The State Financial Accountability Agency (BAKN), as a permanent board in terms of monitoring the use of state finances, functions to review the BPK RI audit report. Therefore, it is hoped that the existence of BAKN will contribute positively in implementing transparency and accountability in the use of state finances as well as maintaining the credibility of public trust of DPR RI, especially in carrying out the supervision function of the council. The working visit of BAKN DPR RI to Universitas Brawijaya on Tuesday (6/4) was one of the activities that discussed the review of LHP BPK RI related to Special Allocation Funds (DAK). DAK itself is a fund originating from APBN revenues allocated to certain regions with the aim of helping to fund special activities which are regional affairs and in accordance with national priorities. In the process of the mechanism, in the regions there are still frequent polemics and there is no synergy between the central government and regional governments starting from stipulation, use, budgeting to reporting.
Law Expert, Dr. Muhammad Ali Safa’at SH, MH as the Dean of FH UB highlighted the differences in DAK regulations from the point of view of legal problems. Where Law No. 23 of 2014 and Law No. 23 of 2004 experience imbalances between regional authority and national priorities that often becomes conflict in their work programs. There are three issues of concern in the DAK polemic. (First) is the Amount Problem: Where the amount of DAK is relatively small compared to the General Allocation Fund (DAU), even though it actually functions to reduce fiscal disparities. The determination of the criteria for receiving regions and the amount received is still unclear for the regions. In addition, the regions still have to lobby at the top level to decide on the amount of the budget. (Second) Problem Effectiveness: Namely activities are still based on input, not on outcomes. The function achievement as an equalization grant cannot yet be measured, so it has not been oriented towards increasing benefits. (Third) is the Problem Planning and Model related to the decisions time with regional budgeting.
Meanwhile, Dr. Fadhillah Amin, MAP, PhD as the Dean of FIA UB revealed that the problems that arise are also very diverse apart from being viewed from the legal aspect. The anatomy of this problem recurs almost every year, such as the DAK technical guidelines (juknis) from the Technical Ministry which are often published late so that it has an impact on the execution of activities. There are also some local governments that are still less proactive and responsive in managing the DAK they receive, which results in a large number of DAK funds being burned and not being utilized due to failed auctions. Not to mention the procurement of goods through e-catalogs that are not in accordance with the specifications of the goods needed in the field or the unavailability of these goods in the e-catalog.
In the discussion, UB academic community members provide directions and recommendations to the BAKN DPR RI participants in responding to problems that arise on the surface. Starting from the acceleration of DAK absorption associated with the policy of advancing the processing time for DAK disbursement at the beginning of the year, the percentage and disbursement phase is changed into two stages in order to speed up the administration and disbursement of funds, simplify phase one of the prerequisite for disbursement of funds by attaching the Regional Regulation on Regional Budget, activity plans, absorption reports and output performance. Meanwhile, the list of activity contracts that previously had to be submitted in the initial physical DAK distribution was shifted to phase II. Other recommendations, such as accommodating regional priorities with a bottom-up approach, provide more space to innovate in utilizing DAK in line with the objectives of decentralization. The development of work evaluations that are not limited to outputs but also outcomes so that later it can motivate regional officials through the implementation of incentive and de-incentive policies in appreciating their performance. [Humas UB/ Trans. Iir]
