The Kedungombo decision

The Kedungombo decision

The joy of the 34 Kedungombo farmers, who won a legal battle
against the Central Java provincial government last July, has
turned out to be short-lived. Only three months. The other day,
in a very surprising decision, the Supreme Court announced that
it had annulled its own previous verdict, and was now ruling in
favor of the government.

The new decision unquestionably will raise some questions,
because it is highly unusual for the Supreme Court to annul its
own decision in such a short time. Indeed, seen from any point of
view, the Kedungombo case is bizarre. From the very beginning one
could see a number of "strange" matters evolving in this case.

Last July it was made public that in July 1993, curiously a
whole year before, the Supreme Court had ruled that the
government must pay Rp 50,000 for each square meter of land
formerly owned by 34 farmers, which was used for the Kedungombo
dam, plus Rp 2 billion for the non-material losses incurred.

The farmers were among the thousands of families who lived on
a 6,700 hectare plot of land which they had to abandon when the
government started the Kedungombo reservoir project, financed by
the World Bank, in 1990.

The Supreme Court's initial ruling sent shockwaves through the
bureaucracy. Some government officials, notably Central Java
Governor Soewardi and Central Java Military Commander Maj. Gen.
Soejono, were reportedly furious over the verdict. Later, Chief
Justice Purwoto reportedly met with President Soeharto to explain
the decision. And immediately, only a few days after the ruling
became public knowledge, the Central Java Provincial Government
filed for a review and a new trial.

And now, within three months, a new verdict has been made.
Curiously, the reversed decision was announced by outgoing Chief
Justice Purwoto Gandasubrata on the day he handed over the post
to his successor Soerjono. Purwoto, who took part in the five
member team which annulled the previous decision, was replaced as
chief justice on Nov. 1.

According to Purwoto, the Supreme Court's earlier decision was
faulty because the presiding judges set the compensation rate
higher then the people's claim. Beside that, the Supreme Court
failed to take into account a 1993 presidential decree on setting
a compensation rate for land acquired by the government, and
based its decision on a 1975 ministerial decree which had been
superseded by the 1993 ruling.

While we don't question the legal procedures behind the new
decision, one could not help but wonder why the Supreme Court has
so suddenly become capable of moving in such a speedy manner by
making a new verdict within three months, while the backlog of
thousands of appeal cases reportedly has hampered the activities
of the Supreme Court for years.

The fact that the new verdict was made just two days before
Purwoto's retirement has given rise to the impression that
somehow the two are related. In short, all these circumstances
make it difficult for us to shake off the vague notion that
somehow there is something odd behind the Supreme Court's about
face.

Of course, one could assume that the new verdict may have been
motivated by a concern, in the part of the government, that a
decision in favor of the displaced farmers could influence
hundreds of other recalcitrant villagers, who were also forcibly
evicted in 1990 to make way for the dam, to sue the government,
thus creating a giant problem for the government.

Hence, we think some sort of explanation should be made to
assure the public that there is nothing unusual behind the new
decision. After all it concerns the integrity of the Supreme
Court, one of our most respected pillars of the state.