Roadside vendors

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.