Post Decentralization Corruption: A study on perpetual corruption at the local level in West Lombok

The current article aims to explore corruption at the local level. There are two main discourses that set the background for this study. First, corruption is considered a result of decentralization, which opened up the local political structure. Second, corruption happened as a result of a societal shift along the prismatic continuum. These two main discourses serve as the theoretical background in research to find the meanings behind the reality of perpetual corruption occurring at the local level. The research employed the theory of decentralization and a prismatic society approach as analytical tools along with a phenomenological approach. The study found linkages in decentralization as a new reason for the growth and development of corruption at the local level on account of the prismatic structure empowering elite rulers to replicate corrupt practices.

, consequently creating a circulation of elites at the local level (Grindle, 2009 social identity secured strategic and substantial positions within the government. Decentralization had ended their dominance. Along the same line, it had brought about fundamental changes that led to the opening of local power structures, subsequently providing opportunities for local identities to express their political interests (J. Kingsley, 2012;Kingsley, 2012;Mietzner, 2014), which was also the case in Lombok.
The island of Lombok is geographically located between two islands, Bali to the West (Lombok Strait), and Sumbawa to the East separated by the Alas strait. Administrative wise, Lombok consists of four regencies and one municipality, namely: West Lombok Regency, Central Lombok Regency, East Lombok Regency, North Lombok Regency, and Mataram Municipality as the capital of West Nusa Tenggara Province. Most of Lombok's populace are Muslims. 1 It is known as an island of a thousand mosques (Telle, 2009;Tyson, 2013). Culturally speaking, the Sasak tribe is the majority in Lombok. 2 Post decentralization, Lombok's socio-political dynamics has received a lot of attention from scholars. Decentralization provided civilians political opportunities to create political space for citizens wanting to express their voices at the local level, including in Lombok (Antlov, 2003). This led to the emergence of local-based security groups (Macdougall, 2007;Tyson, 2013), and the creation of political transformation opening arenas of contestation over political positions within the power structure at the local level (Gayatri, Irene et al., 2009).
A specific phenomenon concerning change in local structure is observed in West Lombok. It is historically noted that classification of local ethnicities was initiated at the time the Dutch governed Indonesia.

Decentralization
Decentralization is the transfer of authority and responsibility for administrative functions, including civilians and the private sector from the central to the regional governments (D. Rondinelli, 1999;World Bank, 2013). It is the delegation of political and legal authority to subordinate government to carry out planning and decision-making functions (D. A. Rondinelli, 1981;Shabbir Cheema & Rondinelli, 2007).
Closer proximity between the public and regional government is a factor that reinforces  (Asthana, 2012).

Decentralization Reduces Corruption
Decentralization became a system for reducing corruption (Fisman & Gatti, 2002). It opened up participatory spaces for civil society to demand improvements in the public sector and encourages government accountability (Grindle, 2009). In decentralization, there is the proximity factor, which is a condition that enables demands and communication to be better and more responsively made and carried out between public officials and citizens (Bardhan, 2002;Umam, 2014;Widmalm, 2008). Decentralization encourages people to correctively question policies that do not support public interest. It provides citizens with direct information when misappropriation of government assistance occurs (Goel & Nelson, 2011;Shah, 2006). The public's closeness with its local political structure makes it easier for collective resistance against corruption to unfold. Various information can be easily acquired and they can reach more local citizens than access to power or authority at the national level can (Manor, 2011;Slijepčević et al., 2020). In the Indonesian context, decentralization opens up spaces for public monitoring, and presents space for public aspirations functioning as a stage for public scrutiny of the government (Buehler, 2010;Ronald L. Holzhacker et al., 2016).
Decentralization accommodates political space for civil society, and it particularly promotes an anticorruption movement as an integral part of its socio-political movement (Rinaldi et al., 2007).

Decentralization as a New Argument for Corruption
In practice, decentralization is, instead, submission to group interests at the local level (Hadiz, 2010;Karlström, 2015;Kirana, 2014;Prud'homme, 1995;Tornquist, 2005;Winters, 2013). Decentralization presents elite capture (Bardhan, 2002;Fjeldstad, 2004). Bribery is on the rise at the local level due to an increasingly complex government system designed to fill the pockets of local bureaucrats (Fan et al., 2009). In Indonesia, it has been proven effective to suppress local tensions that may fracture national integrity.
However, it indicates a predatory countenance at the local level (Aspinall, 2010). It has become a political space for developing new patronage networks throughout Indonesia in the aftermath of the bureaucratic authoritarian system (Hadiz, 2004;Silitonga et al., 2016). Oligarchy remains in power, despite the authoritarian political system

An Approach
A prismatic society is a society transitioning from a fused homogenous traditional state into a diffracted heterogeneous modern society. It is likened to a homogenous light going into a prism. A diversity of colors is created, yet these colors remain confined within the prism without scattering outwards (Priyono, 2016;Riggs, 1964).
A temporary process or condition of a society between a specific past time and a predictable future state is referred to as transition. Under such societal conditions, concepts containing particular characteristics that apply in the country of study need to be used (Riggs, 1964).
Prismatic society is a society that maintains a combination of overlapping modern and traditional values, wherein those values coexist within a single bureaucracy (Harber, 1993;Soelaiman, 1998 Riggs adopted this perspective to examine the dynamics of administration in developing countries (Soelaiman, 1998;Zwart, 2010 (Riggs, 1964). In the context of the present study, it is important that the corruption cases are analyzed based on the pattern of corruption evident in the transitioning society so that a holistic perspective can be acquired to explain how perpetual corruption unfolds. Accordingly, it is essential that the bureaucratic institution be seen as an entity that is inseparable from the effect of influential, old, and traditional socio-political structure (Riggs, 2015).

The Perspective of Corruption in Prismatic Society
Avarice is not a key determinant of corruption. Perhaps corruption emerges from the basic nature of prismatic society itself. In the traditional system, officials are not paid using the central treasury fund, they are paid through tributes, rents, and the like. Harber continues by stating that such corrupt behavior will continue in moderate bureaucracies (Harber, 1993). There are formal rules regulating policies, but they differ in practice. Rules are formally announced, but they are not effectively implemented. It seems highly formalistic in reality, but not so in practice.
For such a contradiction, Riggs referred to it as formalism or double talk (Laxmikanth, 2011;Riggs, 2015;Zwart, 2010). Corruption, bribery, and clientelism are associated with legal and bureaucratic processes that serve an unfavorable function, according to prismatic administration.
Laws and procedures may be implemented in another normative order that has functional implications on the environment they live in without having to change the new environment (Zwart, 2010).

The administration model in a prismatic
society is known as the Sala Model. This is reflected in developing societies (Margono, 1998). Officials enjoy the power and authority their position gives them. Officials of the Sala Model formally comply to rules that are specific in nature but covertly use their discretion to make decisions that tend to be ascriptive, which is a feature of particularism (Riggs, 1964). In terms of public administration, this approach is relevant in explaining the emergence of double talk, wherein modern administration rules and methods are employed but they are utilized to serve particular values and purposes in the public domain (Priyono, 2018).

Social Structure of Prismatic Society
In prismatic societies we can find a unique form of institutional structure, distinct from other social typologies, which is known as polycommunal structure. Poly-communal refers to the existence of various ethnic and religious groups that indicates a state of competition (Laxmikanth, 2011). The elite opposition group in transitioning societies is incapable of gaining access to get in touch with key ruling elites, thereby leading to hostility. Within such poly-communal structure, we can subsequently find poly-functional structure, which demonstrates more distribution of function than association (Riggs, 1964 (Bytyci, 2016;Chapman, 1966;Harber, 1993;Ikeanyibe, 2017)

Methods
The present study is developed based on the interpretive paradigm by using phenomenology strategy to understand the reality of perpetual

Poly-Communal Structure
Poly-communalism is described as an entity of diverse groups with a tendency of low group assimilation. Its power structure indicates a strong tendency of particularism.
Strong support is given to community members thereby influencing social relations. As a result, poly-communal structure also has the potential to produce strong oppositions. As findings in the present research show, groups outside of power also have the ability to uncover corrupt practices.

Formalization of Corruption
Corruption in the perspective of prismatic society is seen as double talk in regulation.
People abide by specific rules but behave very subjectively and are particularistic. Before the public they loudly voice their opposition against bribery and corruption, as well as corrupt practices and behavior. They enforce various rules yet they close their eyes to ongoing violations (Riggs, 1964). Corruption, on the other hand, continues to be a major concern at the local level. Such a condition reflects the presence of a pseudo or façade democracy, i.e., a condition in which democratic institutions and mechanism are established but do not substantively function, a system that operates within artificial democratic instruments (Diamond, 2002, Haynes, 2005.
Civil society openly became a part of those engaged in the existing participatory channels.
In the case of regional asset data, which had,   8 The track record of the case was processed based on various sources and by utilizing news portals containing the trial process on the www.kejaksaan.go.id webpage.
Officials enjoy their strategic position that allows them to receive bribes, they utilize the lower structure to generate extra personal income aside from their official income as a civil servant (Priyono, 2018, Riggs, 1964 wherein the subordinate provides a remuneration or kickback to a higher structure with more authority as a guarantee to getting a promotion. 9 An analysis of such a case from the perspective of prismatic society indicates a structured relationship between administrator-follower which consequently creates administrative hurdles to open up negotiations (Riggs, 1964).

Discussion
Following the findings on the ground, it is clear that there are connections between 9 Reviews of corruption cases like the Sala Model are open in trial. The track records of cases can be acquired via the Mataram District Court case search information system portal, which is accessible at sipp.pn-mataram.go.id decentralization and the prismatic society system, which leads to an increase in corruption at the local level. Decentralization has become a new reason for corruption to grow because institutions found in prismatic society lack enough power to put pressure on the ruling elites. In a prismatic society, the new elites generated by the change in political structure are still in the earliest stages of developing their power and as a result they are easily co-opted by the ruling elites (Riggs, 1964).
The prismatic local structure provided opportunities for ruling local elites to continuously conduct corrupt practices due to the structure's inability to limit the elite's power. It seems that various anticorruption approaches and policies will be incapable of reducing corruption so long as no change occurs in the local structure. There must be a constraining structure that limits local elites from exerting their political power.
An approach that overemphasizes the institutional aspect and localizes the influence of democracy outside of state institutions involving the community is considered to be the cause of failure in corruption eradication (Djani, 2013).
Focusing on incentives to formal institutions does not seem to be enough, it is important to consider influential local aspects as well (Hira, 2016). In other words, the diagnosis on corruption so far, according to the view of universalism, is that it often occurs in a concept of uniformity. Hence, it is important to diagnose corruption based on certain organisms, of which particularism is one: a value that prioritizes personal interest or a form of nonuniversalistic public goods distribution (Mungiu-Pippidi, 2006). Accordingly, corruption should be seen as a result of disorganization where there is an unstable intergroup relationship within a recognized system and authority (Huntington, 1973 (Butt, 2011;Juwono, 2016;Macmillan, 2011). Corruption should be seen as linkages between structure and agency, to be precise, as a duality that continues to generate corruption as social practice. Accordingly, decentralization should be accompanied by efforts to open up participatory channels so that accountability and checks and balances are fostered at the local level.
To achieve such a condition of accountability in the Indonesian context, civil society and mass media capable of playing an optimal role are required to bring about proper political competition at the local level (Kirana, 2014).

Conclusion
There are linkages that mutually complement each other facilitating the expansion of corruption at the local level in West Lombok Regency. The prismatic structure opened up opportunities for creating a perpetual state of corruption. The social structure with its poly-communal and polynormative qualities resulted in poor assimilation as a collective entity. The prismatic structure made it unviable for effective monitoring of public administration to develop, and this condition was exacerbated by the elites having a very difficult time assimilating. Decentralization and poly-10 Dualism is a perspective in social science that attempts to place one perspective over another. It is set as a turning point for Anthony Giddens to bring about a theoretical synthesis of the tension between subjectivism and objectivism, voluntarism and determinism, i.e., the structuration theory.
In the current study, this implies that it does not highlight a single approach, but it attempts to combine two approaches or discourses that have not been done much. Herry Priyono discusses this theme quite straightforwardly in reading the thoughts of Anthony Giddens. communal structure are a duality that has influence in perpetuating corruption at the local level. The two structures provide local political elites the opportunity to continue producing a corrupt public administration system at the local level.

Theoretical and Practical Implications
This research contributes to the field of social and political sciences by providing a perspective on the emergence of perpetual corruption in transitional societies. It also indicates that an approach to corruption that heavily focuses on law enforcement and bureaucratic reform would be insufficient without considering local structures affecting the spread of corruption at the local level.
Local structures must be encouraged to generate checks and balances in order for anticorruption policies to succeed.

Limitation of Study
As a product of science and knowledge,