| | |
| | Yosef Arihadi |
 CORRUPTION AND THE POOR, CASES OF |
| Corruption acts are not exclusively related with high level people, it also included poor people as active or passive actors. This study describes the phenomenon in Indonesian slum areas, how it is entered to the lives of the poor and the damage it caused to them. The study also raised the solutions that the poor think could be achieved. |
ACRONYMS AND TERMS
Akte Kelahiran : Birth Certificate
Arisan : Rotated Saving and Credit Association
BBM : Oil
BKKBN : National Family Planning Board
BP3 : School Supervisor
BRI : Bank Rakyat Indonesia
Dinas Kebersihan : Garbage Collection and Cleaning Service
DPRD : District Level Parliament
FGD : Focused Group Discussion
IDP : Internally Displaced Persons
JPS : Social Safety Net
KAPOLDA : Head of District Level Police
Kecamatan : Sub-district
Kelurahan : Village
KK : Household
KTP : Identity Card
KUA : Religious Office for Marriage and Divorce
LBH : NGO for Legal Aid
NEM : National Evaluation Mark
NGO : Non Government Organization
OPK : Special Market Operation
P & K : Ministry of Education and Culture
PAM : State Water Company
PCA : Participatory Corruption Appraisal
PEMDA : Local Government (District or Province Level)
PLN : State Electricity Company
POLRI : Indonesia
POMG : Parent and Teachers Association
Posyandu : Sub- Health Clinic
Puskesmas : Health Clinic
RT : Neighborhood Association
RW : Hamlet Association
SKKB : Clearance Letter from Police
SSN : Social Safety Net
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
Corruption cases are rampant in developing countries, and Indonesia
The “Corruption and the Poor” project under the support of the World Bank and the Partnership for Governance Reform in Indonesia, was intended to get better understanding on how corruption affects the poor people’s life. Specifically it entails identifying various ways (causes and effects) in which corruption affects the poor; the extent to which corruption enters the lives of the poor and the damage it causes to them (cost-benefit of corruption to the poor); their perceptions of different forms of corruption and the solutions that the poor people think could be achieved. It also elicits case studies that illustrate the detrimental effects of corruption on the poor.
Methodology and Processes
To pursue the project purpose a Participatory Corruption Appraisal methodology was devised and applied in Yogyakarta, Jakarta and Makassar in 2001 - 2002. There were four steps involved in the study:
· Preparation, involving planning, poverty and corruption mapping
· Training on the research methodology for the field facilitators
· Field works in three urban communities: Yogyakarta, Jakarta and Makassar involving focused group discussion and in-depth interviews.
· Reports back: after the research findings were evaluated the fourth step was to report back key findings in a community and stakeholders meeting in three cities with the aim to initiate follow-up activities.
Organization of the Field Work. Several institutions and individuals were involved in this study. Yosef Arihadi, the writer and the Field Work Team Leader, was representing Yayasan Bina Swadaya as the coordinating NGO involved in Jakarta and Yogyakarta field works and partly in Makassar . LBH P2I was the participating NGO in Makassar with its associate staff. Irfani Darma was the field work consultant, Alexander Irwan was the Review Consultant and Stefanie Teggemann was the Project Coordinator. Richard Holloway was the observer and editing this report.
Study Site Visits. There were two visits per study sites; the first was entirely dedicated to field works. Approximately 4 focus group discussions (FGD) and 20 interviews were undertaken per sites. The second site visits was a report-back session (one community and one stakeholder meeting).
TABLE 1: FIELD WORK METHOD AND TECHNIQUES
| PCA Techniques | Objectives | Participants |
| Pre-Field Work Meeting With Community Leaders | To introduce research team, objectives and to get general information about the community | Local field workers meet officials of RW, RT and informal leaders |
| Introductory Meeting: Wealth Classification and Community Mapping | To introduce the research team and objectives, understand the wealth strata of the community and identify the poor | Field work team, poor and non poor community representatives |
| FGD 1: Institution Mapping, Bribe Paying, and Perception | To introduce the research team and objectives, understand the prevalence of corruption, and perception of corruption | Field work team, poor community members, partly split into men’s and women’s group |
| FGD 2: Corruption Problem Ranking, Flow Diagram | To identify most pressing corruption related problems, understanding causes and effects of corruption and identify case study for follow up interviews | Same as previous, flow diagrams were done in 3 smaller groups. |
| FGD 3: Brainstorming on Solutions | To identify solutions to three most pressing corruption problems | Same as previous, solutions were done in 3 smaller groups |
| Interviews | To elicit case studies (individual and community wide) on how corruption affects poor people’s lives | Selected respondents FGD and non FGD participants, predominantly poor but also officials or community leaders if necessary |
Planning and Training Workshop. A planning and training workshop was held in Depok, West Java in June 5-8, 2001 with the coordinating NGO, the NGO Partner from Makassar , the Media NGO, peer reviewers and individuals. The objective was to establish contact and learn about the project objectives. One day for planning and followed by 3 days training and testing of the participatory methods for the field work – leading to the finalization of the field work methodology.
Research Methodology. A new methodology was developed specifically for this project namely Participatory Corruption Appraisal (PCA). PCA builds on Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) methodologies, but adjusts them to elicit information regarding corruption issues in communities in a participatory manner. It is a combination between focus group discussions and semi-structured, in-depth interviews. Sequence of the PCA techniques were Pre-Fieldwork Meeting with Community Leaders; Wealth Classification and Community Mapping; Institution Mapping, Bribe Paying and Perception; Corruption Problem Ranking, Flow Diagram of Causes and Effects; Brainstorming on Solutions; and the last In-depth Interviews on Corruption Cases.
Study Site Selection. As mentioned above, three urban communities were selected – namely RW 3 of Kelurahan Sosrowijayan in Yogyakarta, RW 3 of Kelurahan Pulogadung, and RW 4 of Kelurahan Maccini Sombala in Makassar . The study site in Yogyakarta is located quite in the central of the city and Sultan’s palace. The residence are mostly homogeneous, predominantly with Javanese ethnic with quite a range of wealth strata. Most of the poor, stay close to he Winong river with variety of occupations but mostly informal business people. The Jakarta Makassar is located at the southern part close to the coast line with traditional market and a city canal.
Selection of the FGD Participants and Interviewees. The selection of the FGD participants in Yogyakarta – as the first study site for field work – was done by community leaders based on the list of the poor of BKKBN category. In Jakarta Makassar , from the list of the poor people we excluded the ones who were too old, and then the remaining were split from the male and female.
For the case studies, interviewees were selected based on the knowledge the person had about the corruption cases emerged during the FGD. Persons actively involved in or knowledgeable about the corruption cases were chosen, and additional respondents from outside of the FGD participants were also selected.
The overall processes of the interviewing were done informally using semi-structured pattern. The focus of the exploration was mainly on who experienced what, when, how many times, how much the corruption cases and their impacts. In Yogyakarta and Makassar , the attitude of the elites and the bulk of the community were open and did not deny the phenomenon. In Jakarta
TABLE 2: FGD PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVIEWEES
| Activities | | | |
| FGD I | Participants: 23 Male 8 Female | Participants: 22 Male 17 Female | Participants: 13 Male 22 Female |
| FGD II | Participants: 30 Male 16 Female | Participants: 8 Male 15 Female | Participants: 12 Male 12 Female |
| FGD III | Participants: 5 Male 16 Female | Participants: 11 Male 18 Female | Participants: 12 Male 12 Female |
| Interview | 22 Interviewees: 15 Male 7 Female | 27 Interviewees: 19 Male 8 Female | 13 Interviewees: 8 Male 5 Female |
· NB: In Yogyakarta , the FGD I (wealth classification and community mapping) and FGD II (institution mapping, bribe paying and flow diagram) were conducted in two meeting each. The number of participants reported above is the maximum
CHAPTER II: WEALTH CLASSIFICATION
To reach poor community members, a process of community assessment of social classification were carried out. In Yogyakarta, the wealth classifications were done by the ‘poor’ themselves (under the BKKBN category) who were invited to the first FGD, while in Jakarta and Makassar, the assessment were done by the poor and non poor at the Introductory Meeting to determine them as the invitee for all the FGDs. The following describes the definition of the poor and their proportion in the community.
Local Definition of Wealth Categories.
Across he study sites three major categories of wealth classes were found.
In Yogyakarta , the three categories in local terms were sugih (the rich), sedengan (middle class) and mlarat (the poor). “Mlarat” according to the community definition means a member of community whose socio-economic status is at the lowest, but who still have jobs or activities and derives earnings from them—even if it is seasonal. Major characteristics of this group are that they have small, simple slum houses usually close to the river, they face difficulties in finding food everyday and they have seasonal jobs.
The “sedengan” category is for community members who have just enough to eat everyday. Their livelihood is illustrated as having electricity, a furnished house, access to a doctor, ability to send their children to high school and able to be part of social groups. The “sugih” category describes community member who have more than they need and have many valuable goods such as car, a luxurious house and compound secured by guards.
In Jakarta
The “miskin” is a category for community members whose condition is characterized as having many children, living in a house which has been compartmentalized for their children, or living in a rented house after just getting fired from their jobs. The “menengah” community members are characterized as having permanent jobs, primary and secondary needs have been fulfilled and there is surplus for their savings or even for social contributions.
In Makassar the wealth categories are to kalomannyang (the rich), to sitaba-taba (middle class) and to kasi-asi (the poor). Some major characteristics of the “to kalomannyang” is that they have big houses, good furniture, a private car, and their occupation is as businessman or a high ranking government official.
The “to sitaba-taba” have a small house with simple furniture, drink water obtain from water traders, and their occupation as small fish traders or low government officials. The “to kasi-asi” sleep only on a mat, use kerosene lamps for their lighting, their children have no cloths, and they work as temporary laborers.
Population Distribution Based on Wealth Classification
Based on the community assessment in the Yogyakarta site, out of the total population in the RW only 14% fall under the “sugih” category, 64% “sedengan” and 14% “mlarat”. In Jakarta Makassar , the composition is “to kalomannyang” 10%, “to sitaba-taba” 62% and “to kasi-asi” 28% of the total RW residents.
TABLE 3: POPULATION BASED ON WEALTH CATEGORIES
| Wealth Category | | | |
| I (Upper) | Sugih (Rich) 3 households or 18% | Menengah (middle): 386 households | To kalumannyang (rich): 22 Households or 10% |
| II (middle) | Sedengan (middle): 109 households Or 64% | Miskin (poor): 197 households 0r 27% | To sitaba-taba (middle): 134 Households or 62% |
| III (lower) | Mlarat (poor): 32 households Or 18% | Fakir (very poor): 141 households Or 20% | To kasi-asi (poor): 62 households Or 28% |
Across the study sites, the poor lived in mixed communities. All of them understand that a significant proportion (18 to 28% of the total) of he poor or very poor people still can be found in their communities. From field observations, in Yogyakarta and Makassar , sharp distinctions between the rich and the poor were noted. The distinction was described by the FGD Participants in their drawings and the lists of characteristics that they produced.
A community which was generally poor was described in Jakarta
CHAPTER III: INSTITUTION MAPPING AND THE BRIBE PAYING
Across the study sites, the community expressed a common characteristic in the institution involved in corruption cases. Most of the institutions mentioned by the FGD participants were those connected to public services. It was noted that there were little differences in the issues raised by both genders and many cases were similar. These reflect that the issues are part of common knowledge and concerns at the community and household level.
Definition of Corruption.
From the discussion with the communities across the study sites, the scope of corruptions encompassed corrupt acts such as bribing (cases in the police: release of motorcycle, settlement of traffic violations), illegal or unofficial demands (cases in Kelurahan: ID cards, certificate of births and marriage, land certificate), blackmailing (cases in police: release children from jail) and cheating (staff recruitment in bus company and Deppen cases, and labor recruiting company cases).
Commonly, the generally accepted definition of the word ‘corruption’, was all efforts to abuse public resources for private gains. The word “Corrupter” applied to the person who received the payments, while the person who actively paid were considered as victims of financial loss because of the additional payments they had to make for the corrupt acts of the officials.
There were debates in the poor community as to whether people were ‘victims’ (of corruption). Some people said this was not necessarily correct as they were also ‘beneficiaries’ (of corruption) because they receive, through corruption, some services that they need. In the cases above: additional fee for KTP, fees to speed up the installation of electricity, money to get release from jail were some situations in which those that paid bribes benefitted.
Institutions and Cases of Corruption
The Kelurahan and the Kecamatan (also related to the RT and RW as the lower rungs of the ladder of services), schools, police, PLN and PAM were the most common institutions mentioned by both genders. These institutions also represented the greatest prevalence of corruption cases in all the study sites. Cases of corruption in Social Safety Net Operations (SSN or JPS) were also frequently reported, especially related to rice distribution. Other institution named were Labour Supplier Company, Bus Company and Department of Information Services (Deppen) at which the cases were related to cheatings by the institution in labor issues or new staff recruitment. All the cases identified were categorized as active corruption, in which the actors (poor community members) were actively involved in bribe paying, and none of them were categorized as passive corruption where some external persons paid a bribe and this affected their interests.
In terms of frequency of the corruption cases reported, the kelurahan (including RT and RW as part of the chain) was the most frequent. The reported cases are mostly related to the services that this institution provides i.e. civil documents such as KTP or ID card, Akte Kelahiran or certificate of birth, surat
In terms of the value of money involved, the following descriptions support the above statements. In the case of a KTP application or renewal, people do not know the real costs required for the process. Some consider that this service is free of charge, but in reality various amount of money are involved the process the application. To renew the KTP people paid (at the lowest) Rp2.000,- (in Jakarta ), Rp2.500,- (in Yogyakarta) and (at the highest) Rp30.000,- (in Makassar ).
When the application also involves a transfer of residence from other cities, the price can be higher. In Jakarta Jakarta
Another example of a significant amount of money came from a land certification in Yogyakarta which involved the RT, RW and Kelurahan staff. Aside from the fixed cost, people had to pay Rp75.000,- to the RT, Rp75.000,- to the RW and Rp50.000,- to the Kelurahan. These cases were reported by 8 community members. For the Akte Kelahiran (birth certificate) people had to pay Rp17.500,- (reported by 2 community members) and for Surat Nikah (marriage certificate) a cost of Rp40.000,- was reported by a community member in Yogyakarta .
Aside from the regular administrative matters, some government development program are also based at the Kelurahan. At the three study sites, there was a program dealing with overcoming the economic crisis – the JPS (Social Safety Net). Part of the JPS especially the OPK Beras (Special Market Operation for Rice) was mentioned in all of the study sites, expressing the community’s complaints about the additional payment they had to pay (rice was sold at Rp1.200,- to Rp1.300,- instead of the official Rp1.000,-) or the reduced weight of the rice they get.
Schools were mentioned in all study sites. The cases raised about school were related with many obligatory contributions: entrance fees, uang gedung, uang bangku (building and maintenance, furniture fees decided by teachers), purchase of school equipments and materials (books, colouring pastes, student’s uniform etc.), reduction in scholarship funds. These cases involved relatively large amounts of money and could be regularly repeated. In Makassar for example, entrance fees had reached Rp150.000,- per students and scholarships money had been cut from the official of Rp60.000,-.
Another institution commonly involved in corruption was the police (including here the traffic and security police), which was mentioned in all the three study sites. The most prevalent case involving the police was the informal settlement of traffic violations, involving money from Rp5.000,- to Rp20.000,- depending on the seriousness of the violence and the bargaining skills of the violators. Other special cases were related to paying bribes to release arrested persons from jail. In Yogyakarta, to release children who had been jailed because of a fight using a knife, (poor) parents had to pay a ransom fee of up to Rp2.000.000,-. In Makassar , for informal settling the arrest of an illegal lottery seller, somebody had to pay Rp100.000,-. To release an arrested teenager from a mass fight, parents had to pay a ransom of from Rp200.000,- to Rp500.000,- to the police.
While the above descriptions illustrate some common corruption cases, the detail cases per study site can be seen in TBALE 4, 5 and 6 attached in this report.
Corruption and Transparency of Public Decision-Making
In some cases, corruption was also related to the transparency of public decision making in government projects involving the community. In Yogyakarta , because there was little openness and available information on the way that the JPS rice scheme was administered. Community members believed and spread rumors that lower government officials were engaging in corrupt practices in the delivery of rice under the scheme. Poor people perceived that a price for rice higher than official one was caused by some corrupt acts by RT, RW and Kelurahan officials. However, talking to these officials it turned out that this was not a matter of corruption. They explained that the rice had to be sold at Rp1.200 or 1.300 per kilo instead of Rp1.000,- because of additional handling costs for which no budget was provided to the officials. The rice had to be transported to the RW and RT levels and money was needed for packaging into smaller units of rice. The problem was that information bad not been passed on to the community. A little communication could have prevented allegations of corruption.
Public policy in most places is hijacked or corrupted by local elites, and in this case RT and RW officials are considered as local elites. Public decision are not only made by those elites themselves but are also kept under their control and are not publicly disseminated or offered for participation of members of the poor community.
Other cases related to transparency were the problem getting land certificates from BPN, and ID cards from the Kelurahan, or SKKB from the police (official statement of no criminal record). People do not know the real costs required for the issuance of those documents.
CHAPTER III: PERCEPTIONS ON CORRUPTIONS
Attitudes towards corruption can be seen in the expressions produced by the participants (happy, fair or indifferent, and sad or angry) in respect of corruption cases and further disaggregated by gender. The following table describes the summary of expressions over the corruption cases.
General Perceptions on Corruption
In general over the study sites, people’s perceptions about corruption were dominantly sad or angry with both genders. The reasons behind this perception vary, but most are expressing anger and feeling fear. They are disappointed, and disadvantaged from additional expenses they have to pay even within their current economic difficulties.
TABLE 7. SUMMARY OF FREQUENCY
PERCEPTION TOWARDS CORRUPTION BY GENDER
| Site and Gender | Happy | Indifferent | Angry/Sad |
| Male Female | 1 5 | 1 7 | 38 25 |
| Male Female | 66 8 | 42 40 | - 18 |
| Male Female | 1 - | 24 61 | 52 139 |
| Total Male Total Female Total (M and F) | 78 13 91 | 67 99 166 | 90 182 272 |
If we compare across study sites, the findings show an interesting phenomenon. In Yogyakarta , many cases were responded with sadness or anger by both genders (see detail perceptions on table 9, 10 and 11). In Jakarta Makassar , men were mostly sad or angry, and the same response also comes from female respondents.
The happy and indifferent responses were found much more in Jakarta
Reasons for People’s Perceptions.
In Yogyakarta (see Table 9), the men’s sad perceptions for the Social Safety Net/JPS-Rice were because of the low quality of the rice, that only a few people received the rice, and also because the program management was not transparent. Community members who expressed indifferent or happiness said that this was they received rice, and also because the program management was not transparent. Community members who express indifference or happiness said that this was they received rice as a gift or a help assistance even with indifferent quality. Women also expressed sadness with slightly indifferent reason from the men – such as sadness that they could fulfill the family needs, they did not know why the amount of rice was cut or that they knew the official cost of rice but those managing the project had still cut it.
In cases of civil document (Akte Kelahiran, KTP, Surat Nikah and land certificate) procurement, the male’s sadness expression were because the standard or official cost was not clear, because the whole process in normal way took so long and because any effort to reduce the long normal way needed and service extra money. In the case of police (tilang damai and release arrested motor cycle), the men’s sadness expression was because extra time being lost, because of extra money being lost, because people were afraid to be processed in the court, because of the complicated process and because they felt sorry for violating the traffic law or regulations. In the same case, the sad women’s expression were because of difficulty in earning a living, and because it reduce the amount of money available for household expenses.
While for the PLN case, the sadness people expressed was because of: the loss of money, the poor service, the impatience at the long wait for the installation while they regarded electricity as a basic need for their family. In the bus company staff recruitment case, people expression of sadness was because of the difficulty in seeking jobs, the impossibility of staying jobless for a long time and the difficulty of burdening the family.
In Jakarta
In Makassar , people (men and women) were angry about the garbage collection fee paid (while garbage is not transported or cleared up) because they do not know where else to throw their garbage and they felt useless because of their lost money. People were also angry for the cut of the scholarship money because the children cannot go to school. JPS rice in Makassar also got an anger response from female participants because they felt cheated by the officials.
For issuing KTP, men’s response was anger because they feel hurt by the additional costs charged to them. While for the police cases, (tilang damai and release from prison), the men’s participants anger was because they feel that law was not operating without money.
People express their happy response usually when they received some services for which they paid but for which they considered the payment normal since others did so too. This kind of perception was found in the KTP case in the Kelurahan and also in the Police. For the Police case, people also felt happy because they were able to escape from the long process in the court for the settlement by paying a bribe.
Most of the indifferent responses to corruption cases were because it was customary for people be thankful for the services that they received – and anyone else was the same.
Three Top Ranking of Corruption Problems.
Based on the participants’ perception of what corruption cases were the most destructive and dangerous, what disadvantage came from them and any other bad impacts of the corruption problems.
TABLE 13:
THREE TOP RANKING CORRUPTION CASES
| Ranks | | | |
| I | Police | Garbage Collection/ PLN | Garbage Collection |
| II | School | Police | JPS Rice |
| III | PLN(State Electricity Company) | School | PAM and PLN (Water and Electricity) |
As we can see in Table 13, we found common institutions related to corruption cases. The three top ranking were police, garbage collection, school, JPS rice, PLN and PAM.
Case Study on Corruption
In addition to Participatory Appraisal selected respondents were interviewed regarding corruption cases. Of the three study sites, 62 women and men interviewees were interviewed and this resulted in 26 short stories on corruption experiences. The short stories were then edited and combined into 19 based on the same topics. Of all the cases, 7 cases belonged to general categories while the remaining 12 cases were individual categories. In general the summary can be seen in Table 14. Detailed cases are documented separately.
TABLE 14: SUMMARY OF THE CASE STUDY
| Category | | | | Total |
| Lack of transparency | JPS (CC) | | JPS (2 IC) Infrastructure (CC) | 4 |
| Lack of information | PLN (IC) Land Certificate (CC) | Garbage (IC) RT/RW Management (CC) | Certificate of Marriage (IC) | 5 |
| Lack of collective action | School (IC) Migrant Worker (IC) | School (2 CC) KTP (CC) | School (2 IC) | 7 |
| Criminal Bribes | Police (CC) | Police (IC) | Police (CC) | 3 |
| | 3 CC, 3 IC | 2 CC, 4 IC | 2 CC, 5 IC | 7 CC, 12 IC |
Notes: CC Community Wide Cases
IC Individual Cases
CHAPTER IV: CAUSES, EFFECTS AND SOLUTIONS OF CORRUPTION
Based on the three top ranked corruption cases, diagrams were drawn to help in discussing the causes, effects and solutions.
Causes and Effects
The following causes were identified by the participants in the FGDs (see the detail diagram at the attachment): increasing daily living costs on the one hand while on the other hand low salaries or income, low morality and obedience to the law, an existing culture of corruption, a lack of transparency, a sense of powerlessness or fear to expose or speak up because of threat or sanction, abuse of authority, and a lack of control from superiors or the public.
On the question of income, the issue of salaries at the lower levels of government officials (and also the low salaries of poor people) was often discussed and perceived as the main cause of corruption. However, it was also noted during the discussion that corruption occurs (surprisingly) more often at higher levels of government officials or business millionaire. This make the low salary factor less strong and convincing.
Participants also mentioned low morality and the lack of obedience to the law as a cause of corruption both at the government and community levels where people engage in corrupt acts. Low morality and a lack of obedience to the law relates to the accumulation of authority or power without effective controls over the power. The accumulation of authority by government officials is easy to misuse for their own interests and this includes making money illegally such as corruption.
People’s lack of knowledge about how things are meant to work in running government or public services and development programs is one of the causes of corruption. On the one hand, lack of knowledge itself can be a kind of corruption in the sense that information should be passed out to communities, but it is held and kept for their own needs. On the other hand, the community is unsure about regulations and processes that should be adhered to, and this makes for opportunities for corruption.
Culture is also mentioned as one factor which is a cause of corruption. Gifts to expresse thanks, bribe to higher-ranking officials, uang pelicin (grease money to ease or smooth procedures), and so on are traditions of a bribing culture. With such a cultural background it is not easy to cut back on corruption quickly.
The effects of corruption differ from institutions to institutions: for the police, the effects of their corruption could be a very bad image of the institution of police, the loss of income to the state and greater abuse of power. For school, some effects can be the loss of public trusts, jeopardizing regulations and good procedure and the introduction of great variation in educational services, whereby only the reach can receive a good education while the poor who are in need of it are excluded. For the PLN and PAM institutions, the effects can be unnecessary expenses that the community has to pay, a bad service for communities who cannot afford to pay bribes, and in the end the poor people becoming poorer and also being excluded from the service.
For the JPS rice program case, effects of corruption are poor people remaining poor (they cannot receive the standard assistance), poor becoming frustrated and angry. For the garbage problem, effects that people identified were the fact that the garbage problem has still not been resolved.
It is difficult to start preventive actions when people feel powerless or fearful. These causes that are interrelated challenge us some way out.
Cost and Benefit of Corruption to the Poor
Discussion on cost and benefit of corruption from the FGD participants show that many aspects are included. Financially, corruption has burdened poor people leading into very difficult situations where they have to pay more than is necessary, or refuse to pay – each of which has difficult consequences.
For poor community members, the financial loss reduces their ability simply to survive; by paying bribes they have no money to pay for other things, and they lose their ability to satisfy other of their basic needs or they lose their assets. If they cannot pay, they excluded from the services or access to the services.
The financial loss is not only suffered by the community but also by the state, as the income from corruption is not going to the State Treasury but into individuals’ pocket. The state was thus the poorer and less able to offer services.
In the school corruption case, for example, where parents had to pay extra money to get their children’s grade records for some fake reason produced by the teacher: a daily laborer has average outgoings of Rp.20.000,- per day for food, but a mother in Jakarta has to pay a Rp15.000,-to get her children’s grade records during her children graduation from an Elementary School. In another case still do with school, an ojek driver has to pay Rp450.000,- for the entrance fee for high school, an amount which he can only pay after selling off available household assets or else his family will fall into debt. In this two cases the family decides to pay the forced bribe but they suffer from being unable to feed their children or from losing their assets.
Another case at PLN (National Power Company) shows that bad service delivery to consumers lead to unnecessary paying of bribes. For the new installation of electricity to a house the regular cost is not enough. There have to be additional costs to speed up the process which amount to Rp.700.000,- an amount which only the rich can afford to pay.
This situation reflects the discrepancy between the power held by poor community members and the power held by government officials or service providers. The weak position of the community vis a vis the government puts them into situation where they are forced to pay bribes, and so bribing is become a common or usual practice. The previously ‘forced’ situation has become usual and acceptable because they have to and there is no other choice except to pay a bribe.
Giving bribes voluntarily and being forced to give bribes has wider implications than just the corrupt behavior of the government staff. It is also related to the wealth of the community. The more money or power that people have, the better and more satisfactory will be the services that they will get. This creates another issue – that of inequality in public service provision and low accountability of the public services to the public. We can also see that because certain institutions have a monopoly in delivering certain services, they do not concern themselves with quality in delivering these services to the community. Public trust is also lost because the public know that they can only get the services through bribing. Low standard of ethics and morality is a linked issue, as both government officials and the community get around the formal regulations.
Proposed Solutions
The community proposed some ways out of the situations: they consist either of solutions that can be carried out by themselves or solutions that they expected can be carried out by other parties (see table 15, 16 and 17 for details).
Proposed solutions that can be carried out by community:
1. Refuse to pay and report the cases
2. Mobilize in solidarity for a movement to reject current practices
3. Involve the local media (radio and daily)
4. Develop public awareness and cooperate in demonstrations
5. Find support to take the cases to court
6. Improve people’s moral and ethical behavior so that they obey the laws
Proposed solutions expected to be conducted by other parties:
1. Develop legal ways to improve their income
2. Provide clear information on procedures, regulations, official tariffs and to whom tariffs should be paid
3. Manage greater control over the performances of government officials
4. Replace corrupt leaders
CHAPTER V: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Summary of Findings
This study provided a new experience for the researchers, especially on issues of corruption that were the focus. At the beginning, the researchers doubted whether, during the fieldwork, people would easily talk in public. They worried also whether the techniques applied would be sufficient to get the detailed information which was the purpose of the study. But this first experience has proven to the researchers that the work can be done and there are only a few problems.
The researchers noted the following possible improvements:
· More attention to prepare the community chosen as the subject of the study,
· A more relaxed attitude with the community
· More preparation of the techniques to be used to with the community to enable them to interact in a more open and less conflicting way
There were many cases of corruption within the lives of the poor. Most of the cases related to government or public services in their daily lives. Institutions of public service that are captured by corrupt practices are the ones that most force the poor to get involve in corruption so that they can get access to the services that satisfy their basic needs. Poor people are actively involved in providing bribes to get services from the lowest organizational units of the government (Kelurahan, RW and RT) or to those responsible for the police, schools, garbage collection, electricity and water services. Poor people are burdened by the corrupt practices that are required to get those services or by the threat of being excluded from these services. The corruption cases we have seen involving low levels of government official and small amounts of money but collectively the issues and the amounts are not petty, if we consider the wide spread practice and frequency of such behavior.
Corrupt behavior is also related to those who have power i.e. those with authority are unaccountable to the public and to their own offices. Anny efforts to reduce corruption will challenge both institutions and the poor themselves. The institutions will have to show themselves willing to stop benefitting from the situation and the poor will have to show themselves willing to move away from feelings of powerlessness, and fearfulness about exposing the situation.
Conclusions.
To restate the above summary, cases of corruption are linked to unequal power relations. Members of poor communities are too weak to speak up, bargain and protest or even to ask for corrupt practices to stop: they feel they have no alternative but to themselves act in corrupt ways to get services from those who have power (in terms of information, authority and resources) who are the public service providers.
Exposing cases of corruption and community empowerment thus become key tools in reducing corruption. Together with media and NGOs (or civil society organizations), poor communities need to build coalition to collect and provide information amongst themselves, to expose hidden information, to facilitate openness, and to create an environment with more control by the public of public services which deal with the poor.
Recommendations
Based on the above summary and conclusions, the following recommendations address the methodology and follow up actions.
On the research methodology and processes:
1. Greater preparation is needed for some aspects of the field work. Good relation with the community is a necessity, while thorough preparation of the research methodology is also an important element of success in the work.
2. Principles of participatory research need to be maintained: a relaxed attitude, flexibility and adaptability to the local situation and a smooth flow in the sequence of steps in the study. Approximately 14 days will be effective for the field work.
3. An improved sequence might be better:
· Pre fieldwork meeting
· Introductory meeting
· FGD 1
· FGD 2
· Interviews for case study, and then
· FGD 3 (solution)
4. Excluding local elites from attending the meetings is inappropriate. Setting up invitations to and special group discussions for the elites group will be more useful.
On the follow up action:
1. Documenting and disseminating this first experience as an example of a first effort is important to give a chance for other institution to doing this work in more communities. The documentation of the field work will be useful in providing a methodology of Participatory Corruption Appraisal.
2. Constant exposure of corruption cases and invitations to other NGOs and the media to be part of the wider concerns and action is important to keep the ball of awareness rolling.
3. Facilitating actions at the first locations should be managed at kelurahan level. The piloting must be based on the willingness of the community and kelurahan officials to be part of a pilot program on combating corruption.
4. External supports for the poor community will still be needed from NGO groups with wider interests. They should have focused programs and expertise in combating corruption.
Rewrite in Jakarta
APPENDICES
| TABLE 4 : CORRUPTION CASES IN | |||||||||
| MEN | WOMEN | ||||||||
| Institution | Case | Price Paid | No of Persons reporting case | Frequency of cases | Institution | Case | Price Paid | No of Persons reporting case | Frequency of cases |
| Kelurahan | JPS rice | 1100-1200 per-Kg | 1 | 12 | Police | Traffic ticket Redemption | 55.000 2.000.000 | 1 | 1 |
| | Birth certificate | 17.500 | 2 | 1 | PLN | Instaling light | 700.000 | 1 | 1 |
| | Marriage Sertivicate | 40.000 | 1 | 1 | O’seas Labour Contractors | Female workers | 100.000 | 1 | 1 |
| | KTP | 2.500 | 2 | 2 | Cancellation cost | 1.600.000 | 1 | 1 | |
| | Land certivicate | | 8 | | Kindergarten | Unofficial cost | 8.000 | 1 | 1 |
| | - RT | 75.000 | | 1 | RT | JPS reduction | 2.000 | 1 | Every 3 months |
| | - RW | 75.000 | | | DEPPEN/RRI | Joining staff | 1.500.000 | 1 | 1 |
| | - Kelurahan | 50.000 | | | 0 | ||||
| | Govt. subsidy | - | 1 | | |||||
| Kecamatan | Land certificate | 75.000 | 8 | 1 | |||||
| Police | Motor cycle release | 17.000 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| PLN | Installing electric light | 50.000 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| KUA | Divorce | 50.000 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| Bus Company | Joining staff | 50.000 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| TABLE 5 : CORRUPTION CASES IN | |||||||||||||||
| MEN | WOMEN | ||||||||||||||
| Institution | Case | Price Paid | No of Persons reporting case | Frequency of cases | Institution | Case | Price Paid | No of Persons reporting case | Frequency of cases | ||||||
| Kelurahan | KTP fine KTP Voluntary | 1.000 2.000 | 18 1 | Once every 3 years | Keluarahan | KTP/RI card | 2-5.000 | 8 | Every three years | ||||||
| Police | Traffic violation | 5.000 | 2 | 1 | | KTP/RI card | No quotation | 1 | 1 | ||||||
| PLN | Rounding up | 25-75 | 18 | Once a month | | Rice subsidy | 21.000 per 20kgs | 1 | 1 | ||||||
| RT/RW | Identity card letter | 1.000 | 18 | Once every 3 years | | | | | |||||||
| | Ready to use KTP | 20.000 | 1 | Once every 3 years | Police | SKKB | 12.500 | 1 | 1 | ||||||
| PAM | Rounding off payment | 25-75 | 18 | Once a month | School | Payment determined by school | Payment determined by school | 1 | 1 | ||||||
| PUSKESMAS | Registration fee | 100 | 80 | Twice a year | RT | Garbage collection | 3.000 | 6 | Monthly | ||||||
| | Dinas kebersihan | Garbage collection through PLN | 1.000 | 3 | Monthly | ||||||||||
| Telecom | Micellaneous | 1.000 | 3 | Monthly | |||||||||||
| Pasar jaya | Collection | 9.700 | 1 | Daily | |||||||||||
| BBM Subsidy | 30.000 per household | No qutation | 6 | 1 | |||||||||||
| | | | | | | ||||||||||
| TABLE 6: CORRUPTION CASES IN | |||||||||||||||
| MEN | WOMEN | ||||||||||||||
| Institution | Case | Price Paid | No of Persons reporting case | Frequency of cases | Institution | Case | Price Paid | No of Persons reporting case | Frequency of cases | ||||||
| Kelurahan | KTP/KK letter | 30.000 5.000 | 3 1 | Based on need | PLN | Fluctuating invoice | 36.000-48.000 | 2 | Monthly | ||||||
| Police | Traffic violation | 10-20.000 | - | - | School | Entrance cost for IDPs | 100.000 | 1 | 1 | ||||||
| | Payment –suspected gambling | 100.000 | - | | | Undelivered scholarship | 60.000 | 1 | Twice a year | ||||||
| | Payment – suspected gang fight | 20.000-500.000 | - | | Puskesmas | Payment | 3-3.500 | 2 | Monthly | ||||||
| PLN | Fluctuated invoice | - | - | | Dinas kebersihan | Garbage payment (but no service) | 1.500 | 20 | Monthly | ||||||
| PAM | Payment with no change | 100-250 | - | | Bank | Land certificate payment | 7.650-7.700 | 3 | - | ||||||
| Moslem school | Marriage/Divorce | 200.000-250.000 | | Twice a year | JPS rice | Low quality weighing – more payment | 11.500 | Many | - | ||||||
| | Deducted scholarship money | - | | | Development project | Low quality road works No openness of budget | - | | | ||||||
| | Registration fee | 125.000-150.000 | | Yearly | Telecom | | | | | ||||||
| | More expensive stationery | Varied | | Yearly | Pasar jaya | | | | | ||||||
| PAM | Rounding off payment | 100-250 | | | BBM subsidy | | | | | ||||||
| Puskesmas | Card/ticket | 2.500 | | | | | | | | ||||||
| Posyandu | Weighting toddlers | 2.500 | | | | | | | | ||||||
| Dinas kebersihan | Fee | | | | | | | | | ||||||
| JPS | 10 kg rice | Reduced 2.5 litres | | | | | | | | ||||||
| Agriculture | Easily broken road | | | | | | | | | ||||||
| | Project (1980s) | 7.500-15.000 | | | | | | | | ||||||
| PEMDA | Payment for road lighting | | | | | | | | | ||||||
| | PPJ | | | | | | | | | ||||||
| TABLE 8. SUMMARY OF FREQUENCY PERCEPTION TOWARDS CORRUPTION BY GENDER | |||
| Site & gender | Happy | Indifferent | Angry/Sad |
| Male Female | 1 5 | 1 7 | 38 25 |
| Male Female | 66 8 | 42 40 | - 18 |
| Makasar Male Female | 1 - | 24 61 | 52 139 |
| Total Male Total Female Total (M and F) | 78 13 91 | 67 99 166 | 90 182 272 |
| TABLE 9. FEELINGS ABOUT CORRUPTION CASES IN Feelings of Men: | |||
| ISTITUTIONS/ CASES | HAPPY | INDIFFERENT | SAD |
| Kelurahan JPS : bad quality of rice | 1 Person (Reason: get cheap rice donation) | 4 Persons (Reasons: value and quality were fair) | 12 Persons (Reasons: bad quality, few beneficiaries, rice was limited and less transparent) |
| Birth Certifikate | - | - | 17 Persons (Reasons: effort to cat off the process) |
| Registration of marriage certificate | - | - | 17 Persons (Reasons: do not want to wait long) |
| Land Certificate | - | - | 17 Persons (Reasons: no formal standard cost) |
| Government subsidy given to improper beneficiaries | - | - | 17 Persons (Reasons: government not serious in assisting the poor, generalize less transparent) |
| Kecamatan KTP (Residence Identification Card) | - | - | 17 Persons (Reasons: no formal standard cost) |
| Land Certification | - | - | 17 Persons (Reasons: long process, more expenses , service depends on money) |
| Police Motorcycle release | - | - | 17 Persons (Reasons: fear of the court process, complicated court settlement, sorry for nor bringing licence, reduce household budget, difficult to earn money) |
| Traffic Police Traffic Violation | - | - | 17 Persons: (Reasons: escape from court, complicated, sorry for violation, reduce household budget, difficult to earn monety) |
| PLN New Instalation | - | - | 17 Persons: (Reasons: bad service, no patience, basic need, children can study, difficult to earn money) |
| KUA Divorce | - | - | 17 Persons: (Reasons: escape from complicated procedure, no info on standart cost) |
| Bus Company Bribe to be Officials | - | - | 17 Persons: (Reasons: difficult to seek job, cannot wait to long jobless) |
| Feelings of Women: | |||
| ISTITUTIONS/ CASES | HAPPY | INDIFFERENT | SAD |
| Police Traffic violation | - | - | 15 Persons: (Reasons: difficult to earn money, reduce the household budget) |
| Release from jail | 1 Person (Reason : the problem is over) | 5 Persons (Reason: worthwhile with the problem) | 9 Persons (Reason: Fear of court, complicated, no money, cannot be together, only 1 bread winner, no regular income) |
| Deppen/ RRI Recruitment of civil State Official | - | 3 Persons (Reasons: usual practice, to get job, it can be repaid) | 12 Persons: (Reasons : No recruitment, feel cheated) |
| JPS Reduction of Rice | 2 Persons (Reasons: Receive free assistance, has been assisted) | 9 Persons (Reasons: for RT’s needs, packaging) | 4 Persons (Reasons: cannot fulfil the need, not clear for whom, can be allocated for other needs, know the real price, oppression to the poor) |
| PLN New installation | 3 Persons (Reasons: speed up the process, shorten the time) | 8 Persons | 4 Persons |
| Overseas Labor Company: Recruitment of staff | - | 6 Persons (Reason: can be accepted as worker) | 9 Persons (Reasons: forced to pay, no guarantee) |
| Administration Cost for Cancellation | - | - | 15 Persons (Reasons: lost of money, conflict in family) |
| Buying Pastel (painting color) without receipt | - | - | 15 Persons (Reasons: no proof, lost of money, fear to pay again, excess of expenses, cannot be controlled) |
| TABLE 10: FEELINGS ABOUT CORRUPTION CASES IN Feelings of Men: | |||
| ISTITUTIONS/ CASES | HAPPY | INDIFFERENT | SAD |
| RT/ RW: KTP Letter Ready to use KTP | 18 Persons (Reasons: KTP has been made, accepted as a usual practice) | - | - |
| Kelurahan: KTP- Fine KTP Voluntary Payment | 16 Persons (Reasons: KTP has been made) | 2 Persons (Reasons: it is usual practice) | - |
| Police: Traffic Violation Release | 14 Persons (Reasons: settled right away) | 4 Persons (Reasons: police always search false) | - |
| PAM: Rounding of payment | - | 18 Persons (Reasons: tolerable, because no change) | - |
| Puskesmas: Entrance ticket fee | 18 Persons (Reasons: to help others) | - | - |
| Electricity/ PLN: Rounding off payment | - | 18 Persons (Reasons: tolerable, because no change) | - |
| Perception of Women | |||
| ISTITUTIONS/ CASES | HAPPY | INDIFFERENT | SAD |
| Kelurahan : KTP (Residence Identification Card) | 2 Persons (Reason: KTP has been made) | 9 Persons (Reasons: voluntary, they feel assisted) | - |
| Pasar Jaya: Market retribution | - | 1 Person (Reason: tolerable) | - |
| Puskesmas: Registration fee | - | 6 Persons (Reasons: voluntary, tolerable) | - |
| School: Miscellaneous payment | - | 8 Persons (Reasons: it is the rule) | - |
| Telecommunication: Miscellaneous payment | - | - | 3Persons (Reason: no explanation) |
| PLN-BRI: Garbage retribution payment | - | - | 15 Persons (Reason: it has been collected long time, whileRT also collecting it) |
| RT: Garbage retribution | - | 15 Persons (Reasons: that is the rule in the RT | - |
| Subsidy of BBM : Contribution of money | 6 Persons (Reason: pleased receive gift) | - | - |
| Police-SKKB Unofficial payment no transparent procedures | - | 1 Person (Reason: tolerable | - |
| TABLE 11: FEELINGS ABOUT CORRUPTION CASES IN MAKASAR Feelings of Men: | |||
| ISTITUTIONS/ CASES | HAPPY | INDIFFERENT | SAD |
| Keluarahan : KTP (Residence Identification Card) Letter | - | 1 Persons (Reason: need of it fast) | 10 Persons (Reason: feel disadvantaged) |
| Dinas Kebersihan | - | - | 11 Persons (Reasons: useless lost of money) |
| Imam Marriage/ Dovorce | - | 11 Persons | 3 Persons |
| School : Deducted scholarship | | 7 Persons (Reason: not conform with the rule) | |
| Police : Traffic Violation Release from jail | 1 Persons (Reason: no need to go to court) - | 5 Persons - | 6 Persons 11 Persons (Reason: law/rule was not obeyed) |
| Pemda Road lighting | - | - | 11 Persons |
| Feelings of Women: | |||
| ISTITUTIONS/ CASES | HAPPY | INDIFFERENT | SAD |
| Dinas Kebersihan : Garbage retribution but no service | - | 2 Persons | 20 Persons (Reason: do not know where to throw the garbage) |
| PLN Higher electricity, meter recording (higher invoice) | - | 1 Persons | 21 Persons (Reason: no TV or radio at home) |
| School Entrance school fee for Internal Displaced Persons (IDPs) Undelivered scholarship | - - | 12 Persons 14 Persons (Reason: have no school age children | 10 Persons 8 Persons (Reason: cannot go to school) |
| Bank Land tax payment with no change | - | 13 Persons | 9 Persons |
| Puskesmas and Posyandu Contraception pill payment | | 17 Persons | 5 Persons |
| JPS Low quality of weighing rice, higher payment | - | - | 22 Persons (Reason: feel that they were fooled) |
| TABLE 12. THREE TOP RANKING CORRUPTION CASES | |||
| Ranks | | | |
| I | Police | Garbage collection (PLN) | Garbage collection |
| II | School | Police | JPS Rice |
| III | PLN (National Power/ Electricity Plant | School | PAM and PLN (Water and Electricity) |
| TABLE 13. SUMMARY OF THE CASE STUDY | ||||
| Category | | | | Total |
| Lack of transparency | JPS (CC) | | JPS (2IC) Infrastructure (CC) | 4 |
| Lack of information | PLN (IC) Land Certificate (CC) | Garbage (IC) RT/RW Management (CC) | Certificate of Marriage (IC) | 5 |
| Lack of collective action | School (IC) Migrant Worker (IC) | School (2CC) KTP (CC) | School (2IC) | 7 |
| Criminal bribes | Police (CC) | Police (IC) | Police (CC) | 3 |
| | 3 CC, 3 IC | 2 CC, 4 IC | 2 CC, 5 IC | 7 CC, 12 IC |
| Notes : CC : Community wide Cases IC : Individual Community | ||||
| TABLE 14: SOLUTIONS 1. Action Plan for Police Cases | ||||
| INSTITUTION | CAUSES OR EFFECT | IDEAS/ SOLUTION | CHOSEN SOLUTIONS | |
| ACTORS | PROGRAM | |||
| Police | Low salaries | · Look additional work officially (side income) · Involved the family in a side income · Increase salary | POLRI POLRI | Program of Government |
| | Bad Habits | · Greater control by higher officials · Obey the law · Review the regulations | POLRI POLRI & Community POLRI & Community | Government Government Government |
| | Increase in crimes | · Improve ethics and religious mentality · Get full authority from the government to overcome crimes · Report crimes to the mass media | POLRI & Community POLRI & Community | Community Government Mass media |
| 2. Action Plan for School Cases | |||
| AVOIDABLE/SOLVABLE CAUSE OR EFFECT | IDEAS/ SOLUTION | CHOSEN SOLUTIONS | |
| ONESELF | PROGRAM | ||
| Reducing requirements | Do not purchase unnecessary goods | √ | |
| Economize on electricity | · Using electricity only when needed · Do not use electricity for empty rooms | √ √ | |
| Low salary / benefits | · Look for a side job · Looking for loansto create businesses | √ √ | √ √ |
| Teaching methods linked to available materials | Looking for simple materials | √ | |
| Communication between parents and teacher | · Hold frequent meetings between parents and teacher | | √ |
| Improve the morality of teachers | Conduct religious activities | √ | √ |
| Control the finances | Frequent checks on the finances carried out | | √ |
| | | | |
| Improve income for teachers and parents | · Open side businesses · Look for capital | √ √ | √ √ |
| Improving the quality of learning and teaching | · Manage disciplined learning at school and at home · | √ | √ √ |
| Improving the image of the school | · Stop corruption · Building good communication between parents and teachers (routine meetings) · Proposing improved educational budget to DPR | √ | √ |
| 3. Action Plan for PLN (State Electricity | |||
| CAUSE / EFFECT | IDEAS/ SOLUTION | CHOSEN SOLUTIONS | |
| ONESELF | OTHER PARTIES | ||
| Higher officials do not control of PLN nor is there any external control | · PLN should control its field officers, such as the electricity meter recorders · PLN officers should be disciplined to improve customers’ respect for them · The community expects PLN officers to be controlled by their superiors and external parties · PLN regulations as they apply to its customers should be clear enough to get customers’ trust · Corrupt officials’ should be transferred and the bosses should be honest · Use traditional lightning instead of electricity | √ √ √ √ √ | √ |
| Electricity should help the community to raise their incomes | · Look for capital for individual or collective businesses · Get business skills · The community should report to PLN if its officers try to get additional income | √ | √ √ √ |
| The community should obey the official PLN procedures | · This will be an additional cost or burden for the community | √ | √ |
| Do not give bribes to PLN officials | · This will be an additional cost or burden for the community | √ | √ |
| Action Plan for Improving Management of Social Safety Net (SSN/JPS) and other Programs” (Elite Group Special FGD, consisted of formal and informal leaders in Yogya) | |
| MAIN ISSUES | STRATEGIES FOR IMPLEMENTATION |
| Need for socialization of the programmes and providing information | · Provide information at the Arisan RT. · Provide written information on regulations, budget, etc. · Have an Information Board |
| Social solidarity | - |
| Leadership based on consultation | · Leadership principles should be those of KI HADJAR DEWANTORO and others 1. Ing Ngarso Sung Tulodho 2. Ing Madjo Mbangun Karso 3. Tut Wuri Handayani |
| Transparency and openness | · Everyone agrees that they know what are the criteria for receiving the subsidy · The RT & RW involved the community in setting the rules · Report on progress to the community through the Arisan, information board at RT, etc. |
| Decreasing dependency | - |
| TABLE 16. SOLUTION ON DKI 1. PLN (STATE ELECTRICITY | ||||||||
| CAUSE | SOLUTIONS | IMPLEMENTATION | ||||||
| COMMUNITY | OTHER PARTIES | |||||||
| Customers are pressured to pay | Refuse to pay if the regulation are not known | Ask others not to pay | Report matter to the Kelurahan | |||||
| Customers are accustomed to pay | Do not supply the fee for garbage | Asking others to bring a fixed sum of money (no garbage fee) | Report matters to the cleaning division | |||||
| Customers are used to this behavior | Ask for the official regulations | Invite the community to ask for clarification from PLN, and RT/RW Heads | Report matters to the cleaning division | |||||
| Unknown regulations | Ask for the official regulations | Asking others not to pay before the regulation are provided clearly | Report matters to the cleaning division | |||||
| Decline of ethics | Refuse to pay before the regulations are provided clearly | Asking others not to pay before the regulations are provided clearly | Report matters to the cleaning division | |||||
| ||||||||
| CAUSE | SOLUTIONS | IMPLEMENTATION | ||||||
| COMMUNITY | OTHER PARTIES | |||||||
| Police look for extra income | · Be careful, · Have a complete licence, · Helmet, · Keep to the regulations | Hold demonstrations, give warnings, repot matters to higher officials | Report matters to PM (Military Police), to Kapolda (Head of district police) | |||||
| Low salaries | · Create micro enterprises, · Improve the police’s salary, · Manage their money well | Hold demonstrations, give warnings, repot matters to higher officials | Propose increases for police salaries | |||||
| Police look for additional income | · Do not provide any opportunities, · Have a complete license, · Obey the regulations | Community obeys the regulations and rules | Report matters to the mass media/ newspapers | |||||
| The police look for the opportunities | · Carry out your life carefully · Be careful on road | Be brave in front of the police | Gov’t should increase police salaries | |||||
| The Police have a corruption mentally | · The police should keep a good image, · The police should obey the regulation | The police should not be corrupted | - | |||||
| |||
| CAUSE | SOLUTIONS | IMPLEMENTATION | |
| COMMUNITY | OTHER PARTIES | ||
| Bribes required to register the child for entry into the school | P&K provided free education for children having low NEM (National Evaluation Marks) | Give extra lessons to children with low NEM | Report matters to P&K through the headmaster/ BP3 and hold demonstrations |
| The following “fees” Demanded: 1. Development fee/contribution 2. Fence fee 3. Lesson book 4. Tourism / making report | Refuse through POMG Buy book yourself Parents refuse to accept teachers threat that they will decrease marks on the pupils’ report | Agree to refuse | Report to P&K through headmaster / BP3 and hold demonstrations |
| Low standard of living of teachers | Improve teachers’ salaries | Community supports increased salaries for teachers or hold demonstrations | Gov’t should pay attention to teachers’ salaries |
| Teachers craving for money | Parents should not be accustomed to give presents to teachers | Through meeting of BP3, community should agree not to give anything to teachers | Instruction from P&K teachers |
| Lack of Facilities | Wealthy people to give donations | Through meeting of BP3, wealthy people are expected to give donations | P&K should give facilities to those schools lacking them |
| TABLE 17. SOLUTIONS ON 1. GARBAGE PAYMENTS | |||
| CAUSE | POSIBBLE SOLUTIONS | COMMUNITY ACTIONS | INSTITUTIONS |
| No clear information | Make a collective report to the | Demonstration at Pemda | · Report to mass media reporters, · Lurah provides garbage cans |
| Corrupt mentality of officers at PLN, Cooperatives and Pemda | Officials should be changed | Collective report to PLN/Pemda | Report to NGOs |
| Payments are used for others matters | Ask for clear information Pemda | Accuse the actors in court | Asking legal assistance/LBH |
| No service is provided and the garbage piles up | Do not pay the garbage fee | Pay “payabo”, the youth who provide the garbage service | Ask for containers from the city cleaning service |
| No one protests | Hold a local conference | Write letters to ask information on garbage fees | Inform radio or newspapers |
| 2. ROAD LIGHTNING: PLN (STATE ELECTRICITY | |||
| CAUSE | POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS | COMMUNITY ACTIONS | INSTITUTIONS |
| PLN has never been officially informed of the situation | Report to PLN officials | Hold a community gathering to make a report | · Provide transportation to help in reporting · Seek assistance from RW/ Kelurahan · Reporters write in newspapers |
| The payment/ money has been misused | Demonstrated at PLN | Get collective signature | Local government should report to PLN |
| Higher officials of PLN do not have any control | Make the community aware | Community go to the court together | Asking for legal assistance/LBH |
| PLN acted intentionally | · Get collective statement from kelurahan (village office) to PLN · Accuse PLN in the court, asking for compensation | Meeting with the community should be carried out | Local government should be aware of what is happening |
| 3. JPS/ SOCIAL SAFETY NET: RICE SUBSIDY | |||
| CAUSE | POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS | COMMUNITY ACTIONS | INSTITUTIONS |
| Dishonest officials | Report to DPRD and Camat’s office | · Discuss the situation among community, RT, and RW; · Collect signatures from the community; · Send letters to DPRD; · Making banner about the rice complaints and go to the DPRD | BKKBN should go to places where the rice is given out and control the activity |
| Officials and laborers have low salaries | Asking for special allocation for officials and laborers | Inform the DPRD, asking for special allocation for officials and laborers | Ask help from DPRD |
| The rice is not weighed well giving a low weight of rice | Investigate the weighing | Report to BKKBN Community representative observe the weighing | Rice weighing should be done directly by RW/ RT |
| Community members are unwilling to ask questions about the decreasing amount of rice subsidy | Be brave enough to ask question on the decreasing amount of rice subsidy | Ask the officials collectively | |
| No control over what is happening | Strict control | · Ask BKKBN to have detailed control · The community should participate in rice weighing at RW | DPRD should be involved in helping to control things |
