5 Questions with: ISEAS's Julia Lau
Corruption in Indonesian politics, and what is needed to fix it.
“5 Questions with” features in-depth interviews with experts from academia, business, government, and nonprofits.
In a speech to the legal fraternity in 1967, Singapore’s former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew made a sobering remark about corruption’s long shadow in Southeast Asia:
“We live in an area where to be corrupt is a way of life.”
In Indonesian political life, that remark still holds true. Though corruption and patronage politics are not unique to Indonesia, these ills continue to plague the country across various levels of government.
More recently, it’s also a key theme raised in Indonesia’s 2024 presidential elections. To appreciate the challenge that corruption poses in Indonesia, we spoke with ISEAS - Yusof Ishak Institute Indonesia Studies Programme Co-coordinator Julia Lau to gather her thoughts on the topic. Julia is also an editor at Fulcrum.sg, a publication that showcases research done by the ISEAS - Yusof Ishak Institute.
SEAmplified: Why is corruption and patronage politics so entrenched in Indonesia?
Julia: Corruption and patronage are features of just about any political system that does not have strong institutions, and these challenges are not unique to Indonesia.
Building impartial courts that fairly enforce laws, and creating a professional, well-paid civil service to discourage bribes requires time, political determination, and public support.
In Indonesia’s elections, achieving a fair political process free from personal connection is challenging due to decades of patronage that took root prior to the Reformasi or post-Suharto era.
This practice will not change unless the political elite choose to do so. As we see, including back home in Singapore, rooting out corruption and patronage is an effort that must be consistent and unending.
Sociocultural expectations also matter, as what is perceived as corruption or patronage in one country might not be so in another.
For example, I had a recent conversation with two Indonesians who were surprised that taking concert tickets or having a free hotel stay was tantamount to corruption in Singapore. To them, it did not count as corruption as no money had changed hands.
SEAmplified: Corruption and patronage politics has been raised as an issue in the 2024 presidential elections. To what extent might the elections address this issue?
Julia: Regrettably, the upcoming election is unlikely to fix the deep-rooted ills of corruption, nepotism, and more broadly patronage, in Indonesia’s political and business environment.
Transparency International noted a decline in Indonesia’s ranking under Joko Widodo, and many scholars lament the state of patronage politics in Indonesia today.
Election campaigns are a case in point, with a significant lack of financial transparency around political donations. It is unclear which businesses or individuals support specific candidates, and this plays out in local, general, and presidential elections.
This problem undermines Indonesian democracy. Because political campaigns are expensive to run, hidden or private interests can sway election outcomes. Money, rather than the strength of one’s political platform or ideas, becomes the key to victory at the polls.
SEAmplified: The presidential candidates have espoused different perspectives on how Indonesia can combat corruption. How might the country’s next president shape the country’s anti-corruption efforts?
Julia: Unfortunately, the prospects for the next president to effectively tackle corruption do not look great.
Should Prabowo and Gibran win, the status quo will be even more entrenched as there would be no reason for pro-Widodo elements to relinquish what has worked for them so far.
Gibran’s vice-presidential candidacy is a prime example of patronage and nepotism at work. Indonesian civil society and academia have expressed dissatisfaction with Widodo’s support for the duo, but their disapproval can only go so far. Some high-profile anti-corruption cases will still happen occasionally, but systematically tackling corruption in the next five to ten years looks unlikely.
Under a Ganjar-Mahfud administration, significant anti-corruption efforts might be constrained if the PDI-P maintains its influence as it has in the past decade during Widodo’s tenure as president. Leaders at every level of government, from provincial to village, have their own networks to maintain.
An Anies-Baswedan administration might seek to reform what Widodo has put in place, but they would still face the challenge of rewarding campaign supporters, a common practice not only in Indonesian, but global politics, and is akin to “pork barrel politics” in the US.
SEAmplified: What does Indonesia need to do differently in order to effectively tackle corruption?
Julia: Tackling corruption requires commitment from the top leadership down. President Widodo’s efforts have been inconsistent, but admittedly he inherited a system that has long been plagued by corruption.
A fundamental shift in how Indonesian politics is conducted requires a complete overhaul of the system, and a shift in national culture and thinking around corruption. This is a monumental challenge, particularly in a country as large and diverse in Indonesia, with 280 million Indonesians spread across thousands of islands.
A step forward in the right direction would be to make it safe for whistleblowers to report superiors or peers for alleged corruption or bribery and ensure that critics of the government do not get lawsuits thrown at them.
A recent incident involving Indonesian minister Luhut Panjaitan, who unsuccessfully sued two activists for libel after they criticized his business dealings in Papua, underscores the need for such protections. The activists’ ability to challenge a powerful public figure without fear of repercussions tests Indonesia’s commitment to accountability and transparency.
SEAmplified: Have there been attempts to pull off, as you’ve highlighted, a systemic overhaul in Indonesian politics? If so, why have they not worked so far?
Julia: Not that I am aware of in the way that you have described.
To me, it is human nature. Corruption and bribery work in a patronage-filled environment because everyone is trying to get ahead. If you could not get a business license or your case heard in court without paying a small bribe, sooner or later, unless you were extremely puritan and ethical, you would cave in.
This does not take into account elite-level patronage where jobs and other opportunities are more accessible to those connected to powerful individuals. Again, this phenomenon is not unique to Indonesia.
Keeping corruption at bay requires a clean bureaucracy and a societal consensus that corruption cannot be tolerated. Even with these elements in place, as evidenced by high-profile cases in Singapore, the fight against corruption needs to be continuous, and it takes time to root out corrupt practices entirely.