YLKI sees class action as tool to protect consumers

By I. Christianto and Wirasti Wiryono

JAKARTA (JP): Win or lose, the Rp 500 billion (US$210 million) lawsuit filed last month against the state-owned electricity monopoly PLN has set a precedent in Indonesian consumer advocacy.

Other lawsuits will likely follow as more and more consumers fight for their rights against the mighty producers.

The Indonesian Consumers Organization (YLKI), which filed the lawsuit on behalf of one million electricity users, believes that class action is one measure of enforcing consumers' rights and of punishing those who violated these rights.

YLKI, which marks its 24th anniversary today, sees class action as a kind of participation to improve people's awareness of their rights as consumers, YLKI chairperson Tini Hadad said.

And it saves time and money, she adds.

Tini has no illusions about the prospect of winning the lawsuit or of future class actions for that matter, given the government's aversion to lawsuits.

The government has dismissed class actions as improper for Indonesia, she said.

"During the drafting of a bill on consumer protection, government representatives disputed the clause on class actions. They said class action is not proper in Indonesia yet."

"In my opinion, they should just leave the clause in and let the House of Representatives debate it," she said.

YLKI has filed the lawsuit against PLN with the South Jakarta District Court for the massive power blackout that hit Jakarta and most of Java and Bali last month.

The organization is claiming Rp 650,000 in damages caused by the outage to its office, and it is also seeking Rp 500,000 damages for every PLN consumer affected. YLKI received about 100 complaints but one estimate is that at least one million consumers were hit by the eight-hour blackout.

The government stated the power cut occurred while PLN was conducting some repair work at the Gandul transmission and load- control in Cinere, South Jakarta.

PLN has contested the lawsuit and the court has yet to rule whether YLKI has a case or not.

"We shall see," Tini said when asked about her chances.

The massive class action is another step in YLKI's 24-year struggle to protect consumers in Indonesia.

The group was founded on May 11, 1973, after it took part in a trade exhibition at the Jakarta Fairground to encourage Indonesians to buy local products.

The practice of opening booths at various trade and consumer goods exhibitions continues.

This simple beginning is reflected in the modest office for YLKI's 30 staff on Jl. Pancoran Barat, South Jakarta, and a modest budget of Rp 500 million a year.

However, this has not prevented YLKI from speaking out against the government and against giant corporations, even if up to 20 percent of its budget comes from the government and some from private companies.

Other financial sponsors include the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Asia Foundation.

YLKI's less publicized tasks include analyzing products, strengthening networks with local consumer groups in the regions and improving cooperation with the government. Its product analyses focus on foodstuffs, beverages, vitamins and fast foods.

YLKI uses laboratories owned by state or private research agencies.

The organization has also been active in pushing for consumer protection legislation. In 1981, it produced the draft of a bill which has since been used as a reference for discussion.

The bill never reached the House of Representatives because the Ministry of Industry and Trade had not given its support. The ministry's director of trade, Ismail, said the bill would likely be presented to the House in late 1998.

Consumer advocacy, with the goal of increasing the level of awareness among consumers, remains the YLKI's most difficult task, especially given the current public attitude.

Despite its outspokenness, the organization has not gained the wide acceptance it feels it deserves. People in the lower to middle classes are not aware of YLKI's existence and the upper classes tend to be indifferent, Tini said.

She suggested that manufacturers also get their acts together and stop taking consumers for granted. This is for their own good. "Businesses do not benefit from such practices and poor standards, which could prevent them from gaining access to overseas markets."

Many giant corporations, when asked about YLKI's role, emphasized dialogs as a way of improving their products or services. Most, however, prefer to deal with consumers directly rather than make use of the YLKI and its extensive network.

Merpati Nusantara Airlines public relations manager, Tondo Widodo, and director of the telecommunications firm PT Telekomindo, Rudiantara, say dialogs cut both ways: they strengthen consumers' awareness of their rights and at the same time, they provide valuable input for the firms.

"Companies could finance the meetings," Rudi said.

Tondo said Merpati never uses YLKI to deal with cases or complaints directed at his company.

Sempati Air spokeswoman Rima Novianti said the airline had never used YLKI as a medium to deal with public complaints.

"We normally deal with complaints directly," she said.

PT Sahid Jaya chief commissioner Sukamdani S. Gitosardjono said his company tries to extend appropriate services to the public and does not see any YLKI role in this.

State-owned PT Telkom said the company has cooperated with YLKI on various projects dealing with consumers.

Telkom vice president for external relations, A.M. Sampurna, said that in compensating subscribers whose phones were affected by disruptions for over two weeks, Telkom always sends out information to YLKI.

He said YLKI plays a very important role both for companies and consumers.