The problem with single loyalty

A surprise was recently delivered by the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI). During a presentation of research findings at LIPI's Widya Graha building Wednesday, a basic and strategic subject in our political life -- that of bureaucracy's monoloyalitas (undivided loyalty) -- was again questioned.

The policy of monoloyalitas was introduced following the birth of the present New Order government. Its purpose, in the beginning, was to make sure bureaucracy could perform its duties as public servants unhampered by political concerns. However, as the study concludes, with the passage of time the monoloyalitas concept, which was initially intended to mean undivided loyalty towards the government and the state, was often reduced to one which dictates undivided loyalty towards Golkar.

The question is, what problems, if any, arise from such a policy? The study demonstrates that if the particular link between bureaucracy and Golkar is allowed to continue, any improvement in our public services -- which are generally considered to be inadequate -- will be difficult to achieve. Excesses in this policy could even lead to "rampant corruption, manipulation and secular attitudes in our bureaucracy", according to researcher Yanuarti. The impression is that all this is being tolerated for the sake of the party which the bureaucracy supports.

Therefore, in order to improve the quality of our public services and to restore the function of our civil servants to that of public servants, it is imperative the bureaucracy be freed from any involvement in politics. This also means that freedom must be given to our civil servants to become part of the public at large -- common people with all the political rights and obligations that are inherent in their status as citizens. This means that they should be free to vote or even to become members of the political party of their choice.

Irrespective of the impediments and limitations that it may bring, stability must still be among our primary considerations in the conduct of our social and political life. Still, the eternal question remains, is it possible for social and political maturity to come about on its own accord? Is it possible for it to grow and bloom without going through an extended process of trial and error?

Democracy requires a learning process that is continuous, perhaps even never-ending. Some people believe that democracy may, after all, be nothing more than a system whose superiority lies only in the fact that it is capable of constant self- improvement.

For these reasons it seems there is no other choice for us but to start on this long journey and continue educating the people so that they can more freely express their rights and obligations as citizens.

-- Kompas, Jakarta