Selling the Sea, Fishing for Power by Dedi Supriadi Adhuri

Author:Dedi Supriadi Adhuri [Adhuri, Dedi Supriadi]
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9781922144836
Publisher: ANU E Press
Published: 2013-03-07T13:00:00+00:00

Figure 6-3: The modern village organisational structure.

Source: Adapted from Marsono (1980).

In practice, the role of the village head is obvious. He is the only representative of the village that interacts with the outside world. He is also the only person to whom the power of the central government is delegated. It is only through the village head that the Indonesian government provides subsidies and programs from diverse outside sources. All problems in the village that need to be resolved outside of the village should go through the village head before they are taken to the external agencies.

These laws also regulate the number of positions in the village organisation, who fills these positions, and the ways in which villagers can choose and assume such positions. While the Village Law of 1965 still gave some acknowledgement to local tradition, the Village Law of 1979 paid almost no attention to it at all. In fact, the main goal of the Village Law of 1979 was the unification of the village organisation in Indonesia using a supposed Javanese cultural model (Kato 1989: 94).

It was predictable that the Kei people would not approach these issues in the same way. For example, under both laws the village head should be elected from and by the villagers. This violated the tradition which identified the position of traditional village leader (as well as other village functionaries) as inherited positions. These laws were also not in accordance with the tradition that considered the village leadership to be the privilege of the mel. According to the tradition, the iri had no right at all to take part in any matter regarding village leadership. However, the law stipulated that all villagers had the same right to vote and to be voted for in the election of a village head.

As noted previously, some villagers perceived that these laws did not replace tradition. They believe that the village laws are supplementary to tradition rather than contradictory. This understanding derives from some ambiguity of the law toward tradition. I mentioned earlier that in the Village Law of 1965, the titles of the village leader and functionaries still used local names. As noted by Kato (1989), in the 1979 law, the ambiguity can be found under point b) in the section headed ‘to consider’ (menimbang), which notes:

In accordance with the nature of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia, the state of affairs concerning Desa administration is to be made uniform as much as possible, with due respect for various local conditions of Desa and stipulations of customs (adat istiadat) still in existence, in order to strengthen Desa administration so that [we will be] more competent to mobilize society in its participation in development and to run Desa administration increasingly more extensively and efficiently (emphasis added, ibid.: 93).

Some other villagers considered that the village laws offered new options on how the village could be organised. These people acknowledged the difference between tradition and the law, but did not decide which to follow. In fact,

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.