GBHN AND THE DEVELOPMENT PLANNING IN INDONESIA
Imam Subkhan Abstract After more than a decade Indonesia entered the New Reform era, there is now a desire among some politicians and intellectuals to revive the concept of the Guidelines (GBHN) to guide development planning as it was once used under the New Order regime. The desire was based on the view that the current development planning has led to much turmoil, collision and no sustainability. This paper describes the Guidelines used for development planning in the reform era called Long Term Development Plan (RPJMN) is somewhat similar to the Guidelines (GBHN) in the perspective of theory of modernization development. Therefore, chaos, development planning collision is actually not caused by the absence of the Guidelines itself, but rather on the changes of the state power system into more horizontal system so that no state agency is able to fully control the development planning from the center down to regions, something which was done well in the era of the New Order. Keywords: GBHN, RPJMN, Modernist, Development. During a political debate in Jakarta late March 2014, the 3rd President of Indonesia, BJ Habibie recalled the importance of having a Broad Guidelines of State Policy (GBHN) to be revived1. In late January 2014, at a meeting with Golkar Party cadres, Habibie also reminded the same thing. "We are aware, in the absence of such Guidelines the development in Indonesia will not run well on the long run. So, I want to say, to the entire cadre Golkar, please promise me that we would make correction to the 1945 Constitution.", said Habibie2. Such a longing to bring back the old Guidelines into the contemporary setting is not only voiced by Habibie, but also by several other public figures. In the Indonesian University President Forum meeting in Solo on early 2014, one of the key recommendations is to revive the Guidelines and to encourage the Assembly (DPR) to initiate a constitutional amendment to put back the authority of the Assembly to set the Guideline. In Post-New Order, the guidelines so far had been used as the primary guide in formulating the country's development plan, was removed. This is the consequence of the amendments to the constitution, especially Article 3 which includes explicitly the existence of the Guideline3. Instead, the state switched to a national development planning system which serves as a guide in formulating the Long Term Development Plan (RPJP), Medium Term Development Plan (RPJM) and Annual Development Plan, or commonly known as the Government Work Plan (RKP). One of the main arguments on the importance to revive the Guidelines is the view that planning in the post-reform has resulted in turmoil, without any clear direction and collisions or overlapping in the development activities between Central and regional government. In addition http://www.tempo.co/read/news/2014/03/26/078565577/Habibie-Kembalikan-GBHN-. Accessed on 8 June 2014 2 See http://partaigolkar.or.id/golkar-pelopori-perlunya-gbhn-dihidupkan-kembali/. Accessed on 8 June 2014 3 In the Article 3 of the 1945 Constitution before the amendment, it was stated that “The Assemby (MPR) shall stipulate the Constitution and the GBHN as the Broad Guidelines of Development Planning.”
1

1

the sustainability of development programs is decreasing, as well as many disconnects as government changes. This article deals with a critical question whether the desire to bring the Guidelines is merely a matter of the absence of actual guidelines or there are other factors related to the broader concerns of power relations change state before and after the New Order. This article will show that the problem of development planning which so far has led us to chaos, conflicts of national and regional development planning, and many disconnects during the Post-New Order regime has nothing to do with the presence or absence of the Guidelines. All the more problems arise is related to changes in the political democratic system which has since shifted into a more open, decentralized system and the emergence of a more horizontal, not hierarchical and vertical governance system. State and Development The state and development are two related concepts. In view of the post structuralist as once written by Foucault (2008: 77) it is stated that „„the mobile effect of a regime of multiple governmentalities‟‟. With this conception, the development can be seen as an effect of the state that contain colliding and conflicting processes among the various actors in the realization of a desire to improve, which, Tania Li called “the will to improve”. But in itself, a state is not an entity that is steady, static and homogeneous. A formation of a continuous process that is practiced and actualized through development. Thus there is always a shuttle between the state and development. The state is then formed through a process of development and vice versa the development is constructed by actors, agencies and institutions that represent the state or country to give it characters in the will to make the adjustment and control of the population in a particular area. There are many conceptions of development. Rist (2007), for example, offers how we should define 'development'. Development should not be based on what is thought or expected, but in actual social practice and its consequences is something that can be recognized by everyone. Therefore what needs to be highlighted is the historical process which began two centuries ago and still continues to this day. Rist (2007) defines the essence of development as the general transformation and destruction of the natural environment and of social relations in order to increase the production of commodities (goods and services) geared, by means of market exchange, to effective demand. Thus the 'development' according to Rist (2007) is actually a performative word, based on the saying by doing principle. Development is no longer seen merely as a social construction or a result of political will, but it is more of a necessity than a world order 'natural' that believed and desirable. This view is a powerful way to deal with the possibility of criticism that appears on development. Gardner and Lewis (1996) explained the concept of development in relation to a long historical roots long before popularized by US President Harry S. Truman in 1949. According to Arturo Escobar, development as a set of ideas and practices which have served as mechanisms of colonial domination and neo-colonial countries of the North of Southern countries throughout the 20th century in various usage, and the word implies the development of change of meaning or positive progress. Etymologically, development is defined as 'the stages of growth or progress'. As a verb, it refers to a series of development activities required to bring about change.
2

As an adjective, it means the development of judgment because it involves a standard to compare the South as a backward area and the North as a more developed one. President Harry S. Truman was the one to first use this term and discourse as well as practice of development into the world. In his inaugural address on 20 January 1949, he called up to Western countries to pursue the advancement of science and industry since they can provide benefits for the improvement and growth of underdeveloped areas, in terms of economic growth and modernization. Defining development as economic growth is so common today. The successful development of economic indicators is measured in GDP (Gross Domestic Product), whereas higher per capita income is assumed to automatically lead to positive changes in other indicators such as infant mortality rate, literacy rate etc. Although everyone does not benefit directly from such economic growth, the 'trickle down effect' will ensure those with large economies of scale will benefit from it through increased production and expansion of employment. In short, development can be quantified and reduced economically. The abovementioned view has received a lot of criticisms because of the so-called 'trickle down effect' is actually very rarely happening. Economic growth in reality does not bring improvement of living standards for those in the lower level of economic growth. The critics who are called as the neo-Marxist in the 1970s saw that capitalism inherently contains injustice. They saw the development is basically a political process. When speaking about backwardness or retardation (which is, underdevelopment) we refer to the unequal global power distribution. Thus, they advocate that development should be oriented towards the fulfillment of basic human needs, fighting poverty than promoting more industrialization and modernization. Gardner and Lewis (1996) divided the development theory into three main streams, namely the the modernist stream, dependency stream and post-modernist theory. The three are inter-related where the occurrence of one stream is usually a response to criticism or previously existing flow. In addition, the emergence of this genre is historical too, that the presence of these theories can not be separated from the history of political and social changes that occur in this world. Modernist school also created their own development theory which emerged and became intellectually influential in the 1950s and 1960s and still now dominates the practice of development. Norman Long (1992) stated that the modernization describes development as a movement forward towards a more modern society that is more complex and integrated by technology. Such a modernist understanding is very strongly influenced by evolutionary theory popularized by Darwin. The forms of growth experienced by the northern countries serve as a model for other countries in the South. All are assumed to move in the same direction despite different conditions and situation in terms of historical, political and economic backgrounds. This modernist view has however gathered much criticisms. In fact, the economic development has grown into many shapes and patterns which are not uniform and it is not easy to generalize them to all regions and countries. Modernization theory also views the local culture and tradition is an obstacle to development, and therefore usually ignored. Modernization also ignores the political implications of the growth at the micro level. Anthropologists and sociologists have shown that life is not as simple as imagined by the modernists as shown in their theory of 'trickle down effect'. They ignore the heterogeneity in the community in accessing the resources, powers
3

and interests they have. The most fundamental criticism is their failure to understand the true cause of underdevelopment and poverty. By showing that all countries will pursue the same linear path in development, they basically have ignored anyh political and historical factors of each region or country. In the 1990s many alternative views as a critique of the two streams emerged. There is a tendency to reject modernity on both intellectual and cultural ground that the era is widely known as post-modernism. This era is characterized by the diversity of views that in general rejecting the grand narrative theorem. These changes affect the conceptualization of development that emphasizes more on strategy than theory. There is no single explanation about the development which makes development practices more eclectic. Development Planning in Indonesia Actually, long before the independence of Indonesia, the colonial Dutch East Indies government had implemented a series of policy development primarily focused on ethical policy which began in 1901. This is a political policy the Dutch government as response to the criticism waged by liberals in the Netherlands. Liberals criticized the colonial exploitative policy of the Dutch government primarily through forced cultivation, causing famine in the colony. Such forced cultivation brought profits to the Dutch government and therefore the government should provide some reciprocative benefits to the local people. Therefore the ethical policy is aimed at increasing the welfare of local people in the colony and to encourage efficiency in the management of colonial rule. In practice the ethical politics the Dutch government is conducted through three main policies namely the education, irrigation and migration or relocation. As a colonial policy, the character and intentions contained in this policy can not be separated from the interests of maintaining colonial domination and exploitation in the colony. Therefore the implementation of ethical politics actually benefited more to the colonial interests than the natives. For example, in a proper education policy is should be open for all indigenous groups; in fact the education service can only be accessed by some indigenous elite group working for the colonial power. It also reoriented to produce a group of young indigenous people who later would be employed by the colonial government under low wages. Similarly, the only properly irrigated area of agriculture and plantations were the ones owned by Dutch entrepreneurs. As for migration it was implemented to meet the needs of farm workers and labors in several areas outside Java. However, the colonial government apparently did not realize that this ethical policy also brings unexpected effect, the birth of the native intellectuals who began to grow their national consciousness. And among the small group of educated intellectuals a new sense and demand for nationalism was born which later ousted the Dutch from Indonesia. In the early days of independence to the Old Order the development planning in Indonesia was not running effectively. This is due to the political situation and the state of the young country which was far from stable. Busy with struggle to maintain the independence against various invaders and aggressions and at the same time is also facing some insurgent groups and internal revolt in various regions in Indonesia, Indonesia experienced a bad time in development planning. However, that does not mean there was no systematic attempt to formulate a
4

development plan. This was evidenced for instance through the establishment of the Economic Planning Board on 19 January 1947 proposed by the Minister of Welfare Mr. AK. Gani. The agency was a permanent body in charge of compiling economic development plan for a period of 2 to 3 years which was later expanded into a Ten-Year Development Plan. The development plan initiated by AK. Gani still dwelt on the issue of nationalization of state assets previously owned by colonialists. The Economic Planning Board was then replaced with the Economic Strategy Committee, a think-tank chaired by Mohammad Hatta. An important task of this committee was to study, collect data and provide materials for the government and provide advice to the government in negotiating with the Dutch. This committee then produced an important document as the first comprehensive development plan in Indonesia, entitled "Basic Principles of Indonesia's Economic Development Planning". The development plan contains a variety of programs of development work aiming at improving and expanding prosperity evenly by way of: (1). Intensifying production of goods; (2). Promoting International Exchange; (3). Achieving better standard of living; and (4). Enhancing degrees and skills of the people. Unfortunately, the economic arrangement plan could not be implemented because the state then fell into a chaos following the Dutch' second military aggression and PKI rebellion in Madiun in 1948. In 1948 the government produced "Three-Year Production Plan" drawn up by the Minister for Food IJ. Kasimo. This plan was intended as an attempt to achieve self-sufficiency through a variety of measures such as the strategic cultivation of vacant land, agricultural intensification, nurseries, and transmigration. This plan, however, also faced stagnation due to the unstable political situation at that time. Various development plans also suffered the same fate, and most of them only produced a number of documents without any implementation. The Birth of Early GBHN Although the Article 3 of the 1945 Constitution (before amendment) mandates the establishment of the Guidelines (GBHN) by the Assembly, in fact not until 1960 an actual Guidelines document was created and established by the Assembly. The history saw the President Sukarno on 5 July 1959 issued a presidential decree that marked the era of Guided Democracy. As a follow-up to the presidential decree a National Planning Council (The Council) was established, chaired by Mr. Muhammad Yamin. Their task was to formulate the first national development plan. By the Presidential Decree No. 12 of 1963, the National Planning Council was then changed into National Development Planning Agency (Bappenas). In this era, almost all of the country's development policies had to refer to Sukarno's political views which was extracted from his speech on every 17 August delivered during the National Independence Day, as a normal consequence of the concentration of power and political leadership solely on one figure, Sukarno himself. The first official Guidelines (GBHN) document was established by President Soekarno under his Presidential Decree No. 1 of 1960 on the Broad Guidelines of State Policy. In Article 1 of the regulation it said that "Before the Assembly is formed, the Political Manifesto of the Republic of Indonesia which was announced on 17 August 1959 by President/Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces becomes the Guidelines of the policy of the State itself". One consideration on
5

the establishment of the Guidelines is the need for specific directions and clear guidelines to ensure "a continuation of our revolution into a guided economic democracy development". In addition, the Perpres became the "directions of clear goals and guidelines for the development is contained in the President/Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces speech on 17 August 1959 titled "Rediscovering Our Revolution", and details as well as explanation of some issues and their problems to deal with the revolution in a thorough manner”. This Perpres was then strengthened by Tap MPRS No. I/MPRS/1960 dated 19 November 1960 titled "Manifesto Politik Republik Indonesia sebagai Garis-garis Besar daripada Haluan Negara" (Political Manifesto of the Republic of Indonesia which serves as the Guidelines". This regulation explained that the President's Communique dated 17 August 1960 widely known as the "Jalannya Revolusi Kita" and the President's speech on 30 September 1960 before the General Assembly of the UN titled "To build the world a new" represents the guidelines in the implementation of the Political Manifesto of the Republic of Indonesia. As the details of this provision then the National Planning Council (Planning Council) made a draft National Development Plan Eight 1961 - 1969. This design was later accepted and established by the MPRS as Pattern Outlines of National Development Planning First Phase 1961-1969 through the MPRS No.II / MPRS / 1960 dated December 3, 1960. the Guidelines were last document produced in the era of guided democracy established through MPRS Decree No. IV / MPRS / 1963 on the Guidelines for the Implementation Guidelines of State Policy and Policy Development. The Guidelines also refers to the speech of the President on August 17, 1961 titled "Resopim" (Revolution - Socialism Indonesia - National Executive) and the Speech of the President dated 17 August 1962 titled "Year of Victory" which serve as guidelines for the implementation of the Political Manifesto of the Republic of Indonesia. Reading the national development plan document above, we will find a lot of political views influenced Sukarno and political conditions of the time and the evolving political situation in the world at that time. For example, in the development plan for the welfare of the universe is one of them to "wake up special efforts to raise the level of living of the workers, farmers, fishermen and workers in general by eliminating the burdens as a relic of the colonial and feudal labor relations and combat unemployment". In the area of governance and security/defense is also very firmly stated, "land reform as part of the Indonesian revolution is absolute rather than base construction is based on the principle of the universe, that land as a means of production should not be used as a tool of exploitation". While in the field of production orientation is "to develop the production of power in the interests of the community in order guided economy, people need to be included in the deployment of funds and potential (funds and forces) in the country, in which the workers and peasants play an important role". Political orientation is dominant in democratic ages terpimpinan make some plans for economic development and welfare-oriented production increase will not deliver until after the fall of Sukarno political events of 1965. GBHN and State Consolidations The fall of Sukarno from power marked the start of a new era under the leadership of President Suharto, who was then known as the New Order era. Suharto, assisted by economists began to formulate development plans strategies to restore already unsteady economy. Soeharto Cabinet Presidium Instruction No. 15/EK/IN/1967 Bappenas commissioned to create an economic
6

recovery plan. Bappenas then produced a document called the first Five-Year Development Plan (Pelita I), for the period 1969 to 1973. The era Repelita has lasted up to Repelita to VI which ended in 1998. The planning process in the era Repelita always be based on the guidelines produced by the Assembly which convenes every five years (Bratakusumah, 2003). Later in the period 1969-1998 the Indonesian nation succeeded in preparing a national development plan systematically through the stages of five years. The development is the elaboration of the Guidelines of State Policy (Guidelines), which provide direction and guidance for the development of the country to achieve the ideals of the nation, as mandated in the preamble of the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945. Since April 1, 1969 to May 21 1998, no less than six Tap (Decision) have been issued by MPR on GBHN. The six Tap MPR are (i) Tap MPR No. IV/MPR/1973; (ii) Tap MPR No. II/MPR/ 1978; (iii) Tap MPR No. IV/MPR/1983; (iv) Tap MPR No. II/MPR/1988; (v) Tap MPR No. II/MPR/1993; and the last one (vi) Tap MPR No. II/MPR/1998. Across levels of government (provincial and district/city), the Guidelines document is translated into the document Basic Plan for Regional Development (Poldasbangda). Stages of development are organized in the past has laid the foundations for a sustainable development process and managed to improve the welfare of the people, as reflected in the various economic and social indicators. The New Order government to consolidate the country through various development projects they run like construction of dams and irrigation, road infrastructure development, structuring social institutions, to the media settings. All was done in order to create political stability as a prerequisite for economic development. The doctrine of development very famous during that time was the triology development4. All the power and the state apparatus deployed to achieve political stability, which is part of the process of depoliticization of development as pointed out by Ferguson (1990). Following Foucault, Ferguson sees "development" as an apparatus which organizes the production of forms of knowledge about the community and the country's economy and power design techniques related to that knowledge. Institutional "development" that the state and other development agencies produce their own forms of discourse, and this discourse simultaneously memkonstruksi region and targets a particular knowledge objects and creates a knowledge structure around the object. Intervention then managed based on the structure of this knowledge. If these interventions fail it still has a regular impact in the form of expansion and confirmation of bureaucratic state power, projection of a representation that ignores the social and economic life "politics". In more provocative, Ferguson mentions the development apparatus that operates it works like a machine "anti-politics", politicize everything it touched. The process of development in this period is strongly oriented towards outputs and outcomes. Meanwhile, the process and especially the quality of institutions that support and implement not developed and even politically pressured to become vulnerable to abuse and are not able to function in a professional manner. Underdevelopment in the political system and the institutional, legal, and social causes become imbalanced development results in terms of fairness and in itself threaten the sustainability of the development process itself.
The trilogy of development consists of: (1) A healthy and dynamic national stability; (2) a relatively high economic growth; and (3) Equitable development and the results lead to social justice for all people.
4

7

In addition, the development plan is prepared assuming the stages of a linear development as referenced by modernization theory. The success of development is then reduced in the form of economic indicators such as economic growth, per capita income, unemployment, poverty and other sebagianya. International development agencies such as the World Bank and the IMF are also very dominant in determining the development agenda in Indonesia with a variety of assistance and loans they provide. High economic growth and development institution's various awards for the achievements of Indonesia's development ignores the fact that the gaping disparities, deprived of political rights of citizens in the name of development and ultimately fragile financial crisis struck in an instant in May 1998. The Last of GBHN After the fall of the New Order, there had been a vacuum period in the development planning due to the political transition process in 1998-1999. In the Guidelines established by the Assembly in 1998, Indonesia should have entered the Repelita VII. But the economic crisis which hit Indonesia had erased all the plans that have been developed since the early days of the New Order related to the Take-off Period5. Critics liked to use a rather satire term that taking off is staying on the runway. MPR Decree No. II/MPR/1998 on the Guidelines as product of the New Order era was then removed and replaced with MPR Decree No.X/MPR/1998 on the Principles of Development Reform in the Context of Rescuing and Normalization the National Life as the New State Policy Guidelines. This principal development reform is somewhat different from the prevalence of the Guidelines normally set by the Assembly and made only for the transitional period to be implemented by President Habibie. This document also explained that this guideline provision applied only until the implementation of the General Session as result of the 1999 general election. President Habibie, whose short ruling time was more focused on economic recovery by implementing a package of economic reforms required by the IMF, was able to do a lot in improving the economic condition by conducting monetary policies such as banking recapitulation, reconstruction of the Indonesian economy, and strengthening of the rupiah against the dollar. However, this short reign era ended tragically with the rejection of presidential accountability report in the Assembly's general session in 1999. In 1999 the Assemby resulting from the 1999 election results produced the Guidelines document which was the final Guidelines in the history of the Republic, known as MPR Decree No. IV/MPR/1999 on the Broad Guidelines of State Policy 1999-2004. Although both Guidelines carried the same name of GBHN there were some fundamental differences in the Guidelines of the New Order era to the Reform era. The New Order's Guidelines is a state policy for national development, while the Reform's is the guideline for state governance and administration. The term national development was replaced with state governance (penyelenggaraan negara). The purpose of the guidelines which was previously to provide an affirmation to realize a democratic society was no longer existed. In addition there is
The development concept of Taking Off within the New Era is the period after Indonesia completed the longterm development program of 25 years (PJP) Phase I, which lasted from 1968 to 1993. Whereas PJP Phase II is planned from 1993 to 2018. The concept itself is much influenced by the ideas of WW. Rostow (1960). According to Rostow there are five stages of development namely: Traditional Society, Preconditions for Take-Off, Take-Off, Drive to Maturity, Age of High Mass Consumption.
5

8

the assertion about the length of time that the Guidelines are intended for, which was 1999-2004. In the rules of implementation there were also some fundamental differences. The Reform Guidelines provides the direction for higher institutions of state and all the people of Indonesia. That means, all top government agencies must implement the guidelines and provide accountability to the Assembly. While the New Order Guidelines is implemented by the President and he alone shall provide accountability report to the Assembly on the duty to implement the Guidelines at the end of his term. The foundation of Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution were not explicitly stated again as in the Guidelines in the New Order. From GBHN to RPJMN During the period of 1999-2002, MPR has completed some historical works, i.e. to amend the 1945 Constitutions6. In the third amendment in 2001, the Article 3 "MPR is to set the Constitution and the Broad Guidelines of the State Policy" was changed to Article 3 Paragraph (1), which removes the authority of the Assembly to set the guidelines, and now it reads "the Assembly is authorized to change and set the Constitution". Since then the concept and the term of GBHN is no longer applied for development planning in Indonesia. If we look at the debate in the trial amendment to the Constitution by the Working Committee of the Assembly, the deletion of the Guidelines is related to new way to select the president and vice president who will be through direct election by the people. Directly elected by the people, the president will have the authority to determine the development plan. So it is not necessary to have the guidance made by the MPR, nor it is necessary to have the measure/criteria set by the MPR, so that the President can no longer dismissed basd on policy differences in terms of policy between the Assembly and the President. The only matter that could bring a President down is anything relating to violations of law and the Constitution, but not any breach to the guidelines. The direct election system eliminates the Guidelines as a tool for the party that wins the election platform, to control Presidential. Consequently, the President is no longer accountable to the Assembly, but directly to the voters. So if a President does not fulfill the will of the people, then he will not be reelected, when he's running for another term. For the first time the Indonesian government no longer have to refer to the Guidelines as it has been deleted in mechanism of formulation of the national development plans since 2004. This is also the first year that President and Vice-President are elected by the people. Now, our national development planning refers to the Law No. 25/2004 on the National Development Planning System (SPPN). At present, the document replacing the Guidelines is the Long-Term National Development Plan (RPJPN) of 2005-2025 as stipulated by Law No. 17/2007, or hereinafter referred to as the National RPJP, which represents the national development plan document covering the period of twenty years from 2005 until 2025, and set out with the intention of giving directions as well as a reference for all components (government , communities, and businesses) in realizing the
There have been 4 times of Amendments to the 1945 Constituion. The First Amendment was signed on 19 October 1999. The Second Amendment on 18 August 2000. The Third Amendment on 10 November 2001, and the Fourth on 10 August 2002.
6

9

ideals and national objectives in accordance with the vision, mission, and direction of the development of a mutually agreed that all efforts undertaken by development actors are synergistic, coordinated, and complementary to each other in one patterns of behavior and course of action. The document is then broken down into the Medium Term Development Plan (Plan) and an annual development plan document called Government Work Plan (RKP). This document is the basis for the establishment of the State Budget (APBN). The GBHN and RPJPN as two models of long-term national development planning have served as the guidelines of development of Indonesia in all areas of public life. The difference lies in how the two are created or organized using different juridical framework. GBHN was established by an Assembly/MPR Decree, while RPJPN is formulated in the form of legal provisions of a law (Muhtamar et al, 2012). The previous allegation that current development planning does not have any guideline as a GBHN is not entirely appropriate. In RPJPN just as described in the Guidelines there is a coherent direction and stage of development to be achieved in the long term or the next 20 years and it is further detailed in the RPJMN for five years and RKP for a period of one year. Each year there are five stages in the strategic goals to be achieved. Thus the notion that the chaos and lack of guidelines in development in Indonesia has been solved with the RPJMN which acts as substitute for the Guidelines. However, it must be recognized that the implementation of RPJMN is not as effective as implementation of the Guidelines. This is due to changes in the political system and democratic Indonesia and political decentralization. Head of regional government is now directly elected by the people and they have the autonomy to manage the area. And their management it is often not in line with the central government. The central government no longer has a strong control of the local government and can direct them on how to carry out the central government policies. Even the central government's policies are often found to be in conflict with the policy of the local government as a form of strategic opposition. Democratization of politics at the central level also carries profound implications on the pattern and direction of development in Indonesia. There is no strong state institutions able to control the entire process of development planning in Indonesia. The Parliament's increasingly dominant power can cause the President as head of government, though elected by the people, can not do much. As a result, the hierarchy of the leadership of the central government to the regions can become ineffective. This ineffective situation is obvious when the leader of a political party is different from the president or a regional head of provinces (governor), city (mayor) and district (regent) who won by support of different political party. In these circumstances, the public will be more sacrificed since the formulation of policies to promote development is no longer subject to the president as head of state and government, but more likely to follow and abide by the willingness of the leader of each political party. Closing The discourse about the desire to bring back the Guidelines into the contemporary era in the development process in Indonesia is not caused by lack of guidance in Indonesia's long term development planning. RPJMN documents acts the same as the Guidelines and it shows that
10

Indonesia's development planning still refers to the modernist perspective which assumes that the development is envisioned as linear progress through certain stages that have been planned. This is almost similar to the very process envisioned by WW Rostow (1960), fifty-four years ago when formulating the five stages of development which later became New Order development of reference of different contents. Chaos and conflict of establishment plan in Indonesia is caused more by political factors rather than technical factors. Therefore presenting technical solutions to bring back the Guidelines will never solve the problem. Likewise, the view to return to the New Order period will only make the setback of development in Indonesia. Thus the idea of Escobar (1995) becomes relevant in this case. With the discursive approach, Escobar critically conceptualizes the development. Escobar saw construction as a single experience in the history, as a domain creation of thought and action, by analyzing the characteristics and interrelation of the three frameworks that limit, namely: (1) the forms of knowledge as the reference and making the building up and elaborated into objects, concepts, theories and the like; (2) power system that regulates the practice of development; and (3) the forms of subjectivity that are developed by this discourse. The longing for GBHN is, in my view, caused by the power system that regulates the practice of development, not merely the form of knowledge in development planning documents. This is what I suspect eluded those who missed the Guidelines. To see how the development planning after the New Order is constructed and carried out will require further detailed research at the local level. From here we can see how RPJMN is intended as a guide for development planning in Indonesia as a reference or simply stop at a pile of documents only. References Adiningsih, Sri. 2011. Bahan Diskusi : Sistem Pelaksanaan Pembangunan Nasional. http://diklatpimlan.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/sri-adiningsih-pembangunannaslan.pdf diakses tanggal 8 Juni 2014 Bratakusumah, Deddy Supriady. 2003. Implikasi Perubahan UUD 1945 Terhadap Sistem Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional (makalah tidak diterbitkan) Escobar, Arturo. 1995. Encountering development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World. Princeton: Princeton University Press Ferguson, James. 1990. The Anti-politics machine: "Development," Depoliticization, and Bureaucratic Power in Lesotho. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press Gardner, K. Dan D. Lewis. 1996. Anthropology, Development and the Crisis of Modernity, London: Pluto Press. Chapter 1 Poesponegoro, Marwati Djoened dan Nugroho Notosusanto. 2008. Sejarah nasional Indonesia: Zaman Jepang dan zaman Republik Indonesia, ±1942-1998. Jakarta: Balai Pustaka Rist, Gilbert. 2007. “Development as a Buzzword dalam Development” dalam Practice, Volume 17, Numbers 4 – 5, hal 485-491. Rostow, W.W. 1960. The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Muhtamar, Syafruddin, Abdul Razak, M. Yunus Wahid. 2012. Relevansi Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional Dengan Amanat Konstitusi (Studi Tentang Perbandingan Arah Kebijakan Pembangunan Hukum Dalam GBHN dan RPJPN). Makasar: Program Pascasarjana UNHAS

11

Tim Penyusun Setjen MK. 2010. Naskah Komprehensif Proses dan Hasil Perubahan UUD 1945, Naskah Komprehensif Perubahan Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945, Latar Belakang, Proses, dan Hasil Pembahasan, 1999-2002, Buku III Lembaga Permusyawaratan dan Perwakilan, Jilid 1. Jakarta: Sekretariat Jenderal dan Kepaniteraan Mahkamah Konstitusi Tim Penyusun Setjen MPR RI. 2010. Risalah Perubahan Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945. Jakarta: Sekretariat Jenderal Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat Republik Indonesia Peraturan Perundang-undangan Ketetapan Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat Sementara Republik Indonesia No. I/MPRS/1960 Tentang Manifesto Politik Republik Indonesia Sebagai Garis-Garis Besar Daripada Haluan Negara Ketetapan Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat Republik Indonesia Nomor: II/MPR/1998 Tentang Garis-Garis Besar Haluan Negara Ketetapan Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat Sementara Republik Indonesia No. II/MPRS/1960 Tentang Garis-Garis Besar Pola Pembangunan Nasional Semesta Berencana Tahapan Pertama 1961-1969 Ketetapan Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat Republik Indonesia Nomor: X/MPR/1998 Tentang Pokok Pokok Reformasi Pembangunan Dalam Rangka Penyelamatan Dan Normalisasi Kehidupan Nasional Sebagai Haluan Negara Ketetapan Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat Republik Indonesia Nomor: Nomor IV/MPR/1999 Tentang Garis-Garis Besar Haluan Negara Tahun 1999 – 2004 Undang-Undang Dasar Tahun 1945 (asli) Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 (perubahan) Undang-Undang No. 25 tahun 2004 tentang Sistem Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional (SPPN) Undang-Undang No. 17 tahun 2007 tentang Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Panjang Nasional (RPJPN) 2005-2025 Penetapan Presiden Nomor 1 Tahun 1960 tentang Garis-Garis Besar Dari Pada Haluan Negara Tanggal 29 Januari 1960

12