Everyday human rights violations under the New Order<\/p>\n
By Mohtar Mas'oed<\/p>\n
YOGYAKARTA (JP): The following stories were familiar to many
\nof us during the New Order period.<\/p>\n
Darmin, an orange seller from Nganjuk, always traveled from
\nvillages in East Java to Jakarta's markets. On the way he often
\ngot into trouble because of his failure to \"keep things in
\norder.\" Police officers patrolling interprovincal roads could
\nalways find fault with him: absence of delivery orders,
\nincomplete documents for transporting merchandise and the like.<\/p>\n
Every journey he would encounter a different mishap.<\/p>\n
Darmin, however, was a good citizen, one who was smart and
\nunderstanding. He could always find his way out of trouble
\nthrough musyawarah (discussion to reach consensus) with the use
\nof mutually understood language. Without this skill, he would
\nhave missed the opportunity to get ahead of other traders on the
\nway to market. Late arrival meant a long queue and the
\npossibility of late payment.<\/p>\n
Darmin always knew that the trouble he met on the way could
\nmean bankruptcy. Unfortunately, he did not know that as a human
\nbeing he had the right to travel freely in the country of his
\nbirth without needing the cumbersome papers. Then, the officers
\nwho harassed him might also have been ignorant of the fact that
\nthey were violating Darmin's basic human rights.<\/p>\n
There was another person, Parman, a clove grower from
\nTemanggung in Central Java. He wanted to earn more from his
\ncloves. He heard the price of cloves in a neighboring regency,
\nMagelang, was higher. Unfortunately, selling cloves outside the
\ndistrict of a clove grower's domicile was prohibited. As a
\nresult, Parman had to take the cloves he grew to Magelang
\nstealthily, like a thief. An officer explained the purpose of the
\nprohibition to him, but Parman could not understand it. The
\nofficer himself may not have understood it either.<\/p>\n
One day Durasim, a farm laborer in Situbondo, East Java, was
\nvisited by an official who told him that he had to move because
\nthe government needed his land for development purposes. What
\ndevelopment? asked Durasim. The official did not reply, but his
\ncountenance showed that he was offended by the question. Durasim
\nknew right away that as a commoner he could not pose such a
\nquestion. Just like Darmin and Parman, Durasim was only confused.<\/p>\n
Cooperative<\/p>\n
Then there was Marjuki, a lime seller in Jember, East Java,
\nwho once had the bright idea to organize small-scale businessmen
\nin his village into a cooperative. He hoped that in this way they
\ncould sell their limes directly to factories. The cooperative was
\nset up and briefly ran well until it had to be dissolved because
\nthe regulations stated there could be only one cooperative per
\nvillage, namely the government-controlled village cooperative
\n(Koperasi Unit Desa).<\/p>\n
Unfortunately for Marjuki and his friends, the management of
\nthe village cooperative did not wish to penetrate big markets
\ndirectly but preferred to sell their produce through large
\ndistributors. They argued that large distributors could guarantee
\nsustainable marketing.<\/p>\n
Marjuki had been a university student for a short time and he
\nknew that he had the freedom of assembly. However, the district
\nhead simply turned a deaf ear to his suggestions.<\/p>\n
In the New Order era, confusion like in the above examples
\noccurred frequently among the smaller people in our society. Is
\nit true that you must have a number of papers to travel around
\nthe country? Can the national economy be split like in the clove
\nstory? Isn't a land owner entitled to information about why he
\nhas to relinquish his land? Is it taboo to exercise the right of
\nassembly to fight for a certain cause?<\/p>\n
Many people could not answer these questions and they became
\nconfused. Unfortunately the government did not have much time to
\nprovide them with the answers. Or maybe the government was
\nconfused too?<\/p>\n
The above cases show the dilemma faced in enforcing human
\nrights in this country. Frequently the problem does not lie in
\nthe violation of civil rights (such as the right of travel) or
\ntheir political rights (such as the right of assembly and the
\nfreedom to express an opinion), rather the problem lies in
\nconceptualization.<\/p>\n
On the conceptual level the New Order government placed a
\ngreater emphasis on certain economic and social rights, namely
\nthe right to be free from hunger, unemployment, poverty and the
\nlike.<\/p>\n
In this sense, human rights were technical problems to be
\nsolved by development undertakings.<\/p>\n
If material needs such as food, clothing and housing could be
\nprovided for then it would be easier to handle other problems
\nrelated to human rights, so the logic went. It was believed that
\nthese needs could only be fulfilled if economic development
\nproceeded unimpeded.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, activists fighting for human rights saw the other
\nside of the coin. To them, the real goals of development, namely
\njustice and prosperity, could be attained only if citizens were
\nallowed to exercise their civil rights (the rights to determine
\none's residence, to travel, to profess a religion) and political
\nrights (the rights of assembly, opinion). These activists
\nconsidered the observance of such rights to be prerequisite to
\nachieving justice and prosperity.<\/p>\n
The above stories show how small infringements of human rights
\ncan disrupt productivity.<\/p>\n
The situation remained the same throughout the life of the New
\nOrder government. The government showed a stubborn unwillingness
\nto entertain any discussion of the matter and was unassailable
\nwith logic. As a result, the country's political life was fraught
\nwith tension and danger.<\/p>\n
In a recent discussion, an expert on Indonesia, Daniel Lev,
\ndisclosed that the number of people who died in politically-
\nrelated violence from the end of 1968 onward was higher than at
\nany other time in the country's history.<\/p>\n
Political life in 1950, when the country was still in its
\ninfancy, was characterized by a much smaller number of deaths
\nassociated with political violence, so what has made the New
\nOrder so bloody? One of the most likely causes may be the fact
\nthat the government attempted to develop the economy very rapidly
\nat a time when society at large, stripped of its civil and
\npolitical rights, could exert virtually no influence or control
\nover the ruling clique's activities.<\/p>\n
The Habibie administration has the opportunity to avoid these
\nmistakes and the incentive to this end is quite considerable.
\nWhat is needed is national reconciliation. Economic recovery will
\nneed the support of all groups in society and this will only be
\npossible if they are all allowed to voice their concerns and
\ninterests without restriction.<\/p>\n
In the international arena one of the main requirements to
\ngain support, both in commercial and political spheres, is the
\nrecognition and upholding of human rights.<\/p>\n
Let us prove that the Indonesian government is not a Moloch
\nGod, a god who eats his own children.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/everyday-human-rights-violations-under-the-new-order-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}