Unbridled change threatening Bali

Unbridled change threatening Bali

By Putu Wirata

DENPASAR (JP): Nyoman Gelebet's name frequently makes front
page news in Bali. He is critical of the deterioration the
island's culture. He stands on the frontline of protesters with
Gedong Bagoes Oka, a prominent religious leader who promotes
modernizing Hinduism, and with a number of Hindu students who
object to the planned Garuda Wisnu Kencana sculpture by Nyoman
Nuarta. The statue's sheer height, reportedly higher than the
famed Statue of Liberty in New York, will make it more than a
landmark.

Nyoman is also closely connected to groups opposed to the
development of a hotel by PT Bali Nirwana Resort at Tanah Lot,
the development of a power plant in Bedugul, the statues of
heroes on strategic street junctions, the general spatial plan,
and the date for the Eka Buana cleansing ritual.

In his opinion, the centenarian ritual should be held in 1998,
not in 1996. He suspects that the ritual was deliberately moved
ahead for political and private reasons.

Born in 1944, Nyoman graduated from the Surabaya Institute of
Technology in 1976. Between 1965 and 1971, he helped build the
Bali International Airport, and from 1971 to 1974 he worked for
BIC/SCETO, a research project to formulate a tourist master plan
for Bali. He continued his studies at the Surabaya Institute of
Technology from 1974 to 1976, then worked for Pacific Consultant
Intercontinental until 1980. He was with the Bali Tourist
Development Organization from 1980 to 1982 and joined the
Universal Hindu inventory and documentation team from 1982 to
1990. He is now a lecturer at the School of Engineering at
Udayana University.

He has written a book entitled Traditional Architecture from
Bali, published for a select readership. He is sought for his
critiques. His observations of the changes in Bali often confuse
even himself.

The following is an interview he gave The Jakarta Post:

Question: You have stated the Eka Buana ritual should have
been held in 1988, not 1996. You have also suggested that
deference of the ceremony might have been political.

Gelebet: I actually spoke off-the-record and reporters were
aware of it because I mentioned it to them. Imagine my surprise
when it was splashed across the media. I felt as if I had been
indicted. And that while I am actually a member of the Hindu
Leaders Council. Anyway, because it concerns Yadnya (holy
sacrifice ritual) I won't go further into the subject.

How would Bali and the world benefit from the Eka Buana
ritual. You said that the ceremony would not only cleanse Bali,
but all the world.

The Hindu community holds an annual religious cleansing ritual
which falls on the ninth month of the Saka calender. Aside from
the annual rites, there are the five year rituals, ten year
rituals, hundred year rituals -- like the Eka Dasa Rudra -- and
Seribu Tahunan (1,000 years). The rituals denote a repayment to
nature after periods of constant taking.

Yes, but isn't it a symbolic cleansing ritual? Bali and the
world are facing concrete problems, environmental abuse, cultural
erosion, rising crime rate, narcotics. Why haven't intellectual
Hindus from Bali made use of this momentum in order to evaluate
those problems?

Possibly because they haven't made a scientific analysis yet.
To be able to do that, we need data, we cannot just make noises
without coming up with strong facts.

The Hindu community also appears to only emphasize the ritual
aspect.

True. Our social religious system gives more value to the
ritual aspect of our religion. The philosophical side does not
seem very important.

It seems Bali lacks a figure who can speak on behalf of the
Hindu community.

That is true of Bali. But once patience has run out, people
start to move on their own accord. They don't need to be ordered.
It'll be like the Bali Nirwana Resort (BNR) hotel case on Tanah
Lot. The project received strong opposition from the Hindu
community although nobody was in charge.

Yes, but in the end the BNR hotel was built and it looks as if
the Hindu community lost their fight.

Nobody won or lost. If we claimed victory, who was our
opponent? Under Pancasila, we are not opposed to our country.
There is a difference between the country and administration. We
look for protection from our government.

The government has always been able to smother protests.
Instructions are not effective enough, even to the effect that
the governor of Bali had to alter these rulings.

If man falls short in correcting himself, nature eventually
takes over. Like what recently happened, floods inundated
hundreds of houses in Suwung village. It's all because of the dam
construction on the river estuary. They claimed that an analysis
of the surrounding environs had been made and they reassured us
that there would be no floods, that it would be safe and that our
fears were groundless. Now it looks as if they have faked the
analysis.

Does that indicate moral shortcomings on the side of the
authorities?

Don't go too far. Without putting the dots on the i's, people
understand. The authorities would like to simplify the problem.
When people asked questions about the geothermal exploration in
Bedugul, an official replied: "Of course everything has been
studied." He forgot that only a few days earlier, he had said
that the environmental impact analysis did not exist and that the
national science institute had yet to start research on the
environment. Now, if research hasn't been done, don't tell people
it has.

You have followed Bali's development since the 1960s. Are you
worried about the social changes taking place now?

I'm not the only one who is worried, the whole world is.
During demonstrations opposing the construction of the BNR hotel,
people the world over, those who knew and love Bali, showed
concern. We received letters, people came to see me. They were
apprehensive. Communication with the outside world is one way to
make Bali's aspirations known.

Is it really effective?

It seems that this approach works very well. We have done all
we can, so much so that one of us got a beating at Pura Jeroan
Pura. No one was ever beaten at a pura before. This means that
the incumbent came to the end of his meter. We admit that our
capabilities don't extend beyond that. If the government doesn't
want to listen to the voice of the people, nature intercepts and
takes over. What the government should ask themselves is: Is it
necessary for nature to repeatedly warn us?

When you raised the issue of "pura ground" at the Bali House
of Representatives, the chairman challenged you to come up with
proof of ownership, which allegedly underwent a change of
ownership and then transferred again to the private sector. Were
you able to collect all the data?

How can I collect data? The House has people to do research.
If they say that they didn't know it was pura ground, why did
they agree that the land was to be appropriated for further sale
to a private party. Have they forgotten that they are
representing the people, and not a board of investors. They were
chosen by the people.

What will happen if pura land is owned by a private party?

A pura does not have money to fund rituals, they depend on the
public's generosity. Should people really be burdened like that?
Gains from pura land take care of all ritual costs. Looking at it
from a psychological point of view, a community subsisting on
such land will be morally tied to the pura. If the roof needs
fixing, such persons will wholeheartedly volunteer their
services. And it is the custom that pura land is not for sale. It
is these things that keep Bali culture alive.

But, why have more pura lands been appropriated for marketing
purposes?

May be there were personal reasons for that. I don't like to
comment on it. I am only amazed that officials reportedly said
that traditionally villages do not have the right to own land.
Such customs are not backed by the law. Now, this has to be
straightened out. Land laws are based on traditional rules. Then
how can officials say that land laws can overrule traditional
law? Why not turn it the other way round? I know of a ministerial
rule permitting land ownership based on traditional village
customs. What's more, the essence of this tradition can be found
in the Tri Hita Karana concept, which is unified in the elements
of Parahyangan (temple), Pawongan (members of traditional
village) and Palemahan (private and community grounds). Each
village is unquestionably tied up with the land, the inhabitants
and the temple, it is all integrated into a whole. They are not
to be separated, later the custom chief of the village shall own
the land. In such cases, we should dare to face confrontation.

How much pura land has been cut up in plots and changed into
privately owned land?

Tanah Lot is dense with permanent kiosks, all of them built on
pura land. Then, all along the road to Pura Besakih, permanent
kiosks and shops were built on land never to be owned by
individuals. If they had no permit, why did they dare build
permanent buildings. The puras should retain the authority to
evict people from land, so puras won't be encroached upon by
markets. People had no qualms to build, there must be a ruling
from the government. So what to do?

What do you think about the rapid population growth around
Kuta, Sanur and Denpasar?

A few days ago, around Idul Fitri, I walked around Kuta. The
atmosphere in town was relaxed and peaceful, there were no
sellers, no people crisscrossing over the roads, it was just
beautiful. It's hard to describe, one can only feel it. No
pickpockets, no criminals, no wicked people, all was clean.
Today, it is as busy as ever.

Do you worry about the fate of Bali? That it may end the same
way as the Betawi (in Jakarta), who have practically been
obliterated by urbanization?

It's all up to us, do we have the guts to halt the arrival of
immigrants? We have to take care that we won't be blamed for
instigating hatred of tribal affiliations, and religious, or
racial feelings. People might be afraid to raise their voice.
After all, this is all for the good of the environment. It is
said that we maintain a tourism culture. If urbanization goes
unchecked, all the land in Bali will be gone in 50 years. There
will be over population. The culture of Bali is rooted in the
land, if the land is gone, its culture will vanish and tourists
will stop coming. If this continues, it won't be only Bali people
who loose out. The hotel business in Nusa Dua, Kuta and Sanur
will also feel the pinch.

But population growth from urbanization is also a result of
tourism development.

True, but don't press the Balinese into selling their land to
big time investors. There should be controls and direction. Or, a
system should be made to protect indigenous people. There was a
time when the government used to scream "save Bali culture, don't
sell land, utilize the contract system." That's what they said,
then they issued a rule about the sale of land. Different words,
different actions.

According to the government, investors are not happy with the
contract system.

But is it really true? That's what they say, proof is needed.

It seems people's traditions and customs have fallen short of
expectations. The government makes the decisions, and start
consultations with elders when problems arise. Elders' voices
will only be listened to when existing decisions have to be
enforced.

Yes, people follow without resistance, the influence of the
authorities is rooted. I, therefore, ask for a revival of village
customs to replace the village chief administration system. Such
a system will be meekly followed, especially if the village chief
happens to be a member of the Army. When will they hold
discussions and meet with the people? But, if I talk in this way,
don't go around saying that I'm one of the primordial voices.

That won't guarantee the morals of the Balinese will improve.
The government proved its attention when it arranged a
competition for village customs. Would people's aspirations be
smothered if the government appointed a village chief?

We don't need to discuss the village custom competition,
that's too farfetched. The leading role has been taken over by
the village chief.

What about the fate of the Nusa Dua people after the arrival
of Bali Tourism Development Coordinator (BTDC).

BTDC's earlier concept was not like that. I was born in Bualu
and I followed the planning process of Nusa Dua. The concept had
local village representatives in the BTDC body at first. They
were supposed to channel the village's aspirations. The reality
was different though, the local people were left out altogether.
That's why the body was at liberty to erect a concrete wall
(which isolated roadside kiosks serving the local populace), and
evict people. Now the villages have become acceptors of hotel
waste. Earnings of the Nusa Dua region are being used to fund
tourist development in Manado and Biak. In the original concept,
income from this region was slated to fund the island's tourism
infrastructure. I wonder why earnings of the BTDC are being
transferred to places outside Bali?

The SCETO's master plan has been violated. What about other
master plans, like BPRIP's for instance. Has that undergone major
changes too?

I don't like to say anything about it, I don't like to judge
people. That wouldn't be ethical. I hope that the government, and
its representatives, will understand more about the region's
existence. You might want to go deeper into that.

You complain about space distribution in Bali, of tourist
areas, for instance. What is the basis of your criticism?

The basics can be found in understanding for the region. They
think, that area is meant as a hotel or restaurant site only.
It's true that the Nusa Dua area, Kuta and Sanur, have become
concentrated hotel sites. However, there are also stopover areas
like Tanah Lot. But, their preconceived ideas of the Tanah Lot
area as a hotel site, really did transform the place into such an
area. Construction of a star-rated hotel will be only advantage
those in the hotel business. Whereas, if the government promoted
the development of home stays, cottages, motels, and the like,
local villages could benefit. They could lease their houses,
opened drink stalls and sell young coconut juice and generally
become their own boss. With star-rated hotels in the region, they
might become gardeners or caddies at best, they will be depending
on people.

Has Bali's land and culture been over exploited compared with
tourist areas in other countries?

I have observed many tourist destinations. I have been to
Korea, Japan, the United States, Thailand, also Hawaii. In
Hawaii, the indigenous people have become only part of the
island's decor. In Australia the Aborigines have been removed
from their land. Do we want to go the same way as they have. They
provide good samples and many experts are saying that Hawaii is a
shining example of negative social cultural development. Here we
find many people of the opinion that we should save Bali's
culture, lest it may go the same way as Hawaii. Well, in that
case, it would mean that we would want to keep mistakes to a bare
minimum. But, will it be really done the right way?

You sound as if Bali is a hopeless affair ready to sink into
the ocean. Many people like to compare the Balinese with the
Betawi

If no control over urbanization is exercised, Bali could meet
the same fate as the Betawi.

If our observations are right, the whole thing resembles a
machine running without brakes. Can people stop it?

It's possible, if they only wanted to.

You seem to be the only one taking a stand.

Indeed, honest talk has its risks. We are now enjoying
economic advancement, improved education, but, we don't have the
guts to express what needs to be said. We hopelessly fail in this
matter.

It is said that we are a nation of fighters.

(Gelebet smiled.)

I don't want to belittle my own race, but, history has proven
that we can be easily divided. The Dutch set foot on our soil,
bestowing presents on the village chiefs as they went and we were
colonized for three and a half centuries. Vietnam was
exceptional, it waged an undercover war against the States, and
they won. After the Americans left the country, they started to
rebuild their economy with rapid results. What do you think of
that?

Compared with us, Vietnam is more advanced. Its annual per
capita income is three times that of Indonesia. And that in such
a relative short time after the war. Their lust for work is
extraordinary. Bali is said to be number two on the national
ladder of per capita incomes. But then, don't forget that many of
Bali's hotels are owned by outsiders. They make substantial
contributions to the region's income, which shows up in the
statistics. But, that's all on paper. One tycoon might easily
adopt hundred or a thousand destitute people. Would he really
share his riches with them? I think not.

If you were asked to present a proposal to preserve Bali's
culture, what would you come up with?

I would stress once more to revive the village customs and
suggest to end the system of village chiefs. Just have a close
look, what programs were not successful through the medium of
traditional institutes. There was the village family planning
system, the rice field irrigation program, intensification
through the masses, special intensification program. I don't want
to oppose the government, but these were positive plans. Why did
they resort to the village chief governing system again? I also
disapprove of too many supermarkets, it kills traditional markets
and the small traders, it is conducive to the makings of poverty.
It's true that supermarket taxes could avert poverty, but, if
these small traders were left to exist, government would not need
to fight poverty.