Minister of Transportation to be introspective. This most
refined reproach was made in the wake of a leaked report that the
minister has amassed a mountain of wealth in the past year from
392 violations involving 18 state enterprises.

This means more than one violation, a euphemism for
corruption, per day. Much like a staple food, the "violations"
were a daily necessity. A proper investigation in accordance with
Indonesia's constitution is currently underway, but corruption is
always difficult to prove.

In the first place, few subordinates are willing to point the
finger at a government official on the take, especially those
whose livelihood is at stake. Leaders of the business community
must eradicate this type of "devlope", where hidden costs are
simply passed on to the consumer. This is only possible if they
base their decision making process on the 1945 Constitution,
which aims for a clean government. Labor unions must also strive
to eradicate "devlope". This will make it possible for employers
to transfer the invisible costs of corruption to the visible
costs of higher salaries.

Secondly, all accusations must be supported by evidence.
Minister Moerdiono rightly warns us to uphold the principle of
"innocent until proven guilty" in our quest for a clean
government.

Most are reluctant to take legal action in the face of
corruption due to little legal certainty. Perhaps this reluctance
could be minimized if the judiciary had the reputation of the
judicial system in Singapore, which is ranked first among ASEAN
countries in terms of legal satisfaction. Failing this,
Malaysia's judiciary system, which is ranked second -- though
perhaps unjustifiably -- could also be used as an example.

Employers and employees must make their demands for a clean
government. If they do not, they will continue to face
unreasonably high production costs and unreasonably low labor
wages. Higher wages will help stimulate workers to be more
efficient, making the goods produced more competitive on the
market.

A clean government will have a direct effect on Indonesia's
success within the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation business
environment. The President has already restructured the cabinet
by combining the ministries of trade and industry into one
ministry, a model similar to the Japanese ministry of trade and
industry, or MITI. Less bureaucracy means less possibility of
corruption.

Indonesia's export performance, a possible indicator of a
nation's prosperity, in the last two decades may be a cause for
concern, especially compared to Malaysia and Thailand. In 1985,
Indonesia's export revenues amounted to US$18.5 billion compared
to Malaysia's $15.4 billion and Thailand's $7.1 billion. In 1995
the two neighboring countries are far ahead of Indonesia's $40.1
billion, particularly Malaysia ($65.2 billion).

Eradicating violations in the export sector would allow the
judiciary to prove itself, its ability and its commitment to a
clean government. The Supreme Court has already started in the
right direction in the case of Tamin Sukardi.

For, as the Austrian satirist Karl Kraus (1874--1936) once
said, "Corruption is worse than prostitution. The latter might
endanger the morals of an individual, but the former invariably
endanger the morals of an entire country."

The writer is a professor of law and economics at the
University of Indonesia and a member of the National Commission
on Human Rights.