Contents
Transparency:
70
/100
(Open Budget Index score)
Public Participation:
20
/100
Budget Oversight:
82
/100

Government budget decisions – what taxes to levy, what services to provide, and how much debt to take on – affect how equal a society is and the well-being of its people, including whether the most disadvantaged will have real opportunities for a better life. It is critical that governments inform and engage the public on these vital decisions that impact their lives.

The Open Budget Survey (OBS) is the world’s only independent, comparative and fact-based research instrument that uses internationally accepted criteria to assess public access to central government budget information; formal opportunities for the public to participate in the national budget process; and the role of budget oversight institutions such as the legislature and auditor in the budget process.

The survey helps local civil society assess and confer with their government on the reporting and use of public funds. This 7th edition of the OBS covers 117 countries.

Transparency

This part of the OBS measures public access to information on how the central government raises and spends public resources. It assesses the online availability, timeliness, and comprehensiveness of eight key budget documents using 109 equally weighted indicators and scores each country on a scale of 0 to 100. A transparency score of 61 or above indicates a country is likely publishing enough material to support informed public debate on the budget.

Indonesia has a transparency score of 70 (out of 100).

Transparency in Indonesia compared to others

Global Average
45
Philippines
76
Indonesia
70
Thailand
61
Malaysia
47
Timor-Leste
40
Vietnam
38
Cambodia
32
Myanmar
28
0
Insufficient
61
Sufficient
100

Indonesia’s ranking: 18 of 117 countries

0
100

How has the transparency score for Indonesia changed over time?

51
2010
62
2012
59
2015
64
2017
70
2019
0
Insufficient
61
Sufficient
100

Public availability of budget documents in Indonesia

Available to the Public
Published Late, or Not Published Online, or Produced for Internal Use Only
Not Produced
Scroll
Document 2010 2012 2015 2017 2019
Pre-Budget Statement
Executive’s Budget Proposal
Enacted Budget
Citizens Budget
In-Year Reports
Mid-Year Review
Year-End Report
Audit Report

How comprehensive is the content of the key budget documents that Indonesia makes available to the public?

61-100 / 100
41-60 / 100
1-40 / 100
Scroll
Key budget document Document purpose and contents Fiscal year assessed Document content score
Pre-Budget Statement Discloses the broad parameters of fiscal policies in advance of the Executive's Budget Proposal; outlines the government's economic forecast, anticipated revenue, expenditures, and debt. 2019 50
Executive’s Budget Proposal Submitted by the executive to the legislature for approval; details the sources of revenue, the allocations to ministries, proposed policy changes, and other information important for understanding the country's fiscal situation. 2019 67
Enacted Budget The budget that has been approved by the legislature. 2019 89
Citizens Budget A simpler and less technical version of the government's Executive’s Budget Proposal or the Enacted Budget, designed to convey key information to the public. 2019 67
In-Year Reports Include information on actual revenues collected, actual expenditures made, and debt incurred at different intervals; issued quarterly or monthly. 2018 74
Mid-Year Review A comprehensive update on the implementation of the budget as of the middle of the fiscal year; includes a review of economic assumptions and an updated forecast of budget outcomes. 2018 89
Year-End Report Describes the situation of the government's accounts at the end of the fiscal year and, ideally, an evaluation of the progress made toward achieving the budget's policy goals. 2017 64
Audit Report Issued by the supreme audit institution, this document examines the soundness and completeness of the government's year-end accounts. 2017 76

Indonesia’s transparency score of 70 in the OBS 2019 is moderately higher than its score in 2017.

What changed in OBS 2019?

Indonesia has increased the availability of budget information by:

Including an economic classification in the Executive's Budget Proposal and increasing information on debt from the previous budget year.

Recommendations

Indonesia should prioritize the following actions to improve budget transparency:

Include the government's balance sheet as part of the Executive's Budget Proposal, showing information on the government's financial and non-financial assets for the budget year.
Increase the information in the Executive's Budget Proposal related to fiscal risks, such as quasi-fiscal activities of public corporations, contingent liabilities, and analysis of the long-term sustainability of the government's finances.
Report on the the differences between the estimates and actual outcomes for performance indicators, such as non-financial data results, in the Year-End Report.
Create mechanisms to identify the public’s requirements for budget information in the Citizen’s Budget.

Public Participation

Transparency alone is insufficient for improving governance. Inclusive public participation is crucial for realizing the positive outcomes associated with greater budget transparency.

The OBS also assesses the formal opportunities offered to the public for meaningful participation in the different stages of the budget process. It examines the practices of the central government’s executive, the legislature, and the supreme audit institution (SAI) using 18 equally weighted indicators, aligned with the Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency’s Principles of Public Participation in Fiscal Policies , and scores each country on a scale from 0 to 100.

Indonesia has a public participation score of 20 (out of 100).

Public participation in Indonesia compared to others

Global Average
14
Philippines
31
Indonesia
20
Malaysia
17
Thailand
13
Vietnam
11
Cambodia
6
Timor-Leste
6
Myanmar
0
0
Insufficient
61
Sufficient
100

For more information, see here for innovative public participation practices around the world.

Extent of opportunities for public participation in the budget process

13
/100
Formulation
(executive)
0
/100
Approval
(legislature)
25
/100
Implementation
(executive)
56
/100
Audit
(supreme audit institution)

few: 0 - 40; limited: 41 - 60; adequate: 61 - 100

Recommendations

Indonesia's Ministry of Finance has established public consultations during budget formulation and e-consultations during budget implementation but, to further strengthen public participation in the budget process, should also prioritize the following actions:

Pilot mechanisms during budget formulation that open discussions about the central government's budget that are open to any civil society organization or member of the public who wishes to participate.
Actively engage with vulnerable and underrepresented communities, directly or through civil society organizations representing them.
Support line ministries to conduct public consultations on budgets for sector issues, such as health, education, or other sectors.

Indonesia's People's Representative Assembly should prioritize the following actions:

Allow members of the public or civil society organizations to testify during its hearings on the budget proposal prior to its approval.
Allow members of the public or civil society organizations to testify during its hearings on the Audit Report.

Indonesia's Audit Board (Badan Pemeriksa Keuangan) has established mechanisms to assist the supreme audit institution in developing its audit program. It should prioritize the following actions to improve public participation in the budget process:

Establish formal mechanisms for the public to contribute to relevant audit investigations.

Budget Oversight

The OBS also examines the role that legislatures and supreme audit institutions (SAIs) play in the budget process and the extent to which they provide oversight; each country is scored on a scale from 0 to 100 based on 18 equally weighted indicators. In addition, the survey collects supplementary information on independent fiscal institutions (see Box).

The legislature and supreme audit institution in Indonesia, together, provide adequate oversight during the budget process, with a composite oversight score of 82 (out of 100). Taken individually, the extent of each institution’s oversight is shown below:

Legislative oversight

0
83
100
adequate

Audit oversight

0
78
100
adequate

weak: 0 - 40; limited: 41 - 60; adequate: 61 - 100

Recommendations

Indonesia's People's Representative Assembly provides adequate oversight during the planning stage of the budget cycle and adequate oversight during the implementation stage. To further improve oversight, the following actions should be prioritized:

A legislative committee should examine the Audit Report and publish a report with their findings online.

The emerging practice of establishing independent fiscal institutions

Indonesia does not have an independent fiscal institution (IFI). IFIs are increasingly recognized as valuable independent and nonpartisan information providers to the Executive and/or Parliament during the budget process.

*These indicators are *not* scored in the Open Budget Survey.

Methodology

  • Only documents published and events, activities, or developments that took place through 31 December 2018 were assessed in the OBS 2019.
     
  • The survey is based on a questionnaire completed in each country by an independent budget expert:
    Yenti Nurhidayat
    Forum Indonesia untuk Transparansi Anggaran (FITRA)
    Jl. Tebet Timur Dalam IXC No. 4 RT 012/RW 009 Tebet Timur, Kelurahan Tebet Timur Kecamatan Tebet, Jakarta Selatan 12820
    [email protected]
  • To further strengthen the research, each country’s draft questionnaire is also reviewed by an anonymous independent expert, and in Indonesia by a representative of the Ministry of Finance.

 

Other years