- 24/12/2022
- Category: Commentaries
Author: Alifian Arrazi
Editor: Jasmine Andretha Putri
Governments in many countries are under pressure to digitize their operations due to the increase of technology usage across many sectors. This, in turn, compelled the government to adopt a digital presence due to this rapid development. Since then, the government has made a slow but determined effort to implement a relatively new digitalization into the government system. In this commentary, the author proposed several principles that can assist policymakers in better formulating regulations, plans, or strategies for the transformation of the government’s digital presence.
First, the government must adopt the logic of implementing digital government and not be constrained by the old way of governing. The critics of modern government from neoliberal camps always point out that government is inefficient in solving public problems because of the slow-paced of bureaucracy[i][ii]. The old-fashioned government mindset that seeks stability and conformity must be changed. The long bureaucracy line and the massive regulatory hurdles that constrain government to take action must be rethought amidst the growing use of technology in the public sector. To address this, the government must create a plan to encourage digital innovation within government. In addition to minimizing rigid bureaucratization, the role of digital innovation within ministries needs to be accommodated. With the current technology, the government may accelerate solving public problems more quickly with digital tools. For example, in Indonesia, the beneficial use of technology is well known in handling to lower the pandemic rate through the PeduliLindungi application.
Promoting innovation within the government can be made using a more sandbox-style policy that allows the actor inside the government to experiment digitally. Presidential Decree Number 95, which lays the groundwork for an electronic government system, is one of Indonesia’s best examples of a sandbox-style policy. This law has eased the regulation for the government in developing a cross-platform, interoperable government web service, both locally and nationally. Although the development of electronic government has not been fully mature, hopefully this sandbox policy would create a more innovative use of technology in the government.
Second, to digitally govern, the state must offer effective digital services to its citizens. This also includes gathering data on citizens. Today, the government has numerous institutions that offer services in various fields, including social welfare, the environment, and education. The government is urged to set up a system that enables citizens to use just one piece of information that has been authorized for use across numerous digital platforms. In order to prevent data excess, the government should implement a single sign-on system that collects data from numerous instances[iii].
The government should not keep the same data in the same database or make multiple requests for the same information. For instance, if a citizen has provided health information about their identity, many government institutions should be able to use it without further complex authorization. Building interoperable data storage and developing a profound single sign-on are of utmost importance in establishing this principle. For now, Indonesia has Satu Data platforms where this platforms facilitate data set from various local and national institutions. However, this platform only serves public data where it doesn’t contain personal and citizenship data. Government should expand and utilize this platform as the gateway to developing a more robust single interoperable data system.
We can learn one-or-two things from Estonian interoperability architecture. As one of the countries that successfully digitized itself, the Estonian government is well known for its interoperability of government platforms[iv]. With that interoperability, citizens can only fill out forms regarding their personal information once. This is because the server and architecture of data are being shared across government agencies. In the end, this design makes inputting data easier for citizens.
Third, the government must ensure that citizen data is not being misused by irresponsible parties. Recently, citizens’ trust in digital governance has been eroded by the government’s flaw in protecting citizens’ personal information[v]. The government must acknowledge citizens’ digital rights by securing their data and subsequently, regain public trust. Additionally, digital rights also means uncovering which government institutions have access to their data and how they use it. In this principle, for instance, when a public servant accesses citizen internet data, they should only be given access to the information necessary for their job. Each time data is collected or used; information should be stored in a trackable log file.
Also, learning from Estonia, using this principle, ultimately promotes trust in digital governance[vi]. In implementing that principle, the Government of Estonia has played a role in creating a secured digital identity and public key infrastructure. Citizens’ digital identity is created securely using multiple encryption. In the second invention, the public key infrastructure–held by the government–creates transparency for the citizens of Estonia to see which individuals/institutions do with their data. From this case, we can see how Estonia regards their citizens’ digital rights highly. Recently, Indonesia enacted a new regulation to protect digital rights in citizens’ data[vii]. However, some critics said that this bill heavily focuses on protecting citizen data in the business world[viii]. The question is, in a newly democratic country like Indonesia, can the state fully care about citizens’ digital rights? From reading this commentary, it is clear that several principles can improve a digital transition in the public sector. In conclusion, the government must concentrate on fostering digital innovation within the government, creating an open data network and reducing the silo mentality, and bolstering citizens’ digital rights. A digital government could be strengthened by implementing this combination of principles. However, the issue of digitally reforming a government goes beyond the three mentioned principles. With the current expansion of the digital world, imagining a more effective and inclusive digital governance is more urgent than ever.
[i] HEEKS, R. 2002. Reinventing government in the information age. Reinventing government in the information age. Routledge.
[ii] OSBORNE, D. 1993. Reinventing government. Public productivity & management Review, 349-356.
[iii] GOTTSCHALK, P. 2009. Maturity levels for interoperability in digital government. Government information quarterly, 26, 75-81.
[iv] MARGETTS, H. & NAUMANN, A. 2017. Government as a platform: What can Estonia show the world. Research paper, University of Oxford.
[v] AQIL, M. I. 2022. Ministry denies role in 1.3 billion phone numbers’ reported leak. The Jakarta Post, 20 September 2022.
[vi] KITSING, M. An evaluation of E-government in Estonia. conference “Internet, Politics and Policy, 2010. 16-17.
[vii] SUHENDA, D. 2022. House passes long-awaited privacy bill. The Jakarta Post, 20 September 2022.
[viii] SUHENDA, D. 2022b. Privacy law necessary but critics warn of potential govt overreach. The Jakarta Post, 23 September 2022.
