Contrasting Singapore’s centralised city-state with Indonesia’s highly decentralised democracy can offer some crucial lessons for Jakarta as it navigates a critical developmental crossroads. While Singapore’s unique trajectory from vulnerable entrepôt to powerful global economy is rooted in three core pillars of robust governance – clean and effective institutions, a meritocratic culture and a long-term orientation – Indonesia faces more fundamental challenges, notably, corruption, fragile institutions and lack of policy continuity. Yet, while drawing lessons from Singapore’s unique governance model, Indonesia must learn to adapt and translate these to fit its own pluralistic and unique socio-political context. The task of transforming into a robust and resilient democracy with a highly decentralised system of governance will require Indonesia to robustly reform its primary legal institutions to make sure that they are both democratic and effective.

Anti-corruption bodies are another area where significant differences can be observed between the two countries. Singapore’s Corruption Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) is a body that is meant to investigate corruption with an iron fist. The Bureau is completely independent from the rest of the government, and as such is not influenced by any of the country’s politicians. In contrast, Indonesia’s Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) was once the country’s strongest anti-corruption body, renowned for its commitment to rooting out corruption. However, in recent years, the body has been increasingly undermined by political interference. Corruption in Indonesia is a deeply entrenched problem that is widespread throughout the country. Many forms of corruption are funded by wealthy patronage networks that finance the elections of politicians across the country. If Indonesia is to tackle this problem and root out corruption once and for all, it will require a full-scale........

© Eurasia Review