AN COMPARATIVE OVERVIEW OF FISCAL REFORM IN INDONESIA; STUDY CASE OBJECTIVE: E-BUDGETING IMPLEMENTATION IN DKI JAKARTA AND CENTRAL JAVA PROVINCE.
At this time, the human resources of the state civil servants have a big challenge, namely facing an era ruled by the digitalization system. This era is shifting towards an order of change or transformation in all aspects of life so that it affects the procedures for working, educating families, shopping, doing business and so on. Especially during a pandemic like today where all humans are faced with uncertainty. According to the terms downloaded from the site https://www.jurnal.id/id/blog/kenali-vuca-untuk-identifikasi-strategi-business-anda/:this situation will continue to move quickly and cannot be guessed or is referred to as VUCA ; Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity and Ambiguity. Meanwhile, according to Prof. Rhenald Kasali (2017) explains that VUCA is also based on a fairly strong disruption.
Disruption exists because of the practice of offering more practical and lower prices than existing services, so that many people turn to these services. This disruption through digital transformation that is applied to human work patterns is very necessary to maintain their survival. Humans in all corners of the world adapt to the current conditions. Without exception, public service offices in Indonesia have implemented a digital transformation system in the process of serving the administrative needs of the community. However, in reality, when examined from various aspects of public administration, the pattern or system of public services in government agencies has not been able to provide the best possible administrative facilities for the community. This was initially marked by the absence of public information disclosure regarding the local government budget management process to the public/community, so that many corruption cases were carried out by the government's own internal parties. Whereas public services are actually services that can be transparent, fulfill and provide satisfaction and can accommodate every need and complaint of the pluralistic Indonesian people. Therefore, the existence of information technology is needed to be a solution that can answer the needs of the community. The case study that will be discussed here is about how the government can facilitate and practice accountability for its performance in managing the regional revenue and expenditure budget (APBD).
The Indonesian Anti-Corruption Society Coordinator (MAKI) Boyamin recorded 471 reports received by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) for alleged corruption in DKI Jakarta throughout 2021. In addition, as additional information recorded on the kpk.go.id website, DKI Jakarta ranks first in the number of reports of alleged corruption with 471 complaints. West Java followed with 410 complaints, North Sumatra 346 complaints, East Java 330 complaints, and Central Java 240 complaints. With the complaints of corruption cases with the highest budget leakage in Indonesia, DKI Jakarta has become the government's spotlight, in this case related to cases of procurement of goods and services, licensing issues to buying and selling positions. This increasingly concerning corruption case is further exacerbated by the case of the Purbalingga sub-district head, Raharjom, which was previously reported by the mass media recently who was suspected of being involved in the alleged corruption case in the management of the APBD in Purbalingga District for the 2017-2020 period . The initial assumption was that there was a state loss of around Rp. 334 million. As many as 40 people became witnesses in the case. The witnesses are sub-district officials, district officials and third parties who are sub-district partners. The complexity of the various corruption cases of misappropriation of APBD funds has added to the long list of names of corrupt officials in Indonesia. Whereas with the existence of regional autonomy, each regional government administration in each province in Indonesia is given the authority to manage the regional revenue and expenditure budget or what is referred to as the APBD. However, in practice, the APBD management process is not as smooth as imagined. Constraints that often occur are not technical problems how to manage them, but instead manages that is full of acts of corruption which in the end can lead to various complex problems. If there is a management problem or "how to" in managing APBD funds, it will be good, the government will support assistance with training and so on. But if the problem lies in the abuse of power in this case the misappropriation of APBD funds for personal or other interests not for the state, then this should be a big problem for the state.
.....To be continued..................
Komentar
Posting Komentar