Pemdes

ESTI RAHMADHANI
NIM: D1A022145
REVIEW ARTICLE
Village Administration in Indonesia: A Socio-Political Corporation Formed by State
A. Summary
In Indonesia, the village government is the lowest level of administration, established by
law. However, it is important to note that the village head is not considered a government
official, and village employees are not categorized as civil servants. While the Village
Government has the authority to manage government affairs, the central government does not
fully decentralize these responsibilities to the village level.
The organizational structure of the village government resembles a municipal structure,
consisting of a mayor and council. However, the mayor does not function as the chief of local
bureaucrats, and the council operates as a voluntary board with limited powers. This situation
raises concerns about the legal status of villages within the administration of the Republic of
Indonesia.
Angelino (1931: pp. 403-411) stated that village administration is an indigenous
community institutional buraucracy under control of a “Regentsraad” (Council of Municipal)
and a “Resident” (government official whom his job position is under the Dutch Colonial
Governor and above Mayor or Regent). Before the colonial era, a village was just a peasant
community that did not have a government system. The Government then made it as a
corporation as an instrument of cultivation policy, so called cultuurstelsel.
Law No. 19 of 1965 was amended by Law No. 5 of 1979. Based on this Law, the status of
a village is not a local self-government, but as a socio-political corporation a variant of state
corporatism (Schmitter, 1974). The village is an instrument of the central government to
implement their political and economic policy. Village institution under this law was not
regulated and arrenged as native autonomy. It is recommended that village institutions
transform into public organizations in compliance with the Indonesian Constitution of 1945.
This transformation would enable them to provide public services that benefit the local
population and enhance their role in the governance structure.
The Organizational Structure and Work Procedure (OSWP) can be exposed as follows: the
village head is the leader. The village secretary is the head of staff consisting of six heads of
village affairs: 1) Head of Government Affairs; 2) Head of Development Affairs; 3) Head of
Financial Affairs; 4) Head of Public Affairs; 5) Head of Administration Affairs; and 6) Head of
General Affairs. In addition, the village head is also assisted by regional and technical
implementers. The regional implementing element consists of two hamlet heads and two
technical implementers, namely: the Assistant of Marital Registrar (AMR or P3N) and the
Community Protection Officers (CPO or Linmas).
B. Analysis
The Village Administration in Indonesia, often referred to as a socio-political corporation
formed by the state, faces several critical issues. The ambiguity surrounding the legal status of
village officials and employees as non-government officials and non-civil servants raises
questions about their accountability and the degree of transparency in village governance. This
lack of clear official status can potentially lead to a lack of professionalism and accountability,
which can have negative consequences for the effective delivery of services to the local
population.
The limited decentralization of government affairs to the village level by the central
government raises concerns about the effectiveness of local governance. While the Village
Government is expected to administer government affairs, the central government's reluctance
to delegate significant authority can hinder local decision-making and the ability to address the
specific needs of their communities. This centralized control can undermine the principles of
local self-governance and autonomy.
The structure of the village government, with a mayor who lacks substantial authority and
a council that functions more as a voluntary board, is problematic. This weak structure can
impede efficient decision-making and hinder the village's ability to address local issues
effectively.
C. Conclusion and Recomendation

In conclusion, the Village Administration in Indonesia, often perceived as a socio-political
corporation formed by the state, faces significant challenges in terms of its legal status,
authority, and effectiveness. The vague official status of village officials and employees,
coupled with limited decentralization of government affairs, has created a situation where local
governance is often hampered, and local needs are not adequately addressed. The existing
organizational structure, which includes a mayor with limited powers and a council that
operates as a voluntary board, is far from ideal for efficient decision-making and service
delivery.
To address these issues and enhance the role of the Village Administration in Indonesia,
several recommendations are in order. First, there is a critical need to clarify the legal status of
village officials, potentially considering a legal framework that formally recognizes their roles
and responsibilities. This can lead to increased professionalism, accountability, and
transparency within the administration.
The central government should consider greater decentralization of government affairs to
the village level, empowering these local entities to make decisions that directly affect their
communities. This can be achieved by granting them more autonomy and resources, allowing
for the implementation of policies tailored to local needs.
Furthermore, there is a need for structural reforms within the village government, enabling
mayors to assume more significant roles and granting councils real decision-making authority.
This restructuring can improve the effectiveness of local governance and ensure that local
issues are appropriately addressed.
the Village Administration in Indonesia must evolve into a more functional and genuine
form of local self-government. By addressing the legal status of officials, promoting
decentralization, and restructuring the administration, Indonesia can harness the full potential
of its villages to serve their communities effectively and in compliance with the principles of
democracy and local autonomy. Strengthening the village government's capacity and authority
is essential to empower it as a true local self-governing entity that can meet the diverse needs
of Indonesia's villages.

Pemdes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pemdes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pemdes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ESTI RAHMADHANI

C. Conclusion and Recomendation

You might also like