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)