The methodology for gauging levels of corruption here is pretty invalid. Corruptors don’t self-report, but comparing regions based on how much money those caught had swindled? This is actually a very backward way of measuring it, because it is now a factor of the amount of corruption AND how serious it is being policed. A SumUt spokesman actually gave voice to this in the article itself:

“Just the opposite, actually,” Edi said. “The high number of cases [in North Sumatra] shows that we are serious about tackling corruption.”

I mean, think about how much bigger Jakarta is, not only by way of size, but specifically with regard to financial capital. Certainly, in raw numbers, you would expect levels of corruption in Jakarta to be higher. This study didn’t find that, and I’m guessing that is because there was less enforcement, and thus less arrests in Jakarta. I just find it hard to believe that Jakarta’s corruptors grossed less in Rupiah than did Medan’s.

One thing is for certain – implicating governors and other elected officials is important, but until there is a substantive change in election procedures – namely, by increasing transparency in funding and expenditures – I gather it would be hard for anyone to compete without accept dirty money. =/

American corruption, being more sophisticated and thus harder to measure, can’t really be compared…but I’ll cap by saying that if we are going to involve ourselves in matters of governance and corruption here in Indonesia (and by all regards, we should!), we should be just as or more willing to turn that critical eye back on the lobbying industries and policies in our own country!

(written in response to a friend’s fb posting)