Safeguarding Good Governance

Amid the effort to fight Covid-19 and raised hopes in the face of uncertainties in early 2021, our two governance indexes have dropped. They are the Corruption Perception Index and the Democracy Index.

The Corruption Perception Index (CPI) declined from 40 in 2019 to 37 in 2020, causing Indonesia’s rank to plunge from 85th to 102nd out of 180 countries. Meanwhile, the Democracy Index reached the lowest point in 14 years, scoring 6.3 and putting Indonesia in 64th place out of 167 countries.

While the CPI placed Indonesia on a par with Gambia, the Democracy Index categorized Indonesia as having a flawed democracy.

Whether there was correlation or not, the Palace reacted. President Joko Widodo appealed that the public more actively convey criticism of government performance, while the government was asked to promote the quality of public service (Kompas.com, 8/2/2021). The Cabinet Secretary also affirmed that the government should be “strongly and sharply” criticized (Kompas.com, 9/2/2021).

Also read: Corruption Emergency

Also read: Score in Corruption Index Falls, Alarm bells ring for Corruption Eradication

Certainly, regarding the indications of corruption and democracy quality descent, it is easy to make denials, find excuses or give justifications. However, it will be more beneficial to look ahead to the future with both indexes serving as a warning in order to exercise greater caution in matters of governance.

Between ideas and interests

It seems that the key to comprehending various problems, including governance, is understanding the contest between ideas and interests.

Ideas refer to ideal aspirations. Therefore, they are congruent with ideologies. They give guidance to imagination and reason about what is “good” for oneself as well as others. Ideas are related to values and excellence, such as openness, transparence, democracy and justice.

Interests are connected with what is good and convenient for oneself or one’s own group and the attempt to maintain them. While ideas are close to criteria and ethics, interests are in conformity with the performance of resource handling and power.

Kompas

Indonesian Corruption Perceptions Index 2009-2019. The bigger of the index number, the more perceived the state is to be clean from corruption.

Of course, in real life no ideas or interests alone are fully strived for. There is always a tug-of-war and mutual influence. In a healthy situation, the pursuit of interests is balanced by debates about ideas and vice versa.

But in an unhealthy situation, ideas are forced so that there’s no room for personal or group interests; or conversely, interests dominate through various transactions so that no room is left for ideologies.

On reflection, it seems the latter case is more frequently found in the country. Our socio-political life these days is even more characterized by interests, rather than debates about ideologies or ideas.

This may be rooted in our political system. Practically no parties or political groups are really ideologically imbued. Nearly all of them are motivated by interests. The fact is clear: while the various coalitions in regional elections indicate the absence of ideologies, only in this country a political rival in general elections has been included in the cabinet.

Consequently, there’s no opposition. The government can execute everything from strategic policies to technical matters, almost without any rejection by legislators.

Also read: Political Hopes in 2021

Apart from the substance, this can be noticed in the passage of the revision of the Corruption Eradication Commission Law, the Job Creation Law, the implementation of regional elections amid the pandemic, the dissolution of the Islam Defenders Front and so forth.

Even if there’s disagreement, it’s not due to ideas but rather is merely because of a tug-of-war over interests. There’s no control, let alone correction, except that from a few civil society organizations that, sadly, in general also face about the same problem.

In this situation, debates about ideas—let alone criticism of policies—are apt to be labeled an “anti”-government stance. In fact, the two are clearly different. The problem is that with the “anti” label, It’s not only the security apparatus that may take immediate action, most supporters who actually just create a buzz will also take the law in their own hands.

KOMPAS/RADITYA HELABUMI

The workers who are members of the Confederation of Indonesian Workers Unions (KSPI) held a demonstration in the Silang Monas area, Central Jakarta, Tuesday (29/12/2020). The action was to provide support for the formal and material review of the Job Creation Law at the Constitutional Court.

Street trials now occur not only on public roads or unoccupied grounds, but also in social media; not only by security personnel but also by buzzers.

As a result, polarization becomes more intense between those seen as “pro” and “anti” the government. Actually, this difference is not in ideologies, but instead merely in interests and methods.

It’s thus unsurprising that in the Democracy Index we slumped in the components of political culture (values at 4.38) and civil liberties (valued at 5.59). Indeed, our general elections were considered relatively free, civil culture was judged pluralist and government performance fairly good.

Actually, this difference is not in ideologies, but instead merely in interests and methods.

Yet our political culture has been increasingly farther from public civility and our civil liberties are even more eroded.

Politics is getting more transactional, remote from the pursuit of ideal aspirations, while citizens become more doubtful, if not scared, of voicing dissenting views, let alone criticism of the government.

The Indonesian Political Indicator Survey has discovered this since last year: the majority of the public (79.6 percent) tended to agree or very much agree that today citizens get more fearful of voicing opinions (25/10/2020). Its latest survey has shown that public satisfaction of democracy is only 53 percent and of the President 62.9 percent, the lowest since 2016 (8/2/2021).

Also read: Beware of Authoritarianism

By the same understanding of how ideas are grossly eroded by interests, it’s also easy for us to fathom why our CPI has dropped.

Of all the components measured, the results indicate that the red report has been caused by two dimensions of corruption.

Kompas

Indonesian Democracy Index. The Democracy Index is determined by 5 variables, namely, election administration and pluralism (Penyelenggaraan Pemilu dan Pluralisme), government functions (Fungsi Pemerintah), political participation (Partisipasi Politik), political culture (Budaya Politik) and civil liberties (Kebebasan Sipil). The index is in the range 0-10. The bigger of the index number, better.

First, corruption normally committed by businesspeople for the benefit of public service providers to facilitate business processes. This includes various special payments, export-import bribes and suspicious relations between politicians and business circles.

Second, political corruption deeply involving the political system, in executive, legislative and judicial spheres. This also covers corruption in the bureaucracy, big and small, affecting public policies.

It will soon be noticeable that there’s actually nothing new here. The socio-political condition increasingly lacking in ideas but abounding with transactions of interests in fact offers fertile ground for corruption that undermines our political quality and policies.

What should be done then?

Watching out for power

The Economist (28/3/2020) wrote, “The response to this pandemic has expanded government power never occurring before, ‘giving rise to the fear that’…the state will be reluctant to give up the power after the crisis is over, as has frequently happened in history.”

The quality of democracy is indeed declining throughout the world on average. One of its causes is that the control of Covid-19 makes the government more repressive, putting pressure on different dimensions of civil liberties.

In many countries, not only physical movements are restricted through social or physical distancing or lockdowns, but also public protests and criticism of pandemic control.

This warning is imperatively serious: the political dynamism and response to the pandemic should not result in government power expansion—and that of its supporters—and unwillingness to return to the democratic process after the crisis ends.

If we reflect on the socio-political dynamism that is even more deficit in ideas but full of interests, it becomes evident that the imperative warning involves the future of our democracy.

Therefore, watching out for the reason for power is a must—both the government’s policy making power and the economic-political power of those handling resources—at least through three methods.

First, although the room for civil liberties is shrinking, we should have the courage to make attempts to always remind the government of the key idea: prioritizing public interests, not only those of the elite in power.

Also read: Reviving Democracy

Second, promoting political education for the public so to be more capable of voicing the importance of controlling the government’s power practice, through the legislative assembly and civil society.

Third, bridging the polarization that causes deeper division between what is seen as “pro” and “anti” the government: that criticizing and giving input to the government don’t always constitute an anti-government stance.

KOMPAS/WISNU WIDIANTORO

Yanuar Nugroho

At the time when ideas are even more cornered by interests, good governance should always be safeguarded against arbitrary power, because it’s the cornerstone for the realization of the nation’s aspirations.

Yanuar Nugroho, Adviser, Center for Innovation Policy and Governance; Member, Academy of Indonesian Young Scientists; Visiting Senior Fellow, ISEAS Singapore.

This article was translated by Aris Prawira.