Jakarta – One of the architects of the New Order economy, Prof Dr Soebroto, explicitly stated that the flourishing of various kinds of levies [read bribes - JB] which has been going on, is a reflection of absence of legal security.

This problem is even more aggravated because there are prominent people who should be exemplary in eradicating levies, on the contrary are exacting them.

This affirmation was conveyed by Soebroto to the press at opportune moments during the seminar "Preparing Human Resources In the Free Trade Era", organized in connection with 28th anniversary of YTKI on Thursday (27/2) in Jakarta.

According to Soebroto, as long as enforcement of the law does not proceed effectively or is unable to apply sanctions firmly upon transgressors, then levies will continue. Because when the law is enforced based on correct rules of the game, it is impossible for various levies of unseemly purpose to occur effectively. The more so to the point where they overlap at the center as well as the regions.

Soebroto said that from the beginning, regulations to eradicate those levies existed. The apparatus must not engage in corruption, must not levy this and that. But if the laws to enforce that do not run, then the result is what we have at present.

Enforcement should not only be repressive, but should concretely act, punish and then dismiss when transgression is proven.

This firm attitude must really be shown openly, or it will give rise to a feeling of injustice among the government apparatus itself.

Soebroto stressed that the regional apparatus will think it odd that constraints are applied to them, but not to those at the center.

The main key is the political will from above. Not only in words, but realized in deeds and application of the law to transgressors.

He said that this is important, because ours is a paternalistic society, modelling itself on its leaders. Good example at the center will be followed by subordinates or the regions.

Soebroto does not agree with those who say that the salaries of the government apparatus must be improved to eradicate levies. Salary increases must be considered in the context of resulting productivity. Salary increases while mental attitude remains bad will see those levies continue to exist.

Salary increases should be accompanied by the mentioned steps to enforce the law, and the existing regulations implemented well. Prominent figures can give good example. Only then will the levies disappear.

30 years of festering wounds

Meanwhile, economic expert Prof Dr Sadli responded to the statements of various parties, regarding eradication of levies, on a note of pessimism. He said cynically how it could be possible for a problem rooted during 30 years, to disappear in a day or a year.

Slightly jokingly Sadli said that, even under high cost economy conditions the national economy was running okay. The national economy continues to grow fast even with those "festering wounds".

Prof Dr Awaloedin Djamin, Executive Chairman of the Indonesian Workers Foundation (YTKI), said that the important thing is to prepare the human resources of the national government. Administering the various matters of government is extremely complex, and improving them is no easy job.

He stressed that to eradicate those levies was extremely difficult, because many factors had led to the emergence of these levies. Nevertheless, it had to be admitted that all this was a product of law enforcement which did not work.

Above the matter of salaries is the mental attitude of the civil servant, who has to serve and not prey on the public.

Drs Mashuri Maschab SU, Regional Politics Observer, and also Assistant Dean II of the Social and Political Sciences Faculty of Universitas Gadjah Mada, put forward that the emergence of levies in the regions, from the point of view of government, is a serious problem, originating from disparity in the system of implementing regional autonomy. Meanwhile, the position of the Regional Parliament, which legalizes Regional Regulations concerning various levies, is extremely 'weak'.

He put forward that regional autonomy springs from two reasons, namely political and technical. The political reason is to democratize government, in order that the community in the regions are given opportunity to participate in determining their life in the regions. The technical reason is to obtain optimal efficiency and effectiveness in government. But in Indonesia, the implementation of these two factors has never been balanced.

In the past, the political factor was prominent, giving Regional Parliament great powers with broad autonomy, without paying attention to the technical factor. Now that the technical factor is made dominant, development is the yardstick, and it is not important whether the Regional Parliament is anemic or not, because the important thing is that government is effective and that development runs smoothly.

That condition continued until the policy to implement regional autonomy came into being. But the implementation is crucial, because the extension of regional autonomy which was emphasized at IInd level regions, was translated as additional regional housekeeping, which for the greater part consists of public service. So in effect greater autonomy put greater burden on the regions, while they were not given additional funds commensurate with the augmented tasks.

Mashuri said that a principle of regional autonomy is, that ceding of a task by higher level government to a subregion must be accompanied by means and money. As a result the regions look for fund sources on their own.

On the other side, there is a lack of coordination in the legalization of regional regulations. This results in regional regulations being legalized by the Home Department without considering the regulations of the Finance Department, the National Development Planning Body (Bappenas) and others. As long as one is able to convince about the benefit of the Regional Regulation for the region's financial sources, that regulation is legalized.

But in accordance with the legal principle that Regional Regulations can only be effectuated when legalized by higher level government, levies conflicting with higher regulations can be avoided. (*)