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.