Hooligans: An age-old problem

Hooligans: An age-old problem

By Onghokham

JAKARTA (JP): The recent gang fights by preman (hooligans) at
the Tanah Abang market forced security troops to temporarily
cordon off the area causing massive traffic jams and complete
chaos.

Although hooliganism is not a new phenomenon in our society,
the term preman is relatively new and dates from around l900 when
modern urban centers began to emerge in Dutch colonial days. It
probably originated from the Dutch word Vrije Man (free man) in
contrast to those employed officially as police.

As far as society was concerned, the term did not necessarily
have a negative meaning just like its equivalents in other parts
of the world such as the mafia, triad groups and others. They
functioned as power brokers between interest groups in the
society and alien authoritarian bureaucracy, whether of modern
Italy, America, China or colonial governments.

The function of hooligans in the early period might have been
like that of pokrol-bambu (an unofficial lawyer without any
academic degree) which also came into being at the same time. The
pokrol-bambu knew his way around the law courts and was accepted
as one by the law courts and its clients. Until the late colonial
days there were quite a few famous pokrol-bambu who were very
articulate in presenting and defending their clients' interests
at the cities' law courts.

The term preman might have come from the world of Dutch
colonial dualism as eloquently presented by H.J.Boeke. He said
that colonial society really consisted of two worlds, a European
and an Eastern (native) one, a government (gubernemen) and a
European private entrepreneurial world (partikelir).

Since today dualism is reflected in the existence of such
concepts as non-governmental organizations, mass organizations,
social organizations and political organizations or any
combination of them.

In the Netherlands Indies, the official "real" world was with
the government (gubernemen) and its officials while the
partikelir remained outside gubernemen and was somewhat inferior
although employed by one of the big five Dutch multinationals
such as the Netherlands Trading Company. Therefore the "free man"
in the case of preman was unofficial and hence negative.

If power brokers in urban areas are called hooligans, then in
rural areas they were usually referred to as jago (literally
meaning champion, leader), jawara (strong man), weri (police-
spy/informer) and others. Colonial reports called them
tussenpersonen (intermediaries) perhaps best translated into the
modern Indonesian term of calo. In Indonesia, the political
structures have always traditionally evolved around rival
centers. Next to kraton (palace) authority there were always the
centers of dissenting princes and rival kinglets. Hence, next to
the official authority of village heads there were unofficial
hierarchies of landowners, religious people, cikal bakal
(original village) families and others. And next to police powers
was the power of the jawara.

Official taxes, implementation of government regulations,
demands for government corvee, and other requirements were
handled through the power brokers. The term power brokers points
at the ambivalent positions of the jago. Was he the defender of
the people or was he on the side of the government? Whatever side
he was on, in order to function smoothly between society and
government the jago had to have the confidence of both sides and
both sides must think of him as useful.

The existence of power brokers became more necessary whenever
there were demands for greater government, scarcer government
services and a more alien bureaucracy and police as under modern
colonial rule. There were no electoral or legal institutions to
solve conflicts between the ruler and the ruled and personalities
became more important than offices.

However, the jago was another marked aspect of Indonesian
traditional political culture of focusing on personality. The
personality of the jago was dressed in the folklore of magical
invulnerability both physically and metaphorically.

At times modern governments became frustrated with the
informal power centers of power brokers looking upon them as
obstacles to necessary reforms and felt as though they were being
thwarted by their power. The colonial government, in facing the
power of the jago would then make use of the "extraordinary
powers of the governor general of the Netherlands Indies" and
exile the jago leaders, dukun (shamans) and others from their
place of residence to remote islands outside Java.

In the post-colonial period, the episode known as "mysterious
killings" or "Petrus" which was condemned abroad was an example
of drastic measures taken by a government which felt it had lost
the battle against hooligans. But at the moment, these hooligan
organizations are not organized on a large scale compared to
their counterparts such as the yakuza in Japan, the mafia in
Italy and the triads in China.

New dynasties in Java often emerged from the jago of rival
centers. For example, the l2th century king Ken Arok of East
Java, ancestor to the Majapahit kings was said to be a thief and
bandit in his youth before becoming king, a position he achieved
by murdering his opposition. In the same way, Senopati in the
late l6th century started his career as a bandit leader and
became the ancestor of the still remaining royal courts of
Central Java.

Both Ken Arok and Senopati were made body guards and region
heads since their success as brigand leaders proved their ability
as "tax or tribute collectors" and then slowly usurped the royal
power. Indeed, the tradition of appointing thieves, brigands or
thugs to official positions such as village or district chiefs
was still in use during colonial times. It was based on one of
the traditional Javanese principles of government of "catching
thieves by thieves" which illustrates best of all the place of
hooligans in our society.

Within the official political ideology of Indonesia there
might be no room for opposition -- loyal or legal -- for any such
phenomenon considered rebellious. Nevertheless there are rival
centers of power which need accommodation, repression or at least
manipulation. This is evident by the incorporation within the
official power of boxers in imperial-China and youth groups of
thugs elsewhere. These groups also move through the twilight
world of legality and illegality, always using violence.
Naturally rival gang warfare is part of these traditions and if
given the same political characteristics it could lead to the
widespread violence of l965 to 1966.

The writer is a historian.