Corruption and Democracy: Political Corruption in Post-Soeharto Indonesia

Asran Jalal,

doi:10.47191/ijsshr/v4-i10-08

Abstract

Post-Soeharto Indonesia, known as the era of reform and democracy, has not been able to inhibit corrupt behaviour by state officials at the central and local government levels, in legislative and executive institutions, or in the judiciary as a judicial institution. This article discusses and analyses the corruption process carried out by state officials, especially those occupying legislative, executive, and special judicial institutions at the central government level in interacting with each other and with outside institutions. The public's hope that ongoing democracy will be able to limit political corruption in Indonesia is only an illusion, considering the democracy model that developed in Indonesia post-Soeharto led to a patronage democracy, namely the interaction of power between state institutions which is based on mutually beneficial considerations. Another consideration is that the institution that administers justice which serves as law enforcement agency is involved in corrupt practices.

Highlights

The democratization that took place in post-Soeharto Indonesia has reformed the position of power of high state institutions within the framework of democracy
The argument www.ijsshr.in of this paper is that the rise of post-Soeharto political corruption in the midst of the euphoric spirit of democracy, is related to the Indonesian democracy format which has the character of patronage democracy
POLITICAL CORRUPTION IN INDONESIA: AN OVERVIEW According to Transparency International Indonesia's 2020 report, Indonesia's corruption index is in the 102th position out of 180 countries, in 2019 it was ranked 80

Summary

INTRODUCTION

The democratization that took place in post-Soeharto Indonesia has reformed the position of power of high state institutions within the framework of democracy. Research surveys in the UK show that public officials are more likely to condone corrupt behaviour because it is perceived to have a small impact (Allen & Birch, 2012) Another variable is the dynamic relationship with outside institutions. Interactions between state institutions such as the interaction between the executive and the legislature (Richaerd Fenno 1973), the interaction between members of the legislature and the constituents (David Mayhew, 1974), the interaction between political parties and members of the legislature (Cox and McCubbins, 2007), the interaction between the judiciary and the legislature (Ittai Bar-Siman-Tov, 2015), the interaction of the legislature with interest groups (LaPalombara, Joseph 1974) can take place in a democratic manner (Tom Miles, 2011;717) and a patronage democracy (Edwar Aspinal & Ward Berenchot, 2019).

METHOD

POLITICAL CORRUPTION IN INDONESIA

POLITICAL CORRUPTION PROCESS WA

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS