To be sure, I don’t want us to go to that extreme and following P.R. of China’s way of handling convicted corruptors—that is by dead penalty. Although the idea is sort of compelling, this is far from practical considering how decisions are made in our political system as opposed to the one party regime of PRC.
Some might contemplate the possibility of having one authoritative government again in view of how busy now Indonesian government accommodating the interests of all sides before making one decision. However, dysfunctional it might be, I still believe in the merit of democracy. But enough with the detour and let’s go back to corruption.
My concern here in Indonesia is the lack of social disapproval for corruption. For instance: Nurdin Halid, is still holding his position as the boss of Indonesian Football Association, even after he’s being sentenced due to a corruption case (the organization meetings are held in the prison afterwards to accommodate him, mind you). Apparently his cronies don’t see it as a reason enough to unseat him, they even modify the adopted FIFA’s regulation that should have required Nurdin to step down.
Another one: after freed from prison, Mulyana Kusumah, ex-member of the Indonesia Election Body also sentenced due to a corruption case, was treated—cheered even—like a hero comes home from a hard fought battle. He was even impudently trying to exert his “right” to claim back his seat in the Body. This is the man who infamously caught red handed on tape when trying to bribe a government official! Fallen from grace they haven’t.
For me this is distressing. How come we are highly tolerant towards such people? Oh you might argue that some of them have done their sentence, they are now rehabilitated and we should welcome them with open arms. But I bet you would not treat the “usual” ex-convict the same way you treat these ex-corruptors.
This lack of social disapproval is a huge encouragement for corruptions. Corruptors don’t need to feel bad about themselves; even if they are caught and sentenced, family and society will eventually welcome them back. In Indonesia, being largely a communal society, that means a lot. If you can fall back to your family and community you can endure almost anything.
On the other hand social disapproval can ruin your life no matter how successful you are before. Take for instance the famous cleric Aa Gym and his decision to have a second wife. There was a big controversy back then, when public were disappointed with the act conducted by this supposedly role model. Suddenly Aa Gym found he is not very popular anymore, his a social pariah. And now his appearance before public is slowing down—so is his business I am told.
In Freakonomics, Steven Levitt argues that social incentive sometimes work better than capital punishment or financial sanction. I think he is right and in a closely knitted community like Indonesia this principle should work well. Being a social pariah can be a strong social disincentive that certain acts become so despicable most of the people dares not to do it again.
So from now on let’s despise the corruptors, look scornfully to them and abhor them to the bones. We need them become a social pariah & corruption an incurable infectious deadly disease we don’t want to touch the sufferer.
***
1 comment:
Well in a society seemingly chock full of corruptors it seems either hypocritical or unwise to socially disapprove of them...
Post a Comment