Monoloyalty policy: Problems and prospects

Monoloyalty policy: Problems and prospects

By R. Siti Zuhro

JAKARTA (JP): The Indonesian bureaucracy is not neutral, due
to the government's policy of insisting on the monoloyalty of
civil servants, so that they can only vote for its political
body, Golkar, in general elections.

Since Soeharto started ruling the country in 1966, there have
been fundamental changes in Indonesian politics. The armed forces
have played a significant role in politics, while political
parties have not functioned properly in the same way as their
counterparts in more democratic societies.

In this regard, the government's policy of the "floating mass"
is very harmful to the development of the parties in Indonesia
because they may not have branches in subdistricts and villages.

This policy definitely benefits Golkar rather than the other
political parties. Golkar has become a major force both socially
and politically in Indonesian life, while the Indonesian
Democratic Party (PDI) and the United Development Party (PPP)
have no mass bases in villages.

There is no question, then, of whether the bureaucracy has
played a dominant role in political and social life. Some
analysts believe that the dominant role of the bureaucracy is
ultimately because of the role of the civil servants in politics.
Their involvement in politics, as reflected in their support of
Golkar, has caused the bureaucracy to be no longer neutral.

This phenomena is contrary to the conventional theory of
bureaucracy in which civil servants are expected to give better
service to the people and to remain politically neutral.
Moreover, civil servants are expected to conform to various rules
and regulations in carrying out their duties. Therefore, the main
problem of the bureaucracy concerns their central role in
politics, especially their role in supporting Golkar in winning
elections.

Moreover, to support Golkar, the government has established
the Indonesian Civil Servants Corps (Korpri) as its mass base. As
an organization of civil servants, Korpri has the duties of
helping Golkar win elections and seeking other supporters outside
its organization. Thus, the civil service monoloyalty policy
implemented since 1970 has successfully limited civil servants'
activities in politics.

As government employees, civil servants actually have a
position similar to that of other citizens because
constitutionally they have the freedom to express their desires.
However, the fact is that their freedom of expression is very
limited.

This tendency, in fact, seems to have been perpetuated under
the Habibie government, as reflected in the recent debates on the
crucial issue among PPP, PDI, the Armed Forces (ABRI) and Golkar
at the House of Representatives (DPR).

In these debates, only Golkar has agreed that civil servants
can become members and functionaries of parties. The debates will
affect the result of the proposed new political act.

If Golkar wins the debate, the bureaucracy will not be so much
different from the current condition, which was also called
monoloyalitas tunggal birokrasi (the monoloyalty of the
bureaucracy). This is why the future prospects of the bureaucracy
are still not clear. Whether it will become brighter, or worse.

Golkar's support of the idea of allowing civil servants to
become members or functionaries of political parties can be
explained by the fact that Golkar does not only tend to maintain
its close relationship with Korpri, but also it is not prepared
to lose its traditional support. This it spells out clearly in
its response to the draft political acts of Nov. 25 and 26
November 1998. This also indicates that the future prospect of
the political rights of the civil servants is still questionable,
whether these will become positive or deteriorate.

The problem is if the proposed new political act still permits
civil servants to become functionaries of political parties, it
will have a serious impact on the process of good governance.
However, it will not make the government better able to carry out
its job. And it is contributing to the creation of an inefficient
and ineffective government. It will also hinder the development
of an accountable government.

It is also clear that the politicization of the bureaucracy
through the monoloyalty policy has not only hampered the
development of democracy, but has also resulted in an inefficient
and corrupt bureaucracy, which will make it more difficult for
Indonesian products to compete on the global market.

Furthermore, Indonesia is also facing problems in internal
factors such as the lack of economic resources and the strong
demand for political reform or democratization. This, in itself,
is a very important argument why civil servants should have
political freedom and an independent position. It means, there is
no need for civil servants to become functionaries of political
parties. But they exercise their political rights through their
membership of political parties and their freedom to choose their
representatives at general elections.

The independence of civil servants is fundamentally needed not
only to create fair elections and to make the bureaucracy
neutral, but also to decrease the centralization of power and to
develop civil society. Finally, Indonesians should learn from the
past experience that they have to prevent the high concentration
of conflicts resulting from the politicization of the bureaucracy
under the New Order government.

The writer is a researcher at the Indonesian Institute of
Sciences (LIPI).