Why should bad guys always win?

Arief Budiman

SALATIGA, Central Java (JP): A Hong Kong based business research institution recently released findings that pinpointed Indonesia as the third most corrupt country in the world, after China and Vietnam.

Although I would say that the statement is too dramatic, and we don't know what the criteria and data used to support the statement are, it is difficult to deny that corruption has become a serious problem, which affects the country's development.

As early as the beginning of the New Order in the late 1960s, the elder statesman of Indonesia, Mohammad Hatta, was warning that corruption had become part of the Indonesian culture. What he meant was that corruption had spread everywhere, and existed among top and lower level bureaucrats, and in all sectors involving both private and public institutions.

In more technical terms, corruption is a "rent seeking system", in which state officials and private enterprises work together for mutual benefit at the expense of the public interest. These state officials who hold bureaucratic power are "renting" their power to those who are willing to pay. In return, they provide special services and facilities to their "customers". As a result, collusion between the public sector (state officials) and the private sector (businesspeople) occurs.

The case of Judge Adi Andojo of the Supreme Court is a good example. This case is interesting because it shows us that this rent seeking system affects even high level state institutions, such as the Supreme Court. Clearly, what Hatta was saying three decades ago is valid even today.

Another interesting case is the dramatic escape of Eddy Tansil. Just like two years ago, when he was found colluding with high ranking state officials in securing Rp 1.3 billion (US$ 620 million) in financing, he is in the spotlight again. As we all know, Tansil was sentenced to 20 years in prison for fraud.

As a result, five bankers at state-owned Bapindo, were dismissed from their posts. They were also put on trial, found guilty and sentenced to several years. One recently died in prison. Two high state officials, Admiral (ret) Sudomo and a former minister of finance Dr. Sumarlin, who were alleged to have helped Tansil to get the bank credit, were discredited.

The heading of an article in The Jakarta Post on May 9, 1996, announcing that "Edy Tansil rarely travels alone" states the crux of the current situation. Now, the chief warden of the Cipinang prison in which Tansil spent a year, is another victim. He was dismissed immediately by the minister of justice, when it was known that Tansil had escaped. Sixteen others from Cipinang prison are being interrogated. The many victims of the Eddy Tansil saga prove that collusion is a group crime, it is not the responsibility of one individual. It constitutes cooperation between the "bad" and the "good" guys, working together within the rent seeking system. Yes, Eddy Tansil never travels alone, he travels within a system.

Many people were quite cynical about the Tansil trial. The public view was that Eddy Tansil is only one, among many others, who do this bank manipulation thing, using close connections with high level state officials. In the minds of corrupt people, the only mistake Tansil made was to get caught at it. There are many others still getting away with such maneuvering. Businesspeople in Jakarta know that what Tansil did is a common practice, it is a system that people cannot avoid. Most businesspeople would tell you that either you play within the system, or you will always stay at the bottom.

This rent seeking system was not born with the New Order in the mid 1960s. It had existed under former president Sukarno. Administrations may change, but this system survives, sound and prosperous.

It is true that from time to time there have been efforts to put an end to this rent seeking. During the Sukarno era, the Budhi Operation led by Gen. Nasution was launched to fight corruption within the state bureaucracy.

Under the New Order, Commission Four was established by President Soeharto to investigate corruption during the 1970s. Students have also been active in fighting rent seeking practices. In the 1970s, student demonstrations against corruption were reported extensively by the media. However, all these efforts ended up going nowhere. The rent seeking system has proved to be much stronger than any resistance to it.

Coming back to the Tansil case, it is clear that he got rich by using this system. His getting caught does not mean that the system has been destroyed. It is still there, sound and prosperous. The people involved in collusion may be a little bit timid now because of the massive press coverage, but the system has yet to die.

Eddy Tansil's escape is proof enough of this. Without the rent seeking bureaucrats, it is very unlikely that Tansil could have escaped.

The irony is that just a month before the escape, the minister of justice had visited the prison and determined that press reports about Tansil getting special facilities and treatment were true. He then ordered stepped up security for Tansil. In spite of this, Tansil managed to escape. This means, the system is more powerful than the minister.

"If the prison guard had not been corrupt, Eddy Tansil could have not escaped," said a friend. Another friend, Ariel Heryanto, quickly responded: "If the prison guards were not corrupt, and the many civil servants were not rent seekers, there would not have been an Eddy Tansil case at all."

Eddy Tansil is a product of the system, and he is clever enough to make the system work to his advantage. So, why are we all so angry at him?

Maybe, the more important thing to focus on is how to get rid of the system itself. Many people are beginning to relate the extensiveness of the rent seeking system with democracy, or the power of the people to control the government. At the moment, the government is more powerful than the civil society. It is difficult to get rid of rent seeking practices when the people lack the power to control the actions of the government. So, many businesspeople think, "If you can't beat them, join them." This makes the system even stronger.

However, some other people think that we don't have to wait for democracy to have a good governance. Although the instances are rare, history shows that clean government can exist even under authoritarian regimes.

Singapore is surely a case in point. Everybody knows that Singapore is not a democratic country politically. However, everybody has to admit that its state bureaucrats are relatively honest. I remember that a Singaporean cabinet minister, who was allegedly involved in collusion, committed suicide just as his trial was to begin. He had to face charges even though he had been a good friend of prime minister Lee Kuan Yew.

The writer is a researcher and sociologist based in Salatiga.