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.