Table of Contents
- The Executive Summary
- Price for an Essay
- Corruption classification
- Containing corrupt practices
- The donors part in killing corruption
- Corruption Prevention in Indonesia
- The Public Awareness on Corruption
- Capacity Building
- Strategies for Building Integrity
- Related Free Law Essays
This piece of work outlines the set of tools and basis in advancing reforms on anti-corruption. The sound governance’s rule of law, social and economic progress, the civil society, and democratic values are the main topics discussed, as the basic prerequisites needed to fight corruption and improve the national integrity.
The Executive Summary
Corruption is defined by Transparency International and the World Bank as ill use of public offices for individual gain. The civil servants and politicians, whose authorities create opportunities where they may divert government assets and funds, apply unlawful means to gutter this wealth to their accomplices. The government’s performance and recourse allocation are crippled. This result from poor management, poverty, failure institutions, numbered civil servants, and the lack of transparency and accountability. Failure to curb corruption in Indonesia would make it a common practice to the public. It would go to an extent that the general public would view it as if the government has legalized it.
This paper introduces a strategy on anti-corruption, including a program on governance. Its main aim is to empower communities, individuals, and the Indonesian government through knowledge dissemination. It will help improve the government’s transparency and accountability in its service delivery. Equitable cost effective and sustainable growth will also result in timely public service delivery. Anti-corruption is here pointed out in four entries democratic reforms, economic development, the rule of law’s presence, and a strong civil society that is properly informed to oversee the state (Bracking, 2007).
National integrity is a vital tool in tackling corruption. This way, public awareness on preventing corrupt practices, prosecution of perpetrators and recognition of the honest through rewards will be highly implemented. The roots of corruption in Indonesia can be singled out. In 1949, immediately after Indonesia gained independence, there emerged a failure, when a lasting regime on democracy was not established. Under the first president Sukarno, an authoritarian regime had already flourished by the 1950s. President Suharto formed a political party, based on bureaucracy and military interests. This way, he could reward his family, supporters and friends. Suharto in his 32 years in power stood a chance to vet any one who tried political candidacy, delay justice, pressure legislators, and deny amendment of bills.
The military was able to occupy at least 20% of the parliamentarian seats. An independent body, the Freedom House Index, labeled Indonesia as a non-free country by the years 1994-1998 during the years, when the country was hit by the Asian Financial Crisis. This crisis led Indonesia to political and economic turmoil, when the civil society noticed severe collusion, nepotism and corruption, paralyzing the public sectors and political institutions. Indonesia, however, recovered from being non-free to a partially corruption free area in the years 1998-2005. It was an immense improvement, based on the Gastil Index of Freedom (Casson, 2008).
According to the Corruption Perception Index that analyses levels of corruption, latter produced analysis for a period of about ten years giving an individual rank of one hundred and seven. The corruption index was at 2.20, and at 86.16% of percentile out of one hundred and fifty nine countries by the year 2005. This data show the level of corruption in existence to date. This data perceived Indonesia as highly corrupt. Since then, the Corruption Perception Index has never been higher than 3. Not exactly concentrating on the number of countries on the sample, Indonesia ranks among the highly corrupt countries worldwide. This result yields the need to acquire tools to curb this corruption in Indonesia. All data, then, automatically sight Indonesia as corrupt, regardless of the angle of perception. If the issue is not resolved, it will remain to infiltrate the politics and diminish trust levels (Boyle, 2005).
Corruption may be reduced on applying four essential arenas, through which action against corruption within a country can be enacted. First, strengthen the institution of proper governance. The judiciary should head and be the guardian of integrity and the laws. Without the rule of law under a corrupt judiciary, the drawback is compounded, extending to the general public. Integrity of enforcement and the capacity for its enhancement are the second elements, put in one. The failure to bring cases to magistrates and judges wears out their ability to administer. On the other hand, if proper investigation is undertaken only to be presented to corrupt magistrates and judges, it would bear no fruits for need of serious investigations. Third, preventive tools have to be laid out by the Indonesian government. Independent bodies can also be used to ensure respect to standardized codes of conduct, being the oversights for the public and the private sector (Bylsma, 2010).
Transparency in financial deals by leaders in the government’s judiciary, legislature, and the public sector through disclosure of assets may be put in place. Fourth, education on ethical governance and participation in it by the public would also play a part in fighting corruption in Indonesia. The public stands on the winning side if they were to insist on honesty and integrity in businesses and the government. The public should learn the essentials to fight corrupt zones of government. The public should not pay bribes, sell their votes to politicians, report corruption cases, and pass the moral values to their off-springs. Strategies on anti-corruption should enhance design, evaluation, and the implementation of development programs. Thus, the circle of participants should be broadened, rather than going for a few during procurement programs (Ayre, 2005).
The Corruption Barometer is a tool, introduced and developed by Transparency International. The corruption Barometer assesses how severe corruption is within public institutions and the repercussions in variance of the public trust to such institutions. The parliament, judiciary, political parties and the military appear in the list of these institutions. According to research, it was noted that corruption was severe in political parties, while Indonesia sentiments otherwise. Findings in Indonesia depicted the legislature and the parliament as the highly corrupt institutions of the government. Political parties followed the latter (Bissessar, 2008).Want an expert to write a paper for you Talk to an operator now
Grand corruption is common among high-level officials in public offices and politicians. They have the ability to draw decisions on key public contracts or donor financed projects. Individual greed is the driving force to the need for the gains. Such funds and assets from corruption are moved to political and personal coffers (Bylsma, 2010).
Petty corruption is where the public servants get involved with potential corruption. They are underpaid apart from being honest and decent. The poorly paid employees tend to go for small bribes to keep their lives on the move and sustained.
Systemic corruption is where malfeasance channels extend upwards, starting from the bribery collection bays where corruption is their key to survival. It is normally a web of corrupt individuals. Episodic corruption is the norm, applied to the half honest behavior, where corruption is the exception, and the corrupt individual acts disciplined when detected (Charles, 2004).
Containing corrupt practices
The Indonesian government should find ways to contain the guilty individuals or organizations. Ultimately, sharing the responsibility to contain corruption should apply to all parts of the society, being the unwilling and the willing participants. Many countries use the international donor community and the civil society to lead the reform processes. Empowered, active and involved citizenry is essential for the success of any anti-corruption campaign bodies. Through changes in understanding and expectations, reformers stand a chance to real achievements to a non-corrupt government. For their side, bureaucrats, politicians, and government leaders must provide the positive will to strengthen reforms. Appropriate legislation should be introduced to minimize corruption and provide necessary means to enhance the process of raising integrity and systems of the rule of law (Donatella & Susan, 2007).
It should be a trend that repeats itself. That is, where those, involved in the part of creating the problem, must also be part of the solution. Otherwise, it would be cost prohibitive and unrealistic to try and eliminate corruption. Inefficiencies in the government would be created by such strategies. Draconian programs on anti-corruption would create negative effects on fundamental rights and individual freedoms. It would happen so if regulations would translate to excuses on public officials, becoming increasingly abusive on citizenry. To have effective administration procedures, discretion and bureaucracy are essential. Levels of fairness of the government, efficiency, and honesty would increase, with the aim not to be the achievement of total rectitude (Fiona, 2007).
To contain corruption, the involvement of international firms and the foreign governments actively or passively is extremely essential. Cross-border corruption, thus, can be curbed in Indonesia under such terms, keeping in mind the pledge on no bribery. Bribery may be criminalized, prosecuted, and tax deductibility of bribery within Indonesia (Ministry Of Public Service, 2009).
The donors part in killing corruption
Corruption has generated heat on academic and financially interested parties in the World Bank, International Community and the IMF in general. Corruption is a major bottle-neck in hindering the economic development. Therefore, it would be needless to try and alleviate poverty fully without giving the higher priority on curbing corruption. The IMF and the World Bank’s control on finance do not extend to political control of corruption (Jongsma, 2011). The World Bank can prevent corruption and fraud within projects, financed by the bank. It can also help those countries that cry out for its help to fight corruption, which Indonesia can try out. It can also give ample consideration on policy dialogue, project design and their choice. Its voice on corruption would also be essential on Indonesia. The likely strategy of the bank is to aid the government to evade the systemic corruption in a move to a form that is well-performing on minimizing development’s negative effects. The strategy has three basic actions, strengthening of the institution, reform on economic policy, and international action (Uggla, 2005).
Corruption Prevention in Indonesia
This paperwork gives a holistic approach to corruption. Donors require full co-operation from corruption infested countries on several fronts. Changes in the private sector may be achieved in Indonesia through promotion of healthy governance and prevention to help the country curb corruption, but build integrity. The move, in turn, would bring conspicuous improvements on the public sector. There are three principal activities, comprising the ant-corruption and governance programs: improvement of service delivery in the public sector through accountability and re-introduction of the rule of law; integrity, built through transparency; and an anti-corruption commission and prevention capacity in the public sector. The need for enforcement agencies, parliament, civil society, and judiciary to fight corruption is conspicuous (Farnum, 2011).
One of the most crucial reasons for lack of sustainable development is the lack of accountability through international and national politicians and civil servants. This applies in the poorest countries. How can accountability and transparency be efficiently generated? Anti-corruption tools have been devised for the purpose of helping municipalities and ministries raise the accountability and the general performance of the government (Centre for International Governance Innovation, 2007). Formal surveys can in line with this be administered and integrity workshops organized by clients, involving the officials in the public sector. Awareness on corruption gets to be introduced in such workshops. There is a need for both external and internal pressure combination to initiate transparency and accountability. Involvement, education and empowerment of the percentage of people, working specifically for the Indonesian government, media, private sector and the civil society, would play a leading role in corruption eradication (Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development, 2008).
The Public Awareness on Corruption
The public is the main reason of all sorts of corruption. The Indonesian citizens need education and involvement to aid on building national integrity through different forms in their lives. Public education on TV, radio and through newspapers would do just that, given that an exceptionally large number of the citizens have access to such communication facilities. Invitation to annual workshops, stocked with stakeholders for discussions on problem solution would also take a lead in eradicating corruption. Indonesian citizens need to know their rights to aid the frequent national surveys on service delivery in public institutions. The media ought to be investigative at all levels of administration and the private sector (Robert, 2008).
Capacity building’s main focus is the expansion of skills and government facilities. Skills training, equipment and financed infrastructure call for upright, confident, and transparent leaders, whose goals are to bring sustainable development. Leaders on the ground need to establish rules, declarations, codes of conduct, and means to monitor public assets. During selection of politicians and civil servants, integrity is crucial before occupation to their posts (Padayachee, 2009).
Strategies for Building Integrity
Local ownership need to be achieved, when any pilot program is launched. In this format, the local community of Indonesia can identify, understand and provide the best solutions for their own problems. Action research is the learning through doing. Tools, such as formal surveys providing baseline data and noting the change over the duration of time, need to be put in place. Although through bind by the signature, and not legally, it is crucial to introduce integrity pledges (Transparency International, 2005).
Maintaining and undertaking the public’s total confidence is essential in curbing corruption in Indonesia. It is highly dependent upon loyalty to policies in Indonesia, regarding social, political and economic welfare. The realization that the public and the private sectors need frequent examining is essential in development of effective procedures of acquiring information. The support from all entries of the government’s institutions is important to see the success of doing away with corruption. Proper vetting needs to be taken into consideration before setting up any anti-corruption commission. The Indonesian government stands a high chance to curb corruption if it were to follow the actions and solution directives, mentioned earlier in this paper. Although service delivery surveys are costly to conduct, they remain the most efficient means to perceive changes in corruption (Robbinson, 2009).
The main purpose of the paper was to pin point perspectives and drawbacks, concerning adoption of reforms in Indonesia. Political and institutional relationship is conditional. For an institution to positively produce outcomes, it solely depends on conditions such as actors’ constellation, political will and ideational factors. Conduct codes and the legislature curb corruption, eliminate misconduct, and promote proper governance. Success of the codes of conduct relies on common value and understanding of the problem at hand to fix it. Based on the high level of corruption, perceived in Indonesia, and reduced trust in the parliament, politicians need to enact ethics reforms to show their commitment. This will further help the politicians regain the public trust (Permenter, 2011).
The purpose of the code of conduct should not be used to punish the wrong doers, but to prevent occurrences of misconduct and corruption. Many Indonesian legislators disagree entirely on the rampant widespread of corruption in the country. The politicians need to identify what plagues their political system and they should be undertaken under the code. These varying dispositions would aid Indonesia attain improved governance, corruption free. Once the path to controlling corruption issue has been set, follow-up activity should be carried out to ensure survival of a corruption free zone. If Indonesia were to be a corruption free zone, diplomatic ties with other countries would also improve.