Nurcahyo Jungkung Madyo
(Program Doctor of Law, Universitas Jenderal Soedirman)
Abstract
The massive corruption that occurred in the regional financial management of Banggai Laut Regency has greatly disturbed the sense of justice, a community living in remote parts of the country has also become a victim of corruption crimes committed by the Regent and regional secretaries. Through this research, the author tries to test the application of digitalization to improve governance in order to prevent corruption. This research is not only normative juridical which analyzes theories, legal principles, concepts, and legal norms with a theoretical approach and comparative law but also empirically using a case approach and an analysis of the impact of corruption. The results of this study argue that the main factors for the occurrence of massive corruption in Banggai Laut Regency are poor governance, low accountability and weak transparency and public participation.The innovations suggested by the authors are increasing transparency and accountability through web streaming at auction sessions for procurement of goods and services at local governments, electronic dashboards, digital tools for more accessible and corruption-free public service delivery, and web applications for participatory budgeting.
Keywords: Digitization, Governance, Corruption
INTRODUCTION
Banggai Laut Regency is one of the regencies in the province of Central Sulawesi, Indonesia. Banggai Laut is the result of the division of the Banggai Islands Regency which was ratified in the plenary session of the DPR RI on December 14, 2012 at the DPR RI building on the Draft Law on New Autonomous Regions (DOB). Total population of Banggai Laut in 2021 as much as 70,435 souI, with a density of 97 inhabitants/km2.*The revenue set for the 2020 fiscal year is Rp642,592,942,276.29 (six hundred forty-two billion five hundred ninety-two million nine hundred forty-two thousand two hundred seventy-six point twenty- nine rupiah). While the realization is only Rp. 571,507,938,037.29 (Five Hundred Seventy One Billion Five Hundred Seven Million Nine Hundred Thirty Eight Thousand Thirty Seven Point Twenty Nine Rupiah). “Realized revenue reached 89 percent. The income referred to is sourced from PAD, Balancing Fund and other legitimate income. (LKPJ, 2020) As a Regency with a remote geographical position and such a very low income level, it turns out that the regional head elected through the direct general election mechanism turned out to be corrupt in the misuse of the 2020 APBD. On Thursday, December 4, 2020, Wenny Bukamo as the Regent of Banggai Laut together 15 (fifteen) other people consisting of the ranks of service heads, contractors, and the success team for regional head elections were arrested by the KPK for accepting bribes with evidence of cash amounting to Rp1,000,000,000 which was stored in two boxes.3
Not only the Regent, the practice of corruption was also carried out by the Regional Secretary of the Banggai Laut Regency who also served as the Head of the Regional
Financial Management Agency, Idhamsyah Tompo, was sentenced to 7 years and 6 months in prison in the corruption case of the fictitious Official Travel Order (SPPD) BPKAD for the 2020 fiscal year. In addition, Ansar Mapiase (Expenditure Treasurer) and Silvana Bidja (Active Technical Implementation Officer (PPTK) are inactive, also defendants in the alleged corruption case of irregularities in the official travel budget of the Banggai Laut Regency Financial and Asset Management Agency (BPKAD).Based on concerns about the rights of the community to the results of development that occupy a cluster of islands in remote areas of Central Sulawesi Province, the authors are very interested in knowing the factors causing corruption by using the corruption impact assessment approach (ADK) or corruption impact assessment on the financial management of the Banggai Laut Regency government in 2015. 2020 budget. In addition, the author is also very interested in formulating steps to digitize local government financial governance as an effort to prevent further corruption.
Based on this background, the writer formulates the problem as follows:
1. What are the factors that cause corruption in the Banggai Laut Regency government’s financial management in 2020?
2. What are the practical steps for digitizing the financial management of the Banggai Laut Regency government?
DISCUSSION
Transparency International defines corruption as the abuse of entrusted power for personal gain, thereby eroding trust, weakening democracy, hindering economic
development and further exacerbating inequality, poverty, social divisions and environmental crises (Transparcy International). Exposing corruption and holding corruptors accountable can only happen if we understand how corruption works and the systems that enable it (Transparcy International).
Corruption is a complex social, political and economic phenomenon that affects all countries. Corruption undermines democratic institutions, slows economic development and contributes to government instability.
Corruption attacks the foundations of democratic institutions by distorting the electoral process, perverting the rule of law and creating a bureaucratic quagmire whose sole reason for its existence is bribery. Economic development is hampered because foreign direct investment is discouraged and domestic small businesses often find it impossible to cope with the “start-up costs” required by corruption.’
Indeed, the definition of corruption is very broad, from a socio-political point of view, a formal juridical point of view, or a cultural point of view. All have the same nature, namely a disgraceful act and deserves retaliation in the form of criminal sanctions. The entire current government continues to struggle to eradicate and minimize the occurrence and risk of systemic damage, among others, by the application of information technology in the form of a digitalization process. Through this research, the author tries to test the application of digitalization to improve governance (improvement of governance) in order to prevent the occurrence of corruption. The notion of governance or governance can be understood as an act or process of regulating or supervising the control and direction
of something (such as a state or organization) (Definition of governance). Governance according to the Governance Institute of Australia is that governance includes the systems by which organizations are controlled and operate, and the mechanisms by which those organizations, and their people, are held accountable. Ethics, risk management, compliance and administration are all elements of Governance. (The standard for assessing governance in an organization is the concept of Good Corporate Governance (GCG) (Definition of good corporate governance). According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Good Corporate Governance (GCG) is a value standard as an instrument helping to build the environment of trust, transparency, and accountability necessary to promote long- term investment, financial stability and business integrity, thereby supporting greater growth. stronger and more inclusive societies (Definition of good corporate governance).
The principles of Good Corporate Governance (GCG) are intended to help policy makers evaluate and improve the legal, regulatory and institutional framework for corporate governance, with the aim of supporting economic efficiency, sustainable growth, and financial stability (OECD, G20/OECD Principles of Corporate Governance). The Principles recognize the interests of employees and other stakeholders and their important role in contributing to the company’s long-term success and performance. Other factors relevant to the company’s decision-making process, such as environmental, anti-corruption or ethical issues, are considered in the Principles but are treated more explicitly in a number of other instruments including the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Companies, the Convention on
the Eradication of Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions, Principles United Nations Guidelines on Business and Human Rights, and the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (OECD, G20/OECD Principles of Corporate Governance).
The implementation of the principles of good corporate governance has been very interestingly applied by the North Macedonian government. Good Governance has been implemented in the implementation of public affairs and responsible management of public resources, with reference to the 12 Principles of Good Governance as set out by the Council of Europe. The 12 Principles are implemented in the Innovation Strategy and Good Governance at the local level, endorsed by a decision of the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers in 2008, covering issues such as ethical behavior, rule of law, efficiency and effectiveness, transparency, financial management and accountability healthy (The Council of Europe, 12 Principles of Good Governance).
The Government of North Macedonia has been awarded the European Label of Governance’ Excellence (ELoGE) as an award given to a government authority that has achieved an overall level of good governance as measured by relevant benchmarks. The 12 Good Governance Principles are as follows:*5
1. Principles of Fair Election, Participation and Representation with implementation as/OIIOWS:
a. Elections for regional heads are conducted freely and fairly, in accordance with international standards and national laws, and without fraud.
b. Citizens are at the center of public activity and they are involved in obvious ways in public life at the local level.
c. All men and women can have a say in decision- making, either directly or through a legitimate intermediary body that represents their interests.
Such broad participation is built on freedom of expression, assembly and association.
d. All voices, including those of the disadvantaged and most vulnerable, are heard and taken into account in decision-making, including the allocation of resources.
e. There is always an honest effort to mediate between legitimate interests and to reach broad consensus on what is in the best interests of the entire community and on how this can be achieved.
f. Decisions are made according to the will of the many, while the legitimate rights and interests of the few are respected.
2. Responsibility
a. Objectives, rules, structures and procedures are adapted to the expectations and needs of legitimate citizens.
b. Public services are provided, and requests and complaints are responded to within a reasonable timeframe.
3. Efficiency and Effectiveness
a. The results meet the agreed objectives.
b. The best possible use is made of the available resources.
c. The performance management system makes it possible to evaluate and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of services.
d. Audits are conducted periodically to assess and improve performance.
4. Openness and Transparency
a. Decisions are taken and implemented in accordance with the rules and regulations.
b. There is public access to all information that is not classified for certain reasons as provided for by law (such as protection of privacy or ensuring fairness of procurement procedures).
c. Information on decisions, policy implementation and outcomes is made publicly available in such a way that it is possible to effectively follow and contribute to the work of local authorities.
5. Rules of Law
a. Local governments comply with laws and court decisions.
b. Rules and regulations are adopted according to procedures prescribed by law and enforced impartially.
6. Ethical Behavior
a. The public interest is placed above the individual interest.
b. There are effective measures to prevent and combat all forms of corruption.
c. Conflicts of interest are declared in a timely manner and the people involved should not take part in the relevant decisions.
7. Competence and Capacity
a. The professional skills of those providing governance are continuously maintained and strengthened to improve outcomes and impact.
b. Public officials are motivated to continuously improve their performance.
c. Practical methods and procedures are created and used to convert skills into capacities and produce better results.
8. Innovation and Openness to Change
a. New and efficient solutions to problems are found and advantages are taken from modern service delivery methods.
b. There is a readiness to pilot and experiment with new programs and learn from the experiences of others.
c. A climate that supports change is created to achieve better results.
9. Sustainability and Long Term Orientation
a. The needs of future generations are taken into account in current policies.
b. Community sustainability is always taken into account.
c. Decisions seek to internalize all costs and not transfer problems and tensions, be they environmental, structural, financial, economic or social, to future generations.
d. There is a broad and long-term perspective on the future of local communities along with an understanding of what is needed for such development.
e. There is an understanding of the historical, cultural and social complexities on which this perspective is based.
10. Financial Management Thought
a. The levy does not exceed the cost of the services provided and does not excessively reduce demand, especially in the case of essential public services.
b. Prudence is observed in financial management, including in contracts and use of loans, in the estimation of resources, revenues and reserves, and in the use of extraordinary income.
c. A multi-year budget plan is prepared, with public consultation.
d. Risk is properly estimated and managed, including by publication of consolidated accounts and, in the case of public-private partnerships, by realistic risk sharing.
e. Local governments take part in inter-city solidarity arrangements, equitable sharing of burdens and benefits and risk reduction (equity system, inter-city cooperation, risk mutualization
11. Human Rights, Culture, Diversity, and Social Ties
a. Within the sphere of influence of local authorities, human rights are respected, protected and enforced, and discrimination on any grounds is fought.
b. Cultural diversity is treated as an asset, and continuous efforts are made to ensure that all have an interest in the local community, identify with it and do not feel excluded.
c. Social cohesion and integration of disadvantaged areas is promoted. Access to essential services is
maintained, particularly for the most disadvantaged sections of the population.
12. Accountability
a. All decision makers, collective and individual, are responsible for their decisions.
b. Decisions are reported, explained and can be sanctioned.
c. There is an effective remedy against maladministration and against acts of local authorities that violate civil rights.
The author sees that the eighth principle, namely Innovation and Openness to Change, is the key to the success of improving Good Governance in public services by the North Macedonian Government to prevent corruption in the public service sector. The 12 principles of Good Governance implemented by the Government of North Macedonia are driven by the success of the principles of innovation and openness to change through the public service digitization strategy.
The digitization of public governance and the resulting concepts of electronic governance are hallmarks of the contemporary information society. Both can be defined as processes and outcomes of digital transformation: the transformation of “analog” governance into “digital”
governance. Digitalization is changing the way government organizations conduct their internal operations, the way they make and implement decisions, the way they interact with citizens, businesses, and one another, and the way they govern and manage the territories and sectors under their jurisdiction. Conceptually, digitalization is the
transformation of traditional “analog” governance into contemporary “digital” governance. Not only digitizing traditional government structures, processes and culture, digitalization is also aimed at improving governance performance (Jaromir Durkiewics, 2018).
The Japanese Government’s strategy to improve good governance is also very interesting for writers. As stated by the Digital Administration Ad Hoc Task Force, which recently proposed 5 (five) digital principles to fix the work patterns of legislators and civil servants in the digital era. The 5 (five) digital principles that apply in Japan are as follows:
1. Digital Execution and Automation
Procedures must not require written forms, in- person submissions, or in-person inspections by officials at a designated physical location -they must be digitally viable and, where possible, automated. The goal is end- to-end digital processing, both within government and between government and its constituents, suppliers, and other stakeholders.
2. Agile Governance
Regulations should focus on the desired end result - the risk to be reduced or the performance to be achieved- rather than establishing rigid, uniform processes and procedures. Regulatory oversight should take full advantage of available data and be open to continuous updating and improvement.
3. Public-Private Partnership
Governments should leverage private sector innovation to improve user experience by, for example, adopting user interfaces and other technologies developed by private companies.
4. Interoperability
The system must be interoperable, so that central and local governments, quasi-public entities, and the private sector can share data seamlessly.
5. Sharing Infrastructure
The public and private sectors must share a common basic digital infrastructure for things like digital IDs and basic registry. Procurement specifications should be standardized to avoid silos among different agencies, levels of government, and other entities providing public services.
In addition to the North Macedonian and Japanese governments, the author also analyzes the digitization policy by the South Korean Government. In 2018, South Korea participated in the OECD Digital Government Index (DGI).
DGI assesses and compares the maturity of digital government policies and their implementation under a coherent and holistic approach. As such, it aims to help assess the ability of governments to operate in an increasingly digital and globalized world. This gives the South Korean government the opportunity to review its progress in 6 dimensions: digital by design, government as a platform, data-driven public sector, open by default, user- driven, and proactive (Promoting Digital Innovation to Deliver Value to Korean Citizens).
In addition, Korea can draw insights and lessons from its peers and the OECD on digital identity, data-driven public sector, and service design and delivery through the work of the E-Leaders thematic group. In June 2021, the Korean government announced its digital government
strategy for 2021-2025, a roadmap for implementing intelligent service design and delivery, data-driven public administration, and a robust and inclusive digital infrastructure, reinforcing the weaknesses identified by DGI.
The government will strive to continue to build an inclusive digital ecosystem for public data and public services to improve the daily lives of citizens (Promoting Digital Innovation to Deliver Value to Korean Citizens).
Based on a comparative analysis of the policy implementation of the digitalization strategy of good governance implemented in North Macedonia, Japan and South Korea, it is clear that there is a positive correlation between the implementation of digitalization and efforts to improve the quality of government services according to the principles of good governance. Digital technology has been used to bring government services closer to the community.
Digital instruments and spaces are always playing an increasingly important role in our lives and in that way the public can engage with public institutions in the management of government finances. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated this trend, giving the public many opportunities to quickly expand anti-corruption instruments in the form of new digital tools to support good governance and fight corruption. Although the methods of preventing and eradicating corruption basically have not changed much, the existence of digital tools in people’s daily lives provides new options for implementing these methods.
Officials of public institutions often take advantage of their lack of transparency, accountability, and isolation from the supervision of citizens on the grounds that limited facilities, time and manpower make it too difficult to keep
citizens informed and involved in the management of government finances. Community members also tended to ignore their lack of participation for the same reason, stating that following the oversight of their local government’s financial management and taking part in the process was too difficult and time consuming. These reasons may be temporary, but with the new aim of increasing transparency and the ease of community engagement made possible by the ubiquity of digital tools making such excuses less and less credible.
However, we must recognize that digitalization creates new challenges in expanding society’s digital infrastructure so that all citizens can benefit equally from the new opportunities it provides. Rapid digitization without considering the equal rights of citizens so that they are not on the other side of the digital divide. Citizens who do not have stable internet access or the digital literacy required to use digital devices should be considered. Leaving no one behind requires expanding the use of digital tools in governance supported by efforts to expand access to digital infrastructure and the skills needed to use them effectively.
Factors that Cause Corruption in the Financial Management of Banggai Laut Regency Government in 2020
Dissemination of public information to the public is an important tool for achieving accountability, transparency and participation. To get the process of delivering public information that is accurate and timely, it is necessary to develop a system. Information systems have a significant impact on government and civil society.