Cutting Down on Bureaucracy
Government bureaucracy is still complex; it is not flexible or easy, nor does it serve the wishes of the people. The dynamics of public services move back and forth.
Streamlining government bureaucracy will be carried out by the new government led by President Joko “Jokowi” in his second term of office for the 2019-2024 period.
Carrying out reform is an ongoing effort, a continuous effort that started from the Bung Karno era — the Soeharto era — and is still happening now. But in the results, there is always the intension to carry out reform again and continue with the next set of bureaucratic reforms. When can the results be enjoyed as a clean and good governance? The current system cannot be said to be excellent. Government bureaucracy is still complex; it is not flexible or easy, nor does it serve the wishes of the people. The dynamics of public services move back and forth.
Government bureaucracy has always been the main task of serving the wishes of the people, not serving the wishes of officials. Community service is still far from what was desired. Our bureaucratic system seems to increasingly follow the power of the authorities. Since the Reform Era in 1999 and since the democratic system was implemented properly, there has been the continued growth of political parties.
The involvement of political parties in the government bureaucratic system is increasingly intensive. In the character of a democratic government, the presence of political parties in leading the bureaucratic system is inevitable, while the bureaucratic system was previously led by bureaucrats. Since the presence of political parties leading bureaucracy, it has never been thought of how the working system is between the political officials who lead the bureaucratic system and bureaucrats who carry out the bureaucratic system daily. Then, it was known that there were two categories of leadership positions: the ruler and the administrator.
Government bureaucracy is still complex; it is not flexible or easy, nor does it serve the wishes of the people.
The ruler shows the position that is led by political parties, called political appointees, and the administrator is run by career bureaucrats in the government system. In bureaucratic reform, it is necessary to think about building legislation — it can be a law or government regulation — that regulates the working relationship between political positions and career positions in government bureaucracy so that it can show not as a relationship between superiors and subordinates, but as a system of partner relations that shows the principle of co-equality with the executive.
Cutting the bureaucratic echelons
In the present bureaucratic reform, the government will cut the echelon or structure of government bureaucratic institutions. This bureaucratic characteristic created by Mac Weber is indeed arranged through echelon channels or levels from each position. Bureaucratic echelon is a characteristic that beautifies the bureaucracy, but at the same time, becomes the main problem that makes the bureaucratic system become bureaucratic and widely criticized by the public. Then there are officials who hold positions to take advantage of their power without serving the community.
In Indonesia, the bureaucratic echelon system as we know it today began to be carried out by Soeharto\'s New Order government with a five-level structure. Echelon one is the highest and echelon five is the lowest. For each echelon, a level of allowance is determined. This was what made the echelon positions so desirable at that time because in addition to showing the authority of power, they also had many benefits.
In the international world, according to history, the bureaucratic echelon system was carried out in the era of the Qin and Han dynasties in China. This dynasty originally introduced the merit system through the education and training system, followed by examinations and selections for prospective government officials. In an effort to run a government in an increasingly large area of royal authority, the governments of the Qin and Han Dynasties faced an increasingly complex network of positions.
The application of the echelon system of offices makes the process of providing services to the community slow.
Unlimited prospective positions can be filled by candidates and the mobility of government officials. Job ranks must be determined by a merit system. Finally, a nine-rank system was established by three royal dynasties after the Qin and Han Dynasties. From China, the concept of a merit system of the echelon of bureaucratic positions was later adopted by other countries: It was used in British India in the 17th century and then spread to mainland Europe and America.
In Indonesia, since the government at the beginning of independence until now, the echelon system of bureaucratic positions has been used. However, the implementation was not as expected by the meritocracy discipline. The application of the echelon system of offices makes the process of providing services to the community slow. Moreover, the bureaucratic echelon system, since it is led by political officials (political appointees) from political parties, places more emphasis on the strength of power of the position than the services/devotion to the community.
Based on Law No. 5 of 2014 concerning the state civil servants (ASN), the bureaucratic echelon system is no longer used. ASN bureaucratic positions are divided or grouped into three: executive positions (which are filled by former echelon I and 2 officials), administrative positions and functional positions. The echelon system is no longer known.
If it is later reduced to just two echelons, the bureaucratic structure for the three groups of positions needs to be clarified. Facing the development of Industry 4.0, which is full of digital information technology where the bureaucratic system is largely determined by the growth of the speed of information technology, the arrangement of the echelon system is no longer needed because information moves very fast and can seep into all fields and positions of bureaucratic positions. Therefore, to support the step of cutting the echelons, there needs to be efforts to strengthen the government bureaucratic system. The way to do this is by increasing public service skills by strengthening digital information technology systems, such as computerized system, internet speed, online services, WhatsApp services and so on.
Obstacles for the streamlining
Recent government bureaucratic reforms are facing obstacles because our bureaucratic institutions are too large. Since being led by political officials, the bureaucratic governance system places so much emphasis on power that it forgets community services. Community services are also hindered because the system of division of labor has not been arranged between political offices and bureaucratic career administrators in the regulations.
Recent government bureaucratic reforms are facing obstacles because our bureaucratic institutions are too large.
In the past, in the Soeharto government system, executive officers who led state institutions — both in ministries and in other state institutions — were called state officials, not political officials who worked
or served the state for all the people of Indonesia. In the United States, there is a law on institutions that protects the implementation of the merit system. This law is known as the merit system protecting board.
In this law, it is stated that all state officials who come from political parties may not carry the aspirations and identities of their political parties. This is an effort to ensure that the position of the state is used in the interests of serving the wider community. With no or no legal regulations governing the working relationship between political offices and bureaucratic career positions, this can be said to be the first obstacle that could hinder the implementation of government bureaucratic reform.
The second obstacle is the magnitude of the government bureaucratic institutions due to the large number of state ministries. According to prevailing laws, there must be 34 ministries and it is possible to add the positions of deputy ministers. When compared to other ASEAN countries, Indonesia has the largest number of ministries. Malaysia has less than 34. Japan also has many, more than Indonesia. The US only has 15 ministries.
The number of ministries will have an impact on the government bureaucracy. Indonesia has many ministries because the Cabinet has changed into a Cabinet of political parties that support the President. If government bureaucratic reform is truly to be carried out, consideration must be given to revising the ministry law to require a lean presidential Cabinet that does not increase the power of political parties.
The second obstacle is the magnitude of the government bureaucratic institutions due to the large number of state ministries.
The Cabinet that emphasizes the zaken (working) Cabinet is filled by competent ministers who are experts and professionals. I remember in the old days when I was appointed to form a law ministry under the leadership of the Administrative and Bureaucratic Reform Ministry. The Cabinet that we proposed consisted of three groups of ministries.
First, ministries that must exist and cannot be changed or replaced because their existence is mentioned by the Constitution, such as the Foreign Ministry, Home Ministry, Defense and Religious Affairs. Second, the strategic ministries that accommodate the strategic policies of the new president, which are realized in the form of ministries. This type of ministry can be replaced, changed and eliminated if the new president feels that it is not in accordance with his strategic policies. Third, optional ministries that are very dependent on the needs of the people. These optional ministries are usually called the state ministries. We proposes that the number of ministries should not exceed 22.
Read more : Cutting the Bureaucratic Echelon System
By paying attention to the obstacles of government bureaucratic reform so far, hopefully the bureaucratic reforms that will be carried out by the government of President Jokowi in his second term will work well toward nonbureaucratic public services and can create a lean, dexterous and clean governance system.
Miftah Thoha, Professor (ret.), University of Gadjah Mada