Accountability of Village Government

March 3, 2016

By:I Wayan Nike Suputra*

The Village Government is fear to use village funds accountably. This is due to the weakness of village government’s ability to process administration, the absence of sanction and supervisory agencies. Based on the problem above, there is a question: how village government implementing its authority accountably?

To answer this question, the author conducts theory study and concepts from types of accountability and indicators demanded by village law, explanation from each of accountability, and highlight the context and the implication for the direction of empowerment.

Village law contains 3 types of accountability, namely fiscal accountability, social accountability, and bureaucratic accountability. This article only focuses on fiscal and social accountability in depth. In principal, the mechanism of accountability is a method to hind abuse of power and corrupts behavior; that essentially the relations between agent or authority implementing agencies and responsibility with the leader as individual/ position/ institution to whom the agent deliver their responsibility.

Fiscal accountability is a form of control from the leader that leads down and also leads parallel or horizontal. The leader from leads down control is the regent/mayor, while parallel or horizontal leader is village consultative body (BPD). The strength of this accountability assumed relatively high due to formal position of the government system. Indicators of fiscal accountability associated with the administrative and financial procedures. Control leader are expected to have a great interest to the official financial documents, so that vertical and horizontal supervision are expected to realize.

Indicators of fiscal accountability covering accountability of village implementation annual report to the regents/mayors, resulting medium-term and annual planning documents in the village; village government report documents at the end of the term to the regents / mayors produce documents of implementation and realization of village budget; document governance report information written at the end of each fiscal year to BPD, resulting accountability document and responsibility report information in the village; there is sanctions according to the constitution if it fails to implement these points.

Village government capacity is an important factor to realize the success of fiscal accountability. Some studies have shown the inability of village government in carrying the planning, implementation and reporting based on existing regulations. Lessons learn from these studies is needed to create a program to strengthen the capacity of village citizen and mentoring.

Conceptually, social accountability include in the form of control over the external leadership that leads to the top. Accountability is characterized by the efforts of civil society, individuals and groups, and the media that suppress the decision to ask for information and explanations for all decisions in the area of authority.

Indicators of social accountability include the rules and procedures for the delivery information to the public; the availability of non-formal document, whether written or oral, ease of management and citizens’ access to official documents, their knowledge and experience of citizens regarding these aspects, as well as the imposition of sanctions if it fails to run.

The strength of accountability is depends on the critical attitude of citizens, mass media, and civil society organizations. The author stated that the public interest from the process and financial documents need to be studied further, because it allegedly lower than the interest of the quality of service and results of implementation of the budget. In addition, the author also mentions it necessary to strengthen the capacity of citizens to monitor the government, both the village and service units in the village.

Bureaucratic accountability is an internal control that leads down. In this accountability, the head of village serves as the leader, while village officers as an agent. Indicators of bureaucratic accountability include financial statements document of each semester and each year from the village authorities including: activities of government document plan, village revenue budget expenditure draft document, village regulations regarding village income and expenditure budgets, evidence of expenditure are complete and valid, the document’s budget plan costs that have been approved and verified, the cash ledger activities, payment request letter document addressed to the head of village; village chief regulatory documents about the changes in revenues and expenditures of the village, as well as the imposition of sanctions under existing laws and regulations if it failed to do. These documents will be an indicator of fiscal accountability.

Based on studies conducted by AKATIGA, there are nine reasons contextual background accountability practices, namely:

• Human resource capacity of village government;

• The ability of Village government finance related to access to information and technology    information;

• Social networking of the head of village and village citizen;

• Infrastructure organizations and village governance institution;

• The existence of a critical social groups;

• The existence of programs that introduce accountability practices;

• Social structures, norms and local customs related to transparency and information channels;

• The involvement of local governments in setting and capacity-building efforts.

Financial ability is already addressed by village fund policy, so the focus of empowerment by the central and local governments should be directed to the development of human resource capability village government, opening up access to information and information technology, organizational development and government institution and village citizen, as well as assistance and capacity building.

The weak of village government ability in arranging government administration and the absence of sanctions and the supervisory agencies becoming cause of failure in achieving accountability of village government. Therefore, the central and local governments should provide capacity building and assistance to village government to realize accountability. In addition, active community participation in monitoring and continue to oversee the development of the village administration can be a source of input for the improvement of the village administration.

*The Author is Architectural and Planning Engineering student, Gadjah Mada University who finished internship in PATTIRO.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+WhatsAppPrint

Comments on this entry are closed.