Indonesian Representatives, Lie to Me No More

By Yohanes Sulaiman & Weilin Han on 08:23 pm Apr 07, 2014

A while ago there was a TV series called “Lie to Me” where the main character, Dr. Cal Lightman (Tim Roth), was a psychologist helping law enforcement agents to analyze a suspect’s face and body movements to determine whether he or she was telling the truth.

Ahead of this year’s elections, hosts of TV programs and talkshows in Indonesia are suddenly turning into amateur psychologists. Walking in Lightman’s footsteps, they are analyzing people in similar ways, inviting experts to help reading gestures of various electoral candidates, interpreting and adding meanings, giving seals of approval and disapproval.

Those who felt threatened and humiliated by such analyses responded by claiming that the television hosts were campaigning against them. At the same time, those who were praised in the shows are using the analyses as marketing tools for self-promotion: to show what great candidates they are.

By the end of the day though, these analyses have no objective value. It’s pure entertainment. There is very little correlation between how candidates make gestures and whether they will perform well once they are elected (if that’s the case, then psychopaths would be the best presidents).

On the other hand, there is another familiar way to determine whether a candidate will do as he or she says. It is called a track record. The candidate has to prove what they have done and how they manage conflicts. He is expected to give evidence of his performance, and not what he wishes he had done. An academic CV and list of previous positions may be important as a gauge of a person’s qualifications, but they are less important than experience in actually getting something done.

To some degree though, it is possible to combine both Lightman’s method and actual track records during this year of campaigning. By this we mean that we are taking scores of candidates’ past promises and gestures and see if they keep those promises.

For instance, one promise that often comes up during the campaign is that education will be improved.

“I promise that education should be free and accessible for everyone,” “we have to increase our education quality,” “we will pay attention to the teacher’s welfare” — and many other promises are blurted out in order to garner votes. In reality, though, while officially education is free, people are still saddled with various fees: study trips fees, uniform fees, donations, etcetera.

Moreover, records show that in the last two years, our Education Ministry made many promises, only to break them: look at Kurikulum 2013-gate (K13). The ministry boasted that this curriculum was the only savior for our education system — just like an advertising quack with tales of countless cures to every imaginable disease.

Let us refresh your memory on the broken promises surrounding K13. During the K13 socialization process, it was said that the state would bear the costs for production and dissemination of the books, teachers would be very happy because they did not have to spend a lot of time developing lesson plans and assessments. And since K13 was a progressive curriculum, the state would also provide a new format of the report card, which would show the student’s capacity holistically.

Grade-10 students would take cross-stream subjects that they like instead of following a rigid schedule. The school would use their past report cards and psychological test to make decisions. K13 training would only be carried out by certified and qualified trainers who master the concepts. The list goes on and on.

Let us be fooled no more. In reality it is all business as usual. The original “free books” was just a teaser. Schools must purchase K13 books now. Available lesson plans (which are very poorly written) were samples and teachers in the end had to create their own lesson plans. At the same time, the problem is that most teachers don’t have any clue about how to create their own K13-based lesson plans because not only were trainings limited, the trainers also were not briefed and prepared ahead of time.

Report cards? Schools must be creative, right? So, be as creative as you like. Choosing your cross-stream subjects? The guideline provided during the training officially mentioned that the students could do that only in Grade 11 — and not 10 as boasted. Some schools obediently follow the former instruction and some follow the latter. Monitoring, who cares?

In the end, talk is cheap and people should keep the old adage in mind: Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

We have learned the hard way that those who made promises turned out luring us into muddier and murkier conditions — and, to make matters worse, they used our tax money to do so.

We should now use the limited time available to learn about the track records of candidates. Obviously, we can always just shrug, believing there is no use in voting. Or, we can think that they are all liars anyway. But are you sure you want to lose your chance? Have we not learned to reject stiff-necked crooks?

We use our time to learn about candidates, because we don’t want to have ravening wolves in sheep’s clothing representing us.

Yohanes Sulaiman is a lecturer at the Indonesian Defense University (Unhan).
Weilin Han is a teacher-trainer and school consultant.

India Porn Scandal Holds Important Lesson for Indonesia's PKS

Self explanatory. Indonesia needs more accountability.

---

India Porn Scandal Holds Important Lesson for Indonesia's PKS

Yohanes Sulaiman & Phillip Turnbull | February 16, 2012

Last week, three ministers from Karnataka state in India resigned their positions after having been accused of watching a pornographic video during an assembly session. Even though the three ministers denied the accusation, claiming that they were only watching a video of a rave party, their Bharatiya Janata Party flatly ordered them to resign, lest its name be tarnished.

The Indian scandal should ring a bell in Indonesia. Last year, Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) politician Arifinto was caught by a photographer watching pornography on a tablet PC during a plenary meeting at the House of Representatives on April 8. This case triggered a public uproar — as Arifinto’s party was behind the notorious anti-pornography law — but unlike the Indian scenario, it would take no less than half a year before he would be out of the House.

Both India’s BJP and the PKS here are known for their brands of religious fanaticism. The BJP, for instance, was widely criticized for its tolerance of Hindu radicals and its right wing was deemed to be responsible for clashes with the Muslim minority in India. The PKS, on the other hand, supports Mayor Diani Budiarto of Bogor, who has shown contempt for the Constitution by ignoring a Supreme Court ruling in the ongoing GKI Yasmin controversy there.

The similarity, however, ends here. While the BJP forced its ministers to pack their bags immediately, the PKS allowed the Arifinto scandal to linger.

How is this possible and what does it mean for the future of Indonesia’s most prominent Islam-based party?

Arifinto’s defense was that he had received an e-mail from an anonymous person. He said he opened an attachment, which turned out to contain pornography, but pictures suggested otherwise.

Amid public pressure, Arifinto said he would resign: “As a pioneer in my party, I am drawn to take responsibility [for my actions] for the sake of the continuity and good image of my party.”

The announced resignation brought Arifinto praise and admiration from all quarters. Deputy House Speakers Pramono Anung and Priyo Budi Santoso lauded him and suggested he was a model of responsibility and accountability for other politicians, all too rare these days.

Facing inquiries from the press on whether he was really resigning, Arifinto was quoted as saying: “I am serious. If the PKS asks me to write a letter of resignation ... I will do it right away.”

But things turned bizarre when, on April 29, Arifinto turned up at the House for work as usual. He announced that his letter of resignation had been submitted to the PKS and had to be approved by the party’s executive board and the General Elections Commission (KPU). After that, the next stage would be the OK from the Home Affairs Ministry, before moving on to the State Secretariat and finally the presidential nod and signature.

By this time it seemed that Arifinto had changed his mind and his tactics. Shifting responsibility for his resignation away from himself and onto his party, he decided to play for time. This way he might stall or even renege on his promise by relying on the notoriously slow and inefficient Indonesian bureaucracy.

Not surprisingly, House leaders began to get fidgety as Arifinto’s antics didn’t make them look good. On top of that, he appeared to be challenging their role in the protocols. Arifinto continued to claim that as long as his resignation had not been processed and the president had not signed off on it, he would stay on. And presumably he continued to draw a salary.

Things remained as they were until May 5, when the PKS announced that Mardani would replace Arifinto. Mustafa Kamal, PKS leader at the House, said Mardani would take up his post somewhere “in the immediate future.”

Yet months went by before on Sept. 9, House Speaker Marzuki Alie complained that Arifinto was still considered an “active lawmaker” and drawing a salary. Rather than taking responsibility as the speaker of the legislature, Marzuki blamed the PKS for not taking any action.

On Oct. 20, Mardani was finally inaugurated at the House, and Arifinto was out. But by allowing the process to take several months, our representatives made a mockery of the idea that politicians have to own up to their actions.

For the BJP, the pornographic scandal was intolerable. It went against its credibility and morality as a Hindu nationalist party — especially in the face of potentially losing precious votes in the prosperous Karnataka state. For the no-less-moralistic, Islam-based PKS, however, it seems that its pornographic scandal was just a minor inconvenience.

This difference in attitude is exactly the reason why the BJP is India’s second-largest party, while the PKS remains small. This is unlikely to change: Indonesia may have to tolerate a certain amount of hypocrisy in politics, but voters won’t stimulate the practice at the polls.

---

quas

11:28am Feb 16, 2012

What does it say here? Hindus have a lower tolerance for hypocrisy than Muslims

devine

11:54am Feb 16, 2012

ques; maybe. Could also be that the Indians take there mandate seriously while here it is just playing around...

didikarjadi

12:13pm Feb 16, 2012

It is just more evidence that despite our religious piety and ritualistic behavior and endless hypocrisy, we are arguably one of the most, if not the most, morally fragile nations on the Planet.

padt

6:41pm Feb 16, 2012

What alarms me is the disdain with which politicians treat the public. They behave as if a vote doesn't count and that they are untouchable.

Perhaps they are.

Perhaps a vote here is worthless - that the elctoral system is such that the people who end up in the House are put there by the Parties and their rich backers not the voice of the people expressed in the ballot box.

In other places politicians who act like this are chucked out by the public - and the politicians live in fear of it.

Not much fear of voter backlash in Indonesia. A fair bit of scorn and contempt seems to be the way politicians act.

I saw this in action at the airport once.

One of Indonesia's 'best' and honest politicians walked though the terminal. I watched her intently. She looked at the public as if they were scum and smelt. Not a smile, not a word to anyone, not any acknowledgment of anyone. She walked by with an arrogant look on her face and her head held high. And she's supposed to be one of the best.

devine

8:11pm Feb 16, 2012

padt; yes...they are untouchable (only maybe 0.00001% get caught doing something wrong... maybe they didnt pay off enough people). Yes, too, the vote is worthless. And, you must be talking about Mega. My father in law run for a seat at DPR. Big fuzz, inviting all friends to organize votes for him; simple question of mine: what is your program? Answer; big SMILE and "we dont need program, we only need votes". Says it all...

DrDez

8:32pm Feb 16, 2012

devine
Interesting... In 2nd free election (sic) a man I had known for many years ran with Golkar. I thought him a decent man, good to his workers, family and all round good egg

One evening he had people 'round' prior to his election including Bu n I. After all the usual stuff (lots of spirts BTW) everyone went, as we went to go he asked me what I thought. I asked him about his policies (which I expected us to be listening to)

His answer was 'oh we can sort that out once Im in the house'... so I asked what was the purpose of tonight - His answer with a big smile... 'to guage how much I will need to borrow to get elected'... since then he has gone on to be a decent member of the house I think - I cannot help notice however his massively increased and obvious wealth - from 7 Series BMW's to at least 3 luxury homes in less than a decade... Impressive stuff

devine

9:13pm Feb 16, 2012

Yes DrDez. Exactly. That is how it works. And I guess there is also only a 0.00001% exception to this. Somehow I think we are doomed. No, wrong. We are doomed. When I was young I thought/dreamed positively and enthusiasticlly "what would I do if I were Pres" (still believing that our country could make everybody progress in one or the other way). I have given up... it has become such a mess.

Yohanes-Sulaiman

7:31am Feb 17, 2012

@All: thanks for your comments. I don't think Hindu has less tolerance to hypocrisy, it is just like Devine and Dr.Dez impliy: they don't take their voters for granted, unlike in Indonesia, where they expect to BUY votes and then use their time in the government to recoup the investment and to gain some nice tidy profit before retiring, sometimes forced, into a short pleasant time in private, air-conditioned, luxurious rooms in prisons.

Warisan Gus Dur: Wacana Pemakzulan Dalam Politik Indonesia

Artikel di Kompasiana, sebelum menulis secara teratur di the Jakarta Globe. Hampir saja terlupakan, padahal cukup suka isinya.

------------

Warisan Gus Dur: Wacana Pemakzulan Dalam Politik Indonesia

OPINI | 23 February 2011 | 09:02185 2 Nihil

---

Indonesia mungkin salah satu negara terajaib di dunia, di mana hampir setiap minggu terjadi wacana pemakzulan (impeachment) kepada presiden dengan alasan apa pun, dari ketidakmampuan untuk mengangkat harkat rakyat miskin, kerusuhan agama, sampai karena presiden tidak mau (atau tidak mampu secara hukum) untuk membubarkan Ahmadiyah. Fenomena ini terjadi karena dua hal: pertama adalah karena kesuksesan para politisi dalam memakzulkan Gus Dur dan karena popularitas SBY yang dianggap terlalu tinggi.

Tulisan singkat ini akan membahas kedua penyebab fenomena itu dan kemudian dilanjutkan dengan implikasi dari wacana pemakzulan ini. Intinya, walaupun wacana pemakzulan dikumandangkan sebetulnya untuk mencegah berdirinya kembali sebuah pemerintahan otoriter ala Orde Baru, tapi dampaknya justru akan mengurangi keseriusan dari proses pemakzulan itu sendiri, dan ujungnya akan berbahaya untuk kehidupan berbangsa dan bernegara.

Asal mula fenomena pemakzulan bisa dilacak dari pada saat kejatuhan Pemerintahan Gus Dur, di mana elit-elit politik Indonesia, yang sudah gerah atas tingkah laku Gus Dur, dengan menggunakan alasan skandal korupsi Bulogate, bersepakat untuk menjatuhkan Gus Dur. Jatuhnya Gus Dur sendiri, walau dipengaruhi banyak faktor, terutama dengan bersatunya semua kelompok politik Indonesia dan tentara Indonesia, menjadi sebuah tonggak sejarah penting. Bahwa pertama kalinya seorang presiden atau pemimpin di Indonesia bisa dijatuhkan lewat jalur hukum, tanpa kekerasan, tanpa menggunakan jalur kudeta, dan setelah kejatuhannya pun, tak ada kekacauan, perang saudara, krisis berkelanjutan dan sebagainya.

Rupanya, presiden bukan lagi seorang tokoh yang tak bisa diganggu gugat, ala Sukarno atau Suharto, tapi hanya seorang politisi biasa.

Karena proses dan kesudahan dari jatuhnya Gus Dur relatif mulus (juga disebabkan karena Gus Dur memang Gus Dur, tak peduli tapi sekaligus berjiwa besar), maka pemakzulan menjadi dianggap alat politik yang normal. Wacana pemakzulan pun masuk ke kancah perbendaharaan politik Indonesia, di mana untuk mengontrol tingkah laku seorang presiden, wacana pemakzulan selalu dikumandangkan.

Tak heran, sewaktu SBY terpilih dengan angka yang cukup tinggi (62%) dan popularitasnya yang kelihatannya terus tinggi di masyarakat, wacana pemakzulan pun semakin rajin dikumandangkan. Kelihatannya memang ada ketakutan bahwa SBY, dengan popularitasnya yang tinggi, akan mencoba menggunakan popularitasnya tersebut untuk mengubah konstitusi, membuat dirinya bisa terpilih terus, atau melakukan kudeta eksekutif, seperti dengan Dekrit, yang dilakukan Sukarno di tahun 1959. Apalagi mengingat DPR, yang seharusnya menjadi pengawas dan pengontrol fungsi badan eksekutif, justru mengalami penurunan popularitas yang luar biasa, sampai meraih angka 20%.

Di saat badan eksekutif terlalu kuat dan populer, maka ancaman pemakzulan pun terus dikumandangkan untuk memberikan peringatan kepada eksekutif bahwa jangan sampai ia mencoba menjadi Tuhan.Apalagi mengingat SBY memang terlalu berhati-hati, kelihatannya para politisi menemukan senjata konta yang bisa membuat SBY diam seribu bahasa dan tak mampu untuk mengubah popularitas yang begitu tinggi menjadi mandat untuk bertindak tegas dan melakukan terobosan-terobosan kontroversial tapi diperlukan untuk bangsa.

Bahwa SBY pun masih merasa perlu untuk menjawab tantangan dari organisasi sekelas FPI soal wacana pemakzulan, memperlihatkan bahwa wacana pemakzulan memang sangat ditakuti dan bisa menjadi senjata bagi ormas-ormas lain yang ingin didengar.

Namun yang menjadi permasalahan adalah semakin masuknya wacana pemakzulan ke kosa kata perpolitikan Indonesia, semakin ide pemakzulan itu sendiri kehilangan kredibilitasnya dan kewibawaannya. Bahwa organisasi jalanan seperti FPI berani menggunakan kata pemakzulan kepada pemerintah yang dipilih dengan sah melalui pemilu, memperlihatkan bahwa pemakzulan pun sudah kehilangan makna sakralnya.

Pemakzulan harusnya menjadi alat kontrol paling ujung DPR dan MPR kepada eksekutif, semacam tombol yang meledakkan bom nuklir. Jika wacana pemakzulan ini terlalu sering dilempar ke luar, akibatnya adalah masyarakat pun tak lagi menganggap pemakzulan adalah hal yang serius. Pemakzulan bukan lagi pilihan terakhir untuk mengekang badan eksekutif yang dianggap sudah melanggar tatanan hukum dan peraturan. Pemakzulan menjadi alat pemaksaan, bahwa karena saya bisa memakzulkan kamu, kamu harus tunduk. Itu bukan demokrasi. Itu adalah ciri negara yang tak tahu hukum dan peraturan.

Penurunan derajat kata “pemakzulan,” dari alat untuk mengontrol pemerintah menjadi alat untuk lempar-lemparan lumpur dan bahasa jalanan sebuah organisasi preman, yang mewakili mungkin hanya seperseratus dari seperseribu rakyat Indonesia yang mayoritas adalah moderat dan justru menentang aksi-aksi anarkis yang belakangan ini terjadi, merupakan sebuah gejala yang sangat buruk dan merusak kredibilitas istilah ini.
Bahkan jika memang di masa depan Indonesia memiliki presiden yang berkelakuan buruk dan perlu diturunkan, rakyat yang sudah bosan dan kebal dengan wacana pemakzulan ini tak akan lagi memberikan perhatian. Bila saat itu tiba, siapa yang perlu disalahkan?

Jangan sampai “pemakzulan” bernasib seperti anak yang berteriak “serigala.”

A Commission Without Courage

A critical review of the election of the new head of the Corruption Eradication Commission.
---
A Commission Without Courage
Yohanes Sulaiman & Phillip Turnbull | December 08, 2011

Last week, the justice commission at the House of Representative confirmed Abraham Samad as the new head of the Corruption Eradication Commission. His appointment was unexpected, considering that the front-runner was Bambang Widjojanto, who was believed to have the blessing of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s administration. Instead, Abraham won in a landslide.

While many in the media have expressed their support for Abraham’s appointment, others are suspicious. In an interview with Inilah.com, Great Indonesia Movement Party (Gerindra) politician Martin Hutabarat expressed his puzzlement about the mechanisms of the vote.

The public has a right to be skeptical of Abraham’s promise that he would resign in a year should the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) fail to do its job. They need point only to a history of unfulfilled promises by Yudhoyono’s administration to eradicate corruption.

Public trust in the KPK has steadily declined after a string of failures to convict corrupt officials and to bring high-profile fugitives to justice. In August, the Indonesian Survey Circle (LSI) said that the public’s trust of the KPK had declined from 58.3 percent in October 2005 to 41.6 percent in June 2011.

While the drop was not as drastic as the one for the legislature, political parties and other law enforcement agencies, it is imperative for the KPK, as the agency tasked with fighting corruption, to halt and reverse its falling numbers. This will give it the political capital necessary for the antigraft commissioners to maintain their integrity and do their job. Without public support, it would be easy for corrupt politicians to dismantle the commission once and for all.

The question, then, is how to reverse the popularity decline. Perhaps we need to go back to Abraham’s vow, as it poses an interesting question: By what standard will his leadership of the KPK be judged?

Perhaps the first thing that the KPK should do is to become more systematic about tackling corruption. In the past, it seems that instead of attempting to build strong cases against corrupt officials, the agency has just followed the whims of the public and politicians, prosecuting cases because they are getting lots of media attention or because of political pressure.

With the growing demand for quick results and media sound bites, the KPK has lurched from one public relations disaster to another.

While the KPK has had notable successes, it is the cases that are not prosecuted that raise questions about who is minding the store. As a result, the KPK is in danger of appearing unfocused and susceptible to influence. Rather than a commission to eradicate corruption, the KPK could well become an institution to empower it.

The KPK, regardless of who leads it, must be independent and act according to the law, difficult as that may be. It must regain momentum and be resolute in its work, even if the government isn’t. The astonishing spectacle of a corrupt institution choosing who will investigate it laughably points to this.

Unlike the government, which clearly does not have the will or the know-how to build community support that is authentic and in touch with the aspirations of the majority, the KPK needs to stand up and ride out the storm. It needs to create its own network of broad-based community support, not one manipulated by the government.

To what degree will Abraham represent the aspirations of the people to see justice done in real corruption cases that strike at the heart of the nation’s justice and democracy? Asked about his political and religious convictions, Abraham gave a far from satisfactory response: “I’m just average.”

The answer lacks courage. If it is any indication of his leadership, it does not bode well for the future of the KPK.

What is required is someone who is prepared to prosecute hard and politically fraught cases with a determination and ruthlessness that puts the government and lawmakers on notice. It must be willing to take on the cases that involve those who are doing the most damage to the country and the livelihood of ordinary people, especially those most in need and vulnerable.

Abraham must be prepared to bite the hand that feeds him. If he doesn’t, the commission’s powers will be inexorably eroded and democracy and civil rights will be at risk as the country becomes even more the plaything of robber barons and their clans posing as a legitimate representative government.

The media, lawmakers and the administration can easily make this happen by continuing to distract both the KPK and the public with demands for more superficial investigations that are really just sideshows to the main event. The government and lawmakers have already demonstrated that they are unwilling to commit to corruption eradication because it is clearly not in their interest to do so. Their power and livelihoods are at stake.

So too, at this moment in time, is the effectiveness of the KPK. The ball is in Abraham’s court. And the people will remind him of his promise.

----

trueblue

9:44am Dec 9, 2011

Yohannes/Turnbull. Gents, once again a scholarly and balanced piece. I was surprised that you considered Abraham's personal summary of his political and religious convictions, i.e., " I'm just average" as a far from satisfactory response. Given the false pious posturing that is culturally endemic, I view Abraham's response as refreshingly honest. You have correctly highlighted that his role can be frustrated by distractive media and others, Abraham needs to immediately form a vibrant media unit. Professional communicators who are able to continually feed the gamut of media the positive work the KPK is doing, will again see the organisation's trust rise in the LSI. A good operator knows the importance of "feeding the chooks". A year is a long time in politics and Abraham is complimented for setting a time line to measure his success.

DrDez

11:50am Dec 9, 2011

Y&T
I actually hope with my heart that the KPK can continue its fight and overcome the difficulties and in deals that are so damaging to the nation and at least start to bring some order and respectability to our politics.
My head on the other hand says that his appointment - especially with such a large and quite frankly unjustified majority - smells rank.
I suspect two things are at play. Firstly he may well as you suggested be too weak to withstand political pressure and in essence the KPK will then become a political tool - used by those who influence him for their gain. On the other hand his failure and possible fall will drag the KPK further into the mire and as indicated make it easier to close... As Mafud said.. I really have no idea how to stop this spiralling issue either.
Good luck to him - I suspect he will start making unfathomable statements shortly..
Only Indonesia?? probably in a very select club at least

Yohanes-Sulaiman

11:56am Dec 9, 2011

@Trueblue:

Thank you for your comment. There are several things that you should realize though:
(1) This guy is close to fundamentalist group Laskar Jundullah, which were involved in the ethnic conflict in Molucca back in late 1990s/early 2000s and defending them. He also close to the the Committee to Uphold the Shariah in Indonesia (KPSI) and Abu Bakar Bashir of Majelis Mujahiddin Indonesia fame. Put that in the context, and... make your own conclusion.
(2) Ok, I'll bite that maybe being humble religiously would be a plus. But, politically, it should be a great time for posturing -- and that brings to my point (3) what would be your criteria for being a successful leader? Cleaning up Century in a year? What this guy aims to accomplish in a year, that we can go back to the point of reference and say "oh yeah, he said a, b, c and managed to deal with them successfully."

That's why we are very worried.

DrDez

2:11pm Dec 9, 2011

Yohanes
His links with extremists may well be a plus since only recently another associate Rizaq proposed capital punishment for those found guilty of corruption...
However in the real world his relationship with such groups points to selective corruption fighting - ie with the transgressions of those affiliated with political Islam being ignored and other groups/individuals being harangued
I share you concerns and wonder how the administration is seemingly allowing Islamic law and those influenced by it to creep in - unless they are complicit and have 'assurances'
But what concerns me most specifically is how a man of such little standing and experience can get such a landslide victory - Perhaps his first job should be to investigate the voting process - I suspect its another dark day for the nation

Yohanes-Sulaiman

2:23pm Dec 9, 2011

@DrDez: Thanks for your excellent comment as usual. Right after he was elected, I actually heard from some well connected sources, that his unexpected victory was thanks to him being wished to win by a certain government organization wishing to control whoever get investigated -- so they could quash it right from the beginning of the investigation.

I do hope that my sources were wrong...

DrDez

7:49pm Dec 9, 2011

Yohanes
The conspiracy theories are abound and any of them could be true.
Again though it breaks my heart to see so little pribumi interest - the mass simply care not one jot, oh they moan every now and then and talk about the good old days but that is the end of the road.. How long can these people shun their responsibility? The mass and the elite...???

Yohanes-Sulaiman

9:01pm Dec 9, 2011

The problem here is that people cannot demand responsibility from the elites, because there's no mechanism for direct removal for "bad elites." There are three things to do: (1) Create a strong civil society, not just fly-by-night NGOs that live to extort, and thus ruining the credibility of the civil society itself, (2) creating a strong mass organization that possibly will end up as professional political party, that will provide alternative to our current broken political system, and finally (3) Create mechanism to punish the elites, such as through direct district election, where instead of parties, you pit one politician against the others. It would, however, require people to be fed enough that they would forgo the free "nasi bungkus" and a hundred thousand voter incentive fee and to just throw the bums out.

DrDez

6:52am Dec 10, 2011

Yohanes
I have said much the same - online, speaking at events, dinners etc re point 3 specifically** - however having a mechanism relies heavily on its non corrupt application and that is just unattainable because you are asking the criminals to police the criminals - PS Afrindo is still drawing pay I understand
The true power is with the man on the street - the voter - but as you say while they will vote for $9 and a rice box or riot and even kill for less - then what hope is there that they will accept their part in the self destruction - because it is without doubt getting worse
I am in fact running out of respect for the humanity of most Indonesians
(padt made a similar comment re ethics, behaviour and morals recently) - After 43 years my dear friend that is a sad day. Now retired we are seriously considering a full retreat back to Paris
** but ask what they will do to change it & its a silent wall of embarrassment - why? because they are probably corrupt too

trueblue

7:15am Dec 10, 2011

yohannes, it would therfore follow that if I offered a free feed of nasi bungkus, martabak in a box with my face printed on it, plus T shirt with slogan, a small Aqua and 200,000, would I romp it next time?

padt

10:29am Dec 10, 2011

Dr Dez,
"(padt made a similar comment re ethics, behaviour and morals recently)"
Indeed I did. And what a blast I got.
Touchy, aren't they!
Last year I was working volunarily with a government institution where I was taken for a ride, my generosity abused and I had to endure all kinds of unacceptable conditions. In the end I withdrew my services having done quite an amount of work (free) for them and improved their conditions considerably. But I got fed up with being the only one doing any work while the rest of them sat on their bums. I left.
A delegation was sent to me, asking me to reconsider and return and do a lot more work for this agency for free and fix up all their other problems but first (wait for it!) I had to go to the boss and apologise to him and ask his permission to return.
I told them to shove it up their arse!
Thats part of the problem. These people are living in cloud cookoo land and they call it 'face' and 'respect'.
I call it blatant arrogance and studidity.

DrDez

11:49am Dec 10, 2011

Trueblue
Sadly with the new laws governing who can run for election and the formation of political parties unless you are already deep in the fold you have zero chance even if you offered 10x
Political protectionism, military protectionism, trade protectionism, religious protectionism, environmental protectionism...To benefit the few and screw the rest

DrDez

12:27pm Dec 10, 2011

Padt
Years ago I was asked by the governor to advise on spatial planning. I agreed & the planers & I drew up a list of rules that would govern building in the city. They were submitted to the governor Weeks later we were summoned to the palace. When there we were bullied by the commission 1 by 1 the team apologised in open court, I refused; threats where made (deportation,KPK, even the threat of legal action to recover my fee) I then told them that I had worked 6 months FOC NO FEE. The guy nearly choked. It transpired that I had been paid $50K for my services, I had not.
I asked to see the rules so we could explain them. I was given the sheet & as I suspected many had been replaced. I had the original and passed it to the president - Meeting over
Any free work now is for the wife's foundation - the Biz will not deal with any govt institution, they are lazy, selfish & greedy & that has leached into society; which is the point you made. Morally superior? what planet are Indo's on...

Valkyrie

5:37pm Dec 10, 2011

DrDez:

Impressive indeed! Sorry about the 50K...and obviously the president did not do anything about it.

Yohanes-Sulaiman

10:40pm Dec 10, 2011

@DrDrz&Padt: thank you so much for your great comments. I also have several horror stories, but I doubt that they reached the epic proportion of DrDez's. Needless to say, there are just several combinations here going on: laziness, opportunists, backstabbing, etc -- basically all the seven deadly sins and their derivatives are pervasive in Indonesian bureaucracy -- thus the biggest question is that how on earth a country as dysfunctional as Indonesia managed to achieve a relatively high economic growth. But we'll digress.

Of course we all know: just wrap yourself under religious and nationalism and take a religious pilgrimage for a safe measure, and suddenly your sins are forgiven and you are as clean as a new baby.

On another note, though, it seems to me that people are getting wiser and very skeptical nowadays to both religion and nationalism (as I discussed in my other pieces). Still, the challenge now is to make sure that people know how to fix the system -- not making it worse.

DrDez

7:06am Dec 11, 2011

Yohanes
I am unsure that people are wiser - a great many are still easily tamed or bought
Re Nationalism - It only ever ends up one way - violence - be it civil or international - Nationalism is an evil weapon in the toolbox of people who wish to cover their own failing or capture / maintain power over another group
We should not confuse or mistake pride in the nation with nationalism

DrDez

9:29am Dec 11, 2011

Val
Not that I am aware - someone clearly stole $50K - someone clearly modified our proposals for some benefit or other - and as usual when it was exposed the ranks closed - Something we see in all walks of life here -
I never had an apology, recognition of the work etc in fact it was stony silence until 2009 when I was asked again (by the same person) to provide a critique of the 2010 proposals - I am sure you can guess my response - Bu Dez suggested I learn more Javanese insults just to ensure they fully understood :)

trueblue

11:26am Dec 11, 2011

@DrDez.My wife is forever haggling me over my mangling of the local lingo . . . and the six dialects she can play with as well! Of course in English one can normally get away with the with words of only four letters. Sometimes out of sheer frustration you can choose the wrong four letter word. Take padt for example. In his contribution yesterday he elected to use the word arse instead of anus, an example of the nuances of English. This example is extremely useful for those struggling to switch from English to Bahasa. Here's the the trick. When in doubt and stuck with your Bahasa vocab., simply remember padt, and phonetically say the English word and add . . .arsi.

House Budget Process Is Ripe for Reform

----
House Budget Process Is Ripe for Reform
Yohanes Sulaiman | October 05, 2011

House Speaker Marzuki Alie (third right) with four house deputy speakers Taufik Kurniawan, Pramono Anung, Priyo Budi Santoso, Anis Matta, and National Police Chief Gen. Timur Pradopo (second left) attend a meeting at House of Representatives complex in Senayan, Jakarta, Sept. 29. (Antara Photo/Andika Wahyu)

Last week, Indonesia was again entertained by the embarrassing spectacle of a standoff between the Corruption Eradication Committee and the House of Representatives Budget Committee.

In response to what lawmakers from the Budget Committee called an “insulting” grilling by the body known as the KPK, the committee froze discussion on the 2012 state budget and refused to comply with the KPK’s summons for further questioning.

At the same time, the KPK insisted it acted based on the revelations from its investigation of the Manpower and Transmigration Ministry, saying the Budget Committee received kickbacks in exchange for raising the budget for the ministry. It then refused to answer House Speaker Marzuki Alie’s subpoena, claiming it had too much work.

Regardless of who is at fault in this standoff, there are many signs that something fishy is going on. The growing evidence suggests the committee has too much power over the budget and there are too few safeguard mechanisms.

As noted by Ahmad Muzani, the head of the House’s Financial Accountability Body (BAKN), the Budget Committee has the ability to approve or reject every project in a ministry.

At a glance, this law improves transparency and forces ministries to be accountable to the committee, preventing the creation of “phantom projects” to pad ministries’ budgets and line the pockets of officials. Yet, without any independent supervision, the law can abused by a corrupt committee.

At a personal level, members of the committee might demand kickbacks to look past any signs of abuses. For instance, according to Tempo newspaper, the corruption investigation into the Manpower and Transmigration Ministry was over the padding of the budget to construct a solar power generator.

The budget went from Rp 5 billion to Rp 8.9 billion ($560,000 to $997,000), with Rp 1.5 billion reportedly set aside for the Budget Committee and Rp 1.5 billion for Manpower Minister Muhaimin Iskandar.

At the party level, this law might actually foster more corruption due to the close relationship between ministries and political parties. As noted by Indonesia Corruption Watch in June, many parties use their ministerial seats to fill party coffers. Thus, this “fox guarding the chicken coop” arrangement means that each party represented in the Budget Committee has an incentive to look the other way, lest its own deals be threatened. They have a motive to strike agreements with each other to make sure the carnival of plunder will continue and nobody will be the party-wrecker.

Not surprisingly, the KPK is interested in knowing the details of the committee and the mechanism by which the committee distributes and allocates funds to each ministry. Given how potentially threatening this is for the committee, it is only natural its members cry foul over the KPK’s actions.

At the same time, there are two narratives concerning the KPK’s motives. The first narrative is the usual “KPK as the white knight on the white horse” attempting to break apart the chummy “business as usual” politics between ministries and the House. There is no love lost between the KPK and the House, especially Marzuki, who never hides his desire to dismantle the KPK.

Marzuki has defended the Budget Committee and threatened the KPK’s leadership with a subpoena, saying the KPK had behaved inappropriately by “treating Budget Committee members as graft suspects.” For the KPK, however, by answering the subpoena, it might be seen as capitulating, undermining its reputation should its investigations uncover nothing of importance.

The second narrative, however, questions the motive of the KPK, especially the extent to which the KPK can be trusted to clean the House. One cannot easily discount the allegations made by Muhammad Nazaruddin that KPK leaders could be bought and that the commission has been abusing its power by extorting suspects to line its pockets.

In this narrative, the standoff is explained as one pitting the House that did not want the KPK to keep abusing its power against the KPK that wants to control the House by using its discoveries to blackmail the legislative body.

Regardless of which narrative one subscribes to, it is clear the law needs to be fixed and there must be an increase in transparency over the budgeting process to prevent another embarrassing spectacle. It is too hasty to simply disband the Budget Committee, as many have recently suggested. The Budget Committee still has its use, notably as the legislative branch’s tool to hold the executive body to account.

Instead of having the ability to veto each project, the committee’s authority should be limited to giving approval to the ministry’s overall budget. The committee, however, has the ability to question the merit of each project later, especially when there are allegations of impropriety.

To satisfy a skeptical public, there must be transparency in both the budgeting and auditing processes. The Budget Committee must be able to show there are no vested interests or political motives in questioning the project. Each project must be evaluated on its own merit, with the entire process open to public scrutiny.

With public trust in the House steadily declining, it has more to lose with playing the game of victim politics. Much better would be to show that the House is taking the high road by reforming itself

SBY’s Party Is Burning Down the House

This article was written while doing the research on public policy of Singapore. Talk about killing two birds with one stone.

----
SBY’s Party Is Burning Down the House
Yohanes Sulaiman | July 13, 2011

President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (Center) with Democrat Chairman Anas Urbaningrum (Left) and Mohammad Jafar Hafsah. (Antara Photo/Widodo S. Jusuf)

While discussing the Democratic Party’s proverbial slow-moving train wreck, a colleague of mine remarked that the Nazaruddin case was akin to someone trying to get rid of a rat by burning down the house. The rat escapes, while the house is burned to the ground.

It is an apt description of the upheavals in the party, with frequent new revelations about how entrenched corruption is in its ranks. The brands of both the Democratic Party and President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s have been forever tarnished.

Regardless of whether accusations involving Muhammad Nazaruddin — both those leveled against him and by him — are correct, the fiasco seems to prove the public’s worst fears, that corruption is entrenched in the political elite. Even in a government led by a party that campaigned under the slogan “Say No to Corruption,” a business-as-usual approach continues.

Still, the question remains, why is the house on fire at all? Corruption happens all over the world, even in Singapore, a country so regulated that there is a rule on the mandatory flushing of public toilets.

In 1966, Tan Kia Gan, then Singapore’s minister for national development, was investigated for accepting bribes worth 70,000 Singapore dollars ($57,000 in today’s terms). In 1976, the minister for the environment, Wee Toon Boon, was accused of accepting bribes worth more than 800,000 Singapore dollars from an Indonesian businessman. And in 1986, another minister for national development, Teh Cheang Wan, was investigated for accepting two bribes totaling a million Singapore dollars.

Yet such corruption scandals did not tarnish Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, nor Singapore’s stellar reputation as one of the cleanest nations on earth.

In Indonesia, on the other hand, the latest survey by the Indonesian Survey Circle found that only 47 percent of respondents approved of the government’s enforcement of the law, even though in October 2009, the Indonesian Survey Institute found that 84 percent of people approved of the government’s attempts to eradicate corruption.

The differences between Yudhoyono and Lee lie in the degree of decisiveness shown by the duo and their management of public perceptions.

In Singapore’s case, all three high-profile corruption cases were solved decisively and to popular satisfaction. Lee himself was instrumental in removing all of the ministers, regardless of their high positions in the government. Tan was stripped of his public appointments even though a witness refused to implicate him. Wee was convicted and imprisoned. Teh committed suicide before he was formally charged.

It is notable that the prime minister was instrumental in ensuring that these suspects were brought to justice. Instead of sitting idly by or intervening in favor of the defendants, Lee fostered an image of a stern leader unhappy with graft and working against the defendants by first stripping them of their immunity from prosecution and then by letting the wheel of justice move uninterrupted. When the defendants were judged guilty, he promptly stripped them of their positions. Not surprisingly, the image of Singapore as a serious, squeaky-clean place remains untarnished.

In Indonesia, Yudhoyono’s authority is steadily undermined by his own passivity in dealing with corruption scandals. In the Bank Century case, many people are convinced that former Finance Minister Sri Mulyani Indrawati was a scapegoat to save the Democratic Party. The presidential pardon of Aulia Pohan — a senior Bank Indonesia official and the father-in-law of one of Yudhoyono’s sons — smacked of nepotism and cronyism.

In the case of Nazaruddin, the party’s former treasurer, there have been official missteps and governmental agencies seem to be trying to outdo each other in destroying any remaining public trust in them. Nazaruddin’s ability to leave for Singapore raised eyebrows. This was followed by the revelation that Singapore had actually signed an extradition treaty and was waiting for Indonesia to follow suit.

When Yudhoyono last week berated his ministers, claiming they did only 50 percent of what he asked of them, the dressing down elicited collective yawns of “been there, done that.”

This was not the first time Yudhoyono had berated his ministers in public and yet all of them remained in place. Thus, instead of scoring political points, people saw it as a political gimmick to threaten other parties not to take advantage of the turmoil within the Democratic Party.

With official missteps occurring on a regular basis and the Nazaruddin case exposing corruption within the Democratic Party, it is no wonder that so many people are seriously questioning Yudhoyono’s true commitment to eradicating graft.

In contrast, Lee was known as a trigger-happy leader, willing to fire anyone who performed below his expectations. Not surprisingly, even today Lee remains influential in Singapore’s politics.

What really matters is whether people believe that the government will follow through on its promises. Many people believe that Nazaruddin’s accusations are truthful, as it vindicates their perception of the political elite.

In essence, the house is not burning due to a single rat. Rather, the house is burning because of a series of missteps by Yudhoyono and his party and a public weariness over corruption among the nation’s leaders.

Indonesia’s Culture Of Impunity Offers Too Many Excuses

Each time I re-reading this kind of article, I always go back and think, why on earth are we tolerating idiotic conducts of our so-called political elites? Why do they love to put their feet in their mouths?

Then I realize that there are three reasons:
1. They have no shame because they think they are beyond shame since they are the nobles. It is like the story of the Emperor's New Clothes.
2. No punishment for being stupid. Unlike in the US, when any single mistep will immediately be broadcasted in the 6 o'clock news (and YouTube), in Indonesia, there's no accountability at all. I admit that the MetroTV has been skewering many officials lately, but it is not a systematic skewering by entire mass media.
3. In the US, your opponent will use your gaffee in the election campaign to beat you to pulp. Here, these politicians are invulnerable because either (1) the leaders of their political party are their best pals, so that their position in the political party is practically secure, even though they are dragging the entire party through the mud with them or (2) people don't give a damn because they were paid to vote anyway, not to mention later some "winks and nods" with the electoral committee, ensuring that victory is ascertain. Besides, based on the 2009 election, seems that only very few people here in Indonesia had any bloody clue on how to run a proper political campaign anyway.

Okay, did I leave out something?

Jakarta Globe's readers' comments as usual are included.

Indonesia’s Culture Of Impunity Offers Too Many Excuses
Yohanes Sulaiman | April 11, 2011

A scan of recent news offers more evidence, if any were needed, that accountability means little in the upper ranks of politics and business in Indonesia.

Inong Malinda Dee, an employee of Citibank in Jakarta, last week declared that she was not guilty of embezzling millions of dollars from customers’ accounts. A day later, she promised to return the funds, while maintaining that her actions did not cost Citibank a penny. Her excuse for using her clients’ money? They had handed it over for her to manage.

House Speaker Marzuki Alie, when recently faced with heavy public objections over his plan to build a luxurious new building for the legislature, declared that opposing factions were only trying to sully his reputation. This was his latest in a series of gaffes, from his dismissive attitude toward victims of natural disasters in Mentawai — telling island-dwellers “If you’re afraid of waves, don’t live by the shore” — to his declaration that Indonesian migrant workers were hurting the country’s reputation with their bad work ethic and lack of skills (“Some of them can’t iron properly, so it’s natural if the employer ends up landing the hot iron on the migrant worker’s body”).

In refusing to resign from his post as chairman of the Indonesian Football Association (PSSI) this year, Nurdin Halid claimed that special interests and political pressures were working to oust him. He seemed to ignore the fact that under his leadership the PSSI’s reputation had sunk to a new low, dragged down by money politics, manipulation and the inability to control hooliganism at matches.

Arifinto, a Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) lawmaker, was caught on camera watching a pornographic video at a plenary session last week. He feebly claimed that he was checking his e-mail when he accidentally stumbled upon the pornographic material and deleted it immediately. The fact that a Media Indonesia journalist had sufficient time to take several photographs of the lawmaker viewing the material suggests otherwise.

Finally, the hard-line Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) has declared that Ahmadiyah must be disbanded for upsetting social harmony, despite the fact that it is the members of the religious sect who have been harassed, attacked and even killed in past months. Instead of defending the marginalized group, Religious Affairs Minister Suryadharma Ali blamed the Ahmadiyah for being un-Islamic.

In Yiddish English, such an attitude is called chutzpah, the classic tongue-in-cheek definition of which is “killing your parents and then asking the court to have mercy upon you as an orphan.” In Indonesian, it is called tidak tahu diri , or “not knowing oneself.”

Indonesia is not the only country with this kind of problem. The attitude is common throughout the world, from rich countries like Saudi Arabia to poor ones like Zimbabwe, from Western democracies like the United States to the totalitarian regime of North Korea. People say stupid things and deny responsibility for their actions. It’s always somebody else’s fault.

In Indonesia’s case, the difference lies in the frequency and the scale of denial. The more a society demands accountability from elected officials or public figures, the more careful these figures will be. This is generally a feature of mature democracies, where critical citizens demand social equality and competitive elections.

In advanced democracies such as Europe, the United States and Japan, there have been many cases of public officials resigning due to gaffes, inadequate contributions and unethical impropriety. The reason is simple: People hold officials accountable for their conduct, and they wield the power to vote them out.

By contrast, in an authoritarian society, or in nations where elections are not competitive due to the dominance of one political party, massive electoral manipulation or a nationwide coalition, politicians and public figures simply do not see themselves as accountable to the people. The higher their rank, the less accountable they feel.

Indonesia’s electoral system bolsters such a sense of impunity. Under the representative system, each party has the power to decide which of its members will have a seat in the legislature and government. The reason is simple: Citizens choose parties in the elections, not candidates. As a result, a candidate’s ability to rise to power and enjoy its perks is not controlled by the people.

Even when the Constitutional Court forced a mixed-system under which people could choose either a candidate or a party at the polls, electoral manipulation and lack of familiarity among voters — not to mention confusing ballot sheets full of names — meant that many people still ended up picking parties instead of candidates.

At the same time, back-room dealings among political players, coupled with a lack of law enforcement, helped violent groups such as the FPI become important tools for imposing political control.

For people who lack the finesse, familiarity or connections to engage in politics, they can rely on vocal and violent groups to signal to others that they are also key players in politics. Should those in power fail to serve their interests, they can bring out such groups to cause chaos and embarrass the government.

Political backing allows such violent groups to act with impunity, even taking over the regulatory function of the police. Such unchecked erosion in the authority of the police force further fuels the confidence of violent groups, as it signals to them that they are above the law.

With such an attitude of impunity running rampant, it is no wonder that public trust in the government’s ability to maintain order is declining.

There are three main solutions to this problem of accountability.

First, a major overhaul of electoral law is needed, changing the electoral system to purely a district basis of representation. Under this system, politicians will have to compete against each other solely on track records, forcing them to own up to their transgressions.

Second, rule of law must be implemented, under which violent groups will be given no room in the democratic system.

Third, and most important, is constant and insistent public pressure for accountability, demanding the heads of irresponsible public figures.

Such pressures are able to force change, even in China, where the “Tiananmen treatment” toward protesters allows the authoritarian regime to stay in power.

Last October, in China, Li Qiming was arrested for seriously injuring two girls while driving under the influence. One of the victims later died in the hospital. When the police came for him Li Qiming yelled, “Arrest me if you dare. My father is Li Gang” — the deputy director of local police.

Usually, a culture of nepotism would mean the case would be quietly shelved and the victims’ family pressured to drop the charges. This time, however, the Internet was soon buzzing with outrage — enough that in January Li Qimin was arrested and sentenced to six years a prison. It was a relatively light sentence, and yet, considering his position, it could be seen as progress.

Such popular pressures can force a strong authoritarian government to buckle, compelling it to address injustice. In a democratic Indonesia, we should expect this much and more.

xenocross

10:10am Apr 12, 2011

good article

serenityjam

10:51am Apr 12, 2011

I must congratulate Yohanes Sulaiman for a well-written dissertation on our country's propensity to tolerate abusive people from ostentatious display of power and wealth.


There is no excuse, therefore, for us NOT to be able to stop this nonsensical behavior.


Media should, however, begin with this crusade. Some correspondents write more of the personal side of the persons who caused the scandal and make them look like "innocent victims" rather than write about the harm and injury caused on the real victims. Behind the scenes is money flowing to cushion the impact of a scandal and press people should remember their code of ethics. If a few of them receive payola or palm greasing bribe, they should be denounced as well. Media organizations should police their ranks against these people whose impartiality has been tainted.


Educators, parents, and school administrators should now work to teach our youth about social responsibility and public accountability for professions and careers. Ethics and personal conduct when doing work either as a private citizen or public servant are values that need to be taught to our children even in primary levels.


Nice work, Yohanes Sulaiman!

Beware the Sin of Pride in Luxury DPR Tower

Great comments from my readers after this article.

We all know that the plan for the tower was finally cancelled.after much opposition. Still, I am always amazed how tone-deaf Mr. Marzuki Alie is - even today.


The proposed new DPR building. (JG Photo)

 Beware the Sin of Pride in Luxury DPR Tower
Yohanes Sulaiman | April 04, 2011

There is no religion in the world that does not warn of the danger of pride and hubris. Both the Koran and the Bible illustrate the peril of pride in verses about towers.

In the Koran, the Pharaoh’s disbelief of Moses’ god led him to order his official to build a tower because “I want to reach heaven, and take a look at the god of Moses. I believe he is a liar.” In the end, the Pharaoh and his officials were drowned in the Red Sea.

In the Bible, the first descendants of Noah decided to build a tower in Babel “whose top may reach unto heaven, and let us make us a name.” God decided to confound the language of men and thus the project failed and people were scattered all over the world.

So it is ironic that in Indonesia, the legislature, regularly seen as arrogant, imperious and out of touch with people, has declared its intention to build a luxurious new tower to replace its current building.

It is not that the legislature does not need a new building to increase its effectiveness. Putting aside the outrageous argument that the current structure is tilted seven degrees, as someone who has visited it many times I can agree with the other argument that it is very difficult to do anything there. The rooms are small and elevators are slow.

The question, however, is whether such problems justify the need for a Rp 1.3 trillion ($130 million) building (and this amount will surely increase), especially when many Indonesians are still mired in poverty and face problems in accessing proper education and health care, and the military needs new equipment such as destroyers and fast boats to effectively control porous maritime borders.

One can argue that perhaps better building management would be a more effective way to fix the problems, since many of the rooms are not used effectively and four out of six operating elevators are reserved for lawmakers and, as a result, are seldom used.

Still, for the sake of argument, let us agree that the legislature truly needs a new building due to the current building’s tilt and general deterioration. The question then, is what kind of building it needs. Is it really necessary to include a spa, massage parlors, swimming pool and other amenities when there are many hotels and malls nearby — even at walking distance — that provide the same services? Besides, are these amenities to be paid by taxpayers, even though ordinary taxpayers cannot ask for any tax deductions for visiting such places? To add insult to injury, members of the legislature themselves are so richly compensated that even a daily visit to massage parlors won’t dent their wallets.

Not surprisingly, faced with vehement public rejection, House Speaker Marzuki Alie denied that the new building would have massage facilities. But considering the fact that he remains adamantly opposed to making the blueprints of the new building open to public scrutiny, it would not be surprising should such luxuries creep back into the final plan.

This leads to the second question: Do the current members of the legislature really deserve such luxurious accommodation? In a private discussion, one lawmaker from the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) sadly told me he believed that only around 50 members of the House were properly qualified for their duties. Several experts in the legislature have angrily noted that many of their colleagues do not understand the issues of their supposed specialization, as many of them were recruited through nepotistic practices.

Not surprisingly, a significant majority of the public believes that lawmakers are arrogant and undeserving of the new building, regardless of whether the need for such a building is justified or not.

It is sad to compare the workings of the Indonesian legislature with those of its counterpart in the United States. I once interned for former US Senator Russel D. Feingold at his home office in Middleton, Wisconsin. Even while Feingold was in Washington, the home office remained busy. He was also very involved with regular happenings back in his home state: He sent congratulation letters to award-winning boy scouts and valedictorians and his office helped people who were having trouble with federal bureaucracy even while the senator himself was busy in Washington.

Many of Feingold’s colleagues also understand that they are there in the legislature to represent people, not to line their pockets and enjoy the perks. Moreover, accommodation in Washington comes directly from their own pockets and not from the government. Due to high housing costs in Washington, dozens of new Republican freshmen decide to sleep on cots in their offices, which range in size from 75 to 100 square meters. At the same time, they also need to accommodate about six staff members for each representative.

In stark contrast, the new Indonesian legislative building will have offices that are 125 square meters each, with lawmakers also enjoying subsidized housing and various other perks.

In short, Feingold and many of his colleagues in the US Senate and House understand that they need to earn every penny of their salaries and every vote they received. They do that by acting like adults, trying to understand what their constituents want and need, and behave humbly as members of Congress.

Sadly, such behavior is seldom seen in Indonesia. No wonder Abdurrahman “Gus Dur” Wahid once denounced the legislature as a kindergarten. By planning to build a Pride Tower and denouncing any criticism directed against the project out of hand, lawmakers showed that they simply don’t get it. They don’t seem to understand that they are elected by the people to represent them, not to enrich themselves and relax in luxury at a time when the country is burning with religious intolerance, corruption and abuses of power.

-----------
Comments:

dadeu

6:18pm Apr 4, 2011

The Question is Do They Deserved it ?? What they have given to this country but a bunch of [excrement]
This Greedy Moron will be burnt in hell ( I am writing it in English, because this moron will not understand a bit...)

 

BillWalters99

8:46pm Apr 4, 2011

I have often wondered why everyone thinks Democracy is such a great form of government. It doesn't work that great in the United States either. Washington D.C. is full of towers,too. And Obama had the taxpayer build his own, personal basketball court inside the White House! Now that's hubris.

enakajah

10:05pm Apr 4, 2011

Pak Yohanes, excellent article. You let the cat out the bag with this one. Good stuff.

subrotto

11:10pm Apr 4, 2011

BillWalters998."Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried."
The Obama's basketball court hadn't been built already cos white men can't jump!

blightyboy

11:37pm Apr 4, 2011

"Beware the Sin of Pride in Luxury"
I think the ship has sailed on this one.

Is this not what well off Indonesians are all about, once you get beyond the millions who spend their lives living in sh*t, with nothing at all and no prospects of any change in the future, isn’t it just all a big fancy facade. All show and no substance.

The flash cars, the oversized tasteless palatial homes, where the bigger and the more grossly ornate means the better. In reality the mock Greek and Roman architectural monstrosities that contain within an exhibition of the ultimate in bad taste, just style-less boxes, full of over ornate, badly made furniture, better suited to a cheap dollar a night bordello than a family home, and TV sets in every room. And of course the obligatory family portrait hanging on the wall, all puffed up, stiff and false like everything else.

Cities that contain no parks, no open spaces, no sidewalks, less and less trees. Where there is no culture, no museums or galleries of any quality, no theatres, and no libraries. Where all of the historical buildings are allowed to rot and crumble. Where the streets are broken, full of potholes and crap and garbage, and are never cleaned, accept when they flood. Where zero planning has created roads that are locked up by the flash oversized, gas guzzling SUV’s, choking the city inhabitants to death. Rivers that are just open sewers, and where the waters are so poisonous that not a living thing can survive in them. And then in comparison there are the endless concrete and glass Malls, full of big haired ladies, short skirted bimbo’s, and the hip phone texting western style-junkies, supplying overpriced luxury, and a million ways to over-indulge the senses, except culturally.

Yeh! This new building for the countries managers is a friggin wonderful idea. It will match everything else the inhabitants promote: all show and no substance.

Yohanes-Sulaiman

12:12am Apr 5, 2011

@Bill&Subrotto: Democracy, were it to run "as intended" provides the safety valve to prevent riots from occuring and at the same time a great mechanism to kick leaders that you hate. Indonesia, unfortunately, has a proportional system that strengthening the power of parties and political elites. Had Indonesia used the district system, each candidate then would have to pay attention to his or her district, because now people have the "face" of someone to hate, not simply a formless entity called "DPR."

On Obama: well, if enough people hates his guts, then he will be out in 2012.

@enakajah: thank you very much for your compliment.

@blightyboy: I agree with you and I dislike someone who loves to show off his/her wealth. Still, I think the well-off has the rights to show off their richess, but as long as they are not paid by taxpayers' money, which currently happens with the planned construction of this tower. It is one thing to show the prestige of an institution - the Capitol and the Westminster Building are good examples of elegant buildings that showing off national prestige, but at the same time, properly funded with only essential features included. In Indonesia's case, the timing is bad and the perks there, such as the spa, is really troubling.


I am surprised that nobody comments on my argument that what makes this plan outrageous is the idea that the taxpayers have to pay for something that is non-essential, such as massage and spa.I'd love to submit my tickets to swimming pools as a tax deduction.

Roland

12:45am Apr 5, 2011

@whoa - blightboy - you got your observations about Indonesian lifestyle for the nouveau riche social class just about on the spot. Couldn't agree more!

TGIF

6:01am Apr 5, 2011

There aren't any words to describe the momentum this country is heading...Hypocrisy in the shadow of a religion. Sadly Gus Dur is long gone, the games have already begun.

Once again a religion is being used to entertain the people in believing that forgiveness on a daily basis may somehow be pardoned. God can't be fooled. The devil can only smile on his triumph.

jetset24

6:24am Apr 5, 2011

Let's all call it a mall in one whole building...

It is doubtful that it will change anything in the way the lawmakers do business in tackling the domestic issues of the day. Perhaps there will be more relaxed time when the building may offer so much entertainment....Wink.

Indonesian parliament in SBY's second term

Ah, naivete. How sweet it sounds. I was really hoping when I wrote this article that the parliament would be jolted out into working hard due to their massive turnover in the election. Plus, SBY would use both his massive popularity and Partai Demokrat's position as the biggest party in the parliament into doing something constructive.

Thus, the past two years has been a major disappointment. How someone who started with so much ended up doing so little.

======================

Indonesian parliament in SBY's second term

Yohanes Sulaiman, Jakarta | Mon, 08/24/2009 11:39 AM

"You have sat too long for any good you have been doing lately. Depart, I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!"

 
Oliver Cromwell, the dictator of England, said those words when he dissolved the parliament in 1653. The Indonesian voters did the same thing in the 2009 legislative election when they voted out 70 percent of the members of parliament and replaced them with new faces, including those of actors and comedians.
 
This massive turnover of the parliament was understandable considering the fact that only very few voters really knew who the most effective members of parliament were. The majority of the members of parliament were virtually unknown, owing their seats to their party membership.
 
Therefore, in the 2009 election, as people voted based on how much they recognized the names on the ballot, it led to the high turnover rate.
 
This is both good news and bad news for Indonesian democracy.
 
The good news is that this shock will help improve the quality of the parliament.
 
The representatives will have to start paying attention to what their constituents really want.
 
It is clear from the election results that voters simply could not identify who was supposed to represent their home regions. Most incumbents came from Jakarta. Very few of them maintained their residency in their home constituencies. Even fewer knew what was going on in their home districts and what the main concerns of their constituents were. Not surprisingly, in LSI's survey taken after the parliamentary election, only 18 percent of respondents felt close to a particular political party.
 
Therefore, the newly elected legislators have to start taking their job seriously and to start paying attention to what voters really want if they want to retain their seats in 2014.
 
This means politicians will have to start tackling issues that people really care about, such as poverty, economic development and the rule of law, rather than wasting their time working on divisive and unnecessary laws such as the pornography law.
 
The bad news is that this period will be a huge challenge to the parliament and to the future of Indonesian democracy. As these new, inexperienced members are learning the ropes, unsure about their roles and responsibilities, they will be prone to the manipulation of more experienced politicians.
 
It will be a while before any new members will be able to understand their roles properly and to assert their own independence.
 
This spells a huge problem, considering the fact that the role of both the parliament and the judiciary is to check and balance the power of the executive branch. Compounding the problem is the fact that the parliament is very unpopular in Indonesia.
 
According to a study by Transparency International, the parliament is seen as the most corrupt institution in Indonesia, closely followed by the judiciary.
 
With a popular president on the executive branch, it will be difficult for the inexperienced parliament to assert its authority as a check against the executive.
 
Further complicating the matter is the fact that virtually every political party represented in the parliament is interested in becoming a part of SBY's new Cabinet, and thus do not have much incentive to oppose the president.
 
Without a credible opposition, the parliament will be completely beholden to the will of the president, thus damaging the constitutional role of the parliament. At that point, the parliament will no longer be a relevant political actor in Indonesia and this will damage the future of democracy in Indonesia.
 
The question then, what is to be done?
 
First, members of the new parliament must realize they have a moral duty as the representatives of the people, rather than advocating their own interests. As a result, they must try to connect and to gauge what their constituents really want.
 
Second, the parliament must institute ethical reforms in order to restore public trust in the body.
 
Third, they should keep in mind the fact that the constitutional role of the parliament is to be both partner and main critic of the executive branch. Even though parties have seats in the Cabinet, they have to understand that in order for democracy to be effective, the parliament has to maintain an attitude of being a loyal opposition.
 
Finally, coming back to Cromwell's quote, that quote basically signaled the dissolution of the British parliament and the beginning of Cromwell's dictatorship that lasted from 1653 to 1658. Therefore, without these changes in attitudes, the performance of this newly elected parliament will be much worse than in the previous period. This would be a huge blow for Indonesian democracy.