Regional autonomy without the community?

Regional autonomy without the community?

By Meuthia Ganie-Rochman

JAKARTA (JP): Internationally, the notion of regional autonomy
has at least two dimensions, namely greater say for
regional/local governments and the participation of the community
in decision making.

Over the past decade, the second dimension has gained greater
importance. The era has passed where regional autonomy meant the
delegation of power from the central government to the regions.

The focus now is no longer on the capabilities of the regional
governments in managing development programs where efficiency and
effectiveness in delivery of services were the only things that
mattered.

Along with the increasing emphasis on the second dimension,
the regional autonomy is more understood now as having to do with
the community's role in local governance.

Therefore, the regional autonomy drive embodies new meanings:
development of people's participation, representation, and
empowerment of the society. The new meanings are important as the
basis of a fairer public policy.

The balance between the two dimensions is different in
different places. There are regions that urgently need to develop
the local government capacity in fulfilling the people's basic
necessities.

For more "developed" regions, the second dimension occupies
greater importance, rendering these regions a higher quality of
autonomy. A two-way communication between the community and the
local government develops this condition.

The conventional wisdom is that regardless of the needs of any
particular region, the second dimension should not be left out.
This conventional wisdom goes along the notion that governing is
not merely about government but governance as well.

Therefore, if the Indonesian government is still thinking
about "local government" and not "local governance", they are
still trapped in the obsolete view of regional autonomy.

This trap could indeed bring far-reaching consequences. For
example, it directs regional autonomy to only institutional
development of central-regional administration and ignores the
necessity of having a healthy and strong civil society.

Fortunately, it seems there is now more attention on the role
of the society. The preamble of Law No. 22/1999 states that the
implementation of regional autonomy needs to emphasize the
principles of democracy, people participation, equality, and
justice.

However, the role of the government administrations is much
too dominant in discourses on regional autonomy.

This curiously has something to do with the background of the
regional autonomy policy. Ponderous decentralization of authority
at the district level is a policy taken in the midst of pressure
from the regions for greater say and greater share of their
natural resources, and political tensions at the national level.

This situation produces many loopholes which potentially
invite intrigue, new patronage, corruption, and greater exclusion
than ever of certain groups.

The question is: Should we worry about the development of the
second dimension now when we have yet to settle the problems in
the administrations?

The answer is yes because governance must be developed along
with the regional autonomy. This is because the Indonesian
society is currently devoid of leadership at many levels.

Many groups are now fighting to control economic and political
resources. They use the loopholes in the laws to organize crimes.
If the trend persists, the economic resources would again be
controlled by only a few.

The second reason is that democratic local governance (DLG)
with transparency and accountability as its principles has
already become a standard in foreign relations, either in the
areas of aid or commerce.

Countries such as the Philippines, Ukraine, Bolivia, Honduras,
Mali and India had started focusing their attention on developing
DLG since the early 1990s. Poor marks in this particular area may
result in a poor image and declining investment.

What does Indonesia need to do to empower regional communities
within the framework of the autonomy policy? The first step is
reinventing the framework itself, so that the autonomy policy
becomes a DLG-oriented endeavor rather than an administrative
project.

This calls for the establishment of some principles, namely
people's sovereignty, equality, and freedom of expression and
association.

It is important to note that DLG is not only about the local
government's accountability to the legislative body. This kind of
accountability has proven problematic as legislative members tend
to be involved in money politics at the expense of public
welfare.

Therefore, there must be two levels of accountability; from
the local government to the legislative body and the legislative
body to the public.

The second step is reshaping the role of the central
government. So far the role overly focuses on increasing the
administrative capacity of the local governments, with no
attention given to the need for making the transition process
more humane. Principles like cooperative governance, people's
participation, and justice must become its trajectory.

Many have realized that regional autonomy occurs in certain
political contexts at the national level. We cannot just assume
that the central government would be willing to be creative in
developing different approaches in the autonomy drive.

Therefore, advocacy, policy recommendations, and monitoring
must be continuously performed by a special body. Advocacy must
also be conducted by civic organizations that specializes in
regional autonomy.

The role of the central government is to help regions design
its structure of authority that endorses the principles of public
transparency, increases public participation, improves access to
public services, eases concentration of power, cuts off the
decision-making authority's link to both budgeting and spending,
and installs a merit system in the local bureaucracy.

The crucial step is empowering the local community and
establishing them as credible partners in the decision-making
process. Problems of representation also need to be solved.

Some countries solve this problem by establishing city
councils whose members come from the community, or by introducing
legislations that ensure fair representation of all members of
the community.

The second challenge is awakening the community to the fact
that the direction of local governance lies in their hands. The
first strategic step toward this goal is allowing the community
control over budgeting and spending.

Many people, including members of non-governmental
organizations (NGOs), still think that budgeting and supervising
of the budget is a complicated matter. But we can learn, for
example, from NGOs in India which have been successful in
encouraging public participation in local budgeting. John Samuel,
an activist of National Center for Advocacy Studies, wrote in
Understanding the Budget As If People Mattered, believes
Indonesia can do the same thing.

Civic organizations, be they NGOs, universities, or social
organizations, should therefore focus their programs on strategic
aspects such as local budgetary. We can expect success in these
selected areas to lead to success in other areas.

The writer is a sociologist at the University of Indonesia.