LBH avails itself to Kedung Ombo villagers

JAKARTA (JP): The Legal Aid Institute office in Semarang is offering its services to 34 Kedung Ombo villagers in Central Java who were recently defeated in a battle in the supreme court over land disputes with the government.

The institute's Semarang director Puspo Adji said the villagers have not lost their case entirely because the supreme court simply annulled its earlier decision which favored the villagers but did not grant victory to the government.

There is still a legal recourse if the villagers want it, Puspo told the Antara news agency.

The institute's office has represented the 34 villagers since 1987 in fighting for a better compensation for their land which had been procured for a huge reservoir in the area. Altogether there were 60,000 families displaced by the World Bank funded project and most of them have accepted the compensation from the government.

The court had earlier ruled in favor of the villagers and ordered the government to pay Rp 50,000 a square meter in compensation, compared to Rp 4,000 the government was willing to pay and the Rp 10,000 sought by the villagers.

The government later filed for a review of the ruling and the supreme court relented and annulled its earlier decision.

But the case is not yet over because the latest supreme court ruling did not mention who was in the right or wrong, Puspo said. "We can still apply for a new court hearing. This is, of course, up to the villagers."

The chairman of the Semarang Chapter of the Indonesian Bar Association Sinar Tarigan Girsang warned against filing for a new court hearing because the chances of winning are now small and it would involve yet another long wait before the case could be settled.

"I think it is more important that this case be resolved once and for all and the villagers can enjoy the compensation for their land without having to wait for the lengthy legal procedures to be complete," Sinar said.

He painted a bleak picture for the villagers if they filed for a new court hearing, stressing that a court is likely to reject a petition for the hearing of a case that had already been settled, unless there were substantial differences from the previous case.

There is another reason why the villagers stand to lose their case -- their land has already been flooded by water so it would be difficult to assess the precise size of the land in dispute. This, he explained, would make the villagers' case even more obscure. (emb)