Jakartass Home thoughts from abroad. Alien thoughts from home.

I've signed a few petitions organised by Avaaz.org. These include one protesting the use of Japanese tsunami relief funds being used to provide security for a whaling fleet, another condemning the use of torture by Syria's regime against demonstrators, and others concerning the rape of the planet by oil companies and their rapacious ilk.

At the last count, Avaaz had 10,580,054 members who receive email notifications from a dedicated team funded by donations from the members. Our concerted voices do have an impact, yet I feel that the suggested action requested from "friends across Indonesia" may be counter-productive.

The suggested petition is worded thus:

To President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono:

In the wake of the A.A.L. sandal scandal, we call on you to end the criminalisation of children, initiate a fundamental review of the police, and devise urgent reform programmes so that our police carry out their civic duties repsonsibly (sic). This is a time for you to stand with Indonesian citizens — we count on you to take all necessary steps to bring about a police force that works for the people, not against them.

Yes, I am in whole-hearted support of the message, and have already drawn attention to it in my last post. However, Avaaz has the following on the petition page: Since police in Palu brutally beat fifteen year-old A.A.L. and threatened him with a 5 year jail sentence in the 'sandal scandal', citizens across the country are standing up against police brutality. If we can ramp up public pressure now we could end this abuse.

'Torture' is ingrained in the mindset of the police, and was throughout colonial Dutch times and the Suharto era. A mere petition will do nothing to change it, nor will SBY be swayed, as he will surely refer to foreign-funded NGO's interfering in Indonesian affairs, as he did recently.

Let the pressure mount from within is what I've suggested  A petition will do nothing, but making monkeys out of the police by presenting them with bananas is not an arrestable offence, but they will surely take note. Non-violent yet upfront demonstrations can be effective and media-worthy events.

Mweanwhile, the case for police reform is already a media topic, as this recent opinion article in the Post  clearly shows.

Punishment for children should provide strong educational and deterrent effects instead of merely throwing them in jail. Civility is supposed to be a yardstick when it comes to dealing out punishment for kids.

Hence, the need for Juvenile Court legislation that really makes sense, that would prevent children from being detained in prison. There must be correction houses, such as boarding schools or special dorms, for children with legal problems.

The government and the House of Representatives need to say yes to pass the bill without delay. The bill must give an ear to a restorative justice approach with a view to prioritizing mediation and rehabilitation over penalties.

The absence of the country’s justice system in dealing with young delinquents frequently makes law enforcers take a punitive approach.

I would add that civilian control of the police is of paramount urgency.. Although it will probably take a generation for critical reasoning to be engrained in the rakyat, there are signs that it is beginning to take hold. AAL is an unfortunate victim, a martyr to the cause, and there will be more resulting in an even gretaer pressure for true reformasi to take hold.

So, my message to Avaaz is simple: Sabar aja, dong!

When someone bumbles around or bumbles about, they behave in a confused, disorganized way, making mistakes and usually not achieving anything.

Some think that SBY deserves the appellation Pak Bumble because his slow response to every conflict in the country [has] contributed to the weakening of state authority in the country.

This character analysis of Mr. Bumble from Charles Dickens’ Oliver Twist says that he has a heart for the poor. But the trouble is he doesn’t act on his pity – he seems to feel like it’s a weakness, and he doesn’t want to lose face. He seems to think that he won’t be respected if he shows pity to anyone.

State authority at most levels has always been subject to, or in league with, forces beyond public control, be they strategic alliances with the Muslim bloc or rapacious foreign based conglomerates seeking land to deforest and supplant with palm oil plantations or destroy with coal and gold mines.

One can but agree that if SBY is the ultimate authority in Indonesia, then he seems to lack the gravitas to exercise it. Contrarian that I am, although one may think that I’m cynical, history may yet judge SBY to be the true architect of reformasi, the word coined in the latter months of the Suharto era  by the proponents of demokrasi. There are signs that we are on the threshold of achieving a country governed by the people for the people.

There is increasing disgust at the antics of small fundamentalist Islamic groups, at the rapaciousness of oligarchs who think little of grabbing the nation’s resources without a by-your-leave, let alone compensation, and at the incompetence and corruption of self-elected politicians and bureaucrats who believe that being a public servant means that the public are there to serve them.

The rakyat are beginning to recognise that if they want something done, then perhaps they should do something about it themselves.

Hence the co-ordinated demonstrations this week by farmers protesting land grabs without financial or legal redress.

Note: whereas the 1960 Agrarian Law states that the state should respect the land owners’ rights over their lands, the 2009 Law on Minerals, Energy and Coal stipulates that owners of land known to have potential deposits should allow their land to be explored and exploited – and their refusal may result in imprisonment.

Other signs of public discontent include the rallying for victims of insensitive law enforcement agencies. This has seen a 15 year old boy accused of stealing a policeman’s worn out flip-flops, beaten up, and prosecuted as an adult and facing a five year jail sentence. Although the flip-flops presented as evidence were not those he allegedly stole, the judge found him guilty but set him free. This inconsistency was no doubt due to the public furore over the case, and that 5,000 pairs of (used) flip-flops were donated to the police on the grounds that they must be impoverished. One would have thought that the cost of bribes would have kept pace with inflation, but I could be wrong about this.

Another case in the news is of two “mentally retarded” 20-something guys kept in detention from 11th November last year charged with stealing 15 bunches of bananas. Although prosecuters originally refused to accept the case, once they had done, on Friday last week, they immediately freed the suspects in a bid to close the case. Meanwhile, student activists organised a collection of 1,000 bunches of bananas to give to the police, thus making monkeys out of them.

These are not the first examples of a sense of humour coming to the fore in Indonesia when addressing grievances. It’s been two years since I wrote about a batch of cases including Prita Mulyasari’s fine for defaming the hospital which maltreated her which was paid through a public coin collection.

Confrontation can only be met with more violence, so this week of civil disobedience has been welcome. But I do wish these demonstrators outside the legislature hadn’t blocked the toll road which is part of my route home!

Remember: Get Angry, but Have Fun.

The feeling that I get now all over the world [is] that the fabric of society is really stretched thin. Behaviour has gotten totally irrational and it can spark off at any moment.
Steven Soderbergh

I think he’s right; yes we are seeing the breakdown of civilisation as we know it and I believe that it is a ‘good thing’.

The downfall of autocratic dictators continues apace with Gadhafi of Libya the latest but by no means the last.

President Bashar al-Assad of Syria and President Ali Abdullah Saleh of the Yemen are both using their security forces to avoid Gadhafi’s fate – a lynch mob.

Others, such as President Mugabe in Zimbabwe told reporters in 2009 that he would retire “when I am a century old.” If the populace can wait that long, then it will be because of a forced accommodation with some of his critics, including protestors.

The ‘new’ parliamentary regime of Myanmar appears to have heeded worldwide condemnation about its treatment of its citizens, reaching an apparent accommodation with Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung Suu Kyi, and recently releasing some political prisoners as part of a broader amnesty. Whether this was a cosmetic exercise to overcome economic and political sanctions and to take the helm of ASEAN, the regional political organisation as scheduled next year, is yet to be evaluated. The treatment of its prisoners needs to be vastly improved and is but one of several steps it needs to take before its virtually universal opprobrium is overcome.

For North Koreans, there is little hope; Dear Leader Kim Jong Il may have suffered a stroke in 2008, but his third son is waiting in the wings.

The UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in the North Korea, Marzuki Darusman, has cited satellite imagery showing that the size of North Korea’s sprawling prison camps had gone up in recent years – and could now accommodate as many as 250,000 prisoners, most of whom are there until they die from overwork, malnutrition and disease.

Darusman estimated that two thirds of North Korea’s 24 million people are getting about half what they need to eat while suffering from “lack of adequate water and sanitation facilities, shortages of electricity and lack of minimum physical facilities” needed for basic medical care.

But it’s not just the citizens of ‘rogue states’ who are suffering.

The organic growth of the Occupy Wall Street movement was in part inspired by the “Arab Spring”, but was also inspired took its core ‘activism’, a camp in the city centre, from the 15-M Movement which started on 15th May in Madrid.

The Madrid protestors had a fairly well-developed philosophy.

Even though protesters form a heterogeneous and ambiguous group, they share a strong rejection of unemployment, welfare cuts, Spanish politicians, the current the current political system, capitalism, banks and bankers, political corruption and firmly support what they call basic rights: home, work, culture, health and education.

They call for a form of grassroots participatory democracy based on people’s assemblies and consensus decision making. These horizontally structured assemblies are completely transparent and open to anyone who wants to participate.

(See Divided We Stand IV, my call for the same objectives here in Indonesia.)

However, as Stephen Foley says in the Independent, the Occupy Wall Street Movement and the copycat demonstrations in other American cities and European capitals is self-defeatingly determined to avoid making any particular demands. One New York protester was quoted yesterday saying “the second we start making demands, we start splintering and we are no longer the 99 per cent”.

Change may be wanted, but without a strong sense of resentment, a set of goals, the willingness and a fire in the belly to make the necessary changes, then the ‘one per cent’ have nothing to fear. And if they do, then as witnessed in Rome, a few anarchic youths (or agents provocateurs) can easily subvert a cause.

Nevertheless, I support the occupations as a necessary challenge to entrenched power.

The success of Homo Sapiens rests primarily with our capacity for empathy and our urge to understand and appreciate others.
fr. review of The Age of Empathy: Nature's Lessons for a Kinder Society by Frans De Waal

In a recent article in the Post, Indonesia’s State of Democracy, Jennie Bev attempted to draw parallels between the 'democracies' of the USA and Indonesia. She also asked what we can do to improve civic participation and people’s deliberation in the election and voting processes. I hope I can offer an answer which goes beyond her analysis.

Regarding Indonesia, Jennie says that "some academics and pundits posit that it is a democracy by form, but not by substance. Others argue that it is an oligarchy and the rest say that it is a young democracy with a dark shadow of historical authoritarianism." I would argue that it is all three, and it is the electoral process which is the key to a working democracy.

The term 'democracy' comes from the Greek language (δημοκρατία) and means "rule by the (simple) people" or as Abraham Lincoln put it, "Government of the people, by the people, for the people."

Most would agree that the form of government adopted in Indonesia is far from that. Those nominated have to be members of political parties, and they have little attachment to their electors who in turn are not expected, or wanted, to contribute to government.
 
Many, if not all, of Indonesia's rulers are a self-perpetuating élite, vestiges of the Suharto era, which awards itself lucrative contracts in order to first pay off debts accrued through the electoral process and to then further enrich themselves. Every four or five years, the electorate is bought with unrealistic promises, an assumed piety and/or minimal cash handouts and T-shirts to attend free dangdut concerts,

Nor can the electorate expect to benefit from any legal certainty. Laws are flouted with seeming impunity by those who are tasked with making the laws while for those at the bottom of the social ladder there are few transparent ways of seeking regress for the wrongs committed against them.

It is not uncommon to read of those charged with minor thefts – such the grandmother charged with stealing 3 cacao pods worth Rp.1,500 – being treated proportionately worse than politicians who steal billions of rupiah from the state.

It seems that the only way for the voices of the rakyat to be heard is through the social media which could, as was recently witnessed in Ambon, have disastrous consequences. An alternative is to rely on NGOs to lobby the lawmakers and bureaucrats. However the NGOs are also facing difficulties in that the much criticized Home Affairs Ministry is, according to its spokesman Reydonnyzar Moenek, currently seeking to replace or revise the 1985 Mass Organization Law so they "can make decisive efforts concerning civil society organizations without having to worry about legal issues."

That's an alarming statement and without a say in the wider issues that effect us, it is small wonder that we are seeing an increasingly fragmented society, one in which individuals strive to meet their own needs and appear to have lost empathy with anyone not in their immediate social or religious circle.

What is sorely needed is a system of people empowerment, one in which individuals can express their concerns and by being part of the process can effect the changes that would not only address the needs of the individual but those of the community s/he is part of. In short, there is an urgent need to return to the good, old-fashioned values which encouraged respect, courtesy and mutual co-operation.

Suharto's drive for rice self-sufficiency in his 'green revolution' in the mid-80's cost many farmers their land and as a consequence much of the community spirit described by Clifford Geertz in his essay Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology (2000) has dissipated. He described rukun (mutual adjustment), gotong royong (joint bearing of burdens) and tolong-menolong (reciprocal assistance) as "an enormous inventory of highly specific and often quite intricate institutions for effecting the cooperation in work, politics, and personal relations alike"

The country is zoned from street level up to the national government, from the rukun tetangga (RT – neighbourhood association), to rukun warga (RW – citizen's association), to kelurahan (village administrative unit), to mayor, governor and finally the Presidential Palace.

The formation of 'citizen councils', which adopted the Javanese values, and those of all the other ethnic groups, utilizing that administrative mechanism, could provide the illusion of a people's democracy, but I suspect that much breath would be wasted.

A change in mindset is needed. In 2007, the UK passed the Sustainable Communities Act.  The then responsible Minister said that the government was "moving away from ‘top down’ working, to ways of working that take the needs and wishes of communities into account and that try to meet those needs with services that are tailored to local circumstances."

Another model which lawmakers could consider is the Participatory Budgeting, pioneered in 1989 by the mayor of Porto Alegre, Brazil, and since adopted in a number of countries. This is a decision-making process through which citizens deliberate and negotiate over the distribution of public resources, thus creating "opportunities for engaging, educating, and empowering citizens, which can foster a more vibrant civil society."

Could either work here? With goodwill from all sides, yes, but given that both models help promote transparency, with the potential to reduce government inefficiencies and corruption, I would not expect the current uncaring lawmakers to even consider them.
……………………………………………………………
Submitted to but not published by the Jakarta Post.
(Read Parts 1, 2 and 3)

Regular readers here will know that I regularly pour scorn on the current Jakarta Governor who, in the best traditions of British satire, I call Fuzzy Bodoh. (Bodoh is the Indonesian for stupid, and many feel that his pronouncements and actions fall into that category.)

However, in one respect he deserves unreserved praise.

And it is the word 'respect' which he may yet come to personify.

This week his administration has formally established a forum expected to function as an arena for informal leaders from various ethnic groupings, government officials and religious leaders to preach pluralism and promote tolerance among religious communities.of informal leaders.

In his address during the opening ceremony Fauzi said, “Jakarta must be a barometer for other regions. Therefore, religious tolerance must be maintained by all social elements.”

This comes against a background of an increasing number of acts of religious intolerance carried out by fundamentalist Muslims, possibly with a 'hidden agenda' paid for by disgruntled military figures, agitating (generally violently) against Muslim sects and Christians alike.

Isolated incidents apart, and ignoring ploys by politicians seeking to create a holier-than-thouu image for electoral purposes, inter-religious harmony is the norm here and Indonesia is generally peaceful.However, Gov. Bowo's message is timely.

Interestingly, there appears to be an 'underground' movement spreading the same message through graffiti and other forms of 'street art'.

The freedom to be different should surely be what separates we humans from the rest of the animal world.We may not seek it for ourselves, yet we should be able to accept it in others.

I’ll buy you a Cadillac.
If you just give me some of your love.
Donovan Leitch

Many observers here liken the ‘abdication’ of Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak to that of President Suharto in 1998 .

Reading this article is confirmation. In the following excerpts substitute ‘Suharto‘ for each reference to ‘Mubarak’, ‘Indonesia’ for ‘Egypt’ and the parallels are clear.

Hosni Mubarak’s presidency was born amid gunfire and bloodshed and ended in an equally dramatic fashion.

It had become clear to Egyptians and the world in recent years that …. he regarded the presidency as his by right, …. and that he would not quit voluntarily. As the crisis overwhelmed him, he said he had …  no intention of standing again …. Few believed him.

Mubarak’s attitude to his people was by turns paternalistic, aloof and repressive. Though he claimed to love his fellow Egyptians, he did not trust them. ….

Leading an unswervingly secular, pro-western regime, he demonised even moderate Islamist parties. (Only in the latter years of his reign did Suharto actively court Islamist  groups.)

……. he implied that he believed he held some sort of divine mandate, that he ruled through and by God’s will. (Suharto was steeped in Javanese mysticism)

Not for him the showy extravagance of Sadat (read Sukarno). In charisma, he was wholly lacking. Imagination was not his strong suit.  Imperious, abstemious (he does not smoke or drink), and intensely private, he suggested Egyptians were lucky to have him in charge.

From the start, the president refused to countenance serious opposition, rigging presidential and parliamentary elections with unashamed efficiency. Moderate, secular, liberal politicians and their academic, business and financial constituencies had little choice but to ally themselves, directly or indirectly, with Mubarak’s dominant National Democratic party (read Golkar), or enter a political wilderness of persecution and impotence.

He made periodic promises about reform he did not intend to fulfil, he bought off the army and the political and business elites (for example by doing little to check corruption).

Yet in the end, the main causes of Mubarak’s undoing were economic, not political. The grievances of the relatively small number of young, secular, urban middle-class activists who triggered the unrest after Ben Ali’s exemplary fall in Tunis were not by themselves sufficient to create a revolution.

(And here lies the major difference between the two revolutions: it was the aspiring middle classes and students who lead the street demonstrations in Jakarta and other major cities.)

And this is Indonesia now.

In this Egypt millions still struggle below the poverty line, and a succession of governments of time-servers, corrupt politicians, businessmen, and technocrats have failed to lift up the masses while simultaneously increasing the wealth and privileges of the ruling elites.

Good luck with your reformasi, Egypt; change will be slow.

First, grant freedom to the press. Listen to the voices of the people and allow dissent.

Encourage pluralism and allow representatives of the people to directly serve their constituencies, but limit their terms of office and do not allow family members to succeed them.

Establish anti-corruption and money-laundering institutions – with teeth.

Restrict the military’s role to guarding your borders and emergency disaster relief operations.

Finally, establish a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Enable closure of the past so that with a clear vision you can go boldly into a just and honourable future.

(That last step is one that is still needed here in Indonesia.)

Today could be one of the most important days in the modern history of Indonesia.

Cities throughout the country will see massive anti-korupsi demonstrations which have been largely provoked by the excesses of the political and business elite in league with the military and police i.e. the remnants of Suharto’s New Order.

It’s not just the big cases which have stirred up the masses – the attempts to emasculate the Corruption Eradication Commission and, still ongoing, the bailout of Bank Century.

The public have sided with victimised rakyat, the ‘little’ people – the grandmother who ‘stole three cacao pods, the two farmers accused of stealing one watermelon … and the list goes on.

Regarding the Prita case, the it’s encouraging that all sectors of society are donating to the appeal for coins launched on her behalf.. The Post reported yesterday today that scavengers have banded together to contribute from their minimal incomes, and today that the Regional Representatives Council (DPD) has collected Rp.70 million.

I am encouraged, excited even, that the public, with the support of the media and using the tools of the internet is stirring and demonstrating for an equitable and fair society.

Reformasi is, at last, taking hold. Rather than the sham of the electoral process, this is what I understand to be true democracy.