Structural improvements imperative

Structural improvements imperative

Reports of lavish spending in high places -- including a
multi-billion-rupiah governor's house, a regent's swimming pool
and fleets of staff cars -- have made headlines in recent weeks.
Now there are allegations of corruption at the Ministry of
Transportation. One top official recently criticized such
expenditure on the part of a section of the political elite. The
Jakarta Post interviewed scholar Franz Magnis-Suseno on this
issue.

Question: How important is the elite's role in providing
examples in the life of the nation?

Answer: I think the role of the country's elite and community
leaders is quite important in the Indonesian cultural
environment. The elite are regarded as role models.

At almost all levels of life, the way a leader behaves, his
work ethics and the way he communicates have a considerable
influence on his employees and the other people around him.

But I really think that we should be careful not to view the
whole of public morality from this angle alone.

Q: Why not?

A: First, leaders whom we know through the mass media can be
presented in a particular way. It is only public relations. By
means of public relations we can create a certain image.

People do not reject an image constructed by public relations.
But neither are they very much impressed by such images. The
reason is that they also look at the leaders' actions, especially
those actions which directly affect them. That is why, although
the personal morality of leaders is very important, this alone is
not enough. This is where we need social ethics.

Q: What are social ethics?

A: Social ethics have an objective and a structural aspect.
Objective in the sense that they are not directly dependent on
particular individuals. For instance, social ethics in their
political dimensions must be measured on the basis of whether or
not our legal system is running according to the demands of a
state that is based on law.

In practice, a country is called strong when it is free from
upheavals, even if its leader is of mediocre intelligence or
weak. Take America as an example: Not all its presidents have had
superb qualities. But, since its political system runs well, the
people do not really depend on the quality of a president.

Now, to make this all come true, we should have the structural
element I talked about just now. By "structural" I mean that a
structure of decision-making should support ethics of development
realization; it should be in line with social ethics.

Q: How would it be in concrete terms?

A: For instance, if the Peoples' Consultative Assembly dared
to question the government. The same applies to the House of
Representatives. If they had the courage to criticize what should
be criticized; if they were not afraid of being recalled, for
instance.

This kind of mechanism would automatically hamper tendencies
towards corruption. It would generate the values I am talking
about, all of which are based on Pancasila.

Such a system would foster good behavior. The press would
enjoy greater freedom. It would be very difficult for a
politician, official or businessmen to engage in corrupt
practices, since everything would be scrutinized and brought into
the open. I think democratic structures are going to play a key
role. In fact, the 1945 Constitution provides the format. If we
would like to promote social ethics, democracy should be pushed.

Q: From a political and social ethics point of view, how do
you see the general situation in Indonesia right now?

A: There are good and bad sides. The good part is that all of
us are enjoying progress. We are making headway in all sectors.
For instance, poverty alleviation, more social justice. Human
rights may be discussed openly, a push towards democracy is
taking place. But, of course, there are still many shortcomings.
One example: stories of violence appear in the newspapers every
day. People express their grievances to the National Human Rights
Commission or to the House.

Worse still is the treatment of people in police custody. Take
the treatment of the accused in the Marsinah case, for instance.
That was truly embarrassing. Fifty years of independence, and we
still have to cope with such matters.

So, in my opinion, the upholding of justice is still a long
way off. This applies also to a state based on law. The House
speaks in cautious tones. The Consultative Assembly has not
functioned as it should. Most cases of corruption have not been
discussed. The papers are scared to report on them for fear of
being closed. In short, we are still burdened with problems that
need digging into for the sake of social ethics.

Q: How much are people aware of these matters?

A: I'm afraid that the people are keenly aware of them. Most
lecturing from people in top jobs is met with cynicism or
regarded as a passing storm alone. They have grown immune to such
talks because they are aware of the reality. Thus, a strategy
that amounts to lip service proves to be a self-defeating one.

Q: What do we have to do then?

A: Structural improvements are imperative. And they have to
take place now, as we approach the end of the 20th century. It is
time to make that leap and reach for reality; be done with hollow
rhetoric.

During the New Order, we have made achievements in
development, state administration and foreign policy. Now is the
time to make a stride in social ethics.

Q: Doesn't all that require goodwill on the part of the
authorities?

A: Without goodwill on the part of the leaders it will,
indeed, be hard to bring about changes. All of us would like
change to occur with wisdom -- in an evolutionary rather than a
revolutionary way -- in ways that will guarantee continuity as
opposed to discontinuity. We have to make changes based on the
results of our achievements, in accordance with our present
model. We should not change the model. (swa)

Dr. Franz Magnis-Suseno is professor of social philosophy at
the Driyarkara School of Philosophy in Jakarta.