Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Abstrak :
One of important issues that currently raised by Indonesian people is how they can obtain good service from government apparatus. An effort has been conducted by the Indonesian President to provide people good public services by issuing Presidential Decree Number 44 Year 2000 on the National Ombudsman Commission. The establishment of this commission is aimed to create conducive situation for people and to empower them in combating corruption, collusion, and nepotism, popularly known as "KKN". Likewise, it is aimed to give people more protection in having better access to public services, justice, and welfare.

The research in this dissertation has a main goal to make an evaluation of the formation and the implementation of the Presidential Decree Number 44 Year 2000. It further explains the socialization of its formation and implementation, and the further recommendation of the Ombudsman to the conflicting parties. Significantly, the result of this research demonstrates that the implementation is bad and inadequate. Such poor condition has been proved by a continuing decrease of complaints to the Commission. Meanwhile, the follow-up of the recommendation by government institutions tends to insignificantly increase.

More importantly, according to this research, the bad and the adequate implementation is caused by the bad process of the formation of the Commission. It is further found in the research that in the process of its formation, the President did not involve people as the stakeholder. For this reason, the substance of the Presidential Decree was so blurred, and has furthermore resulted in creating confusion and uncertainty on the Ombudsman's role.

Aside from its bad process of formation, the research said that there is also a problem in relation to the implementation, which must be immediately overcome. This problem develops from the main public policy maker in the country, or the President, who has not yet given sufficient attention to that implementation. Moreover, other parties, largely government institutions, as part of the executive power, have not yet shown their great commitment and response to the implementation, for example, in the matters of immunity rights, double occupations, and health requirements. Subsequently, legal base, lack of budget, and problem in communication have contributed more to the bad implementation. More interestingly, it is said in this dissertation that although the socialization on the role and function of the Commission has been maximally introduced, its effect is still insignificant, due to a limited budget and low profile approach.

Finally, the result of the research of this dissertation has given some recommendations, as follows: 1. In short-term: it becomes urgent to provide a permanent building or office for the National Ombudsman Commission. Meanwhile, it is necessary too for the Ombudsman to organize weekly meeting in its office; 2. In long-term: to enable the Ombudsman to effectively implement its role, task, and functions, the formation of a law on the National Ombudsman Commission is a must. Different from the Presidential Decree mentioned above, such a kind of law must stipulate the salary the Ombudsman, which must be made equal with the salary of other public officials. It must also mention the prohibition for having double occupations, and include a provision on health requirement. Meanwhile, the budget for the activities of the National Ombudsman Commission should be separated from the budget of the State Secretariat; 3. It is important to encourage the formation of Ombudsman Commission in the regions of the country; 4. Recommendations made by the Ombudsman should be sent also to the national Parliament, or the House of Representatives (DPR), which can be raised as crucial issues to be discussed by Members of Parliament in performing their supervisory function; 5. To help the Ombudsman effectively implement its role, all government institutions have to make they own Standard of Procedures (SOPs); 6. Last but not least, the Commission must change its low profile approach with a high profile one, so that it will be more respectable amongst other state institutions.

Abstrak :
Analisis Kebijakan Otonomi Khusus Papua 2001-2016 dalam Perspektif Deliberative Public Policy Penelitian ini menganalisis kebijakan Otonomi Khusus Otsus di Provinsi Papua dan Provinsi Papua Barat. Berbeda dengan penelitian sebelumnya, yang hanya melihat kebijakan Otsus Papua pada tahap implementasi, penelitian ini menganalisis kebijakan Otsus sebagai sebuah proses kebijakan, mulai dari tahap formulasi hingga implementasi, dengan menggunakan perspektif deliberative public policy dari teori Dryzek 1990 mengenai deliberative democracy. Data dikumpulkan melalui studi kepustakaan dan wawancara mendalam dengan informan beragam, baik yang mendukung maupun yang mengritisi kebijakan Otsus. Para informan adalah para pembuat kebijakan Otsus Papua di DPR RI dan Pemerintah, serta di Provinsi Papua dan Provinsi Papua Barat. Kegiatan observasi dilakukan di Jayapura, Wamena, Manokwari, Sorong, dan Kaimana, yang merepresentasikan wilayah kota dan kabupaten, serta wilayah pantai dan pegunungan. Data dianalisis dengan menggunakan metode kualitatif, dan sesuai dengan tujuannya, untuk menganalisis kebijakan Otsus di Provinsi Papua dan Provinsi Papua Barat, penelitian ini menggunakan tipe eksplanatori kualitatif. Triangulasi dilakukan melalui kegiatan focus group discussions, yang melibatkan para pemangku kepentingan. Berbeda dengan penelitian LIPI 2004 , yang mengungkap bahwa kebijakan Otsus Papua sudah dilakukan secara partisipatif, penelitian ini menemukan partisipasi yang dilakukan dalam tahap formulasi bersifat semu pseudo-participation . Penelitian ini selanjutnya mengungkap bahwa dalam tahap implementasi, orang asli Papua sebagai target penerima manfaat cenderung diabaikan partisipasinya. Menurut hasil penelitian ini, formulasi dan implementasi kebijakan Otsus Papua harus memperhatikan prinsip-prinsip deliberatif. Penelitian menemukan bahwa perspektif deliberative public policy telah membuka cara pandang baru dalam menganalisis kebijakan Otsus Papua. Penelitian ini mengemukakan kebaruan novelty bahwa dalam perspektif deliberative public policy, pembatasan waktu dalam proses formulasi kebijakan akan menimbulkan masalah dalam implementasinya. Penekanan pada substansi deliberasi lebih penting dari pada sekadar pemenuhan formalitas, karena ia akan menimbulkan pseudo-deliberative, yang menciptakan situasi konflik akibat distrust yang terus tumbuh dan memperkuat tuntutan separatisme. Kata kunci: deliberative public policy, pseudo-deliberative policy, Dryzek 1990, otonomi khusus, Papua, Papua Barat.

---

Papua Special Autonomy Policy Analysis 2001 2016 A Deliberative Public Policy Perspective This research analyzed special autonomy policy in the provinces of Papua and West Papua. Different from previous researches which only discussed the special autonomy during its implementation, this research examined it as a process since its formulation until its implementation by employing the 1990 Dryzek rsquo s deliberative democracy perspective. Data collection was conducted with library studies, continued with in depth interviews with various informants. The informants consisted of those who supported the special autonomy policy and those who criticized it inside the national parliament and the government, as well as different parties in the provinces of Papua and West Papua. In addition to this, observation works have been conducted in cities and municipalities, as well as coastal and mountainous areas, e.g. Jayapura, Wamena, Manokwari, Sorong, and Kaimana. Data was analyzed by employing a qualitative method. In accordance with the objective of this research, namely to clearly examine both the formulation and implementation of special autonomy policy in the Papua and the West Papua, an explanatory qualitative type was applied. Triangulation of data was, furthermore, conducted with focus group discussions, involving relevant stakeholders. Unlike the 2004 LIPI rsquo s research, which concluded that the Papua special autonomy policy has been deliberatively discussed and created, this research argued and found that the public participation organized during its formulation was actually pseudo, by which the researcher has identified it as pseudo participation. This research has also revealed that since its implementation, the participation of native Papuan, presumably should have gained the benefits of the policy, have been, in reality, ignored. This research further found that the deliberative public policy has introduced a new perspective for analyzing the Papua special autonomy policy. From such perspective, therefore, its formulation and implementation must consequently rely on deliberative principles. As its novelty, this research has revealed that time limitation during the formulation process will bring about problem in its implementation. The researcher accordingly concluded that emphasizing to have a real deliberative process is much more substantial rather than attempting to make it artificially that led to a pseudodeliberative policy. A pseudo one has, in fact, produced conflict caused by the growing distrust of the Papuan to the government, which strengthened aspiration for separatism. Keywords deliberative public policy, pseudo deliberative policy, Dryzek 1990, special autonomy, Papua, West Papua.