Building Villages Without Neglecting Human Dignity

The presence of the Kopdes Merah Putih (Red and White Village Cooperative) brings new hope for rural economic development. The government has positioned this programme as an instrument to mobilise local economic potential whilst strengthening the self-reliance of village communities. Through cooperatives, economic activities that have so far been sporadic are expected to be managed collectively, ranging from the distribution of basic necessities and the development of productive enterprises to financial services and the management of leading commodities in each region. Behind the high hopes for this programme lies the conviction that capital and infrastructure are not enough for grassroots economic development. Equally important is preparing the people who will manage all that potential. For this reason, the government then encouraged the character building of prospective cooperative managers through education that adopts a pattern of military discipline. The hope is simple: to produce individuals who possess integrity, loyalty, endurance, and a strong spirit of service to the community. To a certain extent, this objective is understandable. Economic institutions do require discipline. Without good governance, the public trust will be easily neglected. The issue becomes different when, in the process of character building, an incident occurs that claims the lives of five prospective Kopdes Merah Putih managers. Although medical examination results stated that the participants’ deaths were related to their respective health conditions and not due to violent acts during training, the incident still raises a more fundamental question: is a semi-military approach truly the most appropriate path for managers of a people’s economic institution? This question is not intended to reject the grand idea of village development. On the contrary, it arises from a desire for good goals to be pursued through means that are also aligned with human values. It is in this context that maqashid shariah offers an interesting space for reflection. Maqashid shariah fundamentally speaks about the purpose of the presence of law and policy in human life. Imam Al-Syatibi explained that sharia was revealed to safeguard five essential elements of life: religion, life, intellect, lineage, and property. This idea was later developed by Ibn ’Asyur, who placed social welfare as an important orientation in reading the dynamics of modern society. In more recent times, Jasser Auda also reads the concept of maqashid as non-rigid, because maqashid should be read as an interconnected system that is responsive to changing times. If this framework is used, the discussion regarding the training of prospective cooperative managers no longer stops at the level of administrative right or wrong. The concern becomes the extent to which the policy truly leads to public welfare and minimises the possibility of harm. The protection of life, or hifz al-nafs, becomes the first point of departure. In the Islamic tradition, human life holds a very noble position. The state, society, and all social institutions are obliged to safeguard the safety of every individual under their responsibility. The incident that killed five participants should serve as a momentum and a reminder to the state that there is one important aspect in the hierarchy of maqashid shariah that has been sidelined in this policy: the safety of the participants. When a public programme presents a risk that results in the loss of life, there must be a total evaluation of the urgency of this policy. This is part of the state’s moral responsibility to its people that must be fulfilled. This criticism does not mean to disregard the factor of discipline, which is also important in leadership formation, but the means to achieve that goal need to be continuously weighed and adjusted to the context of the work they will undertake. After all, a cooperative manager is not a commander or a leader of a marching troop. That is not the main task and function of a Kopdes manager. They are more often faced with more complex problems, namely interacting with the diverse characters of a pluralistic society. Their main task is to build trust, manage economic resources, and facilitate common interests. Their workspace is filled more with deliberation, negotiation, and empowerment than with hierarchical instructions. This consideration brings us to the second dimension of maqashid shariah, namely hifz al-’aql, or the protection of the intellect. In a broader sense, protecting the intellect does not only mean safeguarding humans from things that damage the ability to think, but also creating space for the development of knowledge and wisdom. The progress of a cooperative is often determined by the ability of its managers to read business opportunities, understand community needs, and formulate strategies appropriate to local conditions. Such competence is usually born from education that emphasises economic literacy, strengthening managerial capacity, and skills in building social networks. Of course, discipline still has an important place. However, discipline in cooperative management has a different character from discipline in the military tradition. It rests on an awareness of the mandate, responsibility to the community, and a commitment to managing common interests professionally. Another equally important matter is the protection of property, or hifz al-mal. From the outset, cooperatives were formed as a means to manage community welfare collectively. Every rupiah collected and every policy implemented must ultimately lead to the common good.