Local Government Function Authority in Indonesia and Japan[1] : Elaboration and Analysis on Similarities and Differences

A. Background

Local government in one country is regarded important for several reasons. One of them is function implementation for public welfare. It can be happened that there are differences in function delivery quality among local governments, however the principal more or less is the same, which is to give service and welfare for public. This is important especially for people in rural area where they are not close with the government centre as urban people and in some certain condition they have limitation in fulfilling the needs.

Another important reason why local government is important to deliver its function for public is, it is only local government that knows or understands the condition and needs of public, since they are closer. Local governments can estimate or know what resources are available and unavailable in their area to accomplish the needs of people, and based the local condition, they can map the service allocation for public.

For those purpose, the authority must exist. Local government can apply their function well only if they have a certain authority to implement function delivery process. This is also vital to be a guidance in determine their operational mechanism and target.

Furthermore, a clear definition or separation of authority, whether between central and local government or between local governments themselves must be present. Some reasons will be explained here using the case of Japan and Indonesia local government authority separation.

B. Indonesia System and Concept

In the Local Autonomy Law 23/2004, Article 10(2) mentions that for the local authorities, local government can run the autonomy as wider as they can, to regulate and take care the government matter by themselves based on the autonomy principle.

The concept using here is, local governmental matters are divided into compulsory and optional substances. Subsequently, the compulsory matter implementation is based on minimum standard of service and conducted in phases and set by Government.

Table 1

The Separation of Authorities Between Central and Local Government

(Provincial and Region/City Level)

Government	Authorities
Central Government	a. foreign affairs or politics; b. defense; c. security; d. justice; e. national monetary and fiscal; and f. religion.
Compulsory	a. development planning and control; b. spatial planning, using and supervising; c. public order and serenity; d. public tool and infrastructure; e. health service; f. education and potential human resource allocation arrangement; g. over regions/cities social problem overcoming; h. over regions/cities labor service; i. cooperation, small and medium enterprise improvement facilitation including over region/city; j. enviroment control; k. land service including over region/city; l. citizenship and civil administrative service; m.general government administrative service; n. investment administration service including over region/city; o. other basic services that have not been able done by region/city and p. other compulsory authority that mentioned by law	The concept of area and scale is used to determined which government should handle, e.g activities over one regions or cities will be handle by province government
Optional	Governmental authority which is exist and potential to improve social welfare based on condition, special characterisitic and local competitive potentiality

Sources : Republic of Indonesia Law 32/2004 concerning Local Government

Moreover, based on the Article 12 of Local Autonomy Law, governmental matters are divided into two parts :

1. Governmental matter that are given to local executive chief followed by financing sources, tool and infrastructure and employment transfer based on desentralised matter;
2. Governmental matter that is delegated to Governor followed by financing based on deconcentrated matter

C. Local Government Functions in Japan

Most familiar day-to-day public services are the responsibility of local government. These include: family and resident registration; building and management of daycare centers, kindergartens, primary and secondary schools, libraries, public halls and similar facilities; construction, maintenance and management of ref use and sewage disposal facilities, water supply and sewage works; development and improvement of roads and parks; and police and fire fighting services (Council of Local Authorities for International Relations, 2004, Local Government in Japan in http://www.clair.or.jp/e/forum/other.html).

Table 2

Division of Authorities in Japan

Government	Authority
Central Government	· juridical affairs; · criminal punishment; · transportation and communication at the national level; · national hospitals and sanatoriums; · facilities for navigation, meteorology, and sea channels; · national museums and libraries. · diplomacy, · national security,
Local Government	Prefecture Government	Municipal Government
· Similarities	· All domestic aspects except diplomacy, national security, the courts and the penal system · Public services : education, public works, health and hygiene, environmental protection, social welfare, social security, agriculture, forestry, commerce and industry · Regulatory functions : maintenance of public order, public safety and welfare, including the care and control of juveniles or the prevention of pollution · Build and improve roads, construct public rental houses, make city planning decisions and build sewage systems and parks
· Differences	· Operates numerous senior high schools and schools for the handicapped. · pays the primary and secondary schools teacher salaries . · mainly engage in wide area or large scale projects that extend over a number of municipalities, · undertake police administration · license and passport	· Establishes and operate primary and secondary schools. · each municipality carrying out the project within its territory, · mainly provide firefighting services and ambulant municipalities · garbage service

Sources : Elaborate from Local Government in Asia and the Pacific: A Comparative Study Country Paper: Japan in www.unescap.org/huset/lgstudy/country/japan and Local Government Class Material Week 7

In the Japan case, there are some overlapping in the function operational. The overlapping can happen in the level of central government and local government-prefecture and also between prefecture and municipal government. However, the sureness is there is area or scale limitation which is necessary technique in marking the line of authority and which government level should handle.

Under the current local autonomy system, it is hard to draw a clear line between the jurisdiction of local governments and that of central government, although it is mostly agreed that the degree of autonomy of local governments is limited and that many policies are formulated and decisions taken at the central level. The type and degree of autonomy which local governments are entitled to have differs greatly across sectors. This is the result of complexity of practices accumulated over a long time, rather than the application of a set of principles.” (OECD, 1997)

D. Analysis

1. Similarities

1. Functions cover service and regulation

Local government has an authority to operate functions including services and regulatory function as wide as mention in the law. For instance, services are education, health services. Regulatory function covers public order, safety and welfare.

1. The concept of area and scale for determining which government level should handle the function.

As in the general understanding, the authority of province or prefecture government is broader than region/city or municipal government. For Japan case, a larger or wider scale project is handled by prefecture government, while in Indonesia is not so different that, the activities that cover over regions or cities become the province government’s authority. Municipal or region/city concentrates to activities within their areas.

2. Differences

1. For Indonesia, there is a qualification or division concept of local government authority ; compulsory and optional authority.

This is a good concept considering Indonesia is still in the process of empowering all the local government aspects. Although Indonesia has been applying the decentralization concept since 1999, but there are a lot of aspects still in the process of implementation. Some are established well, while some others have to change because of the adjustment and unsuited result of policy implementation. Thus, besides the compulsory, Local Autonomy Law offers the optional authority based on each special criteria of local government. Each local government can decide whether they have been competent enough in taking that responsibility or not. Central Government can give the authority or responsibility based on the local initiative. In short, in the optional authority, the readiness from local government plays major.

For Japan case, this concept of compulsory and optional is not so recognized. Japan uses concept of decentralization with the separation of authority and local government implement the authority and pursues the aim, which is well-operated function.

1. Overlapping

As in the case of Japan, there are overlapping in the operational of local government function, such as road and school. To some extent, it will not become a problem only if that matter is solved or taken care by two governments in the overlapping. In addition, there will be a competition and one cannot monopoly one matter in overlapping (Local Government Class Week 7). This is a positive effect of overlapping process.

<!–[if supportFields]&gt; SHAPE \* MERGEFORMAT &lt;![endif]–><!–[if supportFields]&gt;&lt;![endif]–>

CG

Source : Local Government Class Material Week 7

However, the problem will occur if there is no party wants to take care or in charge for that matter, thus that project or activities is abandoned. To avoid this abandoning or blaming to each other, in Indonesia, the central government through the local autonomy law, draws a line among authorities, which one is in the central, province or region/city government authority. The rule of the game is determined first.

1. Central Government Role

It is undoubtedly that central government still plays an important role in the authorities or functions separations. To some extent, if the decentralization is conducted in a proper mechanism, then the role of Central Government is less needed. Local government’s independence can run very well if there is a strong initiative from inside the local government. Central government can do the supervising without interference, otherwise the local government enters the central government authority or national matter, and then Central Government can take the matter into the central authority.

In applying the decentralization concept, local government has been trying and learning to take the responsibility of being more self-governing. Central government role has been decreased and many aspects have been assigned truly by local. For Japan, this independence seems that a little absurd or ambiguous. The concept of decentralization is within the law, but the implementation is still contained a strong willing up to central government through some top down policies, such as the authority setting.

Local authorities can do anything (except in certain fields) so long as they do not infringe on the national legal framework. In the Japanese legal system, national laws and Cabinet ordinances (which must be based on national laws) always take precedence over by-laws of prefecture governments; and by-laws of prefecture governments over-rule those of municipalities. The fact is, however, that the central government has established national laws in major policy areas, keeping control over local governments. This situation can partly be attributed to the highly centralized system of administration in the pre-war period (Local Government in Asia and the Pacific: A Comparative Study Country Paper: Japan in www.unescap.org/huset/lgstudy/country/japan).

E. Further Elaboration : Persuasive Opinion

1. An obvious weakness of Indonesian system is that in the definition of function in the law, specifically in the optional authority, there is an unclear description present. The limitation is absurd and potential to raise question, to what extent “Governmental authority which is exist and potential to improve social welfare based on condition, special characterisitic and local competitive potentiality” can be defined. In short, the difficulty raised is the interpretation problem.

For that purpose, the lower regulation or law is necessary to define the function therefore it is clearer, although it will be better that such this type of provision is not first choice. The optional authority concept itself offers a good condition, which as a result, local government can measure their capacity in running their function.

On the other hand, for Japan, the overlapping can be overcome also by creating clear definition. It will make a more efficiency in local government function implementation. Although, sometimes the competition is good, but it is also potential in occurring conflict and inefficiency.

<!–[if mso & !supportInlineShapes & supportFields]&gt; SHAPE \* MERGEFORMAT &lt;![endif]–>

Clear Provision or Definition

Indonesia To avoid an absurd and unclear understanding this will lead to function authority interpretation

Japan To create more efficient function operational by decreasing overlapping process

Point : Unclear Interpretation Matter

Point : Overlapping Decreasing Matter

<!–[if mso & !supportInlineShapes & supportFields]&gt; &lt;![endif]–>

1. Disparity

a. disparity of local condition as the cause

b. inequality in achievement as the effect or result

In the decentralization operational, required consideration is in observing the capability and condition of each local government. The differences among them can result in two kinds – strength and weakness–. The positive effect is that a good competition can lead to a higher achievement of local government. On the other hand, it can also result a worse condition for local government that cannot get along in the competition, furthermore it will make a wider gap and disparity among local governments.

In this matter, first, the concept of compulsory and optional authority is suitable for country that in the process of decentralization implementation. Secondly, although the central government sets the function authority or its portion to local government, central government also must support in creating a conducive competition climate among local governments. Thirdly, local government must improve their capability and initiative, such as in the case of Indonesia, local government has an improved authority in function delivery process. Central government has decreased their role, and as a result local government can work more efficient in solving social or public problems, since they are nearer to grass root level and know better their local condition

F. Conclusion

Similarities and differences between Indonesia and Japan show the importance of function authority in local level. The elaboration is rather in emphasizing more on the local function authority implementation. What parts are positive enough now, although it is possible to improve, and for other parts, the issue will be: how it can be operated well or better. Although some parts mentioned about the central government authority, it is not the focus here.

The abolition of Agency Delegated Function in Japan can push the progress of decentralization implementation in Japan. Local government is expected to have a more independence and confidence in running their program and duty.

It is important for local government to have a clear function authority, so they can implement their function to public well. In the process, sometimes the concept and rule are challenged by the reality. The concept and decentralization must suitable with the local governments characteristic, however it is possible to observe other country’s experience in finding the positive aspect to improve local government capability.

References

Book

Council of Local Authorities for International Relations, 2004, Local Government in Japan in http://www.clair.or.jp/e/forum/other.html

Reports

Local Government in Asia and the Pacific: A Comparative Study Country Paper: Japan in www.unescap.org/huset/lgstudy/country/japan)

OECD, Managing Across Levels of Government Japan, 1997 in http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/10/16/1902326.pdf

Local Government Class Material

Week 7

Law

Republic of Indonesia Law 32/2004 concerning Local Government

Websites

http://www.clair.or.jp/e/forum/other.html

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/10/16/1902326.pdf

http://www.unescap.org/huset/lgstudy/country/japan

---

[1] The comparison between Indonesia and Japan is taken because the writer found several elements can be compared to each other and also can enrich the understanding about local government function authority.