Jumat, 19 April 2013

Civil society groups flourish in Indonesia, but threatened by ‘ormas’ bill


Civil society groups flourish in Indonesia,
but threatened by ‘ormas’ bill
Lauren Gumbs  The writer holds a Master’s in communications from Griffith University in Queensland and is currently studying a Master’s in human rights at Curtin University in Perth
JAKARTA POST, 18 April 2013

  
Indonesia’s flourishing civil society activists and advocacy organizations stand in contrast to a darker culture of mob violence, militarism and extremist groups.

Despite the recent rise in reported conflicts carried out by mobs of local vigilantes, soldiers and hard-line Islamic groups, Indonesia also has a growing civil society that is vocal, active and mobilized for positive social and political change.

Because of civil society efforts, the House of Representatives has halted its deliberations on revising the controversial mass organizations (ormas) bill.

The House was supposed to deliberate and pass the proposed amendments, which would give government officials discretionary powers to suspend and dissolve civil society organizations (CSOs), restrict local and international CSOs with regard to the Pancasila ideology, force international organizations to secure permits and limit the activities of CSOs to those within the purview of “the duty of law enforcers and government”.

The reason the plenary meetings did not go ahead was because it was too risky for lawmakers to alienate voters before the 2014 legislative election, particularly when civil society groups can take strong political positions and have the power to mobilize members to pointed effect.

But isn’t this why the bill was drafted in the first place? To tighten the reins on dissent?

It is to its credit that Indonesian civil society has managed to stall the ormas bill so far, and only due to the ability of opposition groups to foster enough bridging capital to overcome differences and reject what they see as excessive controls on civil and political freedoms.

Even though they hold different viewpoints, Muslim groups and rights groups recognized what sort of repercussions the bill would have on their organizational activities and for civil society as a whole.

The World Alliance for Citizen Participation (CIVICUS) published an open letter to the House, criticizing the proposed amendments that would further limit CSOs above and beyond already-restrictive legislation.

CIVICUS, in alliance with the International NGO Forum on Indonesian Development, and the Indonesian Forum for the Environment (Walhi), said the already vague and overbroad provisions should not seek to further expand state interference in CSOs, which are crucial for a robust democratic society, and that mass organizations should comply with international standards and constitutional protections on the freedom of association.

They said the bill severely undermined freedom of association enshrined in the Constitution and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) to which Indonesia is signatory. CIVICUS suggested the House formulate alternative legislation to create an enabling environment for civil society free from unwarranted restrictions.

While many Indonesians feel powerless to act against injustice, compelled to violence or apathy, the efflorescence of grass-roots civil society organizations speaks of a significant transformation in the way people across the country demand change and undertake rights claims.

Indeed, the Hotel Indonesia traffic circle in Jakarta is awash on most days with demonstrators and protesters advocating a host of causes, from feminist warriors to aggrieved farmers, whose relentless presence represents a movement toward recognition of democratic consolidation, people power and democratic rationality. The rise of civil society groups echoes the cultural tendencies of Indonesians to band together over common problems, but this innate community spirit has now evolved into a politicized form of social capital that is contributing to the practical realization of democratic norms.

That is, democratic norms are realized in processes that allow legitimate actors to advocate for and demand social change instead of resorting to violent and unjust means.

However, as the attempt to introduce even more restrictive legislation proves, a flourishing civil society challenges the authority of lawmakers, the military and anyone else who employ extractive measures to exploit and perpetuate the status quo. 

Yappika, an Indonesian civil society alliance for democracy that was founded in 1991 to strengthen civil society organizations, created a so-called civil society index. In a report issued in 2006, Yappika said that despite significant environmental and structural obstacles, such as legal barriers, poor law enforcement and a lack of financial resources, Indonesian CSOs scored high for values and participation. 

Indonesia has a civil group for just about anything one can think of: the Pedestrian Coalition advocates for safer streets; the New Alliance for Men has men who are unafraid of wearing miniskirts in public to oppose violence against women; Indonesia for the Environment; the Indonesia Prosperity Foundation; the Foundation for Women in Small Businesses, and many more.

Last week, members of the Yogya Pedicab Driver Community took to Yogyakarta’s streets to campaign against thuggish behavior after 11 Army’s Special Forces (Kopassus) commandos were named suspects in the murder of four detainees inside Cebongan prison. In Jakarta last Wednesday, the streets were blocked by members of workers’ unions protesting low wages and a lack of health care.

Legitimate civil society organizations do not engage in violence; none of these groups will seal a church, attack a family, or raid a prison to get what they want, but they will march through the streets with banners, lobby the government, talk to journalists and write press releases for their web pages.

The question is, will the government listen and support them, or will it continue to overlook and even protect the vigilantes, hard-liners, village mobs and military personnel?

The shift toward civil society groups and the vocal, diverse range of their advocacy, despite the challenging operating environment, is a definite positive for Indonesia’s democracy and development and challenges an insidious culture of violence, abuse of power and vigilantism, by encouraging participation and resistance against illegitimate means of dominance.

Tidak ada komentar:

Posting Komentar