Introduction
Though the infrastructure for the new capital in East Kalimantan is underway, a central issue has yet to be addressed. Since the inception of this idea to move the capital, there is seemingly a lack of coordination between the Central and Local governments. More specifically, the lack of regulations will impede the Central government to seamlessly move to the new capital. Further complicating this move is that most civil servants are against this move, preferring to stay in Jakarta. This article aims to provide insights into how such lack of coordination and negative sentiments by civil servants will challenge both Central and Local governments in ensuring a smooth move to East Kalimantan by 2024.
Lack of Coordination since the Beginning
A lack of coordination between Central and Local government is evident from when the idea of moving the capital was first mooted. Within less than a fortnight since President Joko Widodo’s (Jokowi) announcement to move the capital, he declared two East Kalimantan regions, Penajam Paser Utara and Kutai Kartanegara, to be locations for the new capital. This short time indicates a lack of discussion between Central and Local governments. This stems from the lack of legal basis to move the capital away from Jakarta.
Going against regulations, the Central government has yet to submit four revised laws and two new draft laws to the People’s Representative Council (DPR) for their deliberations to move Indonesia’s capital. Of these six laws, Law 29 of 2009 must be revised as it assigns Jakarta as Indonesia’s capital. Till this law is revised, Indonesia’s capital is still legally Jakarta. Additionally, the absence of legal basis has led the Ministry of National Development Planning being mandated to solely spearhead the move with no representations from Local government agencies. Therefore, the ministry could unilaterally decide how to implement the smart city concept in East Kalimantan. Collectively, these strongly suggests that the decision to move was “one-sided.”
Such one-sided decision will lead to two challenges. First, without regulations to assign East Kalimantan as a capital, the Local government is not obligated to develop and implement policies to facilitate the move. Second, the Local government will be in a bind coordinating its agencies with that of the Central government’s. This is because the lack of regulations will consequently prevent the Local government to have the necessary autonomy as that experienced by Special Regions such as Jakarta.
Challenges to Effective Management of Land Use and Preventing Corruption in New Capital
With a change in status from region to capital (pending the revision of Law 29 of 2009), East Kalimantan will be classified as an autonomous region. Based on Government Regulation Number 29 of 2007, East Kalimantan’s local government will have more autonomy including unilaterally deciding the appointment and dismissal of Mayors and regents, and developing its own regulations for policies from planning, implementing and evaluating.
However, a change in status will challenge the Local government’s effectiveness and professionalism. Currently, there are at least 162 mining, forestry, palm oil, coal-fired power plants and property concessions owned by political party members and businessmen. These will be managed by the Local government upon becoming an autonomous region. Unfortunately, the Local government is inexperienced in managing these industries, potentially impacting National policies. Such inexperience can result in administrative issues such as lack of accountability and transparency.
Further complicating matters is the discovery that two-thirds of local government land in East Kalimantan is still uncertified and contested. Without legal certification, the Local government of East Kalimantan would not be able to implement intended developments such as building of infrastructure for the generation of sufficient energy for the new capital. This consequently impacts the effective management of the new capital’s land use. One way to resolve this is for the Central government to award ownerships and land certifications to the Local government. By doing so, the Local government will have the authority to manage these lands. However, this potential solution will not address corruption opportunities vis-à-vis land use in the new capital. Due to limited resources, it is common for land to be managed by public-private partnerships. Regardless of whether land is owned by the Central or Local government, awarding the rights for land use could be driven by greed rather than public interest. Notably, there have been cases of corruption involving infrastructure projects in East Kalimantan prior to developments in the new capital. This, thus, emphasizes the importance of a legal system to prevent such cases from repeating in the new development. The development of such legal system entails close coordination between Central and Local governments. Such close coordination can be realized by the formulation of an Inter-Ministerial Committee (PAK) backed by regulations for the preparation, transfer and development of the new capital. Structurally and functionally, PAK will be responsible for close coordination and communication for the new capital’s developments. Whereas the regulations provide a legal framework for PAK to carry out its responsibilities.
Need to Improve Civil Servants Buy-in for Move
Another major issue to address is the negative sentiments by civil servants on the move to East Kalimantan. It was recently discovered that 94% of civil servants rejected plans to move the capital. Their rejection primarily stems from the continued frequent flooding in the new capital areas. This is further confounded when 78.3% of interviewed civil servants indicated their preference for early retirement if they were forced to move to the new capital. The problem becomes more complex when the when Central government is instructing its civil servants to accept the move to the New Capital under the risk of sanctions. Additionally, the Central government has further instructed them to be ready for upskilling to effectively manage the new capital and its Smart City concept. Furthermore, there are little incentives for civil servants to heed these instructions. Noteworthily, civil servants are also uncertain who among them will be involved in this mandatory move. It is still undecided whether the 1.8 million civil servants required to run the new capital will be provided by the Local government or transferred from the Central government. These poses two challenges to the Central government. First, their rejection to move threatens day-to-day bureaucracy in the new capital. Day-to-day bureaucracy will be more challenging with the implementation of the Smart City concept. The implementation of Smart City requires not only professionalism from civil servants but also necessary skills to work closely with new technologies and artificial intelligence. Second, there may not even be sufficient capable civil servants deployed in the new capital. As aforementioned, civil servants in the new capital are required to possess innovative attributes such as being “data literate, citizen-centered, curious, storytellers, and insurgent.” These requirements are arduous for most civil servants as evident from Indonesia’s low rankings in global assessments: ranking 37 out of 140 countries in the 2015-2016 Global Competitiveness Report and ranking 85 in government effectiveness by the Worldwide Governance Indicators. To facilitate greater buy-in from civil servants, the Central government should steer away from sanctions and award more incentives for the move to the new capital. This could be effective as since the New Order regime, civil servants tend to have a transactional mindset. These incentives should not only include rewards but also provision of facilities such as temporary housing.
Conclusion
Moving of Indonesia’s capital is not as straightforward as simply physically moving from Jakarta to East Kalimantan. On one hand, the Local government in East Kalimantan, in the absence of any legal basis, will be challenged in effectively managing land use and its corruption in the new capital. On the other, the Central government will be challenged in deploying sufficient capable civil servants to the new capital. More importantly, by addressing issues associated with the move, the new capital would not repeat what transpired in Jakarta; lack of proper management. Without proper management which would lead to overpopulation as happened in Jakarta, Indonesia may have to consider moving its capital again.
