N

owadays, the House of Representatives is the object of public disdain because of the members’ involvement in numerous corruption scandals and the blatant transactional politics that is becoming standard practice. Much of this disrespect is well deserved, especially in the light of expectations of the post-1998 euphoria of democracy and governance.

But if you look closer, there are parts of the House where people are putting in laudable efforts for the good of the public, albeit with uncertain outcomes. One such legislative activity is the continuing effort to produce an indigenous peoples bill (Undang-Undang Masyarakat Adat). It was first taken up in 2012, followed by many steps forward and an almost equal number of steps backwards. This year, we are up for another attempt to produce a groundbreaking piece of legislation.

Indonesia has never had a bill for indigenous people, although indigenous peoples’ rights are guaranteed by the Constitution. Like the agrarian reform bill, it should secure communal rights alongside individual rights.

The indigenous peoples bill will complete a constitution that has served the nation for 72 years. Indigenous peoples are an essential part of our society; they have existed even before there was a state. Preliminary discussions started in 2012 and received a big boost when President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo was elected in 2014, bringing with him a commitment to support indigenous rights.

Last year, a draft found its way into the national legislative program (Prolegnas), but it did not get far. The whole process had to be repeated this year, because legislative drafts are not carried over from year to year.

What kind of bill is desired? It is a bill that can address major issues that will raise the profile of indigenous peoples in the eyes of the law that will recognize them as legal subjects. It means it will confirm basic rights, such as territorial rights to give indigenous people a voice in local government.

The indigenous peoples bill must be able to move between prevailing regulations. Ultimately, they must strengthen local autonomy and increase tax revenues.

The current impasse, when the bill is so close to fruition yet not guaranteed of success, creates concern on the part of public stakeholders. Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara (AMAN), the primary federation of indigenous peoples, is appealing to the public not to let the legislative opportunity slip away. The bill is important and is critical for its passage this year.

In the absence of this bill, problems abound for the government and the people. Despite the government’s apparent commitment to indigenous rights, enforcement is difficult in the field without legal cover. Four years after the Constitutional Court ruled in favor of indigenous rights over the forest, no laws exist to implement the court’s decision.

Local governments are reluctant to enforce it. The reason is that many of the plots of land that need transfer of rights have been claimed as commercial land by plantation businesses and municipalities.

Last year, a draft bill found its way into the national legislative program. But by year’s end the government managed to produce only 20 local regulations.

The Supreme Court has revealed there is a backlog of 16,000 cases since 1945; half of them land dispute cases involving indigenous rights.

Actually there are numerous regulations that have been put in place related to indigenous peoples’ rights. One example is the empowerment of indigenous villages by the Ministry of Education and Culture and programs in the Social Affairs Ministry and programs in indigenous forests in the Ministry of Environment and Forestry. But they lack authority because of binding conditions requiring adherence to regional government laws.

The stark reality is that this legal vacuum is a breeding ground for violent crime against rightful owners of forest land.

Hidden by the procedural intricacies of the legislative body are more sinister reasons for the law’s slow passage. Business groups aligned with local politics are taking advantage of the legal void by using de facto claims and operations of indigenous lands for commercial purposes such as plantations and mines.

Conflict resolution is hampered by the fact that 70 percent of indigenous lands are not securely in the hands of indigenous peoples. It is the state’s obligation to empower community rights.

These rights are subverted by a legal loophole that says lands not specifically allocated through legal ownership are set by default as state-owned. This masks practices that through the years have served big business to the detriment of indigenous peoples’ rights.

The 2013 Constitutional Court ruling is not effective as it refers to outdated forestry laws that need to be revised. The bill for indigenous peoples must be endorsed by multiple institutions, including the Ministries of Agrarian Affairs and Spatial Planning, Home Affairs, Village and Disadvantaged Region Development and Transmigration, Social Services and Environment and Forestry.
_________________________

The writer was the spokesman for former president Abdurrahman Wahid (1999-2001). The views expressed are his own.