The index on the risk of bribery in Indonesia, which has been relatively stagnant, indicates the need to improve the anti-bribery and anticorruption system. The government’s political will is badly needed.
By
RINI KUSTIASIH /CYPRIANUS ANTO SAPTOWALYONO
·5 minutes read
JAKARTA, KOMPAS – Doing business in Indonesia is still highly susceptible to bribery. The optimization and improvement of the anti-bribery and anticorruption system in private and public sectors constitute an urgent necessity for the government to realize to reduce the risk of bribery and the risk of its negative impact on the business world.
The Bribery Risk Matrix 2019 by TRACE International, released this month, ranks Indonesia 90th out of 200 countries. TRACE International is an anti-bribery business association with more than 500 multinational members and clients in the world.
In the index, conducted since 2014 but omitting 2015, Indonesia has tended to remain around the same rank. The Bribery Risk Matrix scores countries from 1 to 100, with 1 indicating the lowest risk and 100 the highest risk.
Indonesia’s stagnant rank in the bribery risk index corresponds with other indexes, such as the Rule of Law Index published by the World Justice Project (WJP). Indonesia ranks 62nd of 126 countries in the WJP Rule of Law Index 2019, which covers absence of corruption as one of its variables. The index’s scores range from 0 to 1, with 1 being the best score and the closer to 0, the worse the rule of law in that country.
The indexes’ scores indicate that it is important to improve the anti-bribery or anticorruption system.
Indonesia scored 0.38 (97th out of 126 countries) in absence of corruption in the 2019 WJP index. This is not significantly different from 2018, when it scored of 0.37 and ranked 90th out of 113 countries.
Anticorruption Studies Center chairman Oce Madril at Gadjah Mada University said on Sunday (17/11/2019) when contacted from Jakarta that Indonesia’s stagnancy in the bribery risk and rule of law indexes indicated that its private sector, state-owned enterprises and public officials were prone to bribery.
“The indexes’ scores indicate that it is important to improve the anti-bribery or anticorruption system at public and private institutions, including regional administrations,” said Oce.
Variables
The TRACE bribery risk Index combines a country’s scores in four domains: “Business Interactions with Government; Anti-Bribery Deterrence and Enforcement; Government and Civil Service Transparency; and Capacity for Civil Society Oversight, including the role of the media”.
Indonesia ranks 90th in the 2019 index with an overall score of 50, rising two ranks from 2018 (92th), when it scored similarly at 51. Its scores in previous years were 45 (2017), 55 (2016) and 51 (2014).
It has scored worse from year to year in two of the index’s four domains: Anti-Bribery Deterrence and Enforcement and Government and Civil Service Transparency. Its score in anti-bribery deterrence declined after reaching a high of 25 in 2014, which then fell to 33 (2016), 40 (2017) and then 52 in 2018 and 2019. Likewise, its score fell in government transparency fell from 24 in 2014 to 29 (2016), 52 (2017), 50 (2018) and then 49 (2019).
As regards this trend, Oce said that the anti-bribery system at public and private institutions needed improvement.
An open and transparent system, like online systems, can eliminate corrupt practices and illegal levies.
As for the anti-bribery system, Oce said this could be formulated in the goods and services procurement system, the budgeting system or transparency in staff promotions and transfers. “Procuring goods and services and budgeting must be transparent, for instance, by doing them online so that everybody can monitor them,” he said.
Bribery was prone to occur in the “dark corridors” of civil service and government. Illegal fees or bribery have a high risk of occurring when the public is given insufficient information, such as on the licensing system and health services.
These dark corridors must be eliminated by openly informing the public on public services and systems. Law No. 14/2008 on Transparency in Public Information already stipulates provisions on public information transparency. “An open and transparent system, like online systems, can eliminate corrupt practices and illegal levies,” said Oce.
Indonesia’s relatively low rank on the bribery index should serve as a basis for reflection among policymakers to ensure that the country’ corruption deterrence and enforcement system does not weaken. The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), continued Oce, had been relatively effective so far in deterring embezzlers. The KPK’s role, with its investigative capacity through wire-tapping, should be supported in its deterrence and enforcement activities. The same applied to other anticorruption units, like the police’s Illegal Fees Eradication Task Force (Saber Pungli).
Warning
Transparency International Indonesia (TII) executive director Dadang Trisasongko said that the TRACE bribery index corroborated its Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI; IPK in Indonesian). The CPI’s profiles of the most corrupt and cleanest countries corresponded with countries with the highest and lowest risk of bribery on the TRACE index. Indonesia’s rank was nearly identical on the two indexes.
Indonesia’s high risk of bribery poses a high risk for business operations in the country. According to Dadang, the CPI and the TRACE Bribery Risk Matrix should be seen as a warning for Indonesia’s economic growth. Unless they were addressed seriously, honest and anti-bribery players in investment and trade would be unwilling to do business in Indonesia. Businesspeople who felt that the efficiency of their business was not guaranteed would leave Indonesia.
Any weakening of the KPK signals the weakening of law enforcement against bribery.
“The important factor to consider is whether enforcing the law against those involved in bribery is effective or not. This is also a warning for the President to protect and strengthen law enforcement against corruption. Any weakening of the KPK signals the weakening of law enforcement against bribery,” he said.
On the other hand, said Dadang, the police’s Saber Pungli had been showing a decline in performance. The scores on the bribery risk Index reflected a government’s success or failure in eradicating bribery and other corrupt practices, because the greater responsibility for corruption prevention lay with the government.
The Indonesian Chamber of Commerce and Industry’s deputy general chair for economic zone development, Sanny Iskandar, said that strong political will on the part of government leaders and all state apparatuses was needed in order to develop the anticorruption system. The prevailing culture of turning a blind eye to bribery had made the investment climate unattractive.