The nation has not made much progress in improving public services. Prolonged delays and procedural abuse continue to occur, and may even be dominating efforts.
By
·3 minutes read
The nation has not made much progress in improving public services. Prolonged delays and procedural abuse continue to occur, and may even be dominating efforts.
This is indicated in the Indonesia Ombudsman’s annual report 2019, released in Jakarta on Tuesday (3/3/2020), with 7,903 public complaints received in the past year. Complaints over delays due to maladministration numbered 1,837 (33.62 percent), on procedural abuse 1,583 (28.97 percent), and 967 complaints (17.7 percent) on unprovided services.
The report is certainly a concern to us all. Perhaps, however, we are unsurprised by it because such experiences occur and are visible from day to day. This is seen in the types of complaints that the Indonesian Ombudsman has received in relation to the agrarian and spatial planning sector (15.83 percent), the civil service (13.71 percent), education (12.04 percent), police (10.08 percent), civil registration (4.56 percent) and labor (3.37 percent). The institutions also vary. Those with the most complaints were regional administrations (41.62 percent), government/ministries (11.22 percent), and the police (10.25 percent).
Law No. 25/2019 on Public Services stipulates that the state is mandated to serve the public so that every citizen may fulfill their basic rights and needs. Therefore, the ombudsman report should not be considered as just a “small” warning but as a slap in the face for a complete overhaul.
The country has long been aware of the need to improve its public services. The National Ombudsman Commission was established in 2000 during the era of President B.J. Habibie in direct response to the public’s high demand for better public services, covering all services from the government, state-owned enterprises (BUMN), regionally owned enterprises (BUMD), as well as private companies and individuals that received partial or full government funding through either the state or regional budget.
However, awareness alone is not enough. What is needed is strong commitment in the form of concrete measures for overall improvement at all levels from the top to down, followed by reward or punishment through evaluation.
The evaluation must start from public administrators; namely the Cabinet ministers and the heads of state institutions, non-ministerial agencies and state commissions, as well as governors, regents and mayors. A number of regional heads have taken the lead and made a leap forward in improving public services.
Sanctions must also be imposed for public administrators that violate procedures, starting with a written warning and through rotation to salary reduction, demotion, honorable and dishonorable dismissals, and all the way to permit suspensions and revocations.