Roadside vendors

This year's Idul Fitri festivities in Jakarta have been observed solemnly and peacefully. So say the police and other city officials.

Indeed, most Jakartans would agree with the assessment, with one striking exception -- the roadside vendors and victims of forced demolition. For them, the Islamic holy days were likely colorless and sorrowful.

Those whose houses were demolished by the Public Order officers recently had to observe what was supposed to be a joyful time, in temporary shelters. Others had to spend their days at the compound of the National Committee for Human Rights (Komnas HAM) in Central Jakarta.

The eve of Idul Fitri proved to be a nightmare for some 300 roadside vendors in South Jakarta. Officers forced them to vacate their trading area beneath the overpass on Jl. Tendean.

Similar raids also took place elsewhere in South Jakarta including Kebayoran Lama, Pondok Labu, Lebak Bulus and Pasar Minggu.

Many of the helpless vendors burst into tears as they shook hands with one another to celebrate Idul Fitri on Tuesday morning. They wondered why the clearance operation was conducted on the eve of Idul Fitri. It is true that most of the vendors had no legal permit to trade in the area, but was it not possible for the municipality to allow them to do business for just one or two more days before evicting them?

The head of Mampang subdistrict, Herianto, dismissed the vendors' plight by saying that the authorities did not have enough time to delay the demolition and that a warning was not necessary because the vendors had violated the law by doing business in prohibited areas.

Most of them have been trying to eke out a living since the 1998 economic crisis hit. Local administrations have largely allowed the vendors to operate, but not without telling them that the administration could ask them to leave any time.

The authorities appear to have failed to anticipate the downside of its own policies. The eviction is also a sign that the heretofore good communications between the administration and the vendors has broken down.

Heriyanto said that before Ramadhan, 155 vendors had agreed to move, and the administration had offered the vendors a spot on the third floor of the Mampang market building. The vendors eventually turned the offer down, believing that the new site would bring bad luck because the floor belonged to vegetables sellers. Hence, who is to blame?

There is always an interesting question when it comes to the implementation of laws, regulations or policies by the administration: Why did the administration officials allow the vendors to operate in the prohibited areas in the first place?

It is public knowledge that roadside vendors in several prohibited areas truly thought that they had a legal right to occupy the spots because they paid regular fees to local officials. One roadside vendor revealed that the amount of money he had to pay was by no means small.

Clearly, it would have been easier for the authorities to ban all vendors from operating under overpasses as soon the construction was complete. Furthermore, letting vendors operate in such places goes against safety standards.

Many of the vendors' makeshift kiosks have electricity, and some vendors even have drilled wells in the area to get water for their daily needs.

From the vehicle traffic point of view, the administration should know that roadside vendors inevitably create traffic problems. Unfortunately, the administration - again - failed to anticipate its own incompetence to enforce the relevant law and regulations against the vendors.

There are many questions we could ask, but there has been no clear or satisfactory explanations.

Forced demolition seems to be the most expedient option for the administration in handling the vendors. If this is the case, the demolition is just an expression of frustration among the city officials, who have failed to find a comprehensive solution.

The vendors would likely have abided by the law, that is, if the law enforcers had enforced it properly, and if the administration had been consistent and clear in its policies.

Unfortunately, the Jakarta administration does not seem to have a clear idea -- nor has it from the beginning of the vendor issue -- on just how to regulate and manage the roadside vendors.

Comparative studies in several cities by Jakarta officials have apparently made no difference in the vision and wisdom needed to deal with roadside vendors.

The administration should have prepared itself with an integrated plan and appropriate steps to deal with roadside vendors. Letting them operate without adequately monitoring their activities is not suggested, but demolishing their kiosks and killing their businesses at the height of the holidays is downright inhumane.

Criticisms and suggestions have seemingly fallen on deaf ears at the administration, which has set April 2004 as the deadline for all vendors to leave the areas under the 27 overpasses in Jakarta.

What we have witnessed from the administration can be likened to shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. And then - unfortunately - their solution seems to be to just shoot the horse.