Class action casts light on judiciary

Class action casts light on judiciary

The lawsuit filed Thursday against the State Electricity
Company (PLN) by the Indonesian Consumers Foundation (YLKI) for
an eight-hour blackout throughout Java and Bali last month may
have taken the public by surprise, given its uncustomary nature.
Kastorius Sinaga, a lecturer in social sciences at the University
of Indonesia's postgraduate program, ponders this event.

JAKARTA (JP): The Sunday, April 13, 1997 blackout has
ironically cast a light on our uncertain legal system. It is the
legal right of people to sue the government or state-managed
public enterprises because of any neglect in giving the best
service to the community.

This legal suit represented by the Jakarta Legal Aid Institute
is called class action, a remote term in legal vocabulary.

It is likely that the community, the majority of whom are not
law-conscious, will be confused, wondering whether the state-
owned electricity company could be sued, especially since the
blackout was not intended by PLN.

How is it possible that the Jakarta Legal Aid Institute, a
small private NGO with insignificant power, could fight against
giant PLN using an alien sounding term: class action.

It is therefore interesting to analyze the meaning behind this
class action suit.

Originally, class action was a scientific term that political
scientists used in referring to the existence of a collective
action by a homogeneous community group.

Therefore, class action is often perceived as a labor strike
or demonstration by a community group that is relatively
homogeneous in terms of members' social status and type of work.

Society, however, indispensable of its background of
professions, economic status and gender, is also entitled to
launch a class action suit. It has the same status as consumers
of products or services, provided by certain businesses and
companies.

An important element in class action is the existence of a
situation in which common interest and collective rights are
proven to have been disturbed by a party that is obliged to
protect them.

The form and method of organizing a class action suit vary,
but it has the same platform, through representation by an
institute fighting for the claims of a community group it
represents.

The YLKI, in this respect, serves as trustee for all PLN
consumers who have been prejudiced by the blackout by PLN.
Therefore, the meaning behind the class action suit has expanded.

First, unlike before, our present and future legal system is
no longer seen as a repressive device used by authority over the
interests of society.

On the contrary, as the class action suit against PLN will
show, the legal system should be able to protect the community
from government's arbitrary behavior, especially in its coercive
power as a political entity.

Second, the suit shows the important relevance of public
accountability in government bureaucracy, including in its
institutions, especially considering that government institutions
are monopolistic in the production of public goods and services.

Entrepreneur spirit, professionalism and dedication to quality
and consumer interest are key prerequisites of a market economy
system. These have not yet been displayed by government
institutions in their capacity as principal players in our
economic system.

Third, the tradition of collective legal suits against public
institutions through class action will gradually become
institutionalized in our legal system. This will make the law a
more interesting subject for legal practitioners.

Beyond the law, in the sense that it will become a reflection
of an encounter between various interests and
political forces, elements will be revealed which are seen as the
main enemies of the law itself, that is: arrogance of power,
arbitrariness and authoritarianism.