Sunday, March 30, 2008

Indonesia Structure



5595kompleks-mpr-dpr.png

STATE ORGANS

According to the 1945 Constitution there are six organs of the state:

  1. The People's Consultative Assembly (Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat).
  2. The Presidency.
  3. The House of Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat).
  4. The Supreme Advisory Council (Dewan Pertimbangan Agung).
  5. The State Audit Board (Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan).
  6. The Supreme Court (Mahkamah Agung).

Law Making Process

The 1945 Constitution states that the House of Representatives is the body of the State. The Government submits bills to the House for consideration and approval, but members of the House can initiate their own bills. Such bills must be accompanied by an explanatory memorandum, signed by at least 30 members, and submitted to the Speaker of the House. During the discussion of the proposed bill, the initiating members may make alterations or withdraw it.

If the House passes the bill, it will become law when it has obtained the signature of the President. By authority of the President, the Minister/State Secretary will publish the Act in the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia and henceforth the Act comes into force.


Local Government

The structure and organization of local governments follow the pattern of the national government. On the national level, the President is the Chief Executive and works with a cabinet of ministers. Next to the national executive is the House of Representatives, with whom the government enacts laws and determines the national budget.

Similarly, the Governor is the Chief Executive in the province and works with a staff of regional officials. Side by side is the provincial legislative, with whom the regional government concurs on regional legislation and decisions on the budget.

On the district (Kabupaten) and municipal (Kotamadya) levels, the Chief Executives are respectively, the Bupati (district head) and Walikota kodya (mayor). Again, the Bupati/Walikota kodya concurs with the local legislative on matters relating to local government regulation and the budget. Both provincial and district municipality governments are granted autonomy.

Where the President is the Head of State, the Governor is the Head of the Province and concurrently represents the Central Government in his region. Similarly, the Bupati/Walikota kodya is the Head of the Kabupaten/kotamadya and concurrently represents the Governor in his district/municipality.

The procedure of appointing a governor is as follows: The provincial legislature elects two or three candidates. The election result is reported to the national government, via the Minister of Home Affairs. The winning candidate is then appointed Governor by the President on the recommendation of the Minister.

In a similar way, the Kabupaten/kotamadya legislature elects two or three candidates to be proposed to the Minister of Home Affairs. One of these then is appointed Bupati/Walikota kodya, by the Minister on the recommendation of the Governor.

Below the district municipal level the administrative units are not autonomous. These are the Kecamatan, or Sub-District Administrations and the Kelurahan, or the Village Administrations. The Kecamatan is an administrative sub-division of the Kabupaten or Kotamadya. It is headed by a Camat. The Kecamatan office is in charge of the administration of the sub-district, social welfare and economic affairs. Some national government departments have branches in the Kecamatan office.


Suharto Steps Down After 32 Years in Power

JAKARTA, Indonesia -- President Suharto apologized for his mistakes and resigned Thursday after 32 years in power, handing over his office to his Vice President, B. J. Habibie, in a nationally televised ceremony.

After his brief statement of resignation, he turned the microphone toward Habibie, who immediately took the oath of office as a judge held the Koran above Habibie's head.

Suharto then stepped up, shook Habibie's hand, smiled and walked down a line of judges, smiling and shaking their hands. He gave a small salute to the onlookers and walked away.

Throughout the brief and painful ceremony Thursday morning, Suharto never lost the gentle smile with which he had addressed his people for the past three decades. He concluded, "I'll say thank you very much for your support and I am sorry for my mistakes, and I hope the Indonesian country will live forever."

As he gave way to the mounting domestic and international pressure to resign, Suharto, 76, was careful, as always, to couch his action in constitutional terms, and said power would be transferred to the Vice President under legal procedures. He made no mention of any election, as he had proposed earlier this week, and said that Habibie would serve out the remainder of Suharto's term, which ends in 2003.

[In Washington late Wednesday, President Clinton welcomed the resignation of President Suharto but said the nation still needed to begin "a real democratic transition" that "enjoys broad public support." His statement came just hours after Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright publicly called for Suharto to step down.]

Although Suharto has suggested that he might act as an elder statesmen, he gave no indication Thursday of his future role. Habibie, 61, Suharto's longtime adviser and Minister of Research and Technology, has little independent political base and has depended throughout his career of Suharto.

Student protesters, who reacted jubilantly to Suharto's announcement, had been demanding the President's resignation for three months with protests that culminated this week when they occupied Parliament.

They had also indicated that they would not be satisfied by the installation of Habibie, who has little support within the powerful military and has antagonized economists and foreign investors.

At the ceremony, Suharto said his decision was "based on my understanding that reforms must be carried out peacefully and constitutionally for the sake of the unity."

Then, looking down at his text, he said, "I read this statement today, Thursday, May 21, 1998, my resigation statement as the President of Indonesia."

The officials and reporters gathered in the reception room in his official residence appeared to hold their breath as he spoke, and there was not a rustle of reaction.

Suharto appeared relaxed and smiling, in a grey leisure suit with a gold-colored state employee pin on his shirt, adjusted the microphone to a comfortable level and pulled a pair of glasses from his pocket as an aide handed him his text.

When the address was over, the state-owned television channel returned to a program of pop music.

After Suharto spoke, the justices filed past Habibie and shook his hand. The new President, a small man, seemed almost lost in the crowd of officials.

To the apparent puzzlement of onlookers, Habibie followed Suharto out of the hall without making a statement to the nationwide audience.

The entire procedure took less than 10 minutes.

Defense Minister Wiranto stepped to the microphone and said the military "supports and welcomes the resignation of President Suharto," and pledged his support to Habibie. He also said that the military would guarantee the safety of Suharto's family.

A Government spokesman, Alwi Dahlan, followed with a brief statement affirming that Indonesia would keep its international committments, including those to the International Monetary Fund.

The Parliament building remained occupied Thursday by members of a nationwide student movement that galvanized this politically passive country of more than 200 million only two months after Suharto engineered his ritual re-election to a seventh five-year term. Their protests set off three days of widely destructive rioting in Jakarta last week that caused at least 500 deaths and shocked the nation into a consensus that Suharto must go.

The tasks facing the new President are daunting. The economy is in free fall, with months of rioting deepening a crisis that has brought inflation, food shortages, bankruptcies and paralysis to the banks. The currency is worth less than 20 percent of its value last summer. Little has been done to carry out a $43 billion rescue package organized in October by the International Monetary Fund.

"The country needs to take some very tough economic steps that even a popular President would have difficulty implementing," a Western diplomat said. "For an unpopular President, this will be almost impossible."

In 48 years of independence, Indonesia has never known a smooth transition of power. In 1965 Suharto, then a top general, took control after helping suppress what he said was a Communist coup attempt against Sukarno, the country's founder. An anti-Communist purge followed in which half a million died.

There are ambitious generals in the military today as well, and they will again have the last word in any power struggle. Apart from Suharto's own circle, there is virtually no center of power.

The opposition movement was remarkable in that it had no leader. Though in the end virtually the entire nation turned against him, Suharto was so successful in co-opting public figures and in neutralizing the opposition that the democracy movement remained ineffectual.

For a time the most prominent name among the opposition was Megawati Sukarnoputri, the daughter of Sukarno. But as public discontent grew, she remained passive. A popular Muslim leader, Amien Rais, emerged in recent weeks as a spokesman for the opposition, but public support did not coalesce.

Like the late President Ferdinand E. Marcos in the Philippines, Suharto was pushed toward giving up his office when he lost the support of one sector of society and politics after another.

It was when his obedient Parliament turned against him this week that it became clear that Suharto would not last long. Welcoming the students who occupied their building, the legislators shocked the nation this week by calling for him to quit.

Rather than "people power," it was this display of rubber-stamp-Parliament power that shook the foundations of his rule.

Initially, the military blocked the parliamentary leaders' move, saying it remained loyal to the President. But the legislators persisted. On Wednesday they announced that they would call a special session of the electoral commission on Monday to reverse its two-month-old presidential vote and impeach Suharto.

Asked whether he felt sorry for the man who had engaged his loyalty for so many years, one legislator, Muhamad Asad Umar, said, "I have felt sorry for him for years, but he didn't take the hint."


Saturday, March 29, 2008

Combatting poverty without a gender perspective


Poverty reduction programmes should take into account regional disparities and include gender-sensitive methodologies and strategies as well as allow for the participation and input of women’s civil organizations. In addition, the Government should establish specific measures to meet the Millennium Development Goals and implement mechanisms to reduce corruption and bureaucracy.

A gloomy portrait[1]

Indonesia’s population in 2004 is estimated at around 210 million, half of whom are women. An estimated 55.6% live in rural areas and 65.6% are in the productive age category (15-64 years old). Official data reveal that the average income per capita per annum is USD 621 and that 18.40% of Indonesians live below the poverty line on less than one dollar a day. However the population’s welfare can also be measured by monthly basic needs expenditure. By this measure data shows that the monthly average expenses of over 49% of the population is less than IDR 200,000 (USD 21), which is less than one dollar per day. This would indicate a larger number of people living under the poverty line than reported by official data. Figures from 1993 show much lower poverty levels with only 4.3% of households, or 10% of the population living below the poverty line. These figures might be supported by the 2004 United Nations Development Programme report, whose Human Development Index ranks Indonesia 111st among 177 countries, while in the 2003 UNDP report it was 109nd among 175 countries.

Poverty has a different impact on women and men due to different gender roles and gender bias. Some indicators show that women are in a worse situation than men. The maternal mortality rate is still high, 373 per 100,000 live births and the infant mortality rate is 40 per 1,000 live births. Education is another revealing indicator since it shows that the number of illiterate or under-educated women is twice the number of men. Data from 2002 estimate that 12.79% of women and 5.85% of men are illiterate. However women’s contribution to the economy cannot be ignored. Around 33.5% of women carry out unpaid work to ensure the survival of their family and three times as many women as men work overseas in countries such as Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Korea and Hong Kong. These female migrant workers get hardly any protection from either the host country or the Indonesian Government during their time away and every year cases of violence against women migrant workers are reported.

Another phenomenon in Indonesia is the increasing number of women heading families, including both widows and single women. The 1993 data showed that 10% of households were headed by women. By 2003 the figure had increased to 13.19% but the number could be higher than the official estimate. Ongoing conflicts in some regions of the country and extreme poverty in others (eastern Indonesia) have motivated men to migrate in search of a better life. They often do so leaving the women behind. Households headed by women are in general relatively poorer compared with those headed by men. Data from 1999 onwards show that the number of female-headed households living under the poverty line is increasing while the rate amongst those headed by men is decreasing.

Poor households headed by women are the poorest in Indonesia. Their average daily income is around IDR 7,000 (USD 0.73) or less than a dollar a day. These households have on average three dependents, and many are located in rural and remote areas. The education level of people in these households is very low; more than half only have elementary school education. Household members work mostly in the informal sector as small traders, daily labourers in small paddy fields, or small farmers.[2]

The long journey of poverty reduction efforts

In the last ten years, there have been many poverty alleviation strategies, programmes and activities carried out through various poverty alleviation projects developed by the Government as well as by NGOs. Examples include the Underdeveloped Village Presidential Instruction Project, developed by the New Order Government, as well as income-generating projects organized by NGOs. Also an emergency programme for poor people, similar to the social safety network, was also developed prior to the 1997 economic crisis along with the Community Recovery Programme set up by the Government. Despite an increase in the income of poor households and in the satisfaction of basic needs during the period of the project, a more extensive impact on the elimination of poverty was not noticed.

NGOs have developed various community empowerment programmes to organize people and form networks of poor people such as the Urban Poor Consortium, the Network for Women in Small Business, the Indonesian Farmers Association, the Indonesian Labourers Association, and the Women Head of Household Organization. Although these attempts have increased awareness and allowed people to advocate for their rights, they have not been able to bring about great change or reduce poverty.

The latest Government effort is to develop the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) as a guideline for eliminating poverty in Indonesia in order to meet donor institution requirements. However the PRSP concept is still very gender-blind and the involvement of women’s groups to review the paper and include a gender perspective in it has met with strong resistance from the male-dominated working team. In addition, the Government has also made a commitment to implement the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) to complement its international commitments. The MDGs focus on the issue of poverty and related aspects; however the strategic measures to turn the MDGs into concrete policy have not yet been made clear and the public is still unaware of even the existence of these goals.

Framed by an unjust world

There are many interlinked factors causing the situation in Indonesia.

Socio-economic and political policy is centralized and gender-blind

National data does not always reflect the regional and local situation of the population since Indonesia is an archipelago with vast differences from one region to another. A very centralized and unjust development policy which focuses only on areas close to the capital has led to some areas remaining less developed than others, especially in the eastern part of the country. The proportion of people living under the poverty line is much higher in these areas compared to the national figure. Therefore national data cannot be used to portray the real condition in all areas nor can it be used to develop a national poverty reduction strategy.

Gender discrimination is neither understood nor considered by policy-makers, and this is illustrated by the minor attention paid to social and human resources development problems such as health and education, two problematic areas for women. The budget allocation for both programmes is under 5% of GDP.

Additionally macro-economic policy which focuses on increasing economic growth rates through industrialization, low wages, exploitation of natural resources, and political stability, has ignored the negative impacts of economic development. The urbanization of men leaves women with a double burden, as women are exploited to work for low wages while having to cope as household heads.

The reproductive role of women is regarded as an obstacle to their being active in the production sector. Women must also struggle to prove that their qualifications are equal to those of men in economics and politics. This is reflected by the low presence of women in jobs with high economic value and in the decision-making processes at different levels. In addition, women get paid less than men for doing equal work.

Bureaucracy and corruption in the Government

The major problem of many of the development programmes implemented, including poverty reduction programmes, is the leaking of funds before they reach the poor. An inefficient bureaucracy system and corruption at all levels is part of the system. Consequently, poor people do not benefit from many of the development programmes and the gap between rich and poor continues to widen.

A dominant patriarchal ideology

The prevailing patriarchal ideology leads women to have low autonomy and low social power in their daily lives. Women’s autonomy refers to the authority that women have over themselves compared with men, while social power is the authority that women have or do not have over others in their household as well as in society. Several indicators show that poor women have no autonomy or social power. When work is distributed by gender and a woman’s primary role is in the household, she becomes doubly burdened when she must work outside the home to overcome her family’s poverty. In addition women’s low education levels lead to low participation of women in decision-making within their households as well as in society.

Ongoing conflicts

The conflict that hit Indonesia in 1998 led the nation into a situation of chronic poverty, causing many people to lose their livelihood or interrupt their education. Others were stranded in refugee camps and the death of many men has meant that women have had to become household heads under harsh conditions. Economic activities came to a stop and feelings of security and safety were lost, with women and children suffering the most.

Natural disasters

Indonesia lies on a very fragile continent with a high potential for massive natural disasters such as tsunami, earthquakes, volcano eruptions and typhoons. The lack of early warning systems has caused many people to die or lose their property. For example the earthquake and tsunami which hit the Northern part of Sumatra at the end of 2004 killed hundreds of thousands of people and transformed hundreds of thousands more into internally displaced persons. The tsunami caused complete devastation in some areas and much funding is needed to rebuild. In addition the long dry season caused by climate change has caused farmers, especially in the eastern part of the country, to lose their source of production which has lead to situations of hunger.

Dependence on donor countries and international financial institutions

With a total debt of USD 144 billion Indonesia is one of the world’s most indebted countries. Nearly half of the national budget is absorbed by interest payments on this debt. Consequently Indonesia depends greatly on donor countries and is not independent when it comes to developing its social policy.

Under pressure from donors, the Government adopted structural adjustment programmes to integrate policy into the market system and the global economy. This occurred at the expense of the social rights of the people, who among other losses have sacrificed access to health services. Indonesia’s dependence on offshore loans has also caused it to suffer economically and the country had difficulty recovering after the economic crisis hit the Asian region in 1997. Economic growth reached its lowest point in 1998 and the exchange rate of the Rupee against the US dollar declined below 25%.

The impact of globalization

As a member of World Trade Organization (WTO), Indonesia is trapped in the globalized economy, which is very harmful to the country. Its unequal position and status compared to developed countries, causes national economy to be controlled by global economic players such as multi-national corporations. This can be noted from the fast growth of hypermarkets, the fast flow of imported goods, and the creation of free trade zones and free industrial zones in several regions. The presence of global economic players in the local market has caused the death of the small and micro-business sectors, which employed many women and poor people. In addition, the opening up of the global market has caused the privatization of social services such as education and health even though these services are the responsibility of the Government. This has triggered an even wider social gap between rich and poor. Globalization has also caused an increase in the exploitation of women as sex workers. The trafficking of young girls to work as escorts to workers in industrial regions and other countries, has tricked poor women into believing they might have a brighter future.

Moving forward

Under the current circumstances there is no single way to eliminate poverty and injustice. Multiple strategies at different levels should be developed and applied and multiple organizations and countries should be involved.

· In economic terms poverty is linked to income problems. However a plural definition of poverty should be applied since the income definition cannot fully explain poverty, particularly in rural areas where people are materially poor, physically weak, isolated, vulnerable, and helpless.

· Gender-based methodologies, strategies and approaches must be applied to develop poverty reduction programmes. The Beijing Declaration and framework is still valid and relevant and should be used and adopted as a guideline in the development of national poverty reduction policy.

· Decentralized approaches to development policy and strategy must be taken in order to better address regional particularities. Special attention must be paid to conflict areas, remote and isolated areas, as well as less developed areas.

· A clean government system must be promoted and developed by enforcing anti-corruption laws, bringing all corruption cases to trial, and punishing the corrupt.

· All laws, regulations and administrative practices should be revised to secure equal rights and access of poor people, especially women, to economic resources. Rights based approaches in the framework of “justice for all” should be integrated into all laws, policies and regulations.

· Alliances must be built with people at different levels and their livelihood, leadership and advocacy skills must be improved.

· Regional and international strength must be built in to fight economic globalization and the dominance of multinational corporations in order to lobby against the introduction of WTO-related policies which harm poor countries.

  • Cooperation between small and poor countries should be strengthened at both the government and grassroots levels in order to diminish the dominance of superpower countries and also in order to lobby donor countries and institutions for debt relief.

Notes:

[1] The following report adopts the latest data from the National Socio-economics Survey which was conducted in 2002 and the data from the 2000 report.
[2] Baseline data of PEKKA from 200 villages in 2003.

Monday, March 24, 2008

Japan-Indonesia relations: A 50-year journey

Presiden SBY dan PM  Shinzo Abe saat hadir pada pembukaan Forum Bisnis Indonesia – Jepang di  Hotel Hyatt Jakarta, Senin (20/8) sore. (foto: anung/presidensby.info)

Historically, Japan-Indonesia relations were never as dramatic as Japan's relations with China or Korea. Of course, we also went through a difficult period in World War II when the then Dutch East Indies was occupied by the Japanese Army for three-and-a-half years.

We were in a war, and war is always miserable. We experienced atrocities in some parts of Indonesia, such as in West Kalimantan, but that happened only at the end of the war and with limited victims. Most of the hardships and excesses happened because of the war situation. It should be noted that the Japanese occupation took place when a military dictatorship had ruled Japan since the early 1930s. And a dictatorship, especially a military one, can be really harsh and full of excesses.

On the other hand, the Japanese occupation also taught and did Indonesia some good, such as building a national administration, training a local army and at the end providing encouragement to become independent.

After Indonesia's independence was recognized at the end of 1949, talks began on war reparations in the mid-1950s after the San Francisco Agreement was signed and finalized with the Agreement on Compensation and the opening of diplomatic relations in 1958 between Japan and Indonesia. It was aid in human resources training and infrastructure building, besides trade, that came at the beginning of the formal relationship.

Under Sukarno's presidency the relationship was complicated because Japan was an ally of the United States while Sukarno was becoming more leftist in his foreign policy. But when Soeharto came to power, relations with Japan improved because Indonesia became closer to the United States. Japan took the lead to reschedule Indonesia's debts at the Tokyo Conference and became a big donor in the context of the Inter-Governmental Group on Indonesia (IGGI).

Japanese investment in Indonesia also increased and this happened at the same time Japan reached maturity in its industrialization, and therefore was looking for markets to export to and raw materials to import.

The first challenge arose when, mainly due to domestic political divisions within Indonesia, protests and mass actions against Japanese economic interests broke out in January 1974.

That incident provided a lesson to the Japanese on how to behave in order not to be seen as an "economic animal" and how to adjust to Indonesia's traditions and the psychology of the people. The so-called Tanaka riots taught the Japanese how to prepare their businessmen well.

Since then, relations have greatly improved, including in the area of labor relations. Japanese companies in Indonesia also began to send middle-level workers to Japan to learn about the industries they were in. This is a very good way to create a transfer of technology to Indonesians, the lack of which was a key issue in the criticism launched at the Japanese.

The Japanese had shown a commitment to assisting Indonesia consistently until the financial crisis in Indonesia in 1997, a time when Japan itself had already been facing a weak economy for eight years.

The crisis disheartened Japanese business to increase investment in Indonesia because Indonesia has never really recovered in business terms: Labor relations are not improving and the unions are too militant for them, infrastructure has not improved, the rule of law and its implementation have been very weak and corruption has not been adequately overcome.

Therefore, Indonesia has to do its part, before Japan, who has been well-disposed to Indonesia, could and would do more for us.

In strategic terms Japan is important to Indonesia. It is the second-largest economy and is very advanced in technology. It is also one of the two potential leaders of East Asia, with China. Unfortunately, Japan does not seem to have the strategy necessary to improve its presence in East Asia, because its political development is getting stuck.

The ruling LDP has lost its ability to run Japan effectively due to its weak leadership, while the opposition DJP has become stronger, but not strong enough to run Japan now.

In its foreign policy, Japan also has not been able to debate among its leaders what it is going to do in relation to the United States based on the alliance, on the one hand, and in relation to East Asia, where Japan has its greatest stake, on the other. This should not be a contradiction, but Japan needs to strike the right balance, and this is not happening.

There is also the question of ASEAN. There is a feeling of drift in ASEAN-Japan relations because despite some important initiatives on the Japan side, such as the establishment of the Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA), there is not enough drive and push for the cooperation. This is also felt by Indonesia in bilateral relations with Japan.

Of course, Indonesia has to make improvements on many fronts, but it can only do this if Japan is more involved and more committed to Indonesia's economic development, and if it really considers Indonesia an important strategic partner. The pressure for changes should happen from within rather than from the outside. Japanese business will have more leverage in affecting Indonesia's policies if they remain involved in Indonesia.

In addition, Japan should be more forthcoming in assisting and supporting Indonesia's capabilities for leadership in ASEAN. Indonesia is expected to lead ASEAN and in partnership with Japan also play a greater role in the context of development in East Asia and globally.

For that purpose strategic dialogues are needed between Indonesia and Japan to be able to come up with more ideas and proposals than at present. This should not be confined to the governments, but should also involve different groups that can contribute to these efforts.

The bilateral Indonesia-Japan Colloquiums in the 1970s and 80s provide a useful model for this and can be reinstated with some adjustments to a new strategic environment and challenges.