Civil society organisations' contribution to the anti-corruption movement in Indonesia

Abstract

Soeharto era concern about corruption was deflected by the establishment of toothless anti-corruption committees, and by suppression of anti-corruption activism and media comment. With Soeharto's demise, activists began to publicise their concerns more openly - at first speaking in general terms, but later making increasingly specific allegations. The sporadic activism of the Soeharto years was consolidated, first through cooperative action among similarly motivated informal groups, and later through establishment of formal civil society organisations (CSOs) intent on rolling back corruption. The CSOs have played a key role in pushing for new laws and institutions to help eradicate corruption, and many corrupt officials have been imprisoned. This paper finds little evidence, however, that corruption has declined significantly. It argues that further progress depends on CSOs gaining a better understanding of the underlying causes of corruption, and that these are to be found in public sector personnel management practices.

Combating Corruption during Democratic Transition: The Role of CSOs in South Korea and Indonesia

“…The effectiveness of CSOs in Indonesia to influence decision-making process has been determined by their ability to organize solid alliances, leading to the creation of a strong negotiating power by which they dealt with state institutions [31]. CSOs' alliances were formed both, temporarily during important moments of decision-making processes, and permanently in certain fields of work.…”

“…8 Additionally, apart from the participation in the law making processes and establishment of supervisory bodies, ICW and FITRA also actively reported corruption cases in multi levels of government structure, spread an anti-corruption attitude in Indonesian society, and demanded to recapture state assets that that had sank deep into corruption. They had been the main actors in bringing corrupt officials to justice [31].…”

“…By making a huge coalition with other CSOs, ICW were successful to push the parliament for enacting law number 30/2002 on KPK (Anti-Corruption Commission) and the Special Court for Corruption. Following this achievement, the CSOs' coalition also actively participated in the formulation of law number 13/2006 on the witness and whistleblower protection act, and the establishment of supervisory institutions such as PPATK (Center for Financial Transactions Reporting and Analyses), KON (National Ombudsman Commission), KPPU (Commission for Supervisory Business Competition), KY (Judicial Commission), KK (Attorney General Commission), and Kompolnas (National Police Commission) 7 [31]. Meanwhile FITRA (Forum for Budget Tranparency, founded in 1999) focuses their activities in scrutinizing government budget.…”

“…Following the fall of Suharto, student activists institutionalized their informal associations into more formal, constructive and permanent anti-corruption CSOs in order to confront the corrupt practices of elite groups and prevent a recurrence of the undemocratic system. The driving factor for the anti-corruption campaign is the people's initiative to ensure the success of democratic consolidation and overcome the failure of the state in tackling corruption [31].…”

“…More specifically, in the process of reforms to improve accountability and anti-corruption protocols, CSOs can function on two levels: strategic and practical [17,31].…”