The government's business

he business of government is too important to be left to government alone. True.

But neither should government be used as a vehicle for business to make profits.

We welcome President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's plans to issue clearer guidelines that would avoid the abuse of government privileges for personal business interests.

Nepotism is as improper and wrong as embezzlement and other acts of corruption. It is part of the cancer that afflicts Indonesia's body politic and creates an inequitable government geared toward self-interest rather than public service.

As we are now learning, this system of patronage has also stifled business creativity by producing cronies who reap success from favoritism rather than entrepreneurship. Consequently, at a time when we desperately need a class of ingenious plutocrats to help the economy back on its feet, we find that many of our major entrepreneurs do not have the business acumen of true industrialists.

Apart from a code of ethics, internal and external oversight, along with a strict system of punishment, a strong internal mechanism should be adopted to avoid the pitfalls of cronyism.

No matter how honest a man, the temptations of power can sometimes be too great, even with a clear system of checks.

Unscrupulous individuals and businesses have for too long been left unchecked to pursue these unholy relationships. Susilo's desire to impose more stringent rules on such abuses of authority is extremely overdue.

But the President does not have to 'reinvent the wheel' in formulating a system to help curb these abuses. Several examples can be found in other democratic nations that Indonesia can adopt to its own needs.

For example, in the United States, a Blind Trust is used to diminish potential conflicts of interest by appointed high ranking Cabinet officials and elected representatives.

The system essentially places the assets of the official, while in office, in a trust in which a fiduciary third party has complete management discretion.

There are, of course, no perfect systems. Even in the United States the unscrupulous find ways around them. The latest allegedly involves a U.S. Senate Majority leader who allegedly used inside information to sell stocks supposedly held in a Blind Trust.

Nevertheless, there is a system in place that presents clear guidelines to deter misconduct. The key will be, and has always been, a belief in upholding the system. As the case in the United States shows, while misconduct can occur, oversight allows for a vigorous investigation that can be conducted when suspicions of abuse arise.

It is much better than the passive rumor-mongering that goes on here today.

If we want the military to refrain from abusing its authority to conduct business, then civilian politicians should also be held accountable to the same rules.

While we support this new initiative, we are, however, suspect as to the motives and timing of the President's remarks.

If Susilo is truly concerned about officials misusing their positions and wants to impose a new code of ethics, then the whole nation is undoubtedly behind him.

But suspected cases of nepotism have persisted in all administrations, not just Susilo's; from the upper echelons of government down to the lowest-ranking officials.

So why is the President speaking now? Did this problem just occur to him?

If he is honestly committed to ending graft -- as he often claims in his anti-corruption rhetoric -- then these ideas should have been part of an initiative at the beginning of his term.

What is even more confusing is why the President chose so many businesspeople for his Cabinet. Susilo should have imposed these guidelines in November 2004, not be contemplating them in November 2005.

Furthermore, if he does find such evidence of abuses of authority, the President should dismiss the individuals concerned immediately.

No system will be effective if the top executive dallies over taking disciplinary action.

We are fearful that these important and virtuous notions are simply being aired for political ends in the midst of talk of a Cabinet reshuffle. Once the behind-the-scenes objective has been reached, the debate will wilt meaninglessly away like so many other worthy ideas.

May we remind the President that he was ushered into office with an overwhelming mandate. He should act if he deems it necessary without trying to get the public politically involved in a principle that it already believes in.

Pak Susilo, it is time to take responsibility for your choices.