Jakarta's taxi woes

Jakarta's taxi woes

It could be that not all of us are aware of the latest
annoyance -- if that is a strong enough word -- many of our
fellow commuters now suffer. Space limitations permitted only a
brief report of this nuisance on Thursday.

Compared to the political developments and crises taking place
in Indonesia and the world, grievances about the management of
taxi services around Jakarta may seem quite irrelevant. But the
problem is quite real for those whose lives depend on the
availability of a regular and dependable transportation system
within Jabotabek: the capital and its satellite cities of Bogor,
Tangerang and Bekasi. That adds up to hundreds of thousands of
commuters a day, not including the cab drivers concerned.

During the past two weeks operations were intensified in
Jakarta to enforce an agreement reached last year between the
Land Transportation Control Agencies (DLLAJ) of Jakarta and West
Java. Under the agreement, taxis from companies based in Jakarta
are allowed to take passengers into the neighboring areas of
Bogor, Tangerang and Bekasi but are not allowed to operate inside
these areas or bring passengers back to Jakarta. The reverse goes
for taxis from Bogor, Tangerang and Bekasi.

The restriction was reportedly prompted by complaints from
Jakarta's 27 taxi companies that 95 percent of the estimated
4,000 taxis from surrounding towns invade Jakarta every day. The
rule, and the excesses its implementation have invited, are a
real problem.

Passengers from outside the city have reportedly been ordered
from their taxis by Jakarta DLLAJ officers at the city's borders
on the pretext that the taxis are not allowed to enter the
capital -- not quite in accordance with the Jakarta and West Java
agreement. According to the newspaper Kompas, some DLLAJ
officials in Bekasi are threatening reciprocal action against
Jakarta's taxis entering their territory.

Furthermore, Jakarta's taxi drivers have reportedly begun to
take matters into their own hands by threatening and even
assaulting rival taxis bringing passengers into the city.

All this has of course caused the income of Bogor, Tangerang
and Bekasi taxi drivers (and companies) to decline. Even worse,
though, it impairs the mobility of people traveling between
Jakarta and its surrounds. This diametrically contradicts --
actually negates -- the government's urban development plans.

A major objective of industrial and housing estate buffer
zones is to funnel certain activities and population pressures
away from the city in order to reduce the negative impacts of
urbanization.

Therefore, it seems logical enough to ask: Why have
restrictive boundaries been raised between Jakarta and its buffer
zones? If Bogor, Tangerang and Bekasi are to adequately support
the capital city, wouldn't it be logical to minimize, rather than
impose, obstacles?

Sure, Jakarta's taxi drivers deserve some protection. But this
must be done without overriding the wider interest. Moreover, to
judge by present demand, there is still room for more good taxis
in Jakarta. By providing good service, Jakarta's taxis drivers
would have no reason to fear competition from out-of-town cabs.