Why not compromise?

After years of absence, the becak, that humble three-wheeled pedicab which the city administration has been trying without much success to remove from the capital's streets, is back on the road -- and in the news. The incident that shocked Jakarta's citizens into realizing that the city administration had not entirely succeeded in banishing the hardy becak from Jakarta came on Tues. Aug. 14, when a Hansip (civilian guard) named Matsani died from wounds inflicted by a mob of becak drivers.

For a measly fee of Rp 20,000 -- the equivalent of US$2.40 -- Matsani had agreed to help the city's law enforcement officials carry out a crackdown on becak drivers who were operating in the Roxy area of Central Jakarta in defiance of a city ordinance dating back to 1988. However, as law enforcers increased pressure and becak drivers held fast to their ground, the campaign turned violent. Amid a shower of rocks and hostile insults, Matsani soon found himself cornered and severely beaten by becak drivers. The tragic thing about his death was that it could have been avoided had both sides been able to temper their emotions and act with a little more restraint.

No one seems to know just how or when the becak first made its appearance in Jakarta -- or, for that matter, in other cities big and small. What is known for certain is that, in most cities at least, they did not exist until after the outbreak of World War II, when food shortages and poverty in its direst forms first began to affect thousands or perhaps even millions of Indonesians. Bearing this in mind, the becak can probably be viewed as part of the phenomenon of poverty that has, since the end of the war, never really been eliminated from society.

While no one has apparently kept track of the phenomenon, the becak continued to grow in number until it reached a total of about 7,000 in Jakarta alone this year, operating in a little more than 500 localities throughout the city, according to the best estimates released by the Urban Poor Consortium, a Jakarta- based non-governmental organization (NGO). Although it was officially banned from the streets in 1988, the becak never really disappeared from the city's streets.

So much a part of life have they become among Jakarta's citizenry in the lower and middle-class population brackets that in 1998, when a bylaw was passed by the Jakarta city administration to bar them from city streets, it was not only becak drivers who protested the move, but the majority of the population as well. The fact is that, for many people, the becak fills a real need that cannot be provided for by any other means of transportation. Office workers find them convenient for taking them to work and home again. For thousands of housewives, they provide a cheap and convenient means of transportation to carry them and their shopping home after a trip to the market. For running short distances and in terms of convenience, no modern means of transport compares with the becak.

Given the convergence of interests that exists between becak drivers and the majority of Jakarta's citizenry, therefore, the question arises why a compromise cannot be reached between the city administration and becak drivers. Such a compromise could, in addition, have the added benefit of providing thousands of jobs for migrant workers in this city while preserving peace and order at the same time. This line of reasoning seems all the more justified since a court order, dated July 31, 2000, declared the ban on becak, as contained in Bylaw No. 11/1988, unlawful.

One of the city administration's main arguments for barring becak from the streets is, we understand, that the job is inhumane and disparaging. Another argument, and one that is less often openly admitted, is that becak are difficult to control and tend to cause traffic jams. To the first argument one could contest that if allowing people to drive pedicabs was considered inhumane and disparaging, then depriving people of employment in difficult times, such as at the present, is probably no less so. As for the second -- granted, becak could disrupt traffic on the city's main roads and avenues. For what reason, though, can't they be granted licenses to operate in residential neighborhoods or around certain complexes such as the Gelora Bung Karno sports compound?

Hopefully the city authorities can give this subject some deeper consideration and soften its stubborn stance of confrontation. We are certain that by doing so Jakarta's city fathers will earn themselves gratitude not only from becak drivers but from thousands of Jakarta's ordinary citizens as well.