Regional autonomy must not be postponed

Regional autonomy must not be postponed

The regional autonomy drive will affect many people, most
notably the millions of civil servants. Regional employees, for
instance, may be discriminated against by the policy, according
to Muhadjir Darwin, a public administration expert at
Yogyakarta's Gadjah Mada University and researcher at the
university's Center of Population Study. Although he fears the
autonomy policy may also bred jealousy among different segments
of the society, he says the government should go ahead and
implement it because national integration is at stake.

Question: What is your assessment of the government's
undertaking of regional autonomy?

Answer: Regional autonomy is a must. It can no longer be
postponed, especially given that Indonesia is a big, pluralistic
country. Besides, a centralized government, which was the main
characteristic of the New Order regime, has proved to be
ineffective and only created regional imbalances.

This will not be a simple undertaking, however, because for
years we have been so used to centralized power that initiative
in the regions is poor. We can see this from the reluctance of
some regional governments to implement the regional autonomy law.

In addition, the central government is actually worried about
its loss of authority -- which explains why it has issued a
directive which in effect runs counter to the spirit of the
regional autonomy law. Some people say that Government Regulation
No. 25/2000 steals back the authority that is supposed to be
given to the regional governments through the regional autonomy
law No. 25/1999.

Recently I was informed by the regional government in
Surakarta, Central Jakarta, that it is planning to send a
petition asking the central government to either revise or cancel
Law No 25/1999.

Q: What is Government Regulation No. 25/2000?

A: It is actually a directive, an elaboration of the authority of
the central government and the regional administrations. It shows
that the authority of the central government and provincial
administrations is greater bigger than that of regional
administrations. That means that there is not much left for
regional governments.

In this case, what is given to regional governments is more of
a burden rather than something advantageous. It seems as though
the central government is throwing away problems to regional
governments.

For example, in streamlining its bureaucracy as a consequence
of the application regional autonomy, the central government will
be transferring its former employees to regional governments. If
I'm not mistaken, some two million former central government
employees are being transferred to become the responsibility of
regional governments. This is clearly unfair for regional
governments.

Q: And the danger of this regulation?

A: This could surely threaten the position of regional employees.
Based on another regulation, namely Government Regulation No.
84/2000, for example, the lowest echelon of V has been
eliminated. Regional employees of echelon V have now been
promoted one level and are now echelon IV.

It might appear to be better treatment for regional employees
but it is not. Why? Because the promotion implies that (the non-
echelon) regional employees can no longer hold an echelon
position (in this case either that of echelon III or IV), because
only former central government officers (with certain track
record) can do so.

This is what I call the administrative implication of the
regional autonomy policy, which in fact is not simple.

Q: Are there other implications of the new law?

A: It deals with the question of where regional autonomy is being
developed. I see signs that regional autonomy will (adversely)
affect regional pluralism. The "ego" of regions -- which often
includes divisive considerations such as ethnic, race and
religion -- become very dominant in the development of regional
governments.

Riau province, for example, is presently discussing how to
recruit new regional government employees as a consequence of the
expansion of its present seven regencies to 15.

The main requirement in the selection is that they should be
putra daerah (indigenous to that area). All available positions
should be filled with indigenous people. But who are the
indigenous people? There are indications (that the parties in
charge will decide) that Riau inhabitants who were born in Riau
but belong to other ethnic groups (such as Batak, Minang or Java)
will not be considered indigenous.

It seems the policy may foster ethnic sentiment, which could
lead to antipluralism (which runs counter to democracy).

Q: What further danger could it cause?

A: The possibility of discrimination against some segments in the
community. It could also create jealousy among the population in
the regions as well as conflict.

What happened in West Kalimantan, where Madurese were killed,
is one example. The way the regional government of South Sulawesi
handled refugees is another example; it was very discriminatory.
Refugees -- both from East Timor and Maluku -- who originated
from South Sulawesi were quickly sent to their families. Those
who had no family were sent to transmigration areas. Refugees of
non-South Sulawesi origin, on the other hand, were just left in
the temporary refugee camps for months on end.

A similar thing took place at Gadjah Mada University recently.
While selecting Papuans for a post-graduate program at the
university, a government official there asked the admissions
officer in charge to select only those who had curly hair.

This shows that the regional autonomy drive has resulted in an
overdose of divisive sentiment, which can in turn threaten the
existence of pluralistic characteristics of the Indonesian
community.

Q: What do you suggest we do to stop the trend?

A: This should of course be controlled. All elements in the
community, including universities and NGOs, should be aware and
critical of such a development.

We need to develop regional autonomy wisely. Regional
government officers should be aware of the danger of the fading
of pluralism in the community, as it can further trigger the
emergence of horizontal conflicts and destroy political and
social stability in the regions.

Their concern for indigenous people is something we all can
understand but we should all prevent this concern from
degenerating into discrimination against other groups within
society.

When I wrote about this concern in the newspaper earlier, for
example, I received many comments saying that I was exaggerating
and was too worried about the matter. Some even said that my
concern was a result of an overly suspicious way of thinking of a
Javanese observer.

In fact, I'm not against autonomy. I strongly believe that
regional autonomy cannot be postponed. It's a must. Yet, we
cannot just ignore the concern (that the regional autonomy policy
might result in antipluralism or antidemocracy sentiments). The
concern is no longer hypothetical. It's empirical. The
aforementioned cases prove it.

Q: What about economic implications of the regional autonomy law?

A: It is hoped that regional autonomy will bring increased
business activities to the regions, but this actually depends on
whether regional governments can develop their economies.

If ethnic sentiment dominates, I'm afraid regional autonomy
will not result in a better economic life. Remember, there are
many districts whose indigenous people have yet to master
business. They do not yet have the necessary human resources to
develop business in their regions.

Q: Are you saying we are not ready to implement regional autonomy
next year?

A: If you define ready by well-prepared, no. But we must not use
it as a reason to postpone the application of the regulation.
Let's just try to learn from past mistakes and mend matters for
better results in the future. But never consider postponing it.
(Sri Wahyuni)