Rioting provoked by anarchic actions of authorities

Rioting provoked by anarchic actions of authorities

The rule of law ended in the capital this week following the
fatal shooting of four university students on Tuesday. Mochtar
Buchori, an observer of social and cultural affairs, speculates
on what caused the anarchy.

Question: What lifted the rioters to such anarchic heights?

Mochtar: They resorted to anarchy in response to an anarchic
action on the part of the authorities -- the killing of four
demonstrating students on their way back into their campus. Their
reaction was so vehement because they felt their rights had been
denied for too long by the authorities. They felt their sense of
justice had been violated with impunity, that their views had
been ignored, and that they were always treated in a completely
arbitrary manner.

The outburst of anger did not come from students but from
those who were hungry and felt they had been neglected by the
authorities for too long. Students are not anarchists and the
argument that students might cause anarchy if they are allowed to
demonstrate outside their campuses is not valid.

So, the student deaths detonated an explosion of long-
restrained anger against anarchic acts carried out by the
authorities. The ultimate source of the lawlessness was not the
students, but the unjust and tyrannical actions of the
authorities.

Q: How can you say the authorities have committed an anarchic act
while striving to prevent demonstrations from descending into
anarchy?

M: The definition of anarchy is widely misunderstood. The
definition of anarchy, as suggested by Dom Helder Camara, is any
action which breaks the form of order, but the government seems
to define it as any action against the government. That is why
the authorities never realize they have been acting anarchically.
When they do, it usually comes in the form of tyrannical violence
or oppression. On the other hand, they regard street vendors as
anarchists when they break government rules.

Q: Can you give examples of tyrannical violence perpetrated by
the authorities?

M: When local administrations evict residents from their own
houses, even when they hold land certificates, just so they can
give the land to property developers, then they are acting
tyrannically.

Corruption, cutting civil servant salaries and forcing
students to buy uniforms from their schools are also examples of
tyrannical violence and anarchy.

Q: How have the authorities managed to act in such a way without
realizing it?

M: Because high-ranking officials conduct anarchic actions which
are of benefit to themselves, their subordinates try to imitate
them and seek similar benefits. If the President's children, for
example, are allowed to indulge in certain business activities,
despite regulations to the contrary, the children of governors,
regents and mayors will follow suit. This practice is tantamount
to anarchy because it violates the form of order.

Q: How did the nation become entrapped in this condition?

M: The situation arose because of the absence of public debate
and democracy in the country. All civil servants, for example,
now exist only to justify decisions and measures taken by the
government. Any actions of the government must, therefore, be
correct. In short, the use of reason has been overruled by the
use of power. Valid arguments raised by demonstrating students
are overruled by power wielded by the authorities.

The use of reason was a guiding principle in Indonesia during
the 1950s, when the government was committed to democracy.
However, reasoning was banished by president Sukarno when he
introduced guided democracy in 1963. We started using reason
again in 1966, when the New Order government attempted to reform
the political and economic structures of the country. President
Soeharto invited intellectuals to devise new strategies for
economic development and instructed the military to ensure social
stability.

But reasoning died again in 1971, when the New Order
government limited the number of political parties and their
operations on the pretext of maintaining political stability to
guarantee economic improvement.

Q: Do you foresee a return of the use of reason or democracy once
political reform has been introduced?

M: I hope so. On principle, we must amend the existing five
political laws, which have "killed" democracy. We must introduce
new laws which guarantee political parties the freedom to make
decisions. Political parties, for example, should be given the
opportunity to elect their own leaders without any government
intervention. Good parties will never elect "criminals" as their
leaders.

Respect for freedom of speech, which is the essence of
democracy, and other basic human rights, must be revived. The
press, therefore, should be given freedom to publish factual
events.

However, we must be careful because democracy cannot be
established among a politically illiterate population.
Unfortunately, our people still fall into this class. (riz)