Day, date: Saturday, 08 January 2011
Time: 08.30 – 13.00
Place: Meeting Room of Research Institute (LEMLIT), UNRAM
Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) of Government and Research Institute (LEMLIT) of Mataram University (UNRAM) have conducted a book seminar entitled “Indonesia Menentukan Nasib: Dari Reformasi ke Transformasi Kelembagaan”. 75 participants of the book seminar were invited comprising of Academics, practitioners, Member of Parliament, civil servants, NGO activists, and journalists. The purpose of this activity is to disseminate findings on Indonesian governance after political reforms, results of cooperation among Rajawali Foundation, HKS, and University of Indonesia, and more importantly to develop a culture of academic interaction among academics and professionals in understanding nation development phenomena of Indonesia either some progresses or problems and impediments. Two main discussants were invited in this seminar. The first one is Prof. Dr. H. Gatot Dwi Hendro Wibowo, SH, M.Hum, Head of Doctoral Program of Law, Mataram University, who specifically focus on law, policy, and institution aspects of the book. The second one is Dr. Iwan Harsono, SE, M.Ec., Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Economy, University of Mataram, also the vice-chairman of Integrated Economic Development Area (KAPET) Bima who more specifically discussed on economic and related aspects. The flow of discussion was organized in simple manner. After the chair of organizing committee (Mr. Addinul Yakin) gave brief notes on the purpose and expectation of the seminar as well as congratulate participants who eagerly attended the occasion, followed by short remarks by the head of Research Institute of Mataram University (Dr. Hirwan Hamidi) who appreciate the role of HKS in conducting this important occasion, and encourage main discussants and participants to exchange knowledge and experiences in responding to the findings presented in the book, and officially opened the seminar. Then, the seminar was overtaken by a moderator (Mr. Amiruddin) who led and moderated the seminar to the end. The book seminar was started by giving opportunity to two main discussants, 30 minutes each, and followed by open discussion for all participants. In general, the book seminar flowed in very stimulating and dynamic manner. The first main discussant (Prof Gatot) emphasized that to comprehend the direction of book contents need to know the background of the writers who more or less reflected in the book. He also reminded the audiences that there are six demands of Indonesian reforms to fulfill; amendment of UUD 1945, eliminating dual functions of ABRI, combating corruption, collusion, and nepotism (KKN), liberty of the press or free press, and develop democratic live, so that the discussion of this book should be referring to those reform agenda, although just in institutional transformation aspects. He also highlighted on historical background of democratic transformation in Indonesia and argued that Indonesia does not have strong democratic tradition so the final democratic platform is still questionable. He consciously appreciated the accuracy of the writers in portraying the situations, and finally claimed that institutional transformation depends on human beings, binding ideology, and national character building which are based on adopted political and economic ideology. The second main discussant (Dr. Iwan) elaborated some good progress in Indonesian economy in the last few years and claimed that he was not as pessimistic as the writers in portraying the state of Indonesian economy, but he was fully aware of the existence of this borderless world where money and skills are unavoidable and at the same time human resource capacity (including limited foreign language competence) which hindered competitiveness even with some fellow Asian countries, and at the end also would have some economic implications. However, he agreed on many points of the writers, particularly on the very poor condition of economic infrastructures in Indonesia which made Indonesia difficult to compete, especially in attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) to this country. FDI should be promoted in order to increase investment, especially in production sector. Another important thing he mentioned is the trend of low proportion of borrowings for productive sector than consumptive purpose. He also highlighted the importance of middle class as economic drivers for economic growth, including in business lobbying. He finally suggested that, in industrial sector, promoting value added process through domestic manufacturing and processing industries are imperative if we would like to see strong future Indonesian economic growth. Participants attending the seminar also enthusiastically express their opinions and arguments on topics discussed in the book.
Some participants who actively involved in the discussion and are worthily mentioned in this report were Didik Sumardi, SH (Vice chairman of Local legislative (DPRD) of Mataram city), Ir. Made Slamet (Fraction of PDIP DPRD of Mataram), Prof. Sukardono (Faterna Unram), Dr. Busaini (FE Unram), Dr. Muhaimin (FH Unram), Dr. Fachruddin (IAIN Mataram). Some important points and issues raised in the forum were (1) they fully appreciated HKS for conducting this kind of rare occasion in Mataram. Mr. Didik insisted that there has been subjective spirits from the authors in portraying Indonesian context when it was compared to other countries or international settings. He maintained that it is not appropriate to perceive Indonesian institutions in international context. What have been raised in the book was just in formalistic way, not comprehensively portraying real condition of society. Furthermore, institutions analyzed in the book were unclear, and the role of institution is the only one factor which determined the development results. Another thing he elaborated was regional financial management policy where most funding (75 %) was allocated for governmental spending (routine needs) and only 25% for people service and development. Made Slamet affirmed that this book was only in half-way, not evolving historical background influencing current condition in Indonesia. In addition, this book did not explicitly discussed the social diversity. He also argued that the notion of poor structure with rich function was only a jargon, and never applied, so the government structure is too large and inefficient. He agreed with other participants that nation character building is very crucial. He also proposed that this book is discussed widely up to district/city level to disseminate this valuable information on Indonesian developmental governance. Furthermore, Dr Busaini (FE) commented on some inaccurate prediction on Indonesia, including the idea of “balkanization”. In terms of institutional transformation, two key institutions should be carefully managed: economic institutions, and security and politic institutions, but he was curious that Indonesian economy is directed to a secular economy. He insisted that institutional transformation for economic prosperity might be developed through zakah (alms) institution. One main weakness of Indonesia is a lot of undocumented data, including export, which then he referred to his sentiment on three sources of falsehood: Satan, man, and statistics. Another participant who gave valuable comments was Prof. Sukardono (Faterna). After giving some appreciation to this activity, he insisted that in politics it needs a harmonization among science, policy, and practice. Indonesian economic system is unclear, whether liberals, Keynesian, socialism, or Pancasila? He believed that strong nation should be based on strong system of law and professional education system. For developing countries, authoritarian is OK. Although free market looks good, for Indonesia, governmental control is still necessary. Furthermore, Dr. Muhaimin (FH) argued that Indonesia has been experiencing national leadership crisis in last decade and law supremacy has been very weak because all law institutions do not work properly. He also urged to promote national character building since corruption is not only experiencing by leaders but also by people. Finally, Mr. Fachruddin (IAIN) discussed about more openness of Indonesian relationship with Islamic nations in the Middle East which more or less influence political dynamics in this country. In economic contexts, he criticized that the increasing growth of Islamic economics was not covered in this book.
Apart from some pros and cons on some issues in the book, all discussants have some in common that after political reforms in Indonesia there have been some good progresses as well as drawbacks in Indonesian development, including in institutional transformation. It needs further serious efforts and actions to fulfill the objectives of the reformation. All participants agreed that this book is apparently good reference to correct and to improve overall conditions for better Indonesia in the future.
Mataram, 11 January 2011Some participants who actively involved in the discussion and are worthily mentioned in this report were Didik Sumardi, SH (Vice chairman of Local legislative (DPRD) of Mataram city), Ir. Made Slamet (Fraction of PDIP DPRD of Mataram), Prof. Sukardono (Faterna Unram), Dr. Busaini (FE Unram), Dr. Muhaimin (FH Unram), Dr. Fachruddin (IAIN Mataram). Some important points and issues raised in the forum were (1) they fully appreciated HKS for conducting this kind of rare occasion in Mataram. Mr. Didik insisted that there has been subjective spirits from the authors in portraying Indonesian context when it was compared to other countries or international settings. He maintained that it is not appropriate to perceive Indonesian institutions in international context. What have been raised in the book was just in formalistic way, not comprehensively portraying real condition of society. Furthermore, institutions analyzed in the book were unclear, and the role of institution is the only one factor which determined the development results. Another thing he elaborated was regional financial management policy where most funding (75 %) was allocated for governmental spending (routine needs) and only 25% for people service and development. Made Slamet affirmed that this book was only in half-way, not evolving historical background influencing current condition in Indonesia. In addition, this book did not explicitly discussed the social diversity. He also argued that the notion of poor structure with rich function was only a jargon, and never applied, so the government structure is too large and inefficient. He agreed with other participants that nation character building is very crucial. He also proposed that this book is discussed widely up to district/city level to disseminate this valuable information on Indonesian developmental governance. Furthermore, Dr Busaini (FE) commented on some inaccurate prediction on Indonesia, including the idea of “balkanization”. In terms of institutional transformation, two key institutions should be carefully managed: economic institutions, and security and politic institutions, but he was curious that Indonesian economy is directed to a secular economy. He insisted that institutional transformation for economic prosperity might be developed through zakah (alms) institution. One main weakness of Indonesia is a lot of undocumented data, including export, which then he referred to his sentiment on three sources of falsehood: Satan, man, and statistics. Another participant who gave valuable comments was Prof. Sukardono (Faterna). After giving some appreciation to this activity, he insisted that in politics it needs a harmonization among science, policy, and practice. Indonesian economic system is unclear, whether liberals, Keynesian, socialism, or Pancasila? He believed that strong nation should be based on strong system of law and professional education system. For developing countries, authoritarian is OK. Although free market looks good, for Indonesia, governmental control is still necessary. Furthermore, Dr. Muhaimin (FH) argued that Indonesia has been experiencing national leadership crisis in last decade and law supremacy has been very weak because all law institutions do not work properly. He also urged to promote national character building since corruption is not only experiencing by leaders but also by people. Finally, Mr. Fachruddin (IAIN) discussed about more openness of Indonesian relationship with Islamic nations in the Middle East which more or less influence political dynamics in this country. In economic contexts, he criticized that the increasing growth of Islamic economics was not covered in this book.
Apart from some pros and cons on some issues in the book, all discussants have some in common that after political reforms in Indonesia there have been some good progresses as well as drawbacks in Indonesian development, including in institutional transformation. It needs further serious efforts and actions to fulfill the objectives of the reformation. All participants agreed that this book is apparently good reference to correct and to improve overall conditions for better Indonesia in the future.
Reported by,
Ir. Addinul Yakin, GDEc., M.Ec.
(Chairman of the Organizing Committee; Person in Charge)
Faculty of Agriculture, Mataram Univesity.
No comments:
Post a Comment