Tactical funds wide open to abuse, say legislators, experts

Tactical funds wide open to abuse, say legislators, experts

Ridwan Max Sijabat, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

Despite all the talk about good governance, government
institutions continue to maintain so-called "tactical funds" that
are prone to abuse due to a lack of accountability and are often
little more than slush funds.

Theodorus J. Koekerits, a legislator from the Indonesian
Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) and a member of the House of
Representatives' budget commission, said that although the
government and the legislature had agreed to phase out off-budget
funds by including all government expenditures in the state
budget in an attempt to uphold good governance, the House had
also approved the inclusion of tactical funds in the state
budget.

"Based on this approval, the President, Vice President,
ministers and senior government officials all maintain tactical
funds ... that are usually used to cover unanticipated
contingencies and emergency expenditure.

"But their use has become complicated and they are often the
target of manipulation by government officials due to a lack of
accountability," he told The Jakarta Post on Thursday.

Another legislator, who requested anonymity, said ministries
and senior officials could be very "creative" in employing
various illegal means to raise money for their tactical funds.

"Ministries maintain tactical funds whose contributors include
state enterprises under their respective jurisdictions, and
private sector firms that win development projects or contracts
to supply goods and services," he said, pointing as an example to
the way in which the General Elections Commission (KPU) managed
to raise around Rp 20 billion for its tactical fund from private
sector firms that won contracts to supply election materials
during last year's elections.

The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) is currently
investigating alleged corruption at the KPU, which included the
collection of kickbacks from suppliers.

Both legislators said that the maintaining of tactical funds
by state institutions had continued unabated since the end of the
New Order.

A. Dillon, coordinator of the Partnership for Governance
Reform in Indonesia, criticized the government of President
Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, which had not yet shown a strong
commitment to creating clean and good governance, and eliminating
corruption.

"The running of tactical or operational funds is clear
evidence that the government is not committed to the principles
of clean and good governance, and transparency," he said, adding
that the President should phase out tactical funds not only in
his Cabinet but also in the bureaucracy at large as part of an
initial step on the road to eliminating the culture of corruption
in Indonesian society.

Ngadisah, rector of the Institute of Public Administration
(IIP), said the maintenance of tactical funds in the way this was
done by government offices and state institutions in Indonesia
was not recognized in the science of public administration.

She added, however, that the maintaining of such funds to
cover unanticipated contingencies was tolerable.