In the Name of
Regional Autonomy:
The Institutionalisation of Discrimination in Indonesia
A Monitoring Report by
The National Commission on Violence Against Women on The Status of Women’s Constitutional Rights in 16 Districts/Municipalities in 7 Provinces
Komnas Perempuan, 2010
In the Name of Regional Autonomy | i
In The Name of Regional Autonomy: Institutionalization of Discrimination in Indonesia
A Monitoring Report by the National Commission on Violence Against Women on the Status of Women’s Constitutional Rights in 16 Districts/Municipalities in 7 Provinces
ISBN 978-979-26-7552-8
Reporting Team:
Andy Yentriyani Azriana Ismail Hasani Kamala Chandrakirana Taty Krisnawaty
Discussion Team:
Deliana Sayuti Ismudjoko K.H. Husein Muhammad Sawitri Soraya Ramli Virlian Nurkristi Yenny Widjaya
Monitoring Team:
Abu Darda (Indramayu) Atang Setiawan (Tasikmalaya) Budi Khairon Noor (Banjar) Daden Sukendar (Sukabumi) Enik Maslahah (Yogyakarta) Ernawati (Bireuen) Fajriani Langgeng (Makasar) Irma Suryani (Banjarmasin) Lalu Husni Ansyori (East Lombok) Marzuki Rais (Cirebon) Mieke Yulia (Tangerang) Miftahul Rezeki (Hulu Sungai Utara) Muhammad Riza (Yogyakarta) Munawiyah (Banda Aceh) Musawar (Mataram) Nikmatullah (Mataram) Nur’aini (Cianjur) Syukriathi (Makasar) Wanti Maulidar (Banda Aceh) Yusuf HAD (Dompu) Zubair Umam (Makasar)
Translator
Samsudin Berlian
Editor
Inez Frances Mahony This report was written in Indonesian language an firstly published in earlu 2009. Komnas Perempuan is the sole owner of this report’s copy right. However, reproducing part of or the entire document is allowed for the purpose of public education or policy advocacy in order to promote the fulfillment of the rights of women victims of violence. The report was printed with the support of the Norwegian Embassy.
ii | In the Name of Regional Autonomy
Executive Summary
In the Name of Regional Autonomy: The Institutionalisation of Discrimination in Indonesia
Current national mechanisms have failed to fully ensure the constitutional rights of every citizen to be free from unfounded discrimination. The emergence of discriminatory local bylaws has taken Indonesia ever further from its ideals as a nation-state in the creation of prosperity, justice, and diversity for all.
As many as 154 local bylaws − enacted at the provincial level (19 policies), district/municipal level (134 policies), and village level (one policy) between 1999 and 2009 − have become instrumental in the institutionalisation of discrimination, either in intent or as an impact. These discriminatory local bylaws have been enacted in 69 districts/municipalities in 21 provinces. More than half of them (80 policies) were enacted almost simultaneously between 2003 and 2005. Districts in six provinces − West Java, West Sumatra, South Kalimantan, South Sulawesi, West Nusa Tenggara, and East Java − have proved particularly enthusiastic in enforcing the discriminatory local bylaws. Only 39 local bylaws − 14 policies at the provincial level, 22 at district/municipal level, and three at village level − aim to fulfil the right of victims to recovery.
Of the 154 local bylaws, 63 directly discriminate against women by restricting their right to freedom of expression (21 policies regulating dress codes), by criminalising them, thus impairing their rights to legal protection and legal certainty (37 policies on the prohibition of prostitution), by nullifying their rights to legal protection and certainty (one policy on the prohibition of khalwat), and by excluding their rights to protection (four policies on migrant workers). Of the rest, 82 local bylaws regulate religious issues which fall under the jurisdiction of the national government; they impair the freedom of every citizen to worship according to his or her faith and marginalise minority groups. Nine other policies limit the freedom of the Ahmadiyah group to subscribe to their own religion. All the rights being restricted or curtailed are constitutional rights guaranteed for every Indonesian citizen without exception, in particular the rights to (a) equality before the law and government, (b) freedom to express thoughts and opinions as dictated by conscience, (c) a humane and decent livelihood, (d) protection from fear to exercise their human rights, and (e) freedom from discriminatory treatment.
The discriminatory policies derive from the practice of prioritising procedural democracy. This practice exploits the deficiencies in mechanisms to facilitate public participation and accoun-
In the Name of Regional Autonomy | iii
tability. It allows for the tyranny of the local “majority rules” mentality, which in turn encourages image politics, is lacking in substantive protection of rights, and diminishes community independence through excessive state intervention in the affairs of religions and morality. This precedence of procedural democracy reduces the quality of democracy and may bring Indonesia into a crisis because it threatens the foundation principles of the nation-state of Indonesia.
The discriminatory local bylaws have also eroded the authority and certainty of the law. This is so because the ineffective, in fact pointless, regional regulations have opened the door for corruption and power abuse, as well as the criminalisation and pauperisation of women. The policies have also enabled the emergence of “moral police”, who have no qualms about using violence against members of the public, especially women, in the name of policy enforcement.
The current national mechanisms have failed to prevent or solve the problems caused by the discriminatory local bylaws. The Ministry of Home Affairs and the Supreme Court have not shown leadership in carrying out of their supervisory functions. Meanwhile, the Constitutional Court has no authority over local bylaws that violate the Constitution.
Based on the above findings, Komnas Perempuan (the National Commission on Violence Against Women) has proposed 20 main recommendations, that include:
•••
The Indonesian President elect to immediately declare legally null and void all discriminatory local bylaws that violate the human rights of citizens, especially the violations experienced by women and minority groups, in accordance to the responsibility of the state to uphold human rights;
The Head of the Supreme Court to improve its responsiveness to the judicial review cases put forward by the public regarding the discriminatory regional regulations, and to declare legally null and void all those regional regulations that prove to be discriminatory either in intent or as an impact;
The People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR) to initiate further amendments to the 1945 Constitution aiming at improving the effectiveness of the national mechanisms in fulfilling the constitutional rights of every citizen with no exception, including expansion of the authority of the Constitutional Court (MK) to conduct constitutional reviews down to the lowest level of bylaws and to give to the MK new power to establish a management system for “constitutional complaints” that can be accessed by all citizens;
••
The new members of the House of Representatives (elected 2009) to amend various laws that have enabled the formulation of the discriminatory regional regulations that violate constitutional guarantees;
Regional heads to take proactive measures by revoking discriminatory regional laws and bills or those that may cause discrimination against women and minority groups, as part of the fulfilment of the constitutional guarantees for every citizen with no exception and for the sake of the integrity of the national law, and by improving the mechanisms to receive
iv | In the Name of Regional Autonomy
and handle complaints from the public about the attitude or behaviour of the members of the Pamong Praja Police Unit (Satpol PP)1 − in Aceh, the Wilayatul Hisbah − who resort
to extortion, violence and sexual abuse in the course of carrying out their duties;
•
The new members of the District/Municipal Parliaments (elected 2009) to improve the mechanisms for public participation in all the processes of policy formulation by ensuring equal access for all interested parties and to enact policies only after undergoing democratic public deliberations;
••
The Human Rights Commission to improve the effectiveness of the national human rights mechanisms in handling all forms of discrimination suffered by members of the public as human rights violations; and
Civil society organisations to improve the quality and coverage of political education − including civic education in schools − with a focus on the constitutional guarantees and on building public awareness of and resilience against the danger of politicisation of identity.
1 Satpol PP or Pamong Praja Police Unit is under the jurisdiction of regional governments, not under the
national police—Translator.
In the Name of Regional Autonomy | v
vi | In the Name of Regional Autonomy
Contents
Executive Summary..................................................................................................................... Contents ....................................................................................................................................... Foreword ..................................................................................................................................... Glossary ....................................................................................................................................... List of Tables and Diagrams ..................................................................................................... iii vii xi xii xiii
Chapter 1 Introduction............................................................................................................ Chapter 2 Methodology of the Monitoring .........................................................................
19
2.1. Scope of the Monitoring ........................................................................... 2.2. Resource Persons ........................................................................................ 2.3. Monitoring as a Strategy to Strengthen Local Capacities ...................... 2.4. Cross-Monitoring System to Ensure Impartiality and Enable
Comparative Analyses.................................................................................
2.5. Understanding the Non-Discrimination Principle in the
9
12 13
14
- 15
- Constitutional Framework ........................................................................
- Chapter 3 National Portrait of Discriminatory Local Bylaws............................................
- 19
- 19
- 3.1. General Picture ...........................................................................................
3.2. General Patterns in the Formulation of Discriminatory Regional
Policies .........................................................................................................
3.3. Status and Productivity of the Monitored Districts ...............................
21 24
- Chapter 4 Institutionalisation of Discrimination Against Women ...................................
- 27
4.1. Restriction on the Right to Freedom of Expression Brought About by the Local Bylaws on Dress Codes .......................................................
4.2. Impairment of the Rights to Legal Protection and Certainty Through the Local Bylaws on Prostitution which Criminalise Women .............
4.3. Nullification of the Rights to Legal Protection and Certainty through the Regional Regulation (Qanun) on Khalwat ..........................................
44. Exclusion of the Right to Protection Brought About by the Local
Bylaws on Migrant Workers .....................................................................
27 35 45 51
In the Name of Regional Autonomy | vii
Chapter 5 Deficit in the Quality of Democracy...................................................................
5.1. Procedures of Democracy .........................................................................
59 59
5.1.1. Exploitation of Deficiencies in the Processes of Public
Participation and Accountability .................................................
5.1.2. The Tyranny of Local Majorities.................................................
60 63
- 5.2. The Essence of Democracy.......................................................................
- 66
5.2.1. Image Politics ................................................................................ 5.2.2. Lack of Substantive Protection ................................................... 5.2.3. Diminution of Community Independence ................................
67 71 74
Chapter 6 Erosion of the Authority and Certainty of the Law .........................................
6.1. Eroding the Authority of the Law ...........................................................
77 77
6.1.1. Wasted Regulations ...................................................................... 6.1.2. Ineffective Law in Practice .......................................................... 6.1.3. Corruption and Power Abuse .....................................................
78 80 82
- 6.2. Confusing Legal Certainty ........................................................................
- 83
6.2.1. Criminalisation and Pauperisation of Women ......................... 6.2.2. Violence by Law Enforcement Apparatus ............................... 6.2.3. “Moral Police” ..............................................................................
84 87 89
- Chapter 7 Deficiency of National Mechanisms ..................................................................
- 93
7.1. Neglect of the Ministry of Home Affairs................................................ 7.2. Paralysis of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights ............................ 7.3. Incapacity of the Ministry of Women Empowerment ......................... 7.4. Failure of the Supreme Court ................................................................... 7.5. Powerlessness of the Constitutional Court ............................................
96 98
101 101 104
- Chapter 8 Conclusions and Recommendations...................................................................
- 107
- Appendix 1 : List of Discriminatory Local Bylaws ..........................................................
- 119
1.1. List of Policies- Category: Criminalisation of Women ................. 1.2. List of Policies- Category: Control of the Woman’s Body ........... 1.3. List of Policies- Category: Discrimination Against Migrant
Workers ...............................................................................................
1.4. List of Policies- Category: Limitation on the Ahmadiyah
Community .........................................................................................
1.5. List of Policies- Category: on Religious Devotion or Religious
Life .......................................................................................................
121 124
127 128 130
viii | In the Name of Regional Autonomy
Appendix 2 : List of Local Bylaws Conducive to the Fulfilment of the
- Constitutional Rights of Citizens ................................................................
- 139
- Appendix 3 : Statistics of the Monitored Areas ...............................................................
- 147
- 149
- 3.1. Population Increase in Selected Areas in 2000 and 2007 .............
3.2. Comparison between the Percentages of Women as Head of
Families in 2000 and 2007 .................................................................
3.3. Average Comparison in Terms of School Duration in 2000 and
2007 ......................................................................................................
3.4. Percentage Comparison of Illiterate Women in 2000 and 2007 . 3.5. Percentage Comparison of Working Women in 2000 and 2007.. 3.6. Average Comparison of Marrying Age in Women Over 10
Years Old in 2000 and 2007 .............................................................
3.7. Comparison of Poverty Rate in 2000 and 2007 ............................. 3.8. Comparison of Human Development Index (HDI) between
1999 and 2007 .....................................................................................
3.9. Comparison of Gender Development Index (GDI) between
1999 and 2006 .....................................................................................
3.10. Comparison of Gender Empowerment Index (GEI) between
1999 and 2006 .....................................................................................
3.11. Per Capita Gross Regional Domestic Product (GRDP) with Oil and Gas in 1999 and 2007 .................................................................
3.12. Percentage of Women in Parliament in 2000 and 2006 ...............
150 151 152 153
154 155
156 157 158 159 160
- Appendix 4 : Responses at the National Level .................................................................
- 161
- 163
- 4.1. Response from the Chairman of Constitutional Court ................
4.2. Response from the Vice Chairman of Regional Representative
Council .................................................................................................
4.3. Response from the Supreme Court’s Representative ................... 4.4. Response from the Vice Chairperson of the National
169 171
- Commission on Human Rights ........................................................
- 177
- 183
- Appendix 5 : Responses at the Provincial Level ..............................................................
5.1. Response from the Governor of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam ... 5.2. Response from the Governor of South Kalimantan .................... 5.3. Response from the Representative of Banten Regional Officer for Law and Human Rights ..............................................................
5.4. Response from the Representative of South Kalimantan
Regional Officer for Law and Human Rights ................................
5.5. Response from the Head of West Nusa Tenggara Legal Bureau 5.6. Response from the Representative of Banten Academia .............
185 191
195 201 208 213
In the Name of Regional Autonomy | ix
5.7. Response from the Representative of South Kalimantan
Academia .............................................................................................
5.8. Response from the Representative of West Nusa Tenggara
Academia .............................................................................................
5.9. Response from the Representative of Yogyakarta Academia ..... 5.10. Response from the Representative of West Java Academia ........ 5.11. Response from the Representative of Women Activists In
Nangroe Aceh Darussalam ...............................................................
221 225 229 237
243
x | In the Name of Regional Autonomy
Foreword
The report entitled “In The Name of Regional Autonomy: The Institutionalization of Discrimination in Indonesia” was prepared based on the findings by the National Commission on Anti-Violence Against Women (Komnas Perempuan) during its monitoring on the fulfilment of women’s constitutional rights in the era of regional autonomy. The monitoring was conducted in 16 Districts/Municipalities of 7 provinces by interviewing 339 respondents: 102 people at provincial level and 237 people at regency/city level. These respondents came from various backgrounds such as executives, legislative, law enforcers, religious leaders, traditional leaders, community leaders, critical groups, and women groups especially victims and minority groups in the area. The findings were submitted to the authority and the public at both national and regional levels in early 2009.
At the national level, reporting was made to the Constitutional Court and was responded directly by the Chairman of Constitutional Court, a representative of Regional City Council, Supreme Court and the National Commission for Human Rights. The submission at regional level was carried out in provinces where monitoring was held. These are Banten, West Java, South Sulawesi, South Kalimantan, West Nusa Tenggara, Aceh and D.I. Yogyakarta. All of the responses are also attached in this report in order to provide wider access to public to follow up the report’s recommendations and the responses of respective institutions.
Decentralization is an absolute pre-requisite for democracy that has been developing in Indonesia since the start of reformation era in 1998. In practice, decentralization through regional autonomy policy created not only more room for democracy but also discriminative regional policies that distract the state from its responsibilities to fulfil its citizens’ constitutional rights, especially women. In response to this situation, Komnas Perempuan pioneered a monitoring activity to understand the contradictions occurring within democracy in Indonesia and to find vulnerabilities within the regional autonomy system which stemmed from the imperfection of the national system. This means that it extends beyond local issues specific in particular areas.