-

Poverty is a complex issue. It appears to have been an unbreakable chain of life. The fluctuating number which tends to become larger, and its vulnerability which gradually becomes higher have been endless issues. In 1984-1993. Indonesia was considered to succeed in decreasing the number of poverty as much as 13, 67 % within 9 years (1984-1993). This achievement had been rewarded some compliments from several countries and categorized Indonesia within The East Asian Miracle: Economic Growth and Public Policy, World Bank New York: University Press, 1993). Unfortunately the number started to crawling up in 1994 which reached its peak when there was a crisis in 1997-1998 where the number of poor people increased as much as 17, 47%, in 1998 it became 24, 23%, however in 1999 it decreased into 23, 43%. In 2000 to 2995 the number of poor people kept decreasing into 15, 97%, yet in 2006 it increased again into 17, 75%, it went down in 2007 into 16, 58% and went up in 2008 as much as 21, 92%. In 2009 the percentage of poor people drastically decreased into 14, 15%, continued in 2010 into 13, 33% (BPS, 2000-2010). In March 2011 the number of poor people in Indonesia is 30, 02 million people (12, 49%) into 29, 13 million people (11, 96%) in March 2012 or in another words it had been decreasing as much as 0,89 million people (BPS, 2001-2012) Good Governance was brought by World Bank together with the donating institution in order to help the poverty. Good Governance offered the principles which were implemented as the requirements in dealing with poverty. According to World Bank, Good Governance was a potential way in handling the poverty. This statement was based on the data of poverty that continuously decreased due to the intervention of poverty management program in which the fund was supported by the World Bank, as well as the way the government spent the budget, as in how the decisions were made, how effective the fund was distributed, how the distribution process was implemented appropriately, and how well the programs were monitored. The implementation of the poverty countermeasures through PNPM was considered to be the biggest contribution to the decreasing of the poverty in Indonesia for since 2007-2011 had been implemented 5 main PNPM programs and 12 PNPM non-regular programs, with the highest number of fund compared to other programs. In 2009- 2011 and PNPM had received Rp 33.158.216.000.000, 00 to 1.457 regencies/cities in Indonesia and 19.351 sub-regencies in Indonesia. The achievement claimed by the World Bank was not fair, because the fund granted by the World Bank had brought significant structural consequences that had never been exposed. Therefore, there was no wonder that the Good Governance offered had obtained many critics in which the implementation of Good Governance was related to the mechanism of the free market which did not only weaken the purchasing power of the people, but also affected the legal system and the public administration order. Filho and Johnston (2005: 1), Wiratraman (2008), Eric Helleiner (2008), James B Greenberg (1997), Tshuma (1999), White (1987), Wade (1990) and Gill (1997) had honestly stated that the Good Governance condensed with neo liberalism. The evidence could be seen in Structural Adjustment Program (SAPs) which was signed by the president, of which contained the clause that burdened the creditor, weakened the position of the country to the debtor, and made the people vulnerable for they depend on the market. This SAPs binds and must be implemented, which therefore, either directly or indirectly the country was chained to many rules that had been agreed. Even though it received many critics, Good Governance was considered by the World Bank as the potential way in poverty countermeasures (Making the New Indonesia Work for the Poor, 2006). The implementation of Good Governance had been considered by the World Bank as the solution for poverty issue. The fact in Pangkep Regency, South Sulawesi and Wonosobo, Central Java had shown that the implementation of Good Governance in dealing with poverty was not “GOOD”. From the four principles observed which were accountability, transparency, participation and gender equity, only accountability and participation that could be considered as “GOOD ENOUGH”, it meant that the implementation of Good Governance had not fully implemented all principles. The surprising fact was that the appearance of the variable of leadership as the important variable in Good Governance. A Good Governance had to be based on the good leadership. In this research, it had been found the aspects of leadership that made the poverty countermeasures program worked. The pattern in Indonesia depends on the accountable, honest, and dependable leader for his people. The result of index of good governance in this research had shown the implementation of principles of good governance in implementing the poverty in 2 different areas was good enough. Pangkep Regency had reached 0,60 (close to good) and Wonosobo Regency had index value of 0,59 (enough to less). This achievement had shown the implementation of principles of good governance in PNPM Mandiri had not fully met the criteria of principles of good governance that had been set in the program. The implementation of principle of accountability in Pangkep Regency had reached 0,64 and included in the good category while Wonosobo regency had reached index of 0,59 which was included in the category enough yet tend to low. The implementation of the transparence principles in Pangkep Regency was included in good category with the index of 0,62 while Wonosobo Regency was included in category enough with index of 0,59. The value of the implementation of principle of participation in both regencies was good of which for Pangkep Regency with index value of 0,69 while Wonosobo Regency with index value of 0,63 which included in category good. In general the value of the implementation of the principle of gender equity in poverty countermeasures in both regencies were included in the category enough tend to low which for Pangkep Regency was with index of 0,49 while Wonosobo Regency was with index of 0,56. The contribution of the highest indicator of the implementation of the principle of good governance in dealing with the poverty for Pangkep Regency was given by accountability indicator (0, 64) and Participation (0,64) while Wonosobo Regency was from Participation (0,62) The important lesson in implementing good governance in PNPM program was the motion of all components. Good Governance was not solely the relation of people, private sectors and the government, however the relation that moved the components from the principles of good governance. The countermeasures of poverty must have been guided by the authority which in this case was, the city mayor or the head of regency. The dominant factor of the implementation of the principles of good governance is accountability and participation (Pangkep Regency) and participation for Wonosobo regency. The value of leadership was found in this research. The successfulness of the poverty countermeasures had been achieved when the leader of the region, sub-district and village open to listen, to understand what was happening in the community and implement the mandate given to him honestly and the work hard for the welfare of the community. The principles in the good governance could be achieved when it was moved by the good leader and with the support from the private sector and the community sincerely. Good leadership will encourage the community he leads to do what had been doing by the leader. The leader could be the role model for the community he leads. Therefore the principles of good governance must be deconstructed by requiring the pattern of good leadership as one of the principles as built in the new public administration. The theory of good governance which placed the role of the government as the facilitator in running the function more directed and facilitated than just implemented all the work of public service itself so that it could be more efficient, in this research was not proved. The government was still dominant in implementing the poverty countermeasures. The role of private sector was still weak, while the significant participation of the community had not reflected the representation of the poor people. The result of the research recommends: (1) good governance is necessary for poverty countermeasures as the part of the process of public service. The implementation of the good governance must not be without any requirements and not to meet the requirements to receive credit funds from the donating countries through SAPs and PRSPs; (2) the principles of good government which are accountability, transparency, participation and the gender equity must be the foundation in the efforts for poverty countermeasures through any program, therefore, it needs to build a tool to implement these principles so that the poverty countermeasures is not only just a slogan but it is real to achieve the decreasing of the poor people and to increase the welfare of the poor community; (3) in regard with the implementation of the accountability principle in the poverty countermeasures, it needs to arrange an accountability mechanism which is not only administrative and financial, but also social accountability and policy; (4) in regard with the implementation of the principle of participation, it needs to develop the model of participations that is able to accommodate interests of both men and women; (5) in regard with the implementation of the principle of transparency, the local government must create a transparence mechanism that can be seen by all parties; (6) in regard with the equity (equity and fairness of gender) in poverty countermeasures program, it needs a political commitment from the local leader and SKPD that leads the program of poverty countermeasures in achieving the equity and fairness of gender. It can be started from developing the database of poor people and divide them into men and women. The data will be very important in stating the target and the program that meets the needs; (7) good governance must be implemented as the effort in creating the good government system, not only to create the image, therefore, it can be done by implementing the principles consistently without having to depend on the donating institution. (8) Good governance must be interpreted as the simple concept that can be done by the parties with the same interests; (9) good leadership is good governance. Leadership is the base for deconstruction the principles of good governance; (9) the local leader must be given authorities to arrange the database of poverty. The national government will only verify the data given by the local government; (10) the local leader needs to develop instruments to monitor the achievement of decreasing the poverty in real and make sure that the poor had been decreased because of the program implemented; (11) the local government must be brave in designing the program of local poverty countermeasures in the area. The replica of the program can indeed be done, however, it must be in the context of the need of the poor community and meet the specialty of the area; (12) the poverty countermeasures is mainstreaming, however, the program management and/or the activities must be in Bappeda, hence, Bappeda has the authority to plan so that it can control SKPD in arranging the program or activities and direct it so that it will be pro-poor and pro-gender and (13) there will be needed an evaluation for the achievement of the implementation of the principles of good governance in PNPM Mandiri. The measurement that must be achieved must be measurable, so that the output achieved can be measured.

Kata Kunci : good governance, accountability, transparency, participation, gender equality, poverty reductions, leadership