Indonesia is located since the fall of Suharto in 1998, a turbulent phase in their history. The fundamental challenge for the state and society is in transition from authoritarian regime to a democratic, open society. This system is changing, according to a central institution of democratic institutions (liberal, democratic elections, the division of power between parliament and president, the rights), a phase of consolidation, ie a process of stabilization of foundations of behavior and attitude of moderate or minimum criteria for democracy. In this paper, the "bottom", ie regional and local levels at the point of view, if we assume that the reference level of democracy in the sub-national [Ruland 1991: 282]. It will analyze how the democratic elements in the regions to get a foot or more precisely the extent to which a democratic political process unfolds.
Sub-national democratization in Indonesia is inextricably linked with decentralization. The "new order" under Suharto led a highly centralized system, decisions were made in Jakarta by a small elite made. For most regions remained only the execution of orders, government programs and projects. Independent design and implementation of strategic planning is not a courtroom, there was a classic top-down approach.
Staff, this system is assured by senior positions at the regional level (including governors) directly under the control of the current president. A large bureaucracy in the military are actively involved (in part were military civilian leadership positions), or at least one follow-up, provided a good execution of the orders of the central government. Space for a political process, or even their own powers of regional authorities were not foreseen, and objected to the opinion of unitary state.
A democratization of the state and society had to be replaced by new structures. The first step of this work is an investigation of these newly created institutional conditions that are in their salary to democracy are to be determined. These two aspects are: the system of separation of powers and the possibility of popular participation in the political process. In a second stage, on the basis of observations about politics in the regions represented, and the factors identified with the democratic political process to inhibit or promote. Some cautious remarks about the state of consolidation, as well as some conditions have been created to establish a durable democratic system eventually leave the post.
The laws on regional autonomy
Before the laws that are analyzed, is a reference to the genesis of the law or the historical situation that led to these laws is needed. In addition to the severe initial democratization efforts of the transitional government of BJ Habibie influenced differently strong autonomy and independence efforts in some regions, particularly in Aceh have resulted in bloody clashes abandoning the centralized unitary state model. Political concessions and, above all financial (the resource-rich provinces receive a much higher proportion of their disposal) must secessionist wind sails take. At the same time, it was stated that the central government on the idea of scarce budgetary resources (Asia crisis, debt) deliberately tasks simultaneously, and therefore the financial burden to the regions has to be in key roles (economic crisis ) in order to concentrate.
In these circumstances, fairly quickly, if not designed and approved hectically laws 22 and 25/1999 on regional autonomy will focus on three areas: the vertical separation of powers, the horizontal separation of powers and the allocation of finances.
The former governs the transfer of decision-making powers from central government to regions, precisely those districts (kabupaten) and cities (KOTA), which according to the law and the full self-government law, ie the government's authority in all areas except the right reserved to the central government to exercise and regional regulations may take. The most important right is the budget reviews: The regions alone may decide to set priorities and that therefore the money is spent. This is accompanied by the adoption of administrative tasks in the hope that the public services efficiently and transparently to offer.
These capabilities in the power sector, with provisions for a fiscal breakdown regulated complementary action in the district's income and resource degradation in the financial statements and its own taxing authority.
A by issuing powers to subnational and local levels has allowed the regional political, democratic and efficient, we need horizontal separation of powers, which are mainly through the strengthening of regional parliaments elected in the province and district level village has been regulated by law. The legislature has been with the Law 22/1999 comprehensive monitoring, participation and co-decision rights. Thus, for example, is the Chief Executive is not the first time the President submits (except at village level) of the elected Parliament of this and can be overthrown. The Executive Chef must be an annual report of accountability, the Parliament can reject. Its adoption also requires each regional regulations, including the budget, which Parliament has an important position of power. Special control rights include the review of implementation of regional standards for Investigativrechten. Furthermore, Parliament can have its own budget and has the right of initiative.
In addition, Parliament is required for the establishment and adherence to democratic principles to ensure that public meetings and the aspirations and initiatives of the population into account and if necessary move. The principles of transparency and participation are, therefore, in the style of government influence.
The assessment framework
With regard to minimum standards of democracy, especially in power-sharing and access, participation and accountability, it is noteworthy that the horizontal separation of powers, particularly through the strengthening of Parliament least on paper, they have succeeded. Dominance of the executive, has been restricted. Vertical, there are several uncertainties (eg, in the end exactly what tasks will be running). Here is the right of the central government, local regulations to be revised. At the same time, the regions, but rarely in drafting laws and regulations involved in the monitoring and now significantly underrepresented in Jakarta. This impacts particularly in the financial field, where regions are still in Jakarta assignments are dependent, since the income tax for its own sovereignty still too low.
In general, the laws on regional autonomy, the lack of precision of the accused, among other things, the area of responsibility (accountability) requirements. There are no rules, what information at what time the public should be, or what the Chief Executive to submit its report. Responsibility applies to both the executive and legislative branches. The latter is responsible for controlling the government and its officials, is open only to ensure that in the situation. The question of responsibility is strongly in a situation where the control by the public is not always guaranteed, and with an electoral system in which each member, in fact, far more than their upper parts are specific culprit responsible electorate. This raises the question of the need to change the electoral system and strengthen the political role of political parties.
The involvement of thought is expressed indirectly, but clear rules for public participation through hearings or missing elements of direct democracy. Therefore, the political elite in office and much leeway given. Here is the question of how and what the real factors of decentralization, and (therefore) to influence the process of democratization.
Policy in regions
Even before the official start of the impact of regional autonomy (in the case of the transfer of decision-making power) in January 2001 was a dynamic in the political process at the regional level shows the intensification of the present. As key actors, the executive, legislative and civil society in the spotlight, the judiciary and the military aspect of this play a minor role.
Policy in the regions is a human resource and other policies. The first one was so far the most important role, but there were many important offices to be filled: the governors, Bupatis (district chiefs), officials, village chiefs. Whether by legislative bodies (and governors Bupatis), executive (officers) or directly (village chiefs) are elected, they can identify three characteristics: high politicization / emotional, focusing on "heads" of money and politics. A little place to discuss issues and plans for the election of the executive heads of primary and incentive "created bonds acquired parliamentary or political horse-trading, leaving the still low level of maturity of Indonesia's young democracy. After all, has been selected but not yet made a choice in a democracy.
Specific policies in the region focused mainly on the reorganization of the administration, the framework for local elections, the budget, taxes and granting First Committee forgave. There is still a predominance of the executive noted that in comparison with the legislature and civil society has a clear protrusions (qualifications, experience, but gives no further information.) Regulation staff still come almost exclusively from the executive, the Parliament can only be examined, and a public debate with the participation of far-reaching is done, if anything, after the adoption instead. The control of civil society is often only after the involvement of civil society in the consultation process is hardly exists, except for personal relationships. An organized form of political communication (public forums, hearings), that is, if lawmakers "in the public ', and then usually only to certain people. A partnership between the state and mediating role of the parties does not exist political parties are mere electoral machines, which have no clear political orientation. Therefore, the Parliament is also an internal dynamic, conflicts are rarely found in place of facts. important indicator of this is that public services to date on the subject has been done.
In general, the prevailing view that the quality of regional parliaments remains very poor, many Members only have a seat sponsorship has been achieved without a vision or the basis for tenure or political experience and knowledge to be equipped.
Main point of criticism in Parliament is still totally inadequate role as mediator between society and government, the problems will not be processed independently and their own initiatives are still very rare. Control of the government most likely still receive, but this is rather personal. The lack of services and are often Faul and inertia of experienced officers rarely sanctions. In the context of budget discussions in early 2001 trends that marked an increase in regional income independent absolute priority, often under an additional burden on the population (new taxes, fees, sales of natural resources). Unfortunately, these funds are less items in the budget for development, but rather the routine costs of landing the government and parliament. In particular, the high salaries of the deputies met in many regions of much criticism, but it aroused a sense of disproportion and open self-enrichment. But many parliamentarians are characterized by greater self-awareness, request a change of government documents, especially for existing printing of "down".
But also in the civil sector there are still significant shortcomings. NGOs and self-help groups is often not the lack of good will, but a detailed knowledge, information, communication and access to decision-making more specific proposals to develop and enforce. They are often the laws and regulations specific to explain the effects on the care and / or concrete actions to mobilize, particularly in personnel matters (corruption) or in the case of special urgency, the problems associated with the group to succeed. Freedom of speech and protest are possible in principle: there is a public space, despite a tendency towards criminalization (premanisme) in some regions has occurred. Public space is also supported by the local media (press and radio) production, which play an important role in the mediation process.
Basically, we can say that a systematic involvement of civil society groups are not (yet) is very effective participation of executives from the respective groups depends on the participation and often "noisy" in the form of demonstrations and rallies opinion.
Corruption and ethnic politics
Before there is a prudent assessment of the current status of the consolidation phase to come, some social and political direction, but the image will not only be partially complete.
As the first and most important is the widespread practice of corruption, collusion and nepotism (KKN) to mention. There are no social area, which would be excluded, even and especially in political decisions and positions to be bought. Although considered a decisive factor of democracy and rechtsstaatshemmende and directed to these cultural practices are deeply entrenched and state sanctions rarely, so that the "abolition" only in the long term to achieve. In our considered issues of power and participation KKN that affects the function of the legislature and the judiciary, the role of the judiciary undermined. This means that the parliaments of its oversight role more selective requirements. How about a bribe / collusion of their elected chief executive of bookmarks is not effectively controlled. In many regions, particularly outside Java, the former ruling Golkar party with representatives from the police and the army (which automatically receives 10% of the seats) are often the parliamentary majority, therefore, including the candidates and Bupati is unlikely for an open, professional political process. In terms of participation is also an important part of KKN determine, for example, the population associated with gifts of money needed to be further processed to be false or the legitimacy of participation may be purchased. These are all established in practice tolerated and behavior, which violate the principle of equality and power recognizes those who have money. While the absence of effective mechanisms of social control and participation puts the welfare of such practices into irrelevance, selfishness is rife.
But not only individual but also collective selfishness is a characteristic ge current Indonesian politics. After "years of oppression by the Javanese and the failure of nationalism ago (possibly aided by a misinterpretation of the importance of regional autonomy) ethnicization wide public life. The ethnic conflicts, as in Kalimantan and Sulawesi are the most obvious signs of a creeping return to their own group. The phenomenon Daerah Putra (son of the region) is not only filling positions in the apparatus of the round, but also threatens the basic rights of minorities and immigrants (the right to integrity). The principle of equality, will be suspended, restricted and prevented pluralism. The state is unable to take these principles and to ensure fundamental rights, since it is the monopoly of violence after losing the Empire of the law and only on paper.
The weakness of formal institutions and government bodies is also reflected in the spread-small collective and organized crime and lawlessness. These are rooted in socio-economic and cultural power demand, handling etc, and are increasingly open and controlled by the army no longer existed and the police are not willing or able to combat them. What lies a climate of insecurity, confusion and diffuse anxiety, which, by the continuous political and economic crisis strengthened.
On the state of consolidation
Professions, we focus on the concept of consolidating Plasser, habituation to democratic procedures, stabilization of the behavior and attitudes of Mas-sen and the elite level, the focus at this stage of the transformation process. After the democratic norms, rules and structures have been determined, the adaptive behavior of the stakeholders, especially the elite offering. There are still significant deficiencies in the scene (elitist understanding of rent-seeking), focused on the level of behavior can be as long as no effective mechanisms which comply with the formal rules of democracy. This, in turn, is an institutional problem, because there is no law and therefore does not set standards for coverage. Only if the political elites to the rules of the game, can legitimacy to the new order can be generated. Today, the elite, but with handling, selbstbereichernden make a major obstacle to the acceptance and support of democracy.
What is needed is therefore an effective control of both the average KKN impossible, and power (performance) of offices and staff on the expectations of the population is adapted. As an actor remains the civil society organization in question, this pressure must be built, therefore, the current elite of democracy in the name of a democratic social order to convert the income.
Literature
Plasser, Fritz (1997), "The concept of consolidation in the regime change research." In: Plasser et al. (Ed.), changing political culture in East-Central Europe. Theory and Empirics of democratic consolidation. Opladen: Leske und Budrich
Ruland, Jürgen (1991), "Processes of democratization in Asia." In: Foreign Policy, no. III, p. 281-290
Sub-national democratization in Indonesia is inextricably linked with decentralization. The "new order" under Suharto led a highly centralized system, decisions were made in Jakarta by a small elite made. For most regions remained only the execution of orders, government programs and projects. Independent design and implementation of strategic planning is not a courtroom, there was a classic top-down approach.
Staff, this system is assured by senior positions at the regional level (including governors) directly under the control of the current president. A large bureaucracy in the military are actively involved (in part were military civilian leadership positions), or at least one follow-up, provided a good execution of the orders of the central government. Space for a political process, or even their own powers of regional authorities were not foreseen, and objected to the opinion of unitary state.
A democratization of the state and society had to be replaced by new structures. The first step of this work is an investigation of these newly created institutional conditions that are in their salary to democracy are to be determined. These two aspects are: the system of separation of powers and the possibility of popular participation in the political process. In a second stage, on the basis of observations about politics in the regions represented, and the factors identified with the democratic political process to inhibit or promote. Some cautious remarks about the state of consolidation, as well as some conditions have been created to establish a durable democratic system eventually leave the post.
The laws on regional autonomy
Before the laws that are analyzed, is a reference to the genesis of the law or the historical situation that led to these laws is needed. In addition to the severe initial democratization efforts of the transitional government of BJ Habibie influenced differently strong autonomy and independence efforts in some regions, particularly in Aceh have resulted in bloody clashes abandoning the centralized unitary state model. Political concessions and, above all financial (the resource-rich provinces receive a much higher proportion of their disposal) must secessionist wind sails take. At the same time, it was stated that the central government on the idea of scarce budgetary resources (Asia crisis, debt) deliberately tasks simultaneously, and therefore the financial burden to the regions has to be in key roles (economic crisis ) in order to concentrate.
In these circumstances, fairly quickly, if not designed and approved hectically laws 22 and 25/1999 on regional autonomy will focus on three areas: the vertical separation of powers, the horizontal separation of powers and the allocation of finances.
The former governs the transfer of decision-making powers from central government to regions, precisely those districts (kabupaten) and cities (KOTA), which according to the law and the full self-government law, ie the government's authority in all areas except the right reserved to the central government to exercise and regional regulations may take. The most important right is the budget reviews: The regions alone may decide to set priorities and that therefore the money is spent. This is accompanied by the adoption of administrative tasks in the hope that the public services efficiently and transparently to offer.
These capabilities in the power sector, with provisions for a fiscal breakdown regulated complementary action in the district's income and resource degradation in the financial statements and its own taxing authority.
A by issuing powers to subnational and local levels has allowed the regional political, democratic and efficient, we need horizontal separation of powers, which are mainly through the strengthening of regional parliaments elected in the province and district level village has been regulated by law. The legislature has been with the Law 22/1999 comprehensive monitoring, participation and co-decision rights. Thus, for example, is the Chief Executive is not the first time the President submits (except at village level) of the elected Parliament of this and can be overthrown. The Executive Chef must be an annual report of accountability, the Parliament can reject. Its adoption also requires each regional regulations, including the budget, which Parliament has an important position of power. Special control rights include the review of implementation of regional standards for Investigativrechten. Furthermore, Parliament can have its own budget and has the right of initiative.
In addition, Parliament is required for the establishment and adherence to democratic principles to ensure that public meetings and the aspirations and initiatives of the population into account and if necessary move. The principles of transparency and participation are, therefore, in the style of government influence.
The assessment framework
With regard to minimum standards of democracy, especially in power-sharing and access, participation and accountability, it is noteworthy that the horizontal separation of powers, particularly through the strengthening of Parliament least on paper, they have succeeded. Dominance of the executive, has been restricted. Vertical, there are several uncertainties (eg, in the end exactly what tasks will be running). Here is the right of the central government, local regulations to be revised. At the same time, the regions, but rarely in drafting laws and regulations involved in the monitoring and now significantly underrepresented in Jakarta. This impacts particularly in the financial field, where regions are still in Jakarta assignments are dependent, since the income tax for its own sovereignty still too low.
In general, the laws on regional autonomy, the lack of precision of the accused, among other things, the area of responsibility (accountability) requirements. There are no rules, what information at what time the public should be, or what the Chief Executive to submit its report. Responsibility applies to both the executive and legislative branches. The latter is responsible for controlling the government and its officials, is open only to ensure that in the situation. The question of responsibility is strongly in a situation where the control by the public is not always guaranteed, and with an electoral system in which each member, in fact, far more than their upper parts are specific culprit responsible electorate. This raises the question of the need to change the electoral system and strengthen the political role of political parties.
The involvement of thought is expressed indirectly, but clear rules for public participation through hearings or missing elements of direct democracy. Therefore, the political elite in office and much leeway given. Here is the question of how and what the real factors of decentralization, and (therefore) to influence the process of democratization.
Policy in regions
Even before the official start of the impact of regional autonomy (in the case of the transfer of decision-making power) in January 2001 was a dynamic in the political process at the regional level shows the intensification of the present. As key actors, the executive, legislative and civil society in the spotlight, the judiciary and the military aspect of this play a minor role.
Policy in the regions is a human resource and other policies. The first one was so far the most important role, but there were many important offices to be filled: the governors, Bupatis (district chiefs), officials, village chiefs. Whether by legislative bodies (and governors Bupatis), executive (officers) or directly (village chiefs) are elected, they can identify three characteristics: high politicization / emotional, focusing on "heads" of money and politics. A little place to discuss issues and plans for the election of the executive heads of primary and incentive "created bonds acquired parliamentary or political horse-trading, leaving the still low level of maturity of Indonesia's young democracy. After all, has been selected but not yet made a choice in a democracy.
Specific policies in the region focused mainly on the reorganization of the administration, the framework for local elections, the budget, taxes and granting First Committee forgave. There is still a predominance of the executive noted that in comparison with the legislature and civil society has a clear protrusions (qualifications, experience, but gives no further information.) Regulation staff still come almost exclusively from the executive, the Parliament can only be examined, and a public debate with the participation of far-reaching is done, if anything, after the adoption instead. The control of civil society is often only after the involvement of civil society in the consultation process is hardly exists, except for personal relationships. An organized form of political communication (public forums, hearings), that is, if lawmakers "in the public ', and then usually only to certain people. A partnership between the state and mediating role of the parties does not exist political parties are mere electoral machines, which have no clear political orientation. Therefore, the Parliament is also an internal dynamic, conflicts are rarely found in place of facts. important indicator of this is that public services to date on the subject has been done.
In general, the prevailing view that the quality of regional parliaments remains very poor, many Members only have a seat sponsorship has been achieved without a vision or the basis for tenure or political experience and knowledge to be equipped.
Main point of criticism in Parliament is still totally inadequate role as mediator between society and government, the problems will not be processed independently and their own initiatives are still very rare. Control of the government most likely still receive, but this is rather personal. The lack of services and are often Faul and inertia of experienced officers rarely sanctions. In the context of budget discussions in early 2001 trends that marked an increase in regional income independent absolute priority, often under an additional burden on the population (new taxes, fees, sales of natural resources). Unfortunately, these funds are less items in the budget for development, but rather the routine costs of landing the government and parliament. In particular, the high salaries of the deputies met in many regions of much criticism, but it aroused a sense of disproportion and open self-enrichment. But many parliamentarians are characterized by greater self-awareness, request a change of government documents, especially for existing printing of "down".
But also in the civil sector there are still significant shortcomings. NGOs and self-help groups is often not the lack of good will, but a detailed knowledge, information, communication and access to decision-making more specific proposals to develop and enforce. They are often the laws and regulations specific to explain the effects on the care and / or concrete actions to mobilize, particularly in personnel matters (corruption) or in the case of special urgency, the problems associated with the group to succeed. Freedom of speech and protest are possible in principle: there is a public space, despite a tendency towards criminalization (premanisme) in some regions has occurred. Public space is also supported by the local media (press and radio) production, which play an important role in the mediation process.
Basically, we can say that a systematic involvement of civil society groups are not (yet) is very effective participation of executives from the respective groups depends on the participation and often "noisy" in the form of demonstrations and rallies opinion.
Corruption and ethnic politics
Before there is a prudent assessment of the current status of the consolidation phase to come, some social and political direction, but the image will not only be partially complete.
As the first and most important is the widespread practice of corruption, collusion and nepotism (KKN) to mention. There are no social area, which would be excluded, even and especially in political decisions and positions to be bought. Although considered a decisive factor of democracy and rechtsstaatshemmende and directed to these cultural practices are deeply entrenched and state sanctions rarely, so that the "abolition" only in the long term to achieve. In our considered issues of power and participation KKN that affects the function of the legislature and the judiciary, the role of the judiciary undermined. This means that the parliaments of its oversight role more selective requirements. How about a bribe / collusion of their elected chief executive of bookmarks is not effectively controlled. In many regions, particularly outside Java, the former ruling Golkar party with representatives from the police and the army (which automatically receives 10% of the seats) are often the parliamentary majority, therefore, including the candidates and Bupati is unlikely for an open, professional political process. In terms of participation is also an important part of KKN determine, for example, the population associated with gifts of money needed to be further processed to be false or the legitimacy of participation may be purchased. These are all established in practice tolerated and behavior, which violate the principle of equality and power recognizes those who have money. While the absence of effective mechanisms of social control and participation puts the welfare of such practices into irrelevance, selfishness is rife.
But not only individual but also collective selfishness is a characteristic ge current Indonesian politics. After "years of oppression by the Javanese and the failure of nationalism ago (possibly aided by a misinterpretation of the importance of regional autonomy) ethnicization wide public life. The ethnic conflicts, as in Kalimantan and Sulawesi are the most obvious signs of a creeping return to their own group. The phenomenon Daerah Putra (son of the region) is not only filling positions in the apparatus of the round, but also threatens the basic rights of minorities and immigrants (the right to integrity). The principle of equality, will be suspended, restricted and prevented pluralism. The state is unable to take these principles and to ensure fundamental rights, since it is the monopoly of violence after losing the Empire of the law and only on paper.
The weakness of formal institutions and government bodies is also reflected in the spread-small collective and organized crime and lawlessness. These are rooted in socio-economic and cultural power demand, handling etc, and are increasingly open and controlled by the army no longer existed and the police are not willing or able to combat them. What lies a climate of insecurity, confusion and diffuse anxiety, which, by the continuous political and economic crisis strengthened.
On the state of consolidation
Professions, we focus on the concept of consolidating Plasser, habituation to democratic procedures, stabilization of the behavior and attitudes of Mas-sen and the elite level, the focus at this stage of the transformation process. After the democratic norms, rules and structures have been determined, the adaptive behavior of the stakeholders, especially the elite offering. There are still significant deficiencies in the scene (elitist understanding of rent-seeking), focused on the level of behavior can be as long as no effective mechanisms which comply with the formal rules of democracy. This, in turn, is an institutional problem, because there is no law and therefore does not set standards for coverage. Only if the political elites to the rules of the game, can legitimacy to the new order can be generated. Today, the elite, but with handling, selbstbereichernden make a major obstacle to the acceptance and support of democracy.
What is needed is therefore an effective control of both the average KKN impossible, and power (performance) of offices and staff on the expectations of the population is adapted. As an actor remains the civil society organization in question, this pressure must be built, therefore, the current elite of democracy in the name of a democratic social order to convert the income.
Literature
Plasser, Fritz (1997), "The concept of consolidation in the regime change research." In: Plasser et al. (Ed.), changing political culture in East-Central Europe. Theory and Empirics of democratic consolidation. Opladen: Leske und Budrich
Ruland, Jürgen (1991), "Processes of democratization in Asia." In: Foreign Policy, no. III, p. 281-290
.jpg)
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar