A

bill on mass organizations proposed by the government to replace the current Law No. 8/1985 has received strong criticism from academics and students in Yogyakarta who consider the move an attempt by the government to control rather than protect mass organizations.

“The bill as I see it is there as a reaction to violence committed by certain mass organizations, which accounts for why it is based on the construction that mass organizations are problematic,” Gadjah Mada University sociologist Arie Sujito said in Yogyakarta recently.

Speaking at a hearing held at the campus with members of the House of Representatives’ Special Committee (Pansus) deliberating the bill, Arie said that the government should not consider mass organizations as a threat, but rather as partners.

Providing examples, Arie said that following the powerful earthquakes that devastated Yogyakarta and parts of Central Java in 2006, it was mass organizations and not the government that first came to the affected sites to help survivors, as government rescue forces were paralyzed.

He said it would be a setback if the spirit of the bill was to control mass organizations. Should there be anarchy committed by mass organizations, the police should protect the people.

He also said that there was no need to put an article in the bill requiring mass organizations to state that Pancasila was their principle ideology. They should be allowed to state any ideology they like as long as they it is not against the state ideology of Pancasila, he added.

Hafid of UGM Students Executive Council (BEM) shared Arie’s view, saying that mass organizations should be given the freedom to choose their respective principles but must support Pancasila as the state ideology.

Responding to the input, deputy chairman of the Pansus, Michael Watimena, expressed gratitude. “This will really enrich the deliberation of the bill in the future,” he said.

Home Ministry expert staff overseeing politics and mass organization Tri Pranadji told the hearing that the bill was not a reaction to recent anarchic acts committed by some mass organizations.

“The bill does not have any political motivations. The state just wants to empower mass organizations,” he said.

Monitoring and advocacy director of the Center for Policy and Law Studies (PSHK), Ronald Rofiandi, urged the government to withdraw the bill on mass organizations and instead push the deliberation of the bill on associations that had already been included in the 2010-2014 national legislation program (Prolegnas).

Speaking at a discussion forum, Ronald said that mass organizations were not recognized in the legal framework because mass organizations according to Law No. 8/1985 were a creation of the New Order regime intended to control the dynamics of these organizations.

Indonesian law, according to Ronald, only recognizes two different social organizations: Memberless organizations as regulated in the Law on Foundation and member-based organizations as stipulated in an old regulation, Stb. 1870-64, on legal entity organizations.

“The House and the government must return to the right frame, which is the bill on association that is already on the 2010-2014 Prolegnas list,” he said.