By Siti Namira Aisyah, a governance and performance audit professional at the Ministry of National Development Planning (Bappenas), specializing in risk management and organizational compliance.
DESPITE decades of bureaucratic reform, Indonesia’s fight against corruption has hit a wall. The Corruption Eradication Commission’s (KPK) 2024 National Integrity Survey (SPI) revealed a stagnant score of 71.53—a grim reminder that gratifications remain commonplace in nearly 90 percent of ministries. While public frustration invariably targets the KPK or the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) when scandals erupt, a critical question remains: where were the internal auditors?
On paper, the Government Internal Supervisory Apparatus—known as APIP—acts as the bureaucracy's immune system. These auditors are the final internal safeguard, tasked with providing independent assurance. Yet, the reality is far less heroic. High-profile cases, such as the social aid (Bansos) embezzlement or Covid-19 procurement scandals, were largely uncovered by whistleblowers or public outcry—not by internal auditors.
This reliance on external triggers indicates a passive system. Instead of hunting for risks, this crucial line of defense often waits for the alarm to be rung by someone else. This isn’t just bad luck; it is a crisis of relevance driven by three interconnected failures: misplaced strategic focus, a shortage of "troops," and an inability to speak the language of power.
Strategic Misalignment and the Competency Gap
The inefficiency begins at the very first step: defining the oversight agenda. At this early stage, APIP (internal auditors) defines its strategic focus, which determines the entire audit trajectory. To ensure impact, audit themes must be strictly aligned with high-risk areas that threaten institutional accountability and performance.
Consider the National Strategic Projects (PSN). While trillions of rupiah are poured into these massive initiatives, internal auditors rarely evaluate their actual effectiveness. We are often too busy ensuring the paperwork is complete to ask: "Is this project actually delivering its intended value?" This "safe" administrative compliance means that massive inefficiencies—or worse, corruption—in multi-billion rupiah projects go undetected until external investigators kick down the door.
This issue is compounded by a gap in technical expertise. The 2023 Finance and Development Supervisory Agency’s (BPKP) report reveals that many APIP units lack competency development plans tailored to specific skill gaps. While training is provided, it skews heavily toward mandatory knowledge like codes of ethics.
But integrity alone is insufficient. Auditors need a dual mastery of public policy and fraud mechanics. Modern corruption often hides within the implementation of complex policies, distorting outcomes rather than just stealing cash. If an auditor does not understand a policy's objectives, they will never spot when those objectives are being manipulated for private gain.
An Unequal Battle
Even if the strategy were perfect, execution is hampered by a severe manpower shortage. BPKP data shows that as of 2023, Indonesia relies on approximately 18,000 internal auditors—just 44 percent of the 40,000 required to guard the nation's bureaucracy.
With limited personnel, these units lose the capacity to untangle policy knots. They are forced to default to "checklist auditing"—verifying documents while missing the bigger picture of policy failure. Without the numbers to dig deep, understanding complex policy problems, let alone detecting sophisticated fraud, becomes a mathematical impossibility.
The Communication Barrier
Even when auditors uncover significant issues, their findings often fail to trigger action. This points to a subtle yet critical barrier: the communication gap. It is often assumed that leaders overlook inspectorate reports solely due to political resistance. While hierarchy plays a role, many reports are simply misaligned with the needs of high-level decision-making.
Ministries and agencies need fast, strategic insights. However, auditors often miss the forest for the trees, focusing on operational minutiae while failing to articulate broader policy risks. If an auditor cannot translate a technical deviation into a strategic implication, the report loses its relevance. An inaccessible report is, in practice, as ineffective as no report at all.
Sharpening the Bite
The solution is not a "one-size-fits-all" policy. The path forward must begin with a brutally honest root cause analysis within every ministry and agency. Leaders must identify whether their internal failure stems from the wrong audit targets, a lack of skilled personnel, staffing shortages, or a combination of all three. A clear roadmap must be designed to address these bottlenecks step-by-step, with a concrete target to bridge the staffing and competency gap within the next three years.
Simultaneously, the reliance on passive detection must end. APIP must shift from waiting for whistleblowers to proactively "hunting" in high-risk zones.
Perhaps most immediately actionable is changing how the truth is presented. Before complaining about being ignored by the hierarchy, internal auditors must ensure their product is undeniable. Reports must be direct, high-impact, and free from bureaucratic jargon. By reclaiming their strategic focus and learning to speak the language of impact, these guardians can evolve from passive administrators into true agents of transformation—detecting the fire before the house burns down.
*) DISCLAIMER
Articles published in the “Your Views & Stories” section of en.tempo.co website are personal opinions written by third parties, and cannot be related or attributed to en.tempo.co’s official stance.
