34215 More Than Just Ownership Ten Land and Natural Resource Conflict Case Studies from East Java and Flores Samuel Clark (ed.) Cici Novia Anggraini Luthfi Ashari Saifullah Barnawi Stanis Didakus Yan Ghewa Agus Mahur Peter Manggut Mohammad Said December 2004 Conflict and Community Development Research and Analytical Program Indonesian Social Development Paper No. 4 This report was prepared for the World Bank, Jakarta. The views expressed in the paper are the authors' own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the World Bank. The editor can be contacted at: sclark@wboj.or.id PapersintheIndonesianSocialDevelopmentseriesarenotformalpublicationsoftheWorld Bank. Theyarepublishedinformallyandcirculatedtoencouragediscussionandcomment between those interested in Indonesian development issues. The findings, interpretations, judgments,andconclusionsexpressedinthepaperarethoseoftheauthorsandshouldnotbe attributed to the World Bank, to its affiliated organizations, or to members of the Board of ExecutiveDirectorsofthegovernmentstheyrepresent. Pleasedirectcommentstotheeditor: sclark@wboj.or.id Copies of this paper are available from: World Bank Office Jakarta Jalan Cik Di Tiro 68A, Menteng Jakarta Pusat Indonesia Tel: +62 (0)21 391 1908/9 Fax: +62 (0)21 392 4640 DesignbySalomonManalu Cover photograph by Poriaman Sitanggang Table of Contents Glossary.......................................................................................................................... i Acknowledgements........................................................................................................ iii Introduction..................................................................................................................... 1 Samuel Clark Dang Lebar Land Dispute.............................................................................................. 15 Luthfi Ashari An Inheritance Brings Misfortune ................................................................................. 22 Mohammad Said When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge: Civil Disobedience is Manifested through Burning down the Forest ........................ 32 Cici Novia Anggraini Apparently the Estate Had Been Sold: KDP Potentially Triggering Land Conflict .................................................................... 51 Saifullah Barnawi Not Just a Matter of Communal Land: Land Conflict in Desa Golo Meni .................................................................................. 63 Peter Manggut Who Owns Mbondei Land? A Case of Change and Ambiguity Triggering Conflict ................................................ 74 Agus Mahur Hostility Between the Satar Teu and Kadung: Lingko or "Protected Forest?"...................................................................................... 83 Yan Ghewa Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land .............. 104 Agus Mahur Who is Entitled to the Land? Controversy Over Land Ownership .............................................................................. 120 Stanis Didakus Unrest on the Border: Conflict Over Village Administration and Mass Registration of Land Claims .......... 132 Stanis Didakus References ...................................................................................................................... 144 Glossary Adat Traditional/customary norms AMPI New Indonesian Students BKKBN National Family Planning Co-ordination Board BP3 Agency for EducationalAssistance BPD Village Parliament BPN National Land Agency Bupati Kabupaten (District) Head Camat Kecamantan (Sub-district) Head Dephut Department of Forestry Dusun Hamlet DPP Parish Pastoral Board DPRD Kabupaten Parliament FD Village Facilitator (KDP) FGD Focus Group Discussion Kabupaten District Kades Village Head (rural area) Kampung Sub-village/Hamlet Kapolpos Head of a Police Post Kapolsek Head of the Kecamatan Police KDP Kecamatan Development Project Kecamatan Sub-district Kesbanglimas Community Unity and Protection Office Klebun Village Head (Madura) KM Kab Kabupaten Management Consultant (KDP) KPH Forestry Managers Unit KTP Residence Identification Card Kyai Muslim Cleric Lingko Communal Forest LKD Village Council Head Lurah Village Head (urban area) Mantri Lower ranking civil servant Musbangdus Hamlet Development Council OPK Special Market Operation (for the sale of cheap rice) P3DT Infrastructure Development Program for Less Developed Villages PDM-DKE Regional Empowerment to Overcome the Impact of the Economic Crisis Perhutani Indonesian State Forestry Enterprise Pilkades Village Head Election PMD Community Development Agency, now BPM Polres Kabupaten Police Polsek Kecamatan Police Prona National Land Certification Program Puskesmas Health Clinic RPH Forest Police Station i SD Primary School SDI Presidential Directive Primary School SDK Catholic Primary School SLTP Junior High School STAIN State Islamic High School TPK Project Implementation Team (KDP) TTD Village TechnicalAssistant (KDP) UDKP Inter-village Forum (KDP) ii Acknowledgements The cases presented here were researched and written by Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid, Endro Crentantoro, Saifullah Barnawi, Luthfi Ashari, Mohammed Said, Olin Monteiro, Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus, Peter Manggut,Agus Mahur andYan Ghewa. They were supervised in the field by Rachael Diprose (East Java) and Adam Satu and Jessica Gillmore (NTT). The research was coordinated by Claire Q. Smith and Patrick Barron, with the guidance of Scott Guggenheim, Sri Kuntari and Michael Woolcock. Joanne Sharpe, Kristen Stokes and Suzan Piper translated the cases and provided editorial assistance. Olivia Rondonuwu translated editorial changes. Joanne Sharpe coordinated the collection of the newspaper data. Others involved at various stages of the research included Vivi Alatas, Victor Bottini, Juana Brachet, Jozefina Cutura, Leni Dharmawan, David Madden, Kai Kaiser, Yatrin Kaniu, Sri Kuntari, Ben Olken, Junko Onishi, Menno Pradhan, Arie Purwanti, Sentot Satria, and Inge Tan. Funding came from DfID, AusAID, and Dutch trust funds. Valuable comments on earlier drafts of this compilation were provided by LuthfiAshari, Patrick Barron, Karrie McLaughlin, Adam Satu and Joanne Sharpe. Note: The names of individuals in all cases have been changed to protect respondent anonymity. iii Introduction Land and natural resource issues are often cited as a "root cause" of communal or even separatist violent conflict. The common understanding is that land and natural resource scarcity causes increased competition, forced migration or frustration, which, in turn, creates organised actors and incompatibilities amongst existing actors.1 More ethnographically informed analysis of these conflicts and processes, however, indicates that land and natural resources are often embedded in complex socio-cultural practices, histories and identities.2 These accounts suggest that land and natural resources conflicts are as much about meaning and recognition as they are about simple economic control of scarce resources. In Indonesia it is commonly stated in various forms that land and natural resources issues are what is really at stake behind the high-profile "ethnic" or "religious" conflicts that have erupted since the fall of Suharto. In Kalimantan the gradual dispossession and marginalisation of the Dayak people is said to have provided the conditions that finally exploded and took the form of an ethnic conflict.3 Similarly, in Central Sulawesi competition to secure access to land in a context of migration and changing land ownership and use patterns led to "insider-outsider" conflict, later taking on a more specific ethno-religious form.4 Again in Maluku, local land issues as well as military attempts to grab control of resources is often cited as the fundamental source of conflict, whereas in Papua injustices over the state's control and management of the province's rich natural resources is reported to have significantly contributed to tensions there.5 Consequently comprehending how land and natural resources are controlled and distributed, and how they can act as a base for wider communal mobilisation, is essential for understanding what are largely reported and conceptualised as ethno-religious conflicts in Indonesia. Violent conflict results in the destruction of lives, livelihoods and material belongings, thus damaging the social and economic fabric of communities directly and indirectly implicated. This is true and significant not only for the large-scale conflicts in the `high conflict' areas of Indonesia that have dominated headlines. Recently in Indonesia there have been a number of attempts to focus attention on, and to quantify, the extent and seriousness of conflict in areas normally thought of as being conflict-free.6 An analysis of the periodic Village Potential Statistics (PODES) dataset, collected by the 1 Homer-Dixon(2001);Swain(1993);andMarkakis(1998). 2 Peluso and Watts (2001); Fitzpartrick (2002); Prior (2003); Ross (1995); and Salih (1999). 3 On Central Kalimantan see ICG (2001), Bertrand (2004) and Smith (forthcoming); onWest Kalimantan see HRW(1997). 4 SeeAragon (2001); ICG (2003), HRW(2002). 5 For Maluku, see ICG (2000); for Papua, see ICG (2002). 6 See Barron and Madden (2004) and Varshney, Panggabean and Tadjoeddin (2004). 1 Government's Bureau of Statistics, reports that 7.1 percent (a total of 4,872 incidents) of Indonesia's rural and urban villages (desa and keluruhan respectively) experienced violent conflict in the year 2002.7 Clearly, the impacts of such conflicts are significant. The same report recorded that almost a quarter of these incidents involved fatalities and about half injuries. Although difficult to quantify, total material damage was estimated at Rp. 771 billion (approx. US$ 91.4 million). However land and natural resource conflict may also have a productive function. Like most forms of conflict, they are arguably an inevitable and, indeed, necessary feature of society, particularly in a country like Indonesia that is undergoing multiple social, political and economic transitions. Conflicts are not just an outcome of change but are also a catalyst to further change. If managed well, they can bring to light underlying tensions, as well as help reconfigure power structures and resource distribution in ways that, amongst other things, speed economic growth, consolidate democratization, improve welfare, and promote rights consciousness. In this way conflicts over land and natural resource ownership, as well as ontological struggles over how land and natural resources should be perceived and distributed can, when managed well, result in productive outcomes. Understanding--and reflecting upon--such changes, and how people negotiate and respond to them, is vital in helping to design effective, participatory, and non-violent development strategies. Unstable and insecure land and natural resource ownership and management systems are widely considered to hinder economic development, foster inequality and encourage environmental exploitation.8 Thus the existence of widespread land and natural resource conflict is indicative of the failure or shortcomings of current land and natural resource administrative mechanisms and changes. Simultaneously these conflicts indicate the competing issues, norms, tensions, interests and actors that a stable system needs to incorporate and reconcile. If this complex of issues are not accommodated then existing and future mechanisms and development agendas run the risk of not only becoming redundant but also illegitimate. The ten case studies in this edited compilation were selected from over 70 conflicts that were followed by fifteen researchers, who spent nine months living in villages in two Indonesian provinces (East Java and East Nusa Tenggara - NTT).9 They were collected as part of a large-scale mixed method research project (the KDP& Community Conflict Negotiation study) which aims to understand better the causes and pathways of local conflicts in Indonesia, and to help illuminate how interventions interact--for good or bad--with these processes. The study seeks to examine the relationship between 7 Barron, Kaiser, and Pradhan (2004). 8 Deininger (2003); de Soto (2000). 9 In NTT, the research was limited to the island of Flores. 2 the Kecamatan Development Project (KDP), the Bank's major community development project in Indonesia, and local conflicts, and to evaluate whether the program helps communities manage conflict in peaceful ways. As well as land and natural resource conflicts, case studies relating to, amongst other things, development, issues of domestic violence, vigilante justice, and village election disputes, were followed.10 Incollectingeachofthecasestudiespresentedhere,theresearcherslivedinthevillagewhere theconflicttookplace,conductinginterviews,focusgroupdiscussionsandemployingother anthropological techniques such as participant observation. This localized and qualitative approach allows us to get a better sense of causation: why conflicts took the pathways that theydid. Considerationofsuchpathwayscanhelpusindesigningappropriatestrategiesfor conflictresolutionandprevention.11 Thepathwaysoflandandnaturalresourceconflictsare particularly interesting as they help highlight the endogenous and exogenous events and dynamicswhichcancausespecificincidentstocontributeto,orescalateinto,widercommunal violence. Thisallowsusnotonlytoidentifyappropriatepost-conflictinterventions,butalso helpsustomonitor,andpotentiallyprevent,suchconflictsfromescalatinginthefuture. In sum, these case studies contribute to both our understanding of how low-level land and naturalresourceconflictscanescalateintowidercommunalconflicts,aswellasthecomplex issues development interventions must grapple with in the land and natural resource sector acrossIndonesia. Legal and Regulatory Context ThecornerstoneofIndonesianlandlawistheBasicAgrarianLawof1960(BAL),whichis inherentlyunitary,centralisedandmodern. Designedtounifycoloniallandlawswhichhad upheld a racially segregated system of `European'and `Indonesian'law, BALconverted Dutchandcustomaryclaimsintoaplethoraofstatutorywestern-styletitles.12 Theseinclude hak milik (right to own), hak pakai (right to use), hak sewa (right to rent) and hak guna bangunan (right to build or develop). Hakmilikisthemost"western"oftherights,inthatitisindividual,unlimitedintime,registrable, andprivatelytransferable. Itis,however,onlyavailabletoindividualIndonesiancitizensand certaincorporatebodiessanctionedbythestate,andnottostate-ownedorprivatecorporations or co-operatives.13 These groups which cannot access hak milik must rely on the other state-sanctionedrightswhichoperatemorelikealease,givingtherightholderexclusiveuse 10 See Barron, Diprose, Madden, Smith, and Woolcock (2004). 11 Barron, Smith, and Woolcock (2004). 12 Fitzpatrick (1997). 13 Corporate bodies sanctioned by the state include state banks, agricultural co-operatives and some religious and social bodies. 3 butforalimitedperiodoftime(generallybetween25and30years). Thisperiodcanusually beextended(atleasttwice)throughnegotiationwithbureaucraticofficials. Itiscommonly recognisedbylegal,advocacyanddevelopmentpractitionersthattherearesomesignificant deficiencieswiththislaw. PerhapsthemostseriousdeficiencyofBAListheweakrecognitionofcustomaryclaims. It is true that various references to adat (customary law/norms) are scattered through the document. TheExplanatoryMemorandumcontentsthatthenationallandlawis"basedupon Adat principles" and recognises the ongoing role of adat law. However, this basis and recognitionisheavilyqualified:withregardtotheformer,Article5statesthebasisofBAL"is adatlawasfarasitisnotinconflictwiththeNationalandState'sinterestsbasedontheunity oftheNation";regardingthelatter,Article56providesforadat recognition"aslongasthey [adat laws] are not in conflict with the spirit and the provisions of this law." Similarly, in Article 3 the BAL recognises hak ulayat (communal rights) but does not allow for their registration. IntheIndonesiancontextthisweaknessissignificantbecause,asdemonstrated inmanyofthecasestudieshere,alargeproportionoflandissubjecttosomeformofcommunal control. Thatonly11%oflandoutsideJava,and22%oflandwithinJava,isformallytitled undertheBAL,starklyindicateshowineffective,andinmanycasesirrelevant,thelawis.14 Similarly,theBALdoesnotrecogniseaformof`adversepossession'whereonecanlegally takeownershipoflandthathasbeenoccupiedforconsiderableperiodsoftime. Annulment ofownershipisconsideredinArticle27,butthearticleisconcernedwithreturningabandoned land to the state; in contrastArticle 56 provides some form of default ownership based on localadat,butisheavilyqualifiedandhasinpracticerarelybeengivenlegaleffect. Indeed, asFitzgerald(2002)contends,therearenumerousexampleswherelong-termoccupierswere deniedownership,despitepayinglandtaxforover30years.15 Insumthen,BAL'srecognition of adat and other non-state sanctioned claims can be described, at best, as "hortatory and symbolic", leaving communities, and other "informal occupiers", in the weak position of bargainingthroughadhocprocesseswithbureaucraticofficials.16 Forestry law in Indonesia, a legal legacy of the New Order era, is similar, in that it largely upholds the interests of the central state and its developmentalist agenda (and whims). The New Order law of 1967 (No. 5/1967) contended in Article 5 that "all forests within the territoryoftheRepublicofIndonesia,includingthenaturalresourcestheycontain,aretobe controlledbythestate." Followingthepromulgationofthislaw,amappingexercisedetermined thatover75percentofIndonesiawasdeemed"forest"andthereforeunderthejurisdictionof 14 Stephens (2002). 15 Fitzpatrick (2002, p. 83). 16 Gautama and Hornick give this description in Unity in Diversity: An Introduction to Indonesian Law, 1983, cited in Stephens (2002). 4 theDepartmentofForestry.17 Itadoptedaclassificationandlicensingsystemsothatindividuals, co-operatives, and state-owed enterprises could exploit timber and non-timber products. Thenewforestrylaw(No.41/1999)largelyretainsthepreviouslaw'slicensingsystemand centralised nature, ensuring that decentralization laws introduced prior did not impinge on centralised control. The new law does recognise "adat communities" and "adat forests". However,liketheBAL,itallowsforsignificantgovernmentdiscretionastohowtheserights aretobeassigned. Thecommunity-staterelationsregardingstatecontrolandmanagementof local forest resources are typified in the case study When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge from East Java. In contrast, the case study Hostility Between the Satar Teu and Kadung from NTT depicts a very different state-society relationship regarding forests thanthatimaginedinthenationalforestrylegislation. Inthiscase,thecommunityfirmlybelieves that (for over 50 years) the community has owned the lingko (communal forest) and, also, thatthisisimplicitlyacknowledgedbythelocalkecamatangovernment. In an operational sense, this ambiguity regarding, but not limited to, adat claims, adverse possession, classification, and jurisdiction provides significant scope for interpretation and administration by the courts and implementation bodies, the BPN (National Land Agency) and Dephut (Department of Forestry). In a sense this lends a certain flexibility to the law, necessary in such a culturally diverse society, and, indeed, one in transition. However, it also opens the door to corruption, serious conflict of laws, and, given the significant resources at stake, makes any change subject to tough rent-seeking politics.18 However,ratherthanfocustoocloselyonthewrittenlaw,itslimitations,contradictions,and hierarchies,inordertounderstandlegaldynamicsinIndonesiaitisarguablymorefruitfulto focusontheroletheselawsplayinpracticeinstructuringandframingdiscourseandbehaviour.19 Theworkingsofthelawarecontingentonlocalsocio-legalandpoliticalconfigurations,which areinthemselves"volatile"and"ambiguous".20 Atthesametime,ofcourse,lawscontribute totheseconfigurations. Thisfluidity,notwithstandingthevaguenessinthelawtobeginwith, canbelargelycontributedinthecurrentcontexttotheshifttoregionalautonomy. The"big bang" decentralization that followed the fall of the New Order regime devolved significant 17 This was achieved by classifying all "unoccupied" land as "forest" and therefore under the forestry departments jurisdictions. 18 The inclusion of adat claims in the BAL without any framework for implementation has created an interesting reform dynamic. Many civil society groups that admonish the state for its land law are reluctant to advocate replacing BAL for fear that the existing adat recognition will be lost altogether. The BPN office is also said to be reluctant to change, as the BAL is seen to epitomize the "nation spirit", not to mention the opportunities for graft that its ambiguity creates. 19 McCarthy (2004). 20 Ibid. 5 control to the districts.21 At the same time, as noted above, both BPN and Dephut have managedtomaintaintheirgrip,inalegalsense,onkeylawsregardingthecontrolanddistribution oflandandforestryresources. Thetensionsbetweenthisongoingcentralism,andthemove todecentralization,addsanotherlayerofpotentialcontestationofresourcesandthepowerto influencetheir(re)distribution. IntheIndonesiancontext,thisambiguityandcontestationhasresultedinanumberofdistinctive socio-legaldynamicswhichrelatedirectlyandindirectlytolandandnaturalresourceconflict. Thisincludes,forexample,the"reclaimingmovement",22ethnicelitepolitics,23the"returnto adat"movement,24aswellaslocalinitiativeandopportunismintheadministrationandcontrol oflandandnaturalresourcesatthesub-nationallevel.25 Generally though, the vagueness of the law itself, together with both the reluctance of the judiciary and the relevant administrative departments (BPN and Perhut) to interpret adat claimsgenerously,inaclimateofunevendecentralization,makesforalargelyambiguousand ultimatelyunhelpfullegalandregulatoryframework. Thishasthusledtoafluidplayingfieldin which everyday "practice" has as much relevance as legal orthodoxy. The cases studies presented here contribute to understanding this on-the-ground practice, and the variety of waysinwhichitinteractswiththelegalandregulatoryframework. Land and Natural Resource Conflicts in East Java and Flores Despite no widespread communal or separatist conflicts erupting in East Java and Flores violence as a result of land and natural resource conflicts, including death, injury and physical destruction, was common. In three years, from 2001­2003, 14 deaths, 82 injuries and 1 destroyed building were recorded in East Java; in Flores, 58 deaths, 85 injuries and 127 destroyed buildings were recorded.26 Table 1 indicates how these rates of conflict and violent conflict vary not just across but within the two provinces. Land and natural resource conflict was much more prevalent in Flores than East Java (27 percent of conflict compared to 6 percent) and was much more likely to have violent impactsandresultindeath(46percentviolentwith21percentresultingindeathforFlores; 13percentand4percentforEastJava). Alarmingly,Manggaraidistrictaccountsforoverhalf ofFlores'landandnaturalresourceconflictsthatresultindeath. 21 The revision of the decentralization laws has subsequently given the provinces an enhanced role. 22 Wijardjo and Perdana (2001). 23 van Klinken (2002). 24 On West Sumatra see World Bank (2004b), and Central Kalimantan World Bank (2004c). 25 See the case study Not Just a Matter of Communal Land in this publication, as well as World Bank (2004c). 26 The data presented here was gathered as part of a newspaper mapping exercise in seven districts of East Java and across Flores. In each area data was complied from, and cross-checked by comparing, three local newspapers. Full results and an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of this method are given in Barron and Sharpe (forthcoming). 6 Table 1 ­ Conflict Incidences 2001 - 200327 Province Kabupaten General Land and Natural Resource conflicts (district) conflicts Total That were violent That resulted in death East Java Bangkalan 214 9 2 1 Madiun 267 12 2 0 Magetan 118 3 0 0 Pamekasan 161 14 0 0 Ponorogo 248 10 3 1 Sampang 158 11 4 1 Sumenep 226 24 0 0 Total 1392 83 11 3 Flores Ende 83 16 7 3 Flores Timur 104 25 9 5 Manggarai 108 44 24 15 Ngada 76 24 10 1 Sikka 82 14 6 2 Total 453 123 56 26 The cases studies presented here are generally representative of the land and natural resource conflicts present in the two research provinces. There are more cases from Flores than East Java simply because there are more land and natural resource conflicts in Flores than East Java: 123 compared to 83.28 Only two (from ten) of the case studies note violent impacts, which is generally consistent with the newspaper data, which recorded 13 percent and 46 percent of land and natural resource as violent in East Java and Flores (respectively). The case studies indicate that the police became involved only when the conflict became violent, a dynamic supported by the newspaper data which shows that in 100 and 76 percent (East Java and Flores respectively) of violent land and natural resource conflict the police became involved, compared to rates of only 28 and 25 percent for non-violent conflicts.29 However there are some gaps in this compilation of case studies. Notably lacking are case studiesoflandandnaturalresourceconflictsbetweenindividuals/groupsandthestate. There isoneforestmanagementconflictfromEastJavathatdirectlyimplicatesthestate. However, thenewspaperdataindicatesthatinEastJavaandFlores34and37percent(respectively)of land and natural resource conflicts involved the state as a party to the conflict. Another noticeable difference between the case studies here and the newspaper data is the presence 27 There are now seven kabupaten in Flores, as during the research period (2001-2003) Kabupaten Lembata seperated from Kabupaten Flores Timur and Kabupaten Manggarai Barat from Kabupaten Manggarai. To allow for easier comparison of conflict levels across kabupaten the data is analysed using the original five kabupatens. 28 This difference is even more marked if we consider the much higher population of East Java. 29 The definition of involvement was wide; it may mean they were simply called at some point of conflict or that they were intimately involved in resolution. 7 oftheBupati(districthead)inresolutionattempts. Thenewspaperdataindicatesthe Bupati asthesinglemostfrequentlyinvolvedactorinresolutionoflandandnaturalresourcedisputes, being involved in approximately 34 percent of cases in East Java and 30 percent in Flores. However,thisdisparitybetweenthecasestudiesandthenewspaperdatacouldbearesultof the tendency of newspapers to skew data in favour of incidents that reach higher levels of government,withthecasestudiesbeingmorelocallyfocused. The Cases The first short and concise case study, written by Luthfi Ashari, looks at a typical inheritance land conflict in Madura, East Java (Dang Lebar Land Dispute). He contends that these conflicts often occur amongst neighbours, friends and family because of the communities' reliance on unwritten informal land transactions. The author notes that these conflicts, including this one, seldom become violent and are normally resolved by the local kyai (Muslim cleric) and/or klebun (village head) at the village level. Mohammad Said describes a similar intra-village land conflict (An Inheritance Brings Misfortune) in Madura, which began as a dispute between two individuals and ended up involving the wider community. The dynamics are similar except that this case almost resulted in violence. It demonstrates the ongoing conflict management work the klebun carries out, which at times is more about placating parties than attempting to positively resolve the status of the land. Compared to Flores, particularly Manggarai, these case studies demonstrate how more easily ownership can be determined and adjudicated in East Java, both because of the existence of a legitimate community- based mediator, the kyai or klebun, and because of the smaller units (individual or family) of land ownership. The case study written by Cici Novia Anggraini (When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge) focuses on an antagonistic relationship between a village in Ponorogo, East Java, and the Indonesian State Forestry Enterprise (Perhutani). The conflict at the centre of the case study is related to Perhutani's policy of selecting tree types that are inappropriate for the geographic characteristics of the area and which have negative impacts on the villagers' fields. This conflict is interesting in that it highlights the relationship between a state natural resource institution and the community, and indicates the limited ability a community has to influence institutional policy and demand "service delivery" in a constructive and peaceful manner. Saifullah Barnawi considers a case (Apparently the Estate Had Been Sold) where land was refusedtobefreedforuseinaKDPprojectinMadura,EastJava. Asdetailedinmanyofthe casestudies,landtransactionsandownershipareofteninformal,unwrittenandattimesare obtainedthroughlocalcollusionandpowerpolitics,resultinginagreementbydefaultrather than positive resolution. In this case, the current "owner" was unwilling to offer his land to KDP afraid that it would re-open the history of his land ownership. The case demonstrates 8 howdevelopmentprojectscanpotentially(re)triggerdormantlandconflictand,conversely, how weak land administration can hinder needed change and development, as well as the KDP process. The case study (Not Just a Matter of Communal Land) written by Peter Manggut looks at alanddisputethatflaredupwhenlandoriginally"bequeathed"byclanstothethenGerman mission in the 1950s was "re-zoned" by sections of the community to be used as a market, healthcentreandvillageoffice. Inasimilar"bequeath"caseAgusMahurinvestigatesaland ownershipdisputeimplicatingthelocalseminary,acommunitygroupformedbyaNGO,and the Motu Poso ethnic group (Who Owns Mbondei Land?). These case studies indicate the debates over land use andownership rights in Manggarai, Flores and how they are subject/ exposed to reinterpretation and are contingent on ongoing kinship/ethnic affiliations and agreements. The resolution attempts in the two cases differed. In Peter's case an adat (customary or social norms/law) forum was established to resolve land disputes, as well as otherdisputes;howeveronekeydisputingclanwasnotinvitedandconsequentlythenewly establishedforumwasunabletofindanacceptedresolution. LatertheCatholicChurchwas abletoopendialogueandpreventviolence. However,thestatusofthelandremainsambiguous. InAgus's case the kecamatan (sub-district) and kabupaten (district) governments became involvedinresolutionattempts. However,afterinitialsuccess,consensusbrokedown. The case study byYan Ghewa describes a protracted conflict over a forest on the border of two kampung(residentialarea)withinavillageinManggarai,Flores(HostilityBetweenthe Satar Teu and Kadung). The status of the land and resource was questioned when a group offarmersfromonevillageremovedsometreestoexpandtheirricefields. Initiallytheconflict focused on the use status or management of the forest, but as various attempts at resolution failedthecoreissuebecameoneofownership. Thecasedetailshowthekecamatanattempted to resolve the status of the forest, and hence the conflict, by transferring ownership to the government. This"inventive"suggestionhadsomesuccess,butwasfinallyrejectedbyone disputant. Similar to many of the cases in Manggarai, a second case study written byAgus Mahur looks at a conflict (Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTPLand)wherehistoricalclaims,unwrittenagreements,andambiguityoverlanduseand ownershiprights,whenpoliticallymanipulated,canfacilitateaviolentconflict. Interestingly the conflict was resolved not by determining the status of the land but by dissolving the managerial board of the education foundation so as to restore the relationship between the twoinstitutions. StanisDidakushaswrittentwocasestudiesfromSikka,incollaborationwithfellowresearchers Don dela Santo and Olin Monteiro. The first (Who is Entitled to the Land?) describes an inheritancelandconflict. Theconflictwasinitiallydealtwithatthevillagelevel,involving elementsofboththegovernmentand adatsystem. Howeveritendedupinthecourtsinthe provincial capital Kupang and the land was awarded, in what is described as dubious 9 circumstances,tooneparty. Interestingly,accordingtoadatlawneitherpartywasentitledto theland. Ratherthestep-sonwhonolongerlivedintheareahadanadat"right"totheland. Thiscaseindicateshow,withweaknormsandinstitutions,thestrongerpartyisoftenableto influence outcomes. His second case (Unrest on the Border) looks at a long dormant inter- villageadminstrativeconflictthatwastriggeredbyonevillage'smasslandregistrationactivities. Theseactivitiesbroughtintoquestionthestatusofanumberofhouseslocatedalongavillage boundary,withtherespectivevillageheadsandthehouseholdsconcernedclaimingdifferent positionsforbothpragmaticandnormativereasons. Thecasestudydemonstratesthedifficulty ofascertainingfixedagreeableboundaries,necessaryfora"modern"landregistrationsystem. Furtheritshowshoweasilyascriptiveidentitiescanbemanipulatedsoastopotentiallyincite violence. Analysisofthesetencasestudieshighlightsthreethemesimportantforunderstandingwhyand howlandandnaturalresourceconflictsoccur,howtheyunfold,andhowandwhentheyare successfullyorunsuccessfullymediated.30 Complexity Most apparent from these case studies is their complexity, evident in the variety of norms, interests, actors and institutions implicated in each conflict. Norms of adat, kinship, Islam (inheritance), the state, and "social justice" (among others) are often explicitly or implicitly present in each conflict, often at the same time. These norms are variously utilised to claim ownership and use rights, to interpret historical (oral) decisions and agreements, as well as elucidate appropriate resolution(s).31 Their normative jurisdictions overlap and their hierarchy over one another is often ambiguous and contingent on local political processes. In Flores, adat and kinship norms are relatively stronger than those in East Java, where Islamic and/or state law is relatively more likely, although by no means always exclusively, to be used. Complicating the matter, normative use and practices vary dramatically not just between provinces but within provinces (and, indeed, districts). Norms generally "mask" more pragmatic interests and, unsurprisingly given the high economic stakes of resource disputes, significant interests are at stake. Interestingly, and most apparent in the Manggarai case studies, it is not only interests associated with land ownership that are contested but also land use and management. Where ownership anduseinterests/rightsareimplicatedtheyareoftenconflatedinresolutionattempts;theone successfully resolved case of this type (St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTPLand) focused on 30 It should however be noted that these themes are those recognised by the editor. The case studies, themselves, are rich enough for readers to come to their own conclusions. 31Bowen (2003). 10 improving the relationship of the disputing parties, and hence the management of the land, ratherthanmyopicallyfocusingonownershipinterests. Further,asindicatedbythenewspaperdata,violenceassociatedwithlandandnaturalresource conflictissignificantlyconcentratedinManggarai,Flores. Thequalititativefieldworkindicates thatinthiskabupatentheresourcesatstake,andhenceinterests,areoftenintimatelyintertwined with ethnic identities (see the four Manggarai case studies). This suggests that violence is morelikelytoresultwhenethnicidenitiesareimplicatedand/orinvokedinabidtoassertwhat amounttomaterialinterests. Giventhehighstakesoftheseconflicts,thevarietyofnormativesystems,aswellas(generally) thecentralityoflandandnaturalresourcestosocialandeconomiclife,itisunsurprisingthat there are a variety of actors and institutions involved in the cases. The various fora through whichone'sinterestscanberepresentedandresolved--whichincludeadatforums,community and religious assemblies, local village and kecamatan (sub-district) governments and state courts--makesforanambiguousdisputeresolutionenvironment. Further,thereisnoaccepted hierarchy of appeal so to speak, and although courts are normally tasked with this role, as demonstratedintheinheritancecasefromSikka,theyoftenunabletoensureenforcement.32 Variance in Transition A second theme evident from the case studies, as well as from the broader newspaper data presented earlier, is the variance of land and natural resource conflict. If we take these conflicts as a lens through which to look at societal, economic and political change, this variance suggest that it is not just the pace of change that varies but also, and importantly, the forms and paths it takes. Indonesia is in multiple social, political and economic transitions, the result of a complex combination of local, national and transnational processes. Transitions that are particularly relevant to land and natural resource (conflict) include: the increasing individualisation (territorialisation) and state management of natural resources, including land; the decentralization of politics, policy- making and government services; and the deepening democratisation of politics and society. Theshifttoindividualownershipandstate-managedadministrationregimeshasreceivedmuch attention,particularlywithregardtoland,butalsoothernaturalresources.33 Certainlythisis 32 Which is not necessarily a bad thing given their susceptibility to corruption, see generally World Bank (2004a); andAsia Foundation (2001). 33 A conference held in October this year (2004), funded by DfID and organised by the KEMALA Foundation, directly tackled these issues: Konferensi Internasional tentang Penguasaan Tanah dan Sumberdaya di Masa Indonesia yang Sedang Berubah : Mempertanyakan Jawaban-jawaban (International Conference on Land and Resource Tenure in Changing Indonesia: Questioning the Answers). 11 something which is being pushed in Indonesia, somewhat controversially, by large donors includingtheWorldBank.34 Howeverthearrivalatthetransition'shypothesised(andimagined) end is not a fait accompli. The case studies demonstrate not only the various local systems andmechanismsthatthetransitionneedstoaccommodate(orsupercede)butalsothevariance in how this transition, as a process, is being simultaneously accommodated and resisted by existingmechanismsandinstitutions. ThecasesfromEastJavaindicatethatlandandnaturalresourceconflictislargelyconfinedto individual or family units, ownership and use is conflated,35 and the state's representatives, withexceptionofthekyaiininheritancecases,largelymanagedisputeresolution. However inFlores,andparticularlyinthemoreremoteKabupatenManggarai,landandnaturalresources areoftencommunally"held"withownershipanduserightsdistinguished,andtheexistenceof a variety of norms and institutions "manage" dispute resolution. The case studies, and the newspaperdata,suggestthatthesedifferencesintheperceptionoflandandnaturalresources haveasignificantimpactonwhetherconflictsresultinviolence. InEastJava,wherelandand naturalresourcesarelargelyviewedfortheirmaterialvalue,landandnaturalresourceconflict isunlikelytoturnviolent. WhereasinFlores,andparticularlytheremoteKabupatenMaggarai, where land and natural resource use and ownership is commonly entwined with ethnic and communalidentities,theseconflictsarepronetocommunalviolence. Thecasesalsoindicate great variance in the accessibility and appropriateness of the state's management regime, whether it be the court system for settling land and natural resource disputes or the BPN (National Land Office) for certifying ownership. LuthfiAshari in his case study from East Javasuggeststhatthecourtsareoftenutilizedforresolvinglanddisputes,butthatfewpeople, althoughanincreasingamount,havetheirlandcertifiedbyBPN. InFlorestheCourtdecisions andBPNcertificatesseemopportunisticandmuchlessrelevantthanlocalsystems. Decentralizationcanprovideindigenouscommunitieswitha(perceived)rightandmethodto assert control over land and natural resources.36 In the case study Unrest on the Border, a local villager in Flores speaks with approval of the Sampit massacre in Central Kalimantan andtheDayaks'reassertionoftheirindigenousnessandrighttogovern. Theallusionhighlights thepotentialdangersofsuchpowers. Whenconceptualizingtransitions(aninevitabletaskinthedevelopmentbusiness,whosevery premise is change) it is tempting to adopt a narrative of modernisation. This allows one to easily grasp the aims of development (i.e. a pre-determined "modern" form) and explain variance(i.e.thepaceoftransition). However,asthecasestudiesindicate,itisimportantnot toseethis`ultimatedestination'(forexampleasystemofindividualizedlandtitle,administered 34 See the current Project Information Document, World Bank (2003). 35 Or use rights, in terms of zoning are held by the government. 36 On decentralization and its impacts on resource conflict see McCarthy (2004). 12 and enforced by the state) as fixed or of a singular replicable form. This simplistic train of thought, particularly if accompanied by designs and implementation strategies that are not locallygrounded,encouragesinterventionsthatdonotadequatelyconsidereitherthewaysof getting to a desired end, or whether there is actually a more appropriate destination. Such approaches fail to recognise the agency (and the right) communities have in selecting and resistingwhattheydoanddonotwishtoadopt,andtheextenttowhichlocalpreferencesand knowledgeareafundamentalresourceindesigningbetter,moreappropriate,systems. BoththecomplexityoflandandnaturalresourceconflictsandtheirvarianceacrossIndonesia makeitdifficulttodevelopconclusionsthatareeasilyoperationalisedintobroadpolicy(or project)interventions. Howeverthecasestudiesdoofferhintsofprocessesthataresuccessful andunsuccessfulandthatshouldbetakenintoconsideration. Some implications for policy interventions Broadly, the case studies suggest that if interventions are to be successful they must be consultative, engage with informal and formal mechanisms, and take into account power differentials. This is both relevant to interventions that form part of conflict resolution and prevention strategies as well as land and natural resource administration strategies. Cases by Peter Manggut (Not Just a Matter of Communal Land) andAgus Mahur (Who Owns Mbondei Land?) indicate how land advocacy activities by a NGO and resolution attempts by an adat forum (respectively) failed, and triggered more conflict, because they were not fully participatory and did not involve all stakeholders. Further, Peter's case study and another by Agus (St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land), indicate that resolution interventions should not become too concerned with resolving ownership rights at the cost of wider and more implicit interests such as use or management rights. TwocasesfromEastJava,byLuthfiAshariandMohammadSaid,indicatethesuccessfulrole played by informal community mediators such as the kyai and klebun; similarly, but less successfully,inFlorestheChurch,camat(sub-districthead),thekades(villagehead),aswell as tokoh masyarakat (community leaders), were involved in resolution attempts. However, participation does not automatically translate into "fair" agreements. In the case studies titled Who Owns Mbondei Land?and Hostility Between the Satar Teu and Kadung, weakerpartiesagreed,ininclusivemeetings,tosettlementsproposedbythirdpartymediators. Yetafterthemeetings,theywithdrawtheiragreement,claimingthatthemeetingswerebiased, thattheyhadfeltpressuredtocomply,andthattheagreementsdidnotsatisfytheirinterests.37 Without going into the strengths and weakness of the respective positions of the disputing parties,thissuggeststhatintheabsenceofalegitimatethirdpartymediatoritisoftenunrealistic to believe that a participatory process in itself will defuse power inequalities, protect 37 For a general discussion see Edmunds and Wollenberg (2002). 13 disadvantagedpartiesandkeeplocalpoliticsoutsidemediationprocesses. Conversely,one canaskwhetheranoutsideintervenorhasthelegitmacytomeddlewithlocalpolitics,norms orinstitutions. There are often suggestions that land and natural resource disputes be resolved at the local villagelevel,therationalebeingthatonlyhighlylocalizedinterventionscanadequatelytake intoconsiderationlocalnormsandinterests. Howeverthecasespresentedhereindicatethat, whilemanyofthecasesofhavealocalbasis,landandnaturalresourceconflictsofteninvolve widerinterests,normsandinstitutions. ThecasestudiesbyCiciNoviaAnggriani,AgusMahur and Peter Manggut demonstrate the wider interests and agendas of the state, NGOs, and Church. Theincreasingmobilityofpeople(seecasesbyMohammadSaidandStanisDidakus), andanaccompanyingincreaseintheheterogeneityofpopulations,canalsomakehighlylocalized processesredundant. Localdecision-makingdoesnotautomaticallyresultinfairoutcomes; local processes are just as likely to be glazed with power and inequalities.38 Almost every case study indicates some form of involvement by formal state actors. Often local communities voluntarily opt for "outside" state intervention in order to find mutually acceptableuninvolvedthirdparties. ThiswasthesituationinthecasestudyHostilitybetween the Satar Teu and Kadung, where the Village Head and Camat were both requested to assist in informally mediating the dispute, similarly in the case Unrest on the Border. The state's responsiveness to these requests for assistance from the community is often key to whetheralandandnaturalresourcedisputewillspreadandbecomeawidercommunalconflict. The case study Not just a Matter of Communal Land notes that the Camat initially ignored requests, with the Bupati eventually making a visit and promising to send the Camat. The pervasivenessoflandandnaturalresourceconflictinIndonesiaanditstendency,particularly in areas like Flores, to be resolved through informal (non-court) processes of negotiation, indicatethattransparentanddedicatedmechanismsthatbridgeinformalandformalactorsare required.39 The case studies collected here provide the careful reader with a complex understanding of landandnaturalresourceconflictinIndonesia. Moregenerally,theyalsoindicatejusthow muchcanbelearntfromqualitativeandin-depthfieldresearchonproblemsandissueswhich areusuallyapproachedintechnocraticandover-generalizedways. Theeditoracknowledges thatthesethreebroadthemesarebynomeansexclusive;thatthereadercan,withinsightfrom their own experiences, draw out from these rich case studies new themes, insights and conclusions. 38 See also, Bowen (2003). 39 Agood example is the successful "Team 13" mechanism in Lampung. See Rinaldi (2003). 14 Dang Lebar Land Dispute Dusun Dang Lebar, Desa Panagguan, Kecamatan Proppo, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: LuthfiAshari Dang Lebar Land Dispute Summary The Dang Lebar land dispute was a land conflict that involved friends. The conflict occurred due to the community's habit of conducting verbal transactions and emerged in the second generation of landowners. Land conflicts, which often occur amongst friends and between neighbours, have caused these relationships to fray. As demonstrated in this case the local Kyai (Muslim Cleric) or Klebun (Village Head) play strategic roles in the resolution of these conflicts. 1. Land Conflict: The Most Common Community Conflict Land conflicts are the most frequently occurring disputes at the village level in Madura.1 Usually these disputes are over land boundaries and inheritance disagreements and are often a consequence of three factors: the habit of conducting transactions without written evidence, the weakness of land administration at the village level, and disagreements over inheritance claims.2 Violence does not usually arise from land conflicts in Desa Panagguan.3 This is the case due to the community's sense that land is a matter of property, and it can be compensated for, and as a consequence there is no need to make an issue of land disputes with violence.4 Whereas a conflict over a woman will always give rise to violent carok5 (duel), as interfering with one's woman is the most serious violation of a man's tengka (pride).6 When resolving land conflict the resolution mechanisms used by the community utilise or applyavarietyoflawornorms,including:faraid(thedivisionofaninheritanceaccordingto 1 See Luthfi's Diary, Palengaan Daya, 12 May 2003 and also Interview No. 724, Klebun, June 2003. 2 Interview No. 700, Former Pangbahu, Panagguan, 16 June 2003. 3 Interview No. 735, Dusun Head, Panagguan, 10 July 2003. 4 Interview No. 771, Kyai, Tattangoh, 1August 2003. 5 Carok is a Madurese duel or challenge over a matter of offended pride, often fought to the death. 6 Interview No. 728, Youth, Proppo, 30 June 2003, Interview No. 715, Police, Proppo 19 June 2003, Interview No. 722, Pangbahu, Proppo, 27 June 2003. Researchers: LuthfiAshari and Mohammad Said; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 15 Dang Lebar Land Dispute Dusun Dang Lebar, Desa Panagguan, Kecamatan Proppo, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: LuthfiAshari Islamic law), positive state law (relavent legislation), or village record books (Petok C).7 If agreementisnotreachedatthevillagelevel,thedisputewillbepursuedwiththeCamat. For thisreason,landconflictisthetypeofconflictintheMaduresecommunitywhichusuallydoes notstopatthevillagelevelbutoftencontinuestothekecamatan(sub-district)administrative level, or even the courts.8 TheKyaiandtheKlebunhavecentralrolesinlandconflictresolutionmechanisms. TheKyai playsarolebydividingthelandaccordingtothenormsofIslam,knownasfaraid,whilethe The Kyai are respected by the community for their wisdom in resolving problems and are viewedasteacherswhoimpartknowledgetothecommunity. TheKlebunplaysarolewhen people rely on his abilities and wisdom as a leader, further Klebun, according to Madurese philosophy,areperceivedaselders.9 Asaresult,withtheirwisdom,theKlebunareresponsible forprotectingthepeople. Assuch,itisnotsurprisingthatoneoftheindicatorsofaKlebun's successistheirabilitytoresolveproblems.10 2. Exploration of the Case ThelanddisputebetweenH.Halim(landowner,DusunHead)andAmir(H.Halim'scousin) occurredin2001inDesaPanagguan. H.HalimandAmir'sparentsaresiblings. Amirmade anissueofthestatusofafieldoflandownedbyH.Halim,claimingthatthelandinquestion stillbelongstohisfather(Bakir),andshouldbepartofhisinheritance. Thehistoryoftheland currentlyownedbyH.HalimwasthatitpreviouslybelongedtoAmir'sfather,butithadbeen soldormortgagedtoH.Julis(H.Halim'sfather).11 "Because he needed money at the time (1961), Bakir (Amir's father) sold a portion (of inherited land) to Julis. Some (witnesses) say that at the time Bakir's part was just mortgaged, while other witnesses said that the land was sold. Julis did not need to change the ownership of the land in village records because it was still in his name. Bakir's and Julis'parents did not think that they would fight over land..." Klebun, Panagguan, 8 July 2003 7 Interview No. 761, Former LKMD Head, Tattangoh, 28 July 2003, Interview No. 750, Former FD, Proppo, 18 July 2003, and Interview No. 714, Klebun's Political Opponent, Proppo, 22 June 2003. 8 Interview No 734, Community Figure, Proppo, 10 July 2003. 9 Interview No. 748, op cit. 10 Interview No. 732, 8 July 2003, Interview No. 734, 10 July 2003. 11 Interview No. 732, op cit. Researchers: LuthfiAshari and Mohammad Said; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 16 Dang Lebar Land Dispute Dusun Dang Lebar, Desa Panagguan, Kecamatan Proppo, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author : Luthfi Ashari In 2001, someone made a Rp. 8 million offer for the land purchased by H. Halim's uncle withoutproofofthetransaction. Hearingthisnews,Amir,whohadjustreturnedfromJava, began to make an issue of the ownership status of the land. "In 2001, someone made an offer for the land I owned for 8 million, whereas in 1961 my father (H. Julis) had already bought the land for 60 thousand from Bakiryah (Amir's father). Amir's neighbours slandered and provoked him, saying that the land actually belonged to his father. Many of his family and neighbours slandered him, and toldAmir to take the land back... At the provocation from his neighbours to the right and left, in the end Amir came to my father. Amir questioned the matter of the land. My father toldAmir that he had already given the land to me. In the end,Amir came to myself and asked whether it was true that the land had been bought from his father. If it had been bought then for how much? He asked for proof of the sale. I answered that there was no proof. In the past, the only evidence was a cassava tree that was planted in the middle of the rice fields. Amir wasn't satisfied with my answer. According to Amir, at the very least there was usually a thumbprint as proof. I said that I did not have any proof, but that I had a witness to the land transaction." H. Halim, Landowner, Panagguan, 10 July 2003 The land conflict between H. Halim and Amir surfaced because nothing was put in writing, so the type of transaction, whether it was a sale or just a mortgage, was unclear. There was no proof of this land transaction, so that when it was made an issue of, the two conflicting sides were equally confused. Moreover, the witnesses to the land transaction were already dead, leaving only the second generation of witnesses on both sides.12 According to an informant, the background to the claim made by Amir was not just the jealousy and provocation of people around him, but rather there was a personal matter behind it. "The land case emerged because the besanan (a relationship through marriage) between Bakir and H. Jalenani failed. This failure caused Bakir to open up old wounds.... When Amir visited his cousin's house, he felt that he did not receive a warm welcome. His family said words there that hurt his feelings. Because of that, he dug up the past. He opened up the status of the land owned by his father." Klebun, Panagguan, 8 July 2003 12 See Luthfi's Diary 15 May 2003, Palengaan Daya. Researchers: LuthfiAshari and Mohammad Said; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 17 Dang Lebar Land Dispute Dusun Dang Lebar, Desa Panagguan, Kecamatan Proppo, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: LuthfiAshari 3. Local Wisdom: The Klebun Resolves the Problem Sufficiently As he had no proof of the transaction, and Amir continued to make an issue of it, H. Halim took the initiative to reportAmir's claim to the Klebun, to seek justice. However, before that, several mediations were held at the dusun level. Box 1: The Resolution of the Dang Lebar Land Dispute "Because Amir would not accept it, in the end I reported to the Pak Klebun. Amir came to me just once. Before that, I knew that Amir wanted to take the land. One week later, Pak Klebun calledAmir and myself to him. The meeting was held at Pak Klebun's house. The two divided sides attended. I brought H. Ali and Mubaid as witnesses, while Amir brought Mushar and Masrik ... The meeting was held at 7 o'clock in the morning at Pak Klebun's house. At the meeting I explained how the problem stood, and Amir did the same. On hearing the explanations, the Klebun made some considerations and decisions. After listening to the witnesses, in the end the Klebun decided that the land belonged to me. The meeting ended with taking thumbprints as proof that the problem had been resolved. Those who signed at the time were myself, Amir, Pak Klebun and witnesses."13 H. Halim/Landowner, Panagguan, 10 July 2003 "At the lower (dusun) level there were three meetings at H. Ali's house (H Halim's older brother). The agenda was to clarify the position of the land. Because [the problem] could not be resolved at the lower level, it was brought to the village level... In order to resolve the problem, I referred to the document I had in H. Julis' name. Amir continued to just make an issue of the hereditary land that was only in H. Julis' name. The witnesses' explanations were somewhat confusing. They could not agree on a decision. It seems that [the land] was not purchased transparently back then. It seems that the land was sold when he needed money, and he wanted to redeem it if he had the money. It was certainly bought cheaply. Amir's side acknowledged this. According H. Halim's side, the transaction was a sale... There were many witnesses. The witnesses were ngambang (controversial). Because the two divided sides were both nephews... The atmosphere of the meeting was tense. Amir threatened carok in my forum. Then I divided the land. I returned part of it to Amir, part of it I did not [return]. Consider it divided in two. Amir got 25 percent. I put pressure on him. If he did not accept the solution, then the village would take the land. They were frightened. The community very much supported this method. The problem was resolved. Klebun Panagguan, 10 July 2003 13Interview No. 735, op cit. Researchers: LuthfiAshari and Mohammad Said; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 18 Dang Lebar Land Dispute Dusun Dang Lebar, Desa Panagguan, Kecamatan Proppo, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: LuthfiAshari "Before, the problem was not resolved here (at the Kyai's house). The problem was resolved by awarding compensation. H. Halim awarded Amir an amount of money as compensation for his demands. So that the problem would not be drawn out, the Klebun asked H. Halim to pay compensation to Amir. [What is meant by compensation here is compromise money to resolve the problem, because the claimant's side felt they had lost what was rightfully theirs, or because the land transaction had indeed been unclear]." Village Kyai, Panagguan, 16 July 2003 The resolution of the land problem began at the dusun level, where the two disputing sides met. If the problem was not resolved, it would be taken to the Klebun to obtain a resolution. In order to resolve it, the Klebun would consult the documents in the village, known as the Petok C book (the land ownership record book).14 The names of the owners of the land in the village are recorded in this book. This kind of resolution is sometimes unrepresentative (of reality) because the names noted are usually old owners, whereas the position of the land has changed hands several times in the community. It is this that often becomes the source of difficulty in resolving land cases. If this is the case, then the Klebun's wisdom will be the deciding factor. 4. The Loosening of Family Ties Inlandcases,conflictoftenoccursbetweenfamilyorneighbours. Thiscanoccurbecausein a land dispute case the conflicting parties are not strangers but family.15 In a land conflict relatingtolandboundaries,usuallyproblemsemergebetweenneighbours,landownerswho areadjacenttooneanother.16 Ifthisoccurs,thentherelationshipbetweenfamilyandneighbours willberuined. "The relationship between them since this case has experienced a rift. NowAmir no longer lives here, he went to Java. Their relationship is now very distant. Their good relationship has begun to disappear, for instance the proof is that they do not visit one another, or they have reduced their meetings. If they meet in the street they still greet one another, but only in passing, the atmosphere is not as it used to be." Klebun, Panagguan, 8 July 2003 14Interview No. 732, op cit. 15Interview No. 734, op cit., Interview No. 748, op cit. and Interview No. 746, op cit. 16Interview No. 734, op cit., 10 July 2003, Interview No. 748, op cit, Interview No. 746, op cit. Researchers: LuthfiAshari and Mohammad Said; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 19 Dang Lebar Land Dispute Dusun Dang Lebar, Desa Panagguan, Kecamatan Proppo, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: LuthfiAshari Although a land conflict can damage social interaction between disputing parties, it very rarelycausesviolentconflict. Thisisthecasebecauseofthewaythecommunityviewsland itself. "Usually land cases that do lead to carok occur in rural areas. In more advanced areas there are none, because people understand that it is not a matter of principle. Usually, arguing over land involves people within one family. Besides this, land problems have their limits; there are rules so that they can be resolved by the Klebun." Retired Teacher, Proppo, 26 June 2003 5. Conclusion ConflictresultingfromlandistheconflicttypethatmostfrequentlyemergesintheMadurese community. Unlikeotherconflicts,thisconflictusuallydoesnotleadtoviolentconflict. Landconflictsemergebecausethereisadifferenceoveraboundary,differentviewsoverthe divisionofinheritanceanddifferentviewsoverproofofownership. Conflictcanoccurdueto theweaknessoflandadministrationatthevillagelevel. If a land problem arises, resolution will initially be attempted at the dusun level. If it isn't resolved,itisbroughtbeforetheKlebunorKyai. IntheresolutionofalandconflicttheKyai or Klebunplay very strategic roles. Landconflictsusuallyinvolveconflictbetweenneighboursandfamily. Aftertheconflictthe relationshipbetweenthedisputingpartieswillfray,regardlessofwhethertheyhaveafamily relationshipornot. Researchers: LuthfiAshari and Mohammad Said; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 20 Dang Lebar Land Dispute Dusun Dang Lebar, Desa Panagguan, Kecamatan Proppo, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: LuthfiAshari Case Chronology: Dang Lebar Land Dispute Date Event 1961 Bakir sells (mortgages) land to H. Julis for Rp. 65,000. 2001 H. Halim is offered Rp. 8 million for the land. Amir returns from Java and makes an issue of the status of H. Halim's land. 2001 H. Halim reports Amir's demands to the Klebun. Negotiation at the Klebun's house to resolve the dispute. Dispute resolved. Amir returns to Java. The relationship between H. Halim and Amir frays. Researchers: LuthfiAshari and Mohammad Said; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 21 An Inheritance Brings Misfortune Dusun Palengan Daja, Kecamatan Palengaan, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Mohammad Said An Inheritance Brings Misfortune Summary "It was approaching afternoon, the rice was ready to eat, then suddenly they came from the north [Desa Poreh] and started to shout "Carok...carok...carok!..."1 Sanen, witness to the land dispute This is a case which began with two individuals and ended up involving whole families. Nevertheless it is often described as an inter-village conflict. This is done in an effort to help differentiate between the two parties because they live in different villages. The dispute over the land goes back a long time and is a result of a disagreement between the elders from both families. There is no substantial evidence; rather it is based on the stories from the village elders who witnessed the past events. These village elders are becoming fewer and fewer. This is because people do not live forever. However, land disputes will continue until the earth is destroyed. This is not a violent case, but it may have become violent, had the Klebun (Village Head) of Palengaan Daja not intervened when the two families met after their frustrations had reached a peak. Even though the conflict did not result in carok, the conflict still has not been resolved. This is because after the first resolution attempt there were no further efforts to overcome the conflict. The Klebun invited both parties to a meeting on two occasions, but neither ever turned up. As a result, the case was just left alone. Efforts to resolve the dispute were carried out at the village level by both formal and informal community leaders. Higher levels of government and other groups were not involved. 1 Carok is a duel or challenge between two or more people, using sickles as their primary weapon. In a number of cases, one or more of the actors in the dispute are killed Researchers: Mohammad Said and LuthfiAshari; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Kristen Stokes 22 An Inheritance Brings Misfortune Dusun Palengan Daja, Kecamatan Palengaan, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Mohammad Said 1. Introduction: AReflection of the Unhealthy State of LandAdministration in Madura Nowadays,ifsomebodyinheritsapieceofland,theymaynotonlybeinheritingwealthbut theymayalsobeinheritingadisputeasaresultoftheunclearstatusoftheland. Thefollowing box reflects the unhealthy state of land administrative affairs in Madura, especially in the villages. Box 1: Land Administration in Madura "There is a connection to the purchases and sales. It was sold by the men in the past, land used to be swapped for corn, but now their children are claiming their land back, stating that the land had been swapped for corn. The ones who bought the land are not willing to give it back, if you want it, try buying it at the market price now." "It's not the inheritance which has caused the problems, it is generally the sale and purchase of the land in the past, tana sa lokke' eorob jagung saganthe' (plots of land were swapped for an armful of corn). If you look at the situation nowadays, a plot of land and an handfull of corn doesn't compare, but, in the past they were equivalent because it was hard, it was difficult to even eat, and therefore, even land would be swapped for corn." "In the past land wasn't all that valuable here, therefore, two plots of land would be swapped for a basket of cassava." "Land could be swapped for coffee. If you drink coffee everyday and you can't pay for it, eventually you'll have to hand over your land." Mens FGD participants, 5 May 2003 Land has become like a thorn in Madurese community life as there are a number of land disputes in Madura. Land disputes in Madura are a consequence of the unhealthy state of land administrative affairs in rural Madura.2 Had the Madurese elders known and understood the regulations and processes involved in transferring land ownership rights then it is likely there would not be so many land disputes amongst the current generation. "People who claim that their ancestors owned a certain plot of land will ask the person who has inhabited the land if they have proof of ownership. When they are unable to provide evidence which indicates that they are the owner, a dispute will begin" Abdul Makmur, Village Elder, 2 May 2003 Normally there is no formal evidence which can be used as a point of reference in almost all land disputes. This is because the Madurese generally rely on trust and a 2 See Men's FGD No. 4, 5 May 2003. Researchers: Mohammad Said and LuthfiAshari; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Kristen Stokes 23 An Inheritance Brings Misfortune Dusun Palengan Daja, Kecamatan Palengaan, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Mohammad Said witness who will vouch that the plot of land has been purchased or sold.3 This, however, causes difficulties later because human beings do not live for hundreds of years, and therefore, the only form of proof which existed is lost. "During the Dutch era, the ancestors of the people who are involved in current land disputes bought and sold land based on a sense of trust. They had no formal proof [of the transaction]" Abdul Makmur, Village Elder, 2 May 2003 2. The Beginning Stages of the Conflict Over the Inherited Land Sevenyearsago,around1996,Sammat,fromDesaPalengaanDaja,claimedthatheactually owned the land that Sardiman, from Desa Poreh, was using.4 He reasoned that the land belongedtohisauntwhohadnoheirs. "The background to the dispute is like this. There was a person from Poreh [Sardiman's father] who married a person from Palengaan Daja [Sammat's aunt], but he had no children from the marriage. Then his wife passed away. Throughout their relationship as husband and wife, the wife was in possession of a plot of land which she had inherited from her parents. After the wife died, her husband continued to work the land. Then the husband married for a second time. He had a child from this second marriage. And now Sammat [nephew of the first wife] wants to take the land, but the child from his second wife who inherited the land has prohibited him from doing so because he [Sardiman] believes that the land belonged to his parents" Rahmat, Witness, 3 May 2003 Sardiman, accompanied by his cousin (Jaelani) refused to hand over the land, saying that he had inherited the land from his parents.5 According to Sardiman, the land indeed used to belong to his aunt, but Sardiman's parents bought the land with a cow.6 Because the land was unable to be redeemed in a set amount of time Sardiman's parents [from Desa Poreh] became the owners. However, in Land plot C, the disputed land is still in the name of the party from Palengaan Daja, and there has been no steps taken to transfer the names even though it was apparently sold.7 3 Interview No. 043b. 4 Interview No. 050. 5 Interview No. 050. 6 Ibid. 7 Interview No. 039B, op cit. Researchers: Mohammad Said and LuthfiAshari; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Kristen Stokes 24 An Inheritance Brings Misfortune Dusun Palengan Daja, Kecamatan Palengaan, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Mohammad Said "The names of the party from Palengaan Daja are still on the Land Plot C. The names haven't been transferred even though the land was apparently sold. Therefore, the Palengaan Daja party [Sammat] are in a stronger position in the eyes of the law." Marsuid, Klebun, 5 May 2003 Sammat was unable to reclaim the land after he had met with Sardiman, therefore, he went and reported the case to the Klebun, saying that the land in DusunTenggina Dua had been seizedbySardiman,wholivesinDesaPoreh.8 Beforereportingthecase,Sammatputsome stakesin,markingtheboardersofthelandtoindicatethatitbelongedtohim.9 Thisresulted inanargument.10 "It was like this approximately 2pm and raining lightly. Sammat and Husen [Sammat's relative] dropped by at my [Sanen] house and invited me to help them put in the red bamboo market stakes ... a dispute occurred as a result of the marker posts." Sanen, Witness, 5 May 2003 3. They Even Brought their Sickles to the Meeting to Resolve the Dispute In an effort to resolve the case, the Village Head summoned the two disputing parties to attend a meeting, but Sardiman never turned up. The meeting was going to be held at the Klebun's house. The meeting did not resolve the problem.11 The second meeting was held at the actual location [disputed land]. The two sides were unable to reach an agreement because they both had a very different understanding of the case.12 "Five meetings were held in total to resolve the case. The first one was held at the Klebun's house, but nobody was able to reach an agreement. The second meeting was held at the disputed site with the Klebun, but still no resolution was found." Rahmat, Witness, 3 May 2003 ThethirdmeetingwasheldinDusunTengginaDuasothatbothpartiescouldattend. Dusun Tenggina Dua is located right in the middle, between Palengaan Daja and Poreh.13 The 8 Interview No. 050, op cit. 9 Interview No. 054, op cit. 10 Ibid. 11 Interview No. 054, op cit. 12 Ibid. 13 Interview No. 050, op cit. and 039b, op cit. Researchers: Mohammad Said and LuthfiAshari; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Kristen Stokes 25 An Inheritance Brings Misfortune Dusun Palengan Daja, Kecamatan Palengaan, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Mohammad Said meetingtookplaceatthehouseofarespectedcommunityfigure,PakHamid,whoalsoused to be the head of the dusun (hamlet).14 The meeting at Pak Hamid's house was held in the middle of the day. However, the party fromPorehdidnotarriveuntiltheafternoon.15 Whentheforumwasjustabouttositdownfor lunch,thePorehpartysuddenlyarrivedshouting "carok".16 Approximatelysixpeoplehad cometoPakHamid'shouse,butaftertakingacloserlook,thenumbershadgrown. Eachof them was bearing a sickle.17 According to another respondent, there were approximately twenty people.18 It is unclear just how many people were there, but from the information collected, it would seem that there were at least twenty because it was not just the Poreh partywhobroughtthemasses,butalsothepartyfromPalengaanDaja. ThePalengaanDaja supportershadbeenwaitingoutsidePakHamid'sfencesincethemorning.19 "It was approaching afternoon, the rice was ready to eat, then suddenly they came from the north [Desa Poreh] and started to shout `Carok...carok...carok... there was approximately six of them carrying sickles" Sanen, Witness, 5 May 2003 "...it has it that about twenty people came from Poreh wielding sickles, the masses just kept coming..." Marsuid, Klebun/Mediator, 5 May 2003 Both parties shouted and argued at each other during the meeting.20 Had the Klebun not have been there and immediately stepped in and pacified the two groups, which were not preparedtocompromise,thereisastrongpossibilitythatthecarokwouldhavetakenplace.21 Even from the time that the Poreh people arrived, they had been shouting `carok...carok...carok!" the Klebun showed that he understood their situation and then requested that they not go ahead with the carok, but instead try and resolve the matter peacefully.22 The Klebun requested that they all surrender their sickles to show their good 14 Ibid. 15 Interview No. 050, op cit. and 039b, op cit. 16 Interview No. 054, op cit.. 17 Ibid. 18 Interview No. 039b, op cit. 19 Interview No. 054, op cit. 20 Interview No. 050, op cit. 21Interview No. 039b, op cit. 22Interview No. 039b, op cit. and Interview No. 054, op cit. Researchers: Mohammad Said and LuthfiAshari; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Kristen Stokes 26 An Inheritance Brings Misfortune Dusun Palengan Daja, Kecamatan Palengaan, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Mohammad Said intentions and then leave.23 Eventually, they were broken up and thecarok was prevented. ThisindicatestheKlebun'sauthorityandpoweroverthevillagers. "Finally, the Klebun seized their sickles and got rid of them in the forest" Sanen, Witness, 5 May 2003 "...then I ran into the crowd of people who were going to carok ...at that time the people from Desa Poreh were standing directly in front of the Palengaan Daja supporters. Just as they were about to carok, I jumped into the crowd of people who were all shouting carok-carok!. Finally, I was able to seize their sharp weapons, for example, their sickles and knives, and take hand of the situation" "After I met with both parties, they finally decided to go home, they didn't go ahead with the carok, I collected all their sickles...a whole pile of them" Marsuid, Klebun/Mediator, 5 May 2003 Arepresentative from the kecamatan, Pak Rangga, the kecamatan government secretary, also attended the meeting, although he was not formally invited.24 According to the Klebun, Pak Rangga only came to the meeting because he is his good friend.25 "The police, Kyai (Muslim Cleric),Camat and LandAdministrationAgency (BPN) were not involved in the resolution process. Only the village was involved." Rahmat, Witness, 3 May 2003 "There was no police around when the incident took place" Sanen, Witness, 5 May 2003 Neither the kecamatan nor any higher administrative units were involved in the conflict resolution process.26 The whole process was handled by the village government, and involved informal village leaders, for example, respected and trusted village elders who knew and understood the history of land ownership in Palengaan Daja.27 23Interview No. 054, op cit. and Interview No. 039b, op cit. 24Interview No. 039b, op cit. and Interview No. 054, op cit. 25Interview No. 039b, op cit. 26Interview No. 050, op cit. and Interview No. 054, op cit.. 27Interview No. 050, op cit. Pak Abdul Kramat is a respected informal leader within the community, who has been handling land affairs in Palengaan Daja for tens of years. He was involved in land affairs when he was village secretary, and ever since the community has requested his help to resolve land disputes. Researchers: Mohammad Said and LuthfiAshari; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Kristen Stokes 27 An Inheritance Brings Misfortune Dusun Palengan Daja, Kecamatan Palengaan, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Mohammad Said "The Klebun doesn't know about land maps here. It's the older people, for example, Dul Makmur who understand land distribution and affairs in Angsoka Timur A, Tenggina I and Tenggina II." Male FGD participant, 5 May 2003 Effortstoresolvethelanddisputecontinuedevenaftertheincidenttookplace.28 TheKlebun summonsedthetwopartiestoanotherfollow-upmeeting,butthePorehpartypaidnoattention to the summons, and therefore the case has yet to be resolved.29 After the incident the Klebunsentinvitationsfortwomoremeetings. "The forth and fifth meetings did not take place because the parties did not want to attend ... after they had been summonsed twice and they didn't turn up, nothing else was done about it ..." Rahmat, Witness, 3 May 2003 This case did not involve the Klebun of Poreh because the disputed land is located in Desa Palengaan Daja. It is only the people from one of the disputing parties who live in Desa Poreh. Also, this is not an inter-village dispute so both Klebuns did not need to become involved. The dispute is yet to be resolved (see Box 2). The party from Poreh [Sardiman] still has control over the land. However, there are rumours that Sardiman divided the land up amongst himself and his cousin [Jaelani].30 Apparently, Sammat (from Palengaan Daja] did not receive any of the land whatsoever.31 Box 2: The Current State of the Conflict "After that I didn't follow up the case, both parties didn't take follow up action. Now I've found out that the land is being worked on by the party from Poreh ..." "There was nothing at all from the two disputing parties. News has it that the land was divided into two by the Poreh party" Marsuid, Klebun/Mediator, 5 May 2003 "Until today the dispute has yet to be resolved. Sardiman has taken the land" Sanen, Witness, 5 May 2003"After both parties had been summonsed twice by the Klebun and neither of them attended, nothing else was done. News has it that Sardiman divided the land between himself and Jaelani [Saliman's cousin who helped him defend his land]. Sammat didn't get anything, and even now the case has yet to be resolved ..." Rahmat, Witness, 3 May 2003 28Interview No. 050, op cit.. 29Interview No. 039b, op cit., Interview No. 050, op cit. and Interview No. 054, op cit.. 30Ibid. 31Interview No. 039b, op cit., Interview No. 050, op cit. and Interview No. 054, op cit. Researchers: Mohammad Said and LuthfiAshari; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Kristen Stokes 28 An Inheritance Brings Misfortune Dusun Palengan Daja, Kecamatan Palengaan, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Mohammad Said After the third meeting, when the situation almost got out of hand, the disputed land was vacated, leaving nobody working the land.32 However, this was not for long. The Poreh partywentbacktoworkingtheland. Infact,Sardimandividedthelandbetweenhimselfand Jaelani, both of whom are from Desa Poreh.33 TheKlebunandvillageelderswereunabletoresolvethelanddisputebecausethetwodisputing parties would not attend the planned meetings. The Klebun made considerable efforts to resolvethelanddispute;howeveritwouldhavebeenverydifficultfortheKlebuntoforcehis villagers to resolve the dispute when they themselves had no real desire to resolve the land dispute. Theissuewillbediscussedagainif,inthefuture,oneofthedisputingpartiesrequests the help of the Klebunto resolve the problem. 4. Conclusion A number of land disputes in Madura are the result of a weak land administration system, particularlyinthevillages. ThisisnotonlythefaultoftheLandAdministrationAgency,butis alsobecausepastmethods,understandingsandawarenessofvillagelandadministration. Conflict resolution mechanisms often face difficulties becaue of the lack of hard evidence. Foralongtime,theMaduresehavecarriedoutlandtransactions,relyingonlyontrustandthe wordofawitness. Whilethewitnessisstillaliveandcantesitfy,problemsrarelyarise,butwe have to remember that a human's life span is nothing compared to a piece of land, however disputes often occur once these key figures pass away. Landdisputesaredifficulttoresolveifbothdisputingpartiesclaimlandownershipandwillnot back down. Perhaps it would be better to resolve such cases using the formal legal system, butthiscancauseonepartytoharbourresentmentastheformallegalsystemmaycometothe wrongconclusion. Oftencourtsbasetheirdecisiononformalevidencewhichoftendoesnot allrecordalltransactions,including,forexample,saleandinformalmortgagesofagivenpiece ofland. Intheopinionoftheauthorofthiscasestudy,theyshouldcontinuetousetheinformalresolution mechanisms because the case is extremely complicated. They not only have to trace the historyoftheland,buttheyalsoneedtocollectproofandidentifytheelderswhocanbeused as witnesses and who know the history of the disputed land in the case. 32Interview No. 039b, op cit. 33Ibid. Researchers: Mohammad Said and LuthfiAshari; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Kristen Stokes 29 An Inheritance Brings Misfortune Dusun Palengan Daja, Kecamatan Palengaan, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Mohammad Said Case Chronology: An Inheritance brings Misfortune Date Event Tens years ago A wedding took place. The land owned by the wife, which she had inherited from her parent, was taken by her husband when she passed away. There were no children from the marriage. Seven years ago Sammat tried to reclaim the land from Sardiman, claiming that he should have inherited the land from his aunt. Sardiman refused to hand over the land. One day after Sammat reported the case to the Klebun, stating that initial incident Sardiman had taken his land. A few days Sammat put stakes in the ground, indicating the borders, after initial incident around the land which he was claiming. This resulted in an argument. Time period unknown. Klebun held a meeting at his house but no agreement Probably a few days was reached. or weeks later. Unknown Second meeting. This meeting was held in Dusun Tanggina II, not far from the disputed land. The party from Poreh [Sardiman] did not attend, and therefore the meeting was unable to be continued. Time period unknown. The third meeting was held in Dusun Tenggina II at Pak Still approximately Bahria's house. There was no opportunity to try and find seven years ago a solution to the dispute in this meeting because the party from Poreh arrived and challenged the others to a fight. It did not result in carok because the Klebun was able to pacify the two parties. No resolution was found. Researchers: Mohammad Said and LuthfiAshari; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Kristen Stokes 30 An Inheritance Brings Misfortune Dusun Palengan Daja, Kecamatan Palengaan, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Mohammad Said Location Map: Desa Palengaan Daja, Kec. Palengaan, Kab. Pamekasan D C 9 8 7 6 5 B 11 4 E 1 3 2 A 10 F EXPLANATION : 1 : Dusun Londalem A : Desa Tlambah 2 : Dusun Tareta I B : Desa Blu'uran 3 : Dusun Laccaran 4 : Dusun Tareta II C : Desa Bulmatet 5 : Dusun Angsoka Barat D : Desa Poreh 6 : Dusun Angsoka Timur A 7 : Dusun Angsoka Timur B E : Desa Pangsanggar 8 : Dusun Tenggina I F : Desa Palengaan Laok 9 : Dusun Tenggina II : Dusun Border : Disputed land : Desa Palengaan Daja Border : Border of another village Researchers: Mohammad Said and LuthfiAshari; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Kristen Stokes 31 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author: Cici Novia Anggraini When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge: Civil Disobedience is Manifested through Burning down the Forest Summary A forest is a natural resource susceptible to becoming the object of conflict. One such conflict is the case of the forest fire that took place in Desa Dayakan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java. This conflict is related to the Perhutani (Indonesian State Forestry Enterprise) policy of selecting tree types which are inappropriate for the geographic characteristics of Desa Dayakan, as the trees were causing negative impacts on villagers' fields. This case is interesting in that it highlights the relationship between a State institution and the community, and particularly the limited ability a community has to influence institutional policy and demand "service delivery" in a productive and peaceful manner. This particular conflict was compounded by an ongoing hostile relationship between the village and Perhutani as well as the socio-political dynamics surrounding the Pilkades (Village Head Election) seven months earlier. The impact of the conflict has been the reduction of alternative sources of livelihood for the Dayakan community, who rely on the income from farming dry fields, as well as the destruction of Perhutani forest resources. At present the conflict remains unresolved, without anyone knowing who the actors in the forest fire were. 1. The Nanny Must be Pried Loose in Order to Attract her Attention: The Relationship Patterns Between Perhutani and the Community Dayakan is a village in Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, located at the southern endoftheborderwithKabupatenPacitanandWonogiri. Besideshavingrelativelydryland, Desa Dayakan also covers a large area of forest, 694 ha. from a total area of 1203 ha., meaningthatmorethatfiftypercentofDayakanisforest. Economically,theexistenceofthe forest provides those who live around it with a source of livelihood. It is not clearly known whentheDayakaninhabitantsbeganusingtheforestfortheirlivelihoods. Infact,thereare several dusun or environs whose locations are surrounded by forest and are almost isolated from other dusun and environs.1 This condition has provided a great opportunity for the inhabitantsofDesaDayakantoseektheirlivelihoodsintheforest. 1 Sekarputih is located in a flat area, Kliyur is partly flat and partly gently sloped, while Jurangsempu and Watuagung are largely mountainous and forested. This is conveyed by Totti (a community figure) in an FGD in Dusun Jurangsempu, Desa Dayakan, 29 July 2003 (see Interview No. 854). Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 32 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author: Cici Novia Anggraini Due to the pattern of dry field farming that relies on rainwater, there are more and more productive farming activities being carried out in the wet season. In the dry season, some inhabitants collect pine tree resin that grows in the forest as an alternative source of income.2 Others work the cleared forest land, growing various food crops such as cassava, corn and others, which subsidize the food reserves for the dry season.3 Local inhabitants call this land baon, the land left after logging which has been turned into fields. Besides this, the residents who own livestock rely on the forest for feed for their domesticated animals. Almost every day, usually at midday or in the afternoon, the residents gather the grass that grows in the forest beneath the trees.4 Even so, the people are not legal owners of the forest, although historio-culturally, the people who live near the forest have a `closeness'5 with the area that supports their lives.6 Legally, the forest in the Dayakan area is the property of Perhutani. Based on the structure above, the forest in Desa Dayakan comes under the authority of the Watubonang Forest Police Station (RPH), which is structurally included in the Lawu Forestry Managers Unit (KPH). The management of the forest in Desa Dayakan is directly handled by Pak Ali, the Watubonang RPH Head, who is better known by the title Pak Mantri (lower ranking civil servant), assisted by several overseers. The last thirty years illustrate the lack of harmony in the Perhutani's relationship with the government and community of Desa Dayakan. One informant relates several cases which indicate this less than harmonious relationship. Following is an extract that tells of one case, namely the case of trading government land for private land in the Ogal- Agil area.7 "The Perhutani problem is certainly complex. Before the permission for the matter of road construction [meaning the building of the road to Dusun Jurangsempu in 1998], the community here had already experienced 2 Interview No. 865, Sardiman, Bayan, Dusun Kliyur, 26 July 2003 and Interview No. 881, Juri, ordinary villager, Dusun Kliyur, 2August 2003. 3 Interview 865, op cit. and Interview No. 869, Boinem, ordinary villager, Dusun Jurangsempu, 29 July 2003. 4 Interview No. 879, Ali, Forest Mantri, Dusun Sekarputih, 1 August 2003. 5 The traditional community who live around the forest have a tendency to use the forest wisely ­ `taking just enough from the forest to fulfil their daily needs'. With this pattern of living, the community's basic needs are fulfilled and forest's sustainability is protected. 6 Interview No. 873, Tlenik, Kindergarten Teacher, 30 July 2003 and Interview No. 881, op cit., 2 August 2003. 7 Ogal-Agil is the name of an environ (residential area) in Dusun Jurangsempu. See Desa Dayakan Map. Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 33 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author: Cici Novia Anggraini problems with Perhutani. The problem involved the land to the east of Ogal-Agil, which was to be exchanged for land belonging to Perhutani in the area below here [to the west of Pak Sardiman's house in Dusun Kliyur]. The plan has been there since the seventies but to this day there is no letter of explanation that says that there is an agreement between Perhutani and the community. The term is that there is no ijab kabul (Statement of Agreement). Whereas from the seventies until now is already more than thirty years... I remember it well, I was still a hansip [Civil Defence, civilians with military training as village security forces], and the Village Head was Pak Saraf... Pak Saraf came before Pak Karya, Pak Kardi [the current Dayakan Village Head] came after Pak Karya. The land belongs to the village, but no one is working it, it has been left bare." Sardiman, Bayan (neighbourhood security guard), Dusun Kliyur, 26 July 2003 The Ogal-Agil case was a seed in the lack of harmony of Perhutani's relationship with the government and community of Desa Dayakan. The quote above indicates the community's distrust of Perhutani in handling the matter of the land exchange. Perhutani's offer to exchange land on a mountain slope8 was a source of hope for the village community, whose primary source of income is farming. However the ambiguity of how this offer would be implemented made the community lose hope. Even more saddening is that in the end neither the Desa Dayakan government or community have worked their land that they were to exchange with Perhutani because they are still holding out to exchange it for more productive land. Before the matter of the Ogal- Agil land exchange was over, Perhutani's relationship with the Desa Dayakan community frayed further with the case involving the clearing of a road leading to the southern part of Dusun Watuagung.9 This time, the case added to the tension between Perhutani and the Desa Dayakan community, especially the southern Dusun Watuagung community(seeBox1). 8 The Ogal-Agil area is located in a steep mountainous area. The farmland is located on the slopes of hills, so that the farmers frequently experience difficulties in working or gathering and transporting their crops. 9 The locals call this area South Watuagung, which covers the areas of Dusun Spring, Mbecici and Krincing. However, these three areas are more frequently called by their respective names (Spring, Mbecici and Krincing) rather than South Watuagung. This differs to North Watuagung, because although there are also several areas there (Watuagung, Watu Irung, amongst others), people more frequently refer to them all as North Watuagung. Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 34 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author: Cici Novia Anggraini Box 1: The Case of Clearing a Road to the Southern Part of Dusun Watuagung "The story goes that at the time there was no road to south Watuagung. If you wanted to go there, you had to pass through the forest [meaning the Perhutani forest]. The Watuagung people had wanted to build a road for a long time. Moreover, once there was a woman in labour who suffered bleeding, she had to be taken to the Puskesmas (Health Clinic), Wah angel tenan nggawane (it was very difficult to carry her), because we had to go via the forest. In the end the community negotiated to build a road. They felled Perhutani forest trees. The road is quite long, almost a kilometre. Wah, things were immediately geger (lively, tense). The Bupati (Regent), the Polres (Kabupaten Police), theADM (Perhutani Administrator) from Madiun came too. Perhutani felt that there had been a great deal of theft of their teak wood. Several Watuagung residents were approached by the police and asked all sorts of things...Actually, we had already spoken [meaning asked permission] twice, to the Overseer as well as to the Mantri. But at the time we did not yet have permission. We waited for a long time and there was no explanation, when in fact the permission had already come from Madiun... I know this from the ADM. But if you asked them, the overseers and the Mantri said that they didn't know anything...I do actually understand why the Overseer and the Mantri were dissatisfied, because dozens of teak trees were involved. If, for instance, the people above them knew what happened then the Overseer and the Mantri would have been dismissed, at best transferred. At worst, they would have been removed from their positions. But in the end it was the community who took the blame. Now, after that the community didn't like Perhutani much. The community thought their people had lived around the forest for decades, but even just clearing a road was made difficult. They had asked nicely for permission, why were they then blamed?" Sardiman, Bayan, Dusun Kliyur, 26 July 2003 From the case description presented in Box 1 we can see that there were three factors that caused tension between Perhutani and the community. First, the slowness of Perhutani's response to the community's need to build a road to the south of Dusun Watuagung. The community's initiative in applying for land clearing permission is a positive aspect worth noting. It indicates that the community was aware that the forest through they wished to clear a road belonged to Perhutani. However, their request did not result in a response from Perhutani. Ultimately, the community went ahead and cleared the road without waiting for permission from Perhutani. Thesecondfactoristhestrengthoftheauthorities'prejudicethatthepeoplelivingaroundthe forest are timber thieves, pushing Perhutani as well as other government bodies to take incorrectactiontowardsresolution. Thiswasmanifestedintheactionstakenby Perhutani, thePonorogoDistrictGovernmentaswellassecurityagencies. Becausetheyfeltthatdozens of logs had been stolen,10 Perhutani went to the Ponorogo Polres (Kabupaten Police) as 10 The Informant had difficulty in giving a definite number of trees felled in the clearing of the road. He just estimated the number of trees felled to clear a road almost a kilometer long. See Interview No. 866, op cit.. Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 35 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author: Cici Novia Anggraini wellassomeintelligenceagents. ThepoliceinterrogatedseveralsouthernDusunWatuagung residents. Moreover, one Dusun Kliyur villager who participated in the land clearing was evenapproachedbyintelligenceagents. Followingistheadmissionoftheinformantregarding hisexperiencewhenanintelligenceagentapproachedhim. "... Several Watuagung residents were approached by the police and asked all sorts of things. Then an agent came to my house. I certainly did work to clear the land, and I worked in the name of the Watuagung community. The agent was preman (street thug) style; his hair was this long [indicating his shoulder], he wore a jacket, but he was still different. The way a preman and an agent speak differs. I was pretty nervous too at that point ... I knew that he was an agent from the way he questioned me, moving from the unfocused to the detailed. Moreover, I could see his tape recorder. The recorder was in his jacket, like that. But visable. So I was even more frightened. I thought, wow, I had better be careful here. The thing was that later my voice would be played at the police station. Wow, then I would really be the main player! [Q: What did he ask?] `Who told you to do it?' I answered, `No one, it was the Watuagung people's own desire to clear the road. `Oh really?!'he said disbelievingly. `Honestly'I said. Then the agent asked again, `Where did the timber go?' `The residents who helped with the work took it, it was counted as payment for those who worked together'. `Don't tell me it's been sold!' said the agent. `No, it was taken to the resident's homes.'`Who took it?'the agent kept asking. Well, if you asked me to name them individually, that would have been difficult. Almost everyone in Watuagung helped with the work. And indeed, a great deal of timber was felled. It [the timber] was all divided up between the residents. They ­ yes, the Bupati, the Police, the ADM - thought that the timber had been stolen and sold. " Sardiman, Bayan, Dusun Kliyur, 30 July 2003 Perhutani's actions in approaching the police have had an uncomfortable psychological effect on the Dusun Watuagung community. The third factor which made the situation worse was the attitude of the Overseer and the Mantri,whoshieldedthemselvesfromattackbysayingthattheyneverreceivedanapplication forpermissiontocleartheroadfromtheDusunWatuagungcommunity. Thevillagersdeplored the Overseer and Mantri's attitude because the community was blamed as the result. This hadtheimpactofworseningPerhutani'srelationshipwiththeDesaDayakancommunity.11 Almost ten years had passed since the conflict between Perhutani and the Desa Dayakan community over the case of the Dusun Watuagung road when a very similar case was 11 Interview No. 865, op cit. Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 36 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author: Cici Novia Anggraini repeated in 1998 (see Box 2). At that time, the Dusun Jurangsempu community wanted to widenthesingle-filetrackleadingtotheirdusun. Box 2: The Case of the Widening of the Road to Dusun Jurangsempu "... There had been a road to Dusun Jurangsempu for sometime, but just a single-file track. Before, long before KDP (the Kecamatan Development Project) came here, the community widened the road, they funded it all themselves. The single-file track was widened to around two meters ... The road they built was certainly in Perhutani territory, but because the community really needed it, the road was widened. Previously, the village authorities had tried to ask for permission from Perhutani. However, having waited for months, the funds did not come down, and the news was the letter had already been written in Madiun, KPH Madiun, but had not been given to the community. Because the community could wait no longer, they just widened the road. So, there were many teak trees in the middle of the road at the time. To the left and the right of them the road had been built, but the trees had not been felled because we were still waiting for permission from Perhutani. The people would often dig out the trees, and were grateful if they fell down. So there was no reason for Perhutani to blame the community because the community did not log the trees. The trees that fell down were sawn up and then left just like that at the side of the road in front of my house. No one wanted to take the trees because the people needed a road, not trees. The people did not need timber. Seeing the number of trees that fell, in the end Perhutani gave us permission ..." Sardiman, Kliyur, 26 July 2003 As with the Dusun Watuagung road case, Perhutani was again slow to respond to the application for permission to widen the road to Dusun Jurangsempu.12 Learning from the experience of the Dusun Watuagung case, the people did not immediately cut the trees down which obstructed the road being cleared. They used a more delicate method, digging out the tree roots in the hope that they would fall by themselves. The community also agreed not to take the fallen trees home, they just left them by the side of the road.13 FromthenontheteaktimberwassecuredbytheMantriandtakentotheWatubonang RPHofficelocatedinDusunSekarputih. WhatwasPerhutani'sreactiontothediggingupof theteaktrees?14 LookingatthePerhutani'shandlingofthisDusunJurangsempuroadcase, itseemsthat Perhutanihad begun to learn from the Dusun Watuagung case, where the lack ofpositiveresponsefromPerhutanicausedthebrutalactionsofthepeopleanddisadvantaged Perhutani itself (see Box 2). What is also interesting to observe from the case of building the road leading to Dusun Jurangsempuisthattherewerenoactsofviolence,likethefellingoftrees,suchasoccurred 12 Interview No. 865, op cit. 13 Interview No. 865, op cit. 14 Ibid. Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 37 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author: Cici Novia Anggraini inthecaseoftheclearingoftheroadtothesouthofDusunWatuagung. Althoughatthattime, in1998thereformmovementhadbeguntoflareup,theDayakancommunitywasnotsuddenly influencedtocarryoutviolentoranarchicacts. Thetraumaticpsychologicalexperienceofthe DusunWatuagungcasewasanimportantlessonfortheDusunJurangsempucommunity,and this was behind their choosing not to fell the trees the length of the single-file track in an anarchicmanner. Aside from the above three cases that occurred in Desa Dayakan, there have been several other cases in Kecamatan Badegan that highlight the weakness of Perhutani's conflict resolutionmechanisms. ThecaseofthetimberdemonstrationinDesaBitingisanexample. RPH Badegan's inability to facilitate the tension between the Desa Biting government, the peopleofDusunKresek,andthepeopleofDusunBrangkalcontributedtothedemonstration that took place in 1999.15 Another case that also took place in Desa Biting was the tension betweentheBitingcommunityandtheKDP(KecamatanDevelopmentProject)Facilitatorat the kecamatan level (Badegan), as well as between the KDP Facilitator at the kecamatan level(Badegan)andatthe kabupatenlevel(theDistrictManagementConsultant,KMKab). Thistensionbeganwithadebateoverthestatusof Perhutanilandtobeusedasthelocation for the Kucur Tourism Market development. Perhutani's indecisiveness regarding the applicationforlandusepermissioncausedconflictbetweentheactorsnamedabove.16 The several cases above (Ogal-Agil,Watuagung, Jurangsempu, the timber demonstration and the Kucur Tourism Market Kiosks) illustrate the Perhutani's weakness in considered the people who live around the forest. This differs greatly from Perhutani's mission, whichaimstoworktogetherwithandgiveprotectiontothepeoplewholivearoundtheforest so that they can guard the conservation of the forest together.17 In fact this inconsistency disappointedsomeoftheDesaDayakancommunity,whoselivesdependontheforest. The following sections focus on how the community has more recently advocated their disappointmentwithPerhutani. 15 For complete information see Case Study "Timber Demonstration in Desa Biting", not included in this compilation, but available upong request from the Conflict and Community Development Research Project, World Bank Office Jakarta. 16 For complete information see Case Study "Kucur KDP Kiosks", also not included in this compilation but available upon request. 17 Interview No. 879, op cit. Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 38 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author: Cici Novia Anggraini 2. Then Fire Dances at the Feet of the Pine Trees One day in September 200218, between around one and two o'clock in the afternoon, the peopleofDusunJurangsempuandDusunKliyurwereastonishedattheheatoftheafternoon. Severalpeoplewenttofindoutwhatwasgoingon.19 TwopeoplefromDusunKliyur,Sardiman and Johan saw the teak forest above their house on fire.20 However it did not last long for it did not spread far and in a short time was put out . Some time after that, Pak Sardiman saw the pine forest above the teak forest also on fire.21 Santo, who directly witnessed the forest fire,saysthesamething. Followingareexcerptsoftheirtestimonies. "... The forest fire last year [2002] occurred when STAIN [State Islamic High School] was doing their KKN [FieldWork Experience] here, in around the ninth month [September]. At the time, the KKN boys and I saw it from the road in front over there. The fire was huge, so that you could feel the heat from here.... The area burned was very great, from down there to the top of the hill. If you look at them from the yard, the burned trees now look blackened... [Q:At approximately what time did the event take place?] About one o'clock or two o'clock. At the time it was the dry season and there was a lot of wind." Santo, Dusun Jurangsempu, 29 July 2003 "The fire occurred in the dry season last year, in about the ninth month [September]. In the beginning, it was the teak forest up there that was burned, but that was extinguished. It did not spread further. After that there was another fire at the top, in the pine forest above the teak forest. The fire occurred around about this time [the interview took place between 1 and 2 o'clock.] The pine forest was burning, the fire was very great, and you could feel the heat from here. It sounded like a truck going by on the bitumen over there, grudug-grudug [imitating the sound of a truck going by on bitumen]. The pine forest above the teak forest was all burned down.... That night the pine forest to the east of [Dusun] Sekarputih was also set alight. Mas Jun [Johan] and I were looking to the middle of the 18 Some informants only remembered that it happened in September 2002, but they forgot the exact date and day of the incident, see Interview No. 865, op cit and Interview No. 870, op cit. Some informants only remembered that it happened in 2002, see Interview No. 860, op cit. However, some other informants noted that there had been forest fires for the last two years, see Interview No. 869, op cit and Interview No. 881, op cit. 19 Amongst them were Sardiman (Bayan) and Johan (Community Transformation Agent) for PLAN International in Desa Dayakan) who were looking towards Dusun Kliyur (See Interview No. 865, op cit), as well as Santo (ordinary villager) and a Ponorogo STAIN KKN group who were looking from Dusun Jurangsempu (Interview No. 870, op cit.) 20 Sardiman's house is located in Dusun Kliyur, around 25 m. to the south of the Dayakan Village Hall. 21 Interview No. 865, op cit. Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 39 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author: Cici Novia Anggraini rice fields [to the east of Pak Sardiman's house]. The flames were very high, so that the rice paddies here were lit up." Sardiman, Dusun Kliyur, 26 July 2003 Firesinseveralotherlocationsalsobrokeoutsimultaneously. Sudarmo,alivestockherder, relatedthattheyearbeforetherehadbeensimultaneousfiresonElephantMountain(oneof the mountain peaks in the Jurangsempu area that looks like an elephant) and in the eastern part of the teak forest in eastern Desa Dayakan.22 Besides that, fire also broke out in the baon (clearedforestland)locatedbetweenDusunKliyurandJurangsempu.23 In fact, the forest fire in the pine forest did not occur just that one time. Several informants noted that fires in the pine forest had been occurring for the last one to two years, every dry season. They noted that the water reserves around Jurangsempu had begun to fall. Their conversationfollows. "Now the fields are planted with cassava, but the harvest is not as much as it used to be... [Q: Why?] Not enough water, Mbak (term of address for a woman). The water source is shrinking, there is only enough to fulfil daily requirements... [Q: How long has the water available been lacking?] For the last year, since the forest was burned down, Mbak" Boinem, ordinary villager, Dusun Jurangsempu, 29 July 2003 "...Since the forest was burned down, many of the water sources have been lost. Before, even in the dry season it wasn't as bad as it has been in the last two years. The water was still there, even if it was only a little. However, since the fire, many water sources have been lost..." Juri, community figure, Dusun Kliyur, 2 August 2003 3. Pine Trees are the Masters! Whatisinterestingaboutthefireisthatalargepartoftheforestthatwasburnedwasplanted withpines. Thequestionthatfollowsiswhatisitaboutpinetrees? Fromtheadmissionsof severalinformants,basedontheirexperiences,pinetreeshavehadanegativeimpactonthe water table. Pine trees are a type of tree that draws lots of water.24 Why is this so? 22 Interview No. 860, op cit. 23 Interview No. 869, op cit. and Interview No. 873, op cit. 24 Interview No. 860, op cit., Interview No. 865, op cit.; and FGD Dusun Jurangsempu, 30 July 2003 (see Interview No. 871). However, this is disputed by Pak Mantri. According to him this is just an assumption and requires further research (See Interview No. 879, op cit.). Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 40 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author: Cici Novia Anggraini "...Just try to compare it, if a branch from a teak tree is cut, water will pour out, but pine trees don not [don not have water come out] because a pine tree contains oil, the sap is an oil. Because they contain oil, pine trees need a lot of water." Sardiman, Bayan, Dusun Kliyur, 26 July 2003 Duetothepinetree'scharacteristicoftakinguplotsofwater,theresultisthatthewatertable around the pine forest goes down. What were once large sources of water are now just a trickle, and some sources even go dry in the dry season.25 The clean water supply from the watersourceisonlyenoughfordailyrequirements,andcannolongermeetfarmingirrigation requirements. Asaresult,theharvesthasfallen.26 Facingthisseriousenvironmentalsituation theDayakancommunity,especiallythoselivingaroundthepineforest,complainedaboutthe matter to the village government.27Responding to the community complaint in 200228 the Dayakan village government, fulfilling a request from the kecamatan government and Perhutani, held a meeting between the community and Perhutani. ThosewhoattendedthemeetingincludedofficialsfromPerhutaniBadegan[RPHBadegan],29 the Badegan Camat and his staff, Desa Dayakan officials as well as other community representatives.30 At this meeting, the community suggested that the pine trees be replaced 25 Interview No. 869, op. cit. and Interview 881 op cit. 26 Interview No. 869 op cit. 27 The community chose to make their complaint to the village government even though at that time the BPD (Village Parliament) had already been formed. The BPD is a new body in Desa Dayakan, indeed during the Pilkades in March 2002, the BPD had yet to be formed. The BPD was formed after the elections and as such the community was not used to this representation model. The community preferred the old representative model, where the village government involved the Dusun Heads, NeighborhoodAssociation Heads and other community representatives in resolving a problem or creating policy at the village level (See Interview No. 871, op cit.). 28 The informant could not remember the precise date or day of this meeting. This meeting was held before the forest fire (Interview No. 865 op cit.). If the meeting had responded to the community's complaint about the dryness of their water source in the dry season, it could be logical that the complaint was made in the dry season. After that, the meeting was held. The dry season on 2002 fell between April and October. However, along with this, a Village Head Election was held March 13 2002, and the Head inaugurated on 1 May 2003 (see Imron's Diary, 30 July 2003). The internal consolidation of the village government required about two months. If the forest fire occurred in September 2002, the most logical estimation of when the meeting was held is between May and August 2002. 29 On clarification from the Pak Mantri, he said that what he meant by `Badegan Perhutani', which attended the meeting, was RPH Watubonang, because administratively, the forest in Desa Dayakan actually comes under the supervision of RPH Watubonang. 30 Interview No. 865 op cit. Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 41 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author: Cici Novia Anggraini withteakoralba.31 Ifplantedwithteaktrees,thecommunitycouldguaranteetheirconservation because the source of water would also be conserved, and would even increase. Also, besidesthis,thelandwouldnotberuinedifitwereplantedwithteakoralba. Conversely,if thelandwereplantedwithpines,thenitwouldbecomeasdryasdust. Thesourcesofwater would also run out because the pine trees would draw it up.32 Perhutanididnotimmediatelyreactpositivelyonhearingthecommunity'scomplaintatthe meetinginthevillagehall. Infact,theyrespondedinawaythatgavetheimpressionofbeing mocking. "...The thing is, in the Sarangan area the forest is all pine trees, but the water source there never runs out..." Ali, Forest Mantri, Dusun Sekarputih, 1 August 2003 [Q: Has this been conveyed to Perhutani?] Yes, I have said that the pines are causing the water source to run dry... But they just replied, `the Sarangan Lake is also surrounded by pines, but it has a lot of water.'" Wagimun, Dusun Head, Dusun Jurangsempu, 29 July 2003 Pak Totti, a community representative from Dusun Jurangsempu, explains that he received information that a pine tree plantation must pay attention to the height of the land above sea level. If it does not comply with the height condition then the pine plantation is not optimal and can even interfere with the water table.33 In an interview, the Pak Mantri acknowledged that in fact the height of the land in the Dayakan area does not comply with the height condition for a pine plantation.34 The best quality pine trees can be obtained if they are grown at a height of 500 ­ 1000 meters above sea level, while the Dayakan forest is located 231 meters above sea level. So why then was the pine plantation still defended if in fact the Dayakan area is not at the optimumheight,besidesthefactthatthepineplantationhadusedupDayakan'swatersupply? Theansweris:"Itwasadecisionfromabove[meaningfromthecentralPerhutanioffice]."35 TheDayakanforestcomesbeneaththeRPHWatubonang,whichcomesinunderKPHLawu, 31 On clarification from Pak Mantri, he disputed that a community representative had asked him about this matter. Pak Mantri in fact though that there was no way the community would question this because the community could still take advantage of the pine resin (See Interview No. 871, op cit). 32 Interview No. 865, op cit. 33 Interview No. 871, op cit. 34 Interview No. 879, op cit. 35 Interview No. 879, op cit. Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 42 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author: Cici Novia Anggraini which is classed as a pine enterprise.36 For this reason, pines are obliged to be grown in the RPH Watubonang area, including part of the territory in Desa Dayakan. The Mantri acknowledged that in fact the character of the land in Dayakan is very suited to teak trees. However, due to the rules of that type of local Perhutani enterprise, Dayakan was planted with pines.37 In the end it was decided at the meeting that Perhutani was not yet able to replacethepinetrees. Thereasonforthis,asidefromthatthepinetreeswerenotreadytobe logged, was that their sap could still be collected.38 As a result, this meeting did not reach a satisfactorysolutionorresolvetheproblemthecommunitywasfacing. Perhutani's attitude above indicates the government's lack of attention to the needs and conditionsofthelocalcommunity. TheMantrihasexplicitlyacknowledgedthattheregulations ofthepineplantationinDayakanwerenotinkeepingwiththecharacteroftheland.39 However, Perhutani chose to follow the letter of the law, even though it was not in context with the needsofthelocalcommunity,andindeedhadimpactednegativelyonthem. Anotherbackground reason for the pine plantation policy was to reduce the amount of timber theft that happens more frequently in teak forests. People are not too interested in stealing pine timber, unlike teak timber, which has a higher sale value. The Mantri admitted this when he said that the level of timber theft is relatively low in the RPHWatubonang area because of the different varietiesoftree,theyarenothomogeneouslyteak.40 4. Who and Why? Seeking the Actors and Motives for the Forest Fire Perhutani'slackofattentiontotheneedsandconditionsofthelocalcommunityisstrongly suspectedtohavebeenthetriggerfortheforestfire,especiallyinthepineforest. Theinterim theory put forward is that the fire was deliberately lit by people who were disappointed in Perhutani'spolicyinordertoattractPerhutani'sattention.41Evenmorespecifically,itpoints towardsthepeoplewholivearoundthepineforest. Thistheoryhasemergedbasedonfield observationsandbylisteningtotheconfessionofyouthfromDusunJurangsempuwhoknew 36 In his interview, Pak Mantri explained that there were various classes of business within Perhutani management that indicated which kinds of trees were obliged to be grown (See Interview No. 871, op cit). 37 Pak Mantri acknowledges that the kinds of trees growing now are mixed. There is teak, acacia, mahogany, euclyptus, albasia and pine, amongst others. Of the total forest that comes under the authority of RPH Watubonang, which measures 1500 ha, just 18 ha are planted with pine. Ibid. 38 Interview No. 865, op cit. 39 Interview No. 879, op cit. 40 Interview No. 879, op cit. 41 Ibid. Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 43 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author: Cici Novia Anggraini the`modusoperandi'ofthefire.42Besidesthis,theDusunJurangsempucommunity'sefforts to cover up the fire case further strengthen the theory of the actor(s) in this forest fire.43 Up until now, there have been three theories on what and who caused the burning of the forest. The first, as set out above, is the community's disappointment at Perhutani's policyofmaintainingthepinetrees,eventhoughtheyhadactuallyproventhatthepinetrees were interfering with the water source and the lives of the people living around the forest. Withthistheory,itispossiblethatthefirewasstartedbythoselivingaroundtheforest. They did it as a form of protest, civil disobedience, towards Perhutani's policy which paid no attentiontolocalconcerns. Another theory is that the nglagari activities carried out by the pinsesap tappers caused the forestfire.44 Nglagari istheburningofrubbishbelowthepinetrees. Asidefromproducing fertiliser45,italsoaimstoproducemorepinesap.46 Followingareseveralinterviewextracts that state that the pinesap tappers were the cause of the fire. "...It was actually the people who cultivate land in the forest, who aren't careful... I mean that they nglagari but it spreads... Nglagari is burning waste in the forest to be used for fertilizer. But yes, as I said before, it breaks its boundaries so that the trees are burned too... " Tlenik, Kindergarten Teacher, Dusun Kliyur, 30 July 2003 "The forest fire was lit by the people who tap the sap. It's as though they don't think that a fire will disadvantage many people. In the beginning, they just burned the underbrush beneath the trees. If the site is clean, the tapping of the pinesap is better. They say that there is also more pine resin after the tree has been burned" Juri, community figure, Dusun Kliyur, 1 August 2003 Unlike the theory that the pine forest was burned deliberately out of disappointment at Perhutani's policy, the quotes above indicate that the forest fire may have started from the nglagari activity of the pinesap tappers. The tappers' incautiousness in burning rubbish underneath the trees caused a fire to spread. Here, we can see that there was no element of premeditation; all that happened was that rubbish was being burned and the fire got out of control. 42 See Endro's Diary, 27 July 2003. 43 See Cici's Diary, 29 July 2003, Imron's Diary 23 July 2003, and Endro's Diary, 29 July 2003. 44 Interview No. 870, op cit, Interview No. 873, op cit, Interview No. 881, op cit. 45 Interview No. 873, op cit. 46 Interview No. 881, op cit. Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 44 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author: Cici Novia Anggraini The third theory suspected of being behind the forest fire was the Village Head Election (Pilkades), which brought disappointment for the supporters of the losing candidate. Indeed, looking at the time frame, the forest fire took place six months after the Pilkades. "... That fire definitely had deliberate element, so it wasn't just that it caught alight by itself. Someone burned it down! Here (in Desa Dayakan), the biggest forest fire occurred in October 2002 along with the end of the Pilkades in Dayakan. There were several motives for the burning, because of the person they backed in the Pilkades, meaning that many lost their bets. Another is due to social jealousy, [people are] pegel karo tanggane merga iso tuku wedhus teko hasile (peeved because their neighbors could buy goats with the proceeds) from pine resin... " Ali, Sekarputih, 1 August 2003 The Village Head Election was held in March 2002, withAndi and Kardi as candidates. Andi's support base was in Dusun Jurangsempu and the southern part of Dusun Watuagung (Krincing and Mbecici), while the majority of the residents of Dusun Sekarputih and the central and northern parts of Dusun Watuagung supported Kardi. Kardi won the election. If the suspicion of the culprits points to the supporters of the losing Village Head candidate, this means that it points to the people who live in Dusun Jurangsempu and the southern part of Dusun Watuagung (see Appendix Desa Dayakan Map). If we analyse the three theories further, it is the first and third that are most likely to have been the motive for civil disobedience in Desa Dayakan. The second is not a strong enough cause for the forest fire. Farming and tapping sap in the forest are activities that have been passed down the generations of the Desa Dayakan community living around the forest, and have been carried out for decades. This means that the community's capability of working the forest, including carrying out nglagari, is not in doubt. The possibility that the forest farmers could have made a mistake or been careless in nglagari is low. Even if it ­ an accident which caused the forest to burn down ­ did happen, it would not have been large-scale and would certainly have been extinguished immediately. Whateverhappened,theforestiswhatthelivesofmostoftheDayakanpeople who live in the edge of the forest depend on.47 Asdiscussedinthefirstsection,inthelastthirtyyearsthehistoryoftherelationshipbetween Perhutani and the Dayakan community tends to be negative. The most basic thing is the 47 Interview No. 873, op cit. and Interview No. 881, op cit. Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 45 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author: Cici Novia Anggraini Perhutani'slackofattentiontolocalneedsandconditions,bothsociallyandgeographically. Thecommunity'sdisappointmentwithPerhutani'spolicy,whichhadinterferedwithabasic livingrequirementandtheavailabilityofcleanwater,wasenoughtobeastrongreasonforthe localcommunitytocarryoutprotestaction. Thethirdfactor,thedisappointmentofthesupportersofthelosingVillageHeadcandidate,is also a strong reason to carry out the forest fire action. There are two possibilities as to why the losing candidate's supporters might have done this. Firstly, the action could have been taken as a protest action towards the Village Head Election process that was considered to be unfair.48 Secondly,thesupporterswereseriouslydisappointedandwishedtoundermine thechosenVillageHead'sauthoritybyperformingdestructiveactswhichcauseddamageto someoftheresidentsofDesaDayakan. Ifthevillagegovernment,leadbythechosenVillage Head,isunabletoresolvethisproblem,itisnotimpossibleforhislegitimacytobeweakened. 5. Some Attempts at Conflict Management Forest fires occur every dry season. However, the forest Mantri and his staff cannot do anything.49 Aware that a potential cause of fire is the nglagari activity, the forest overseer has reminded the sap gatherers and forest farmers several times to be careful when lighting fires. However, in reality they continue to nglagari, and this often spreads to locations which do not need burning off.50 After the fire, Perhutani, primarily the Mantri and the Overseer, pro-actively carried out a search,throughinvestigationaswellasbyaskingtheresidentslivingaroundtheforestdirectly.51 According to several informants, no one knew who did it.52 They suspect that there were manyactors,becausetheareaburnedwasverygreatanditwouldhavebeenimpossiblefor just one or two people to have done it.53 Another effort the Forest Mantri made was to approach a community figure in Desa Dayakan in the hope that the community would pay moreattentiontohim. 48 For complete information, see Case Study "Bom, Democracy a la Dayakan: Tensions in the Village Head Elections" by Endro W. Probo, not included in this compilation but available upon request from Conflict and Community Development Research Program, World Bank Office Jakarta. 49 Interview No. 869, op cit. 50 Interview No. 873, op cit. 51 Interview No. 865, op cit and Interview No. 870, op cit. 52 Interview No. 860, op cit., Interview No. 869, op cit., Interview No. 873, op cit. 53 Interview No. 860, op cit. Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 46 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author : Cici Novia Anggraini "... I immediately took preventative measures by coordinating with community figures and village authorities to extinguish the fires... The community figure I usually approach is Pak Said [Dayakan LKD (Village Council Head)], I also often go to the homes of the community around the forest to talk to them so that they understand, and to socialize existing Perhutani programs.... Usually when I'm socializing forest programs I don't wear office clothes, if I go into a community I instead wear ordinary clothes to be the same as them, yes, I hand out cigarettes even though I don't smoke myself. If I don't do it like this then the community cannot be invited to work together (with us) to conserve the forest..." Ali, Forest Mantri, Dusun Sekarputih, 1 August 200354 From Pak Mantri's methods, it would seem that co-operation between formal and informal leaders is needed to make an approach in order to settle down the conflict. Besides approaching the actors, Pak Mantri also touched the community through the `basic needs' issue, in that the forest can support the food needs of the community around the forest, so the community should join in to conserve the forest.55 In handling this forest fire case, Perhutani did not involve the police. The Pak Mantri did not answer explicitly, but the suspicion arises that Perhutani has learned from theWatuagung road case, where the attendance of the police befouled Perhutani's image in the eyes of the Dayakan community. For this reason, Perhutani has minimised taking the case to the police. There have been no pro-active efforts from the Desa Dayakan government to handle the matter of the forest fire. What is certain is that the village government is currently still facing the problem of the weakness of the legitimacy of its power in the eyes of the community, primarily in the eyes of the supporters of his political opponent in the last Pilkades. This can be seen in several villagers' expressions of dissatisfaction towards Lurah Kardi's performance and leadership style.56 On the other hand, the Desa Dayakan governmentalso`condoned'theactionstakenbythecommunitybecausetheirwellintentioned attempt,thatisthemeetingin2002,didnotyieldpositiveresults. 54 Interview No. 879, op cit. 55 Ibid. 56 Interview No. with Miseri (RT Head), Dusun Watuagung, 28 July 2003 (see Interview No. 867) and FGD Krincing, Dusun Watuagung, 30 July 2003 (see Interview No. 875). Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 47 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author : Cici Novia Anggraini 6. My Forest has Burned Down, My life is Cut in Half: Impacts that Must be Borne Now and in the Future One thing that the forest fire lighters may not have considered was the consequences of the burningoftheforest. Someresidents'livesaresupportedbytheirworktappingpinesap. If thepinesareburnedandtheydie,itmeansthattheopportunitytotaptheirsapislost. When the fire spreads to the cleared land, it means that the cassava or corn fields that have been workeddiligently,thatareexpectedtomakeupfoodreservesforwhenthedryseasoncomes, are also lost (See Box 3). Box 3: Impact of the Forest Fire "Actually, the people been disadvantaged by the fire because they can no longer tap pine sap. Usually a hot season like this is good for tapping sap because it isn't mixed with water. However, on the other hand, the burned land has become baon which can be planted with cassava, corn and beans, like the baon up there." Sardiman, Bayan, Dusun Kliyur, 26 July 2003 "[Q: Meaning that the people who used to tap pinesap can now no longer work?] They still can, but the harvest has been greatly reduced. There are still trees that were not burned, but there are very few in total. Perhaps the harvest they gather there isn't much.Santo, ordinary villager, Dusun Jurangsempu, 29 July 2003"...Moreover, since the fire many villagers have sold their goats because they cannot feed them grass, you see the grass in the forest was also burned." Ali, Mantri Hutan, Dusun Sekarputih, 1 August 2003 "The loss is borne by the whole community, some people whose work was as pine sap tappers can now no longer tap the sap because most of [the forest] was burned. Besides this, an impact of the fire was to make the drought even worse, water is more and more difficult in the dry season.... The problem of the lack of water now I think is certainly related to the forest fire. Since the forest was burned, much of the water has been lost. Before, even though it was the hot season, it wasn't as bad as it has been for these last two years. The water was there, even if it was just a little." Juri, community figure, Dusun Kliyur, 1 August 2003 "...Cassava is being grown in the fields now, but the harvest isn't as much as it used to be... [Q: Why?] A lack of water. The water source is shrinking, there is only enough to fulfil daily requirements." Boinem, ordinary villager, Dusun Jurangsempu, 29 July 2003 Inthemid-to-longterm,anotherimpactthathasbeguntobefeltisthelackofwatersources aroundtheforest. Thiswillincreasinglyinterferewiththelifedesiresofevenmorepeople. EvenwithoutthefiremanywatersourcesaroundDusunJurangsempuandKrincinghadrun dry,soiftheforestthatfunctionedasareservoirhasgone,sotoowillthiswaterofliferunout. Today,thiscaseisstillfloating. Theeffortstofindthefirelightershavenotcometofruition. This case is a big piece of homework for Perhutani. The acts of violence that have caused Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 48 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author: Cici Novia Anggraini this material loss must be overcome immediately, because they have already disturbed the resolutenessofthelivesofthelocalswholivearoundtheforest. Asidefromthis,ifthetension between Perhutani and the Dayakan people who live around the forest is not immediately overcome and a solution found, it is not impossible that a similar case will repeat itself and haveanevenmoreseriouslynegativeimpact. Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 49 When the Nanny No Longer Protects her Charge Desa Dayakan, Kecamatan Badegan, Kabupaten Ponorogo, East Java Author: Cici Novia Anggraini Case Chronology: Dayakan Forest Fire Date Event Since the 70s The exchange of land (ruislag) in Ogal-Agil (the name of an area in Dusun Jurangsempu) between the Dayakan village government and Perhutani. 1989 Clearing of a Road to Dusun Watuagung Case 1998 Widening of the Road to Dusun Jurangsempu Case March 2002 Village Head Election May­Augst Meeting at the Village Hall between the Dayakan village govern 2002 ment, Perhutani, the kecamatan Government and community figures. September 2002 Forest Fire. (October 2002) After the fire The Plantation Supervisor and Forest Mantri seek the culprit(s). Following search The culprit(s) are not caught, and until now remains unknown efforts Researchers: Cici Novia Anggraini, Imron Rasyid and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Joanne Sharpe 50 Apparently the Estate Had Been Sold Desa Padelegan, Kecamatan Pademawu, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Saifullah Barnawi Apparently the Estate Had Been Sold: KDP Potentially Triggering Land Conflict Summary "Why did H. Rusdi1refuse to allow his land to be affected by the aberan (retaining wall) project? ... in my opinion one of his reasons was the troubled status of his land ownership. Perhaps he was worried that the project would open the problematic history of his land title ..." Armani, Former FD, Desa Padelegan In 2000 Desa Padelegan received approximately Rp. 60 million in funds from KDP (Kecamatan Development Project).2 The funds were intended to build an aberan (a retaining wall) stretching along the kampung road between Dusun Laok Tambak and Dusun Muara, as well as culverts along the road. When the construction was about to commence, it transpired that H. Rusdi, a Dusun Laok Tambak inhabitant, refused his land to be affected by the project. Despite his attending the previous Musbangdes (musyawarah pembangunan desa - village development deliberative meetings) and not raising any objection to the project. Finally the aberan site was moved from Dusun Laok Tambak to Dusun Daya Tambak, whilst the aberan site at Dusun Muara remained as originally planned. Behind the refusal lay a troubled history of land ownership.3 This case of the land owner's refusal of the KDP project is an extremely interesting one for us to examine because the case demonstrates that the deliberation processes used in KDP can be captured by elite. Further, it indicates how development can potentially trigger dormant land conflict and how conversely how land ownership can hinder development needs. 1 H. Rusdi is a native inhabitant of Desa Padelegan. It was he who refused for his pond land to be affected by the aberan construction project. The pond land he owns stretches along the kampung road in Dusun Laok Tambak where the aberan was to be built. 2 Initiated in 1998, KDP is a massive Government of Indonesia/World Bank community development project, the largest in Southeast Asia, operating in over 20,000 villages across Indonesia. Through block grants given directly to kecamatan (sub-districts) and villages for small- scale infrastructure, social and economic activities, it aims to alleviate poverty and improve local governance. 3 Land cases, compared to other cases, are the most prominent ones in Desa Padelegan. Researchers: Saifullah Barnawi and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Suzan Piper 51 Apparently the Estate Had Been Sold Desa Padelegan, Kecamatan Pademawu, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Saifullah Barnawi 1. A Sketch of Desa Padelegan Desa Padelegan is located on the south coast of the island of Madura, bordering directly on the Madura Straits to the south, and is situated about 7 kilometres from the centre of the kecamatan and about 15 kilometres from the kabupaten capital. Desa Padelegan consists offivehamlets. Threeofthehamlets(DusunLaokTambak,DusunDayaTambakandDusun Muara) are located close to the beach; in these hamlets there is much "pond land" and most oftheinhabitantsworkasfishermenorpondworkers. Thetwootherhamlets(DusunBangkal and Dusun Modung) are located rather far from the beach, their region being dominated by rice fields and rain dependent dry fields and consequently most of the inhabitants work as farmers. In addition to farmers, pond workers and rice/dry field farmers, many of the Desa Padeleganinhabitantsworkasemployees. In the rainy season (October - March) the pond lands are used for fish cultivation and in the dryseason(April-September)theyareturnedintosaltfields. Asfortherice/dryfieldsthey areusedforplantingriceandcornintherainyseasonandareturnedintotobaccofieldsinthe dryseason.4 Thereisaninterestingpracticelinkedtotheeconomiclifecycleofthefishermen inDesaPadeleganastoldbythefollowinginformant: "When it's the dry season (there are no fish in the waters around Desa Padelegan) like now the fishermen go and seek fish at Dungkek (the name of a fishermen district in Kabupaten Sumenep).There they stay 3-4 months and will return home when it's already fish season here again.... That's why the kampung here is quiet now, there are lots of widows [a joking term for fishermen's wives deserted by their husbands' departure for Dungkek] ... There are some wives who also go to Dungkek."5 Armani, Former FD, 15 December 2003 4 See Demographics Report, Desa Padelegan. 5 Interview No. 1216, Former FD, 15 December 2003. In another interview the Desa Padelegan Village Head said that before 1989 the economic life of the fishermen was extremely distressing. Around 1989 there were several investors who established a fish-processing factory in the village buying the fish caught at sea by the fishermen. After that the economic life of the fishermen sharply increased (see Interview No. 1210, Padelegan Village Head, 13 December 2003). Researchers: Saifullah Barnawi and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Suzan Piper 52 Apparently the Estate Had Been Sold Desa Padelegan, Kecamatan Pademawu, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Saifullah Barnawi 2. Background to the Land Dispute: KDP as the Trigger In2000DesaPadeleganreceivedaboutRp.60millioninfundingfromtheKDP.6Thefunds were to be used to build an aberan (a retaining wall along the pond) stretching along the kampung roadbetweenDusunLaokTambakandDusunMuara.7 Planstorepairtheexisting culvertsalongtheretainingwallwereincluded. "Through the Musbangdes II in Desa Padelegan (in 2000) it was agreed that the proposal to be prioritised in submission to the second UDKP II (Kecamatan Development Forum) would be the construction of the aberan and culverts in Kampung Laok Tambak and Dusun Muara. The two kampungs are on the coast, facing the sea. The plan was to build the aberan along the kampung road that bordered directly onto the ponds/ sea."8 Armani, Former FD, 15 December 2003 In accordance with existing mechanisms in the KDP, decision making at the village level about various other matters linked to the KDP is carried out through the Musbangdes forum. This is what occurred in Desa Padelegan. Nevertheless, the Village Head has a determining role in the final decision, as was simply expressed by the following informant: "...The proposal was determined by the Village Head in the Musbangdes forum, yet beforehand each hamlet had been asked to submit their proposal but we spread the word that the proposals would not necessarily be agreed to. And, if they weren't agreed to, the hamlets shouldn't be disappointed.... There was a fierce debate in the forum, and then subsequently each hamlet submitted their final decision to the Village Head. Procedurally there is no difference in decision making between the KDP and what is usually done by village communities, all the processes are decided through deliberations although the final decision rests in the hands of the Village Head..." H. Sukarman, Former FD, 14 December 2003 6 Desa Padelegan twice received KDP assistance, in 2000 and 2001 (KDP year two and year three in Kecamatan Pademawu). In 2000 the village received about Rp. 60 million in funds for the construction of the aberan (retaining wall along the pond and beach) and in 2001 it received Rp. 79 million in funds for the supply of clean water (the installation of piping for clean water). 7 Interview No. 1210, op cit. 8 Interview No. 1216, Former FD, 15 December 2003. Researchers: Saifullah Barnawi and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Suzan Piper 53 Apparently the Estate Had Been Sold Desa Padelegan, Kecamatan Pademawu, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Saifullah Barnawi DesaPadeleganisnottheonlyplacewheretheVillageHeaddominantsroledecisionmaking. Thesamethingoccursinmanyothervillages.9 ForthisreasonitisnotjustcoincidenceKDP projectsareofteninthevicinityoftheVillageHead'sresidence,orrelatedtotheinterestsof theVillageHead. In2000forexample,theKDPprojectinDesaPadeleganwastheconstruction of the aberan located along the road in front of the Village Head's house, and in 2001 the clean water supply project was also located in the vicinity of theVillage Head's residence. Thereisalwaysarationaljustificationforeachprogram;butneverthelesstheprioritisationof theseprojectsisduetotheinfluenceoftheVillageHead.10 Women and the poor of the community are amongst those who are least enthusiastic about takingpartinthedeliberationprocessesandtheyoftendonotattendforvariousreasons. The formerFDpartiallydescribesthis: "... In the beginning all the members, both the poor and the women, were invited to the Musbangdus (Hamlet Development Council) and the Musbangdes forums, but ... these people didn't come, eventually they got sick of inviting them. Perhaps the poor and the women didn't attend the forum because they were busy looking for fish at sea ..." H. Sukarman, Former FD Year Two, 14 December 2003 The reluctance of the poor, women, and ordinary village members to join the deliberation forums was not only because they were busy working. The tendency in deliberation forums such as these for the discussions and decision making to be dominated by the village government elite and community leaders is also a reason. They are reluctant to attend because in the end the decisions are made by the village elite and community leaders. Proposals from ordinary village members just become notes in the forum minutes without any follow-up.11 Sometimes the Musbangdes forum just becomes a means to obtain community legitimatisation, because the decisions have already been previously agreed to by a number of parties. This following comment from a former FD describes this: 9 See KDP implementation report covering several villages in Kecamatan Proppo in Phase 2B. 10 Interview No. 1217, Padelegan community figure, 15 December 2003. 11 Interview No. 1209, Head BPD (Village Representative Council), 13 December 2003; Interview No. 1214, Former FD year two, 14 December 2003; Interview No. 1217, Padelegan community figure, dated 15 December 2003; and Interview No. 1218, Dusun Modung Head, 16 December 2003. Researchers: Saifullah Barnawi and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Suzan Piper 54 Apparently the Estate Had Been Sold Desa Padelegan, Kecamatan Pademawu, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Saifullah Barnawi "... Before the Musbangdes was held, a meeting had already been held between the FD, TPK (Project Implementation Team), TTD (Village TechnicalAssistant) and theVillage Head to seek a solution to the problem. The Musbangdes forum only agreed to [the results from] the previous forum..." H. Sukarman, Former FD, 14 December 2003 Thecommunityalsoparticipatedinprojectimplementation. Apartfromparticipatingaslabor force, they also carried out gotong royong (voluntary labor on village community work) helpingbysendingfoodanddrinkstothepeopleworking. Notallthelaborforcecamefrom amongst the local villagers; some of them came from outside the village, especially the professionals (tradesmen). Building materials in the form of rocks were bought from the VillageHeadbecauseatthetimehehappenedtobetherockmerchantfortheKDPprogram.12 ApparentlytherewereirregularitiesintheimplementationofKDP,especiallyregardingthe spendingoffunds. Box1belowprovidesaroughexplanationofthismatter. Projectfunding cuts by various parties has apparently become a kind of open secret, and in certain contexts hasevenbecomea"generalcustom"andisconsideredtobe"somethingnatural"notanerror orirregularity. Box 1: KDP Funding Irregularities that Became an "open secret" "... Both the KDP and other parties are just the same, the funds the community received are never whole, they're always cut here and there ... everyone asks for a share. In KDP the reality is that kecamatan parties and even the FK also ask for a share ... there is a `contribution' to the kecamatan and FK parties. The sum is not precisely determined ... but it's not done openly ... well, we must be sensitive. If it's not done like that, then our village won't get projects..." "Actually it's wrong, but what else can I do ... it's already become a general custom ... well, we have to take part in the prevailing general customs, don't we? If we don't, then we ourselves could face difficulties ... People here say `Well it not a problem if it's just to wash your face, provided it's not to bathe in' [meaning if it's only small or petty corruption it's still tolerable, provided it's not excessive]" Village Head Desa Padelegan, 12 December 2003 12 Ibid. Researchers: Saifullah Barnawi and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Suzan Piper 55 Apparently the Estate Had Been Sold Desa Padelegan, Kecamatan Pademawu, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Saifullah Barnawi "... It's the conduct of the Pemda (Regional Government) people through the kecamatan staff that makes me confused about reporting on program fund spending ... because those people who are asking for `invisible funds' (a term for funds without a clear expenditure entry, in this context the funds used as illegal fees for kecamatan staff) as much as 3 - 5% of the total assistance received by the village. This is common for all the villages in Pademawu, they say it's an instruction from the Pemda. When I wrote about the fee for Pemda staff who came to the village, they got angry and asked me to change it by writing it up as an entry for purchase of construction materials for an amount that was a little over the actual price ... I tried to ask the Village Head's opinion about these invisible funds, his reaction was "Just leave it because we'll also need access to the kecamatan people if there any further programs so this village is prioritised..." "... nobody dared to question the FK about these matters because I thought the FK was sure to know already because they have an office in the kecamatan, you see..." H. Sukarman, Former FD, 14 December 2003 "...the former KDP implementation was affected by a KDP funding cut of 3% from the kecamatan parties which was collected by the Kepala Desa Murtajih, who said it was a procedure that had been determined by the previous kecamatan [authorities] ...""...there was a manipulation of foundation material supplies ...Perhaps the tradesmen had a deal with the [project] implementers." Sumina and Wanda, Program Users, 15 December 2003 Theconstructionoftheaberanandculvertswaseventuallycompletedonschedule,butatthe timeacriticalproblemoccurredwhichcausedtheaberanconstructiontodeviatefromplan. What caused the problem was the project for Dusun Laok Tambak. H. Rusdi, whose land was to be affected by the project, suddenly objected. He was unwilling for his pond land to be touched by the project. "Without any clear reason H. Rusdi suddenly refused for his land to be affected by the aberan project. And without H Rusdi's willingness the aberan construction located at Dusun Laok Tambak couldn't possibly be implemented because the site happened to be along the land owned by H. Rusdi... I myself don't actually know why H. Rusdi's refused ..." Sardi, Village Head, 13 December 2003 Researchers: Saifullah Barnawi and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Suzan Piper 56 Apparently the Estate Had Been Sold Desa Padelegan, Kecamatan Pademawu, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Saifullah Barnawi 3. Land Owner Refuses - the Construction Site is Moved H.RusdiisanativeinhabitantofDesaPadelegan. Hismainoccupationisprebus(fishmerchant) and he is one of the richer men of his hamlet. His house faces the Dusun Laok Tambak kampung road where the aberan was to be built. His pond land is located precisely in front ofhishouse,stretchingalongtheDusunLaokTambakroadforalmost300metresinlength. HeisacloseneighboroftheVillageHead. H. Rusdi also attended the Musbangdes II, where it was agreed inter alia that the aberan construction was a proposal to be prioritised in submissions to the UDKPII forum. At the timeheraisednoobjectiontotheconstructionthatwouldcrossthepondlandsheowned. H. Rusdi's refusal emerged after the UDKPII, when it had already been confirmed that Desa Padeleganwouldreceivefunding. NaturallyH.Rusdi'srefusalcreatedconfusionformany parties because, if he were unwilling, then it was impossible for the aberan to be built in DusunLaokTambak. "After undergoing the Musbangdes and UDKP process it was finally agreed that Desa Padelegan would obtain KDP funds to build the aberan and culverts. In the beginning there weren't any problems with the construction plans ... When the implementation team [TPK, TTD and Verification Team] began to conduct surveys, suddenly H. Rusdi refused/ was unwilling for his land to be crossed by the aberan project. .. whilst in fact apparently at the Musbangdes H. Rusdi had attended and hadn't raised any problems about the planned aberan construction." Sardi, Village Head, 13 December 2003 It is not particularly clear what were the real reasons why H. Rusdi refused. According to information obtained from several informants, there are at least two possible reasons for the refusal. Firstly, H. Rusdi refused due to concerns that the aberan project would disclose the history of his land title that remains problematic. If he were to sign the statement bequesting part of his land, he was worried that this would trigger the emergence of problems with the beneficiaries of the land he now controlled. "Why did H. Rusdi refuse his land to be affected by the aberan project? ... in my opinion one of his reasons was the troubled status of his land title. Perhaps he was worried that the project would disclose the history of his land title which was actually still a problem ... In physical infrastructure construction projects at KDP, you see, one of the conditions is that there be a bequest statement or a statement of willingness from the Researchers: Saifullah Barnawi and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Suzan Piper 57 Apparently the Estate Had Been Sold Desa Padelegan, Kecamatan Pademawu, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Saifullah Barnawi owners of land affected by the project, well here apparently H. Rusdi was concerned that the bequest statement would be protested by the land beneficiaries because indeed the history of the land title actually still had problems." Armani, Former Female FD, 15 December 2003 Secondly, there was conflict over the boundaries between the pond land and the kampung road. According to explanations from informants, the kampung road used to be quite wide but it was eroded by pond water until it narrowed. When the aberanproject was to be built,therewasaplantowidentheroadtoitsoldsizeandthatiswhenconflictemergedover land boundaries between the pond lands and the kampung road. H. Rusdi did not approve of the kampungroad widening which - in his opinion - would consume his pond land. "... The problem was over the boundary of the land to be freed up for the aberan [retaining wall] project .... It had been agreed in the Musbangdes to widen the road where the aberan was to be built because the road has narrowed now, eroded by pond water, so the initially the road was to be widened to its former state. Several other landowners agreed to allow several parts of their land to have earth piled on top to widen the road, but H. Rusdi didn't agree because it would certainly use up his pond .... [As FD] I found myself arguing with my own Uncle, H. Rusdi ... so I said to H. Rusdi that it wasn't the road eating up his pond but his pond that had eaten up the road because the road was previously very wide. Perhaps H. Rusdi was offended by my words ..." H. Sukarman, Former FD, 14 December 2003 When we examine the explanations of the two informants above, the two stated reasons emerge simultaneously, each strengthening the other. Both the conflict over the land boundaries as well as the land title status triggered H. Rusdi's refusal of an aberan construction project that would cross his pond land. It was a crucal problem because Desa Padelegan had been confirmed to receive KDP funds and the funds were ready to be released, whilst H. Rusdi still stubbornly refused for his land to be crossed by the aberan project. After deliberation attempts and personal approaches failed to change H. Rusdi's stance, finally the aberan construction site had to be moved from its original one in Dusun Laok Tambak to Dusun Daya Tambak for the same construction value and volume. Box 2 below describes the landowner's refusal, the conflict resolution process and the decision to move the construction site. Researchers: Saifullah Barnawi and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Suzan Piper 58 Apparently the Estate Had Been Sold Desa Padelegan, Kecamatan Pademawu, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Saifullah Barnawi Box 2: Refusal of Land Owner and Move of Construction Site "The KDP officials, including the FD, FK, PJOK (Project Managers) and TPK assisted by the Village Head and local community figures tried to make approaches to H. Rusdi, but he still refused... Finally the aberan construction site was moved ... from Kampung Laok Tambak to Kampung Daya Tambak. And as for the site at Kampung Muara it remained as before, unchanged." Sardi, Village Head, 13 December 2003 "The Klebun [Madurese term for Village Head] and community leaders made approaches to H. Rusdi. They provided explanations and the like to H. Rusdi about the importance of the aberan [project] ... but apparently the efforts were unsuccessful. H. Rusdi still refused [to allow] the aberan construction to affect his pond land ...Thus because the KDP funds had already been agreed to and had begun to be released, eventually the aberan constructed was moved... " Armani, Former FD, 15 December 2003 "... Finally it was decided it was better not to cross the land owned by H. Rusdi rather than have problems arise with his own relatives. So the project passed by [avoided] H. Rusdi's land in the hope that one day H. Rusdi would change his mind after seeing the advantages of the aberan construction project." H. Sukarman, Former FD, 14 December 2003 The move of the aberan construction site on the one hand was able to swiftly overcome the problem, but on the other hand this led to community grumbling and dissatisfaction. Dusun Laok Tambak and Dusun Muara adjoin each other. The kampung road where the aberan was planned to be built runs in straight line from east to west. Dusun Laok Tambak is located to the east of Dusun Muara and is the gateway to Dusun Muara. Therefore when the aberan in Dusun Laok Tambak was not built, road conditions remained narrow and grubby-looking, in great contrast to conditions at Dusun Muara after the aberan construction with its wide and neat looking road. The community blamed H. Rusdi who was considered to be the cause of such conditions. "... The project plans had to be changed because [the construction] was interrupted in front of the house of H. Rusdi... so the results weren't perfect." H. Sukarman, Former FD, 14 December2003 "Jalan Kampung Laok Tambak and [Kampung] Muara they're on the one route, so once the aberan at Kampung Maura was finished and the kampung road looked clean and neat, immediately it seemed dirty, the view at Kampung Laok Tambak... Consequently many in the community Researchers: Saifullah Barnawi and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Suzan Piper 59 Apparently the Estate Had Been Sold Desa Padelegan, Kecamatan Pademawu, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Saifullah Barnawi grumbled and blamed H. Rusdi who was considered to be the cause of the failed aberan construction at Kampung Laok Tambak... " Sardi, Village Head Desa Padelegan, 13 December2003 Whetheritwasduetothegrumblingofhisneighborsorotherconcerns,whatisclearisthat one year later H. Rusdi at his own expense constructed an aberan at the site he had earlier refused. TheVillage Head related that it was he who had encouraged H. Rusdi to build the aberan. H.Rusdihappenedtobeplanningtomarryhisdaughter,astudentofmedicineata universityinSurabaya,toacadetfromamilitaryacademy. Thisforthcomingmarriagewas used as entry point to encourage H. Rusdi to build an aberanso the kampungroad out front would not appear dirty when he received his invited guests. Apparently theVillage Head's effortswerequiteeffective. "About one year later H. Rusdi built himself [at his own cost] an aberan along the Kampung LaokTambak road, exactly at the site that he'd earlier refused.... With the construction of the aberan, the kampung looks clean and tidy." Sardi, Village Head Desa Padelegan, 13 December 2003 4. The Estate Land Was Sold Secretly In relation to the history of the troubled status of H. Rusdi's land title, a former female FD said that the pond land used to be her family's estate and she was one of the beneficiaries. Box 3 below briefly explains the problem. Box 3: History of Land Estate Controlled by H. Rusdi13 "The land owned by H. Rusdi may well become a land dispute in the future... The land used to be owned by my family, so actually I still have inheritance rights over that land... Initially the land was worked on by my cousin's family. After my cousin died the children rented the land to H. Rusdi" "I heard the news that apparently the oldest child of my cousin often borrowed money from H. Rusdi. He's unemployed and his wife likes to ask for all sorts of things. Perhaps to meet his wife's demands finally he often borrowed money from H. Rusdi... Finally his debts got bigger and bigger. Perhaps because he wasn't able to pay his debts, the land was finally sold to H. Rusdi" 13 This information was conveyed by IbuAsmaiyah, former FD for Desa Padelegan, who happens to be one of the beneficiaries of the pond land which is now controlled by H. Rusdi which is considered to be under dispute. Researchers: Saifullah Barnawi and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Suzan Piper 60 Apparently the Estate Had Been Sold Desa Padelegan, Kecamatan Pademawu, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Saifullah Barnawi "I myself and also my family only knew the land had been bought by H. Rusdi after the case of the refusal of the aberan construction happened.... Actually grandfather had made a will saying the land should not be sold, but now it's already been done.... Strangely H. Rusdi now says he has a land deed, declaring ownership over the land whereas the beneficiaries, including myself, have never been informed of, much less given agreement to, the sale of the land, moreover the village authorities too have never been aware of the transaction.... Once I said to H. Rusdi's wife that one day the land would become a problem ... she stayed silent." Armani, Former FD, 15 December 2003 Land problems are the most frequently occurring ones in Desa Padelegan.14 H. Rusdi's control of the pond land is just one example. Generally issues emerge due to poor land administration. It is not uncommon for people to carry out land transactions or transfer of rights over land without providing the legal evidence, so that this triggers conflict later, especially when the land beneficiaries demand their rights. It is not uncommon also for the BPN (National Land Agency), as the government department responsible for issuing land certificates, to act rashly. They issue deeds without careful checking of the land's history in the field, so that when the deed is issued by the BPN this in fact triggers conflict over the ownership status of the land. 5. Conclusions · Although the aberan and culverts construction project in Desa Padelegan could be completed on schedule, it had to be changed from its original plans. The construction site was moved from Dusun Laok Tambak to Dusun Daya Tambak as a result of the landowner's refusal. · There were two reasons underlying the refusal: firstly the concerns of the land owner that the aberan project would disclose the troublesome history of his land, secondly, the conflict over the boundaries of the pond land and the kampung road which was to be widened in connection with the aberan project. · The role of the Village Head and the village elite dominated the decision making process. Often decisions were made outside the forum by the village elite before the Musbangdes took place so that the Musbangdes forum gave the impression of only being a means to justify and legitimise the decisions of the village elite. · There were irregularities in the KDP implementation, both at the village and kecamatan levels. · KDP was the trigger - not the cause - of the land dispute conflict. 14 Interview No. 1211, Village Secretary, 13 December 2003. Researchers: Saifullah Barnawi and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Suzan Piper 61 Apparently the Estate Had Been Sold Desa Padelegan, Kecamatan Pademawu, Kabupaten Pamekasan, East Java Author: Saifullah Barnawi Case Chronology: KDP Triggering Land Conflict Date Event 2000 Musbangdes prioritises an aberan along a coastal road between two of the village hamlets 2000 H. Rusdi refuses to have the aberan built on his pondage land 2000 Formal and personal attempts are made to convince H. Rusdi of the benefits but nothing transpires. 2001 H. Musdi builds the road on his section of land himself and at his own expense. Researchers: Saifullah Barnawi and Endro Probo Crenantoro; Co-ordinators: Rachael Diprose and Saifullah Barnawi Translator: Suzan Piper 62 Not Just a Matter of Communal Land Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Peter Manggut Not Just a Matter of Communal Land: Land Conflict in Desa Golo Meni Summary The conflict over the land allocated for the school and village office involved the Manus clan from Desa Rana Mbeling and the Mukun clan from Desa Golo Meni, as well as the Government, SDK (Catholic Primary School) Mukun I, SDK Mukun II. This dispute has been latent since 1972 and remains unresolved. The plan to move the market from the football field to a site just east of the football field inflamed the dispute and resulted in the Manus people carrying out acts of terror and threatening to kill the AMPI (New Indonesia Students) members who were preparing the new market site in 1991. Further, the establishment of the Mukun Adat Forum in 2003, without the involvement of the Manus people resulted in the possibility of a full fledged war between the Manus people and the Desa Golo Meni community on 4 January 2003.The tension between the two groups has been temporarily stifled by the mediation efforts of the Catholic Church and various other parties. Nevertheless, if the problem cannot be resolved peacefully using participatory adat processes, then the shedding of blood will be almost unavoidable. 1. Introduction: History and Kinship System In 1991, the Village Head of Golo Meni made a plan to move the Mukun Market (which is held every Friday) from the football field to a location further to the east. His plan coincided with the arrival of 38 members of AMPI (New Indonesia Students) from Kupang, who had come ready and willing to perform a public service. The Village Head, therefore, requested their assistance to clean and construct a terrace at the location east of the football field in preparation for the construction of market stalls. On the second day, when they were all working, a large gang of Manus people turned up at the site. "They came wielding machetes, hoes and spades and then immediately went and terrorized theAMPI members, threatening that they would murder them if they continued their work. The AMPI members scattered, trying to seek protection where they could find it. The Manus people who had turned up at that time were led by Avent Padu and some other adat [customary] leaders as well as members of the Manus community, for example, Paul Ndarung (Avent Padu's father) and Martinus Ghasa. T hey ridiculed the Village Head of Golo Meni for making a fence, planting Researchers: Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 63 Not Just a Matter of Communal Land Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Peter Manggut bananas and building a rental house and kiosks, including kiosks for the cooperatives in the village which are in fact still there today." Nobert Anggal, former Village Head In order to understand the events outlined above, we need to understand the history of Wau Pat. Wau Pat are the four patrilineal clans, namely, Ngusu, Manus, Mukun and Deru, which all share the same ancestry, that is Meka La. Meka La is said to be a courageous figure,whohelpedtheRembongpeople(originalethnicgroup)murderLusaandLagor. Inan effort to show their appreciation, the Rembong people presented land to Meka La.1 Thesefourwau havetheirownareaswhichtheyrule. WauNgusuandWauManusresidein the area east of theWae Mokel River, or AtaAwo Wewo (See Box 1). Meanwhile, the Wau Mukun and the Wau Deru reside in the area west of the Wae Mokel River, or Ata Sale Wewo.2 Box 1: The Wae Manus' Land The land belonging to the Wau Manus includes the area between Wae Ruwuk, east of Wae Mokel, up to Susang Naru at Wae Mokel, and then west of the Wae Mokel River, into Wae Redong near the Keok, Waru Leok and Pong Taga rice fields, as well as the section east of Kampung Ketal, Parimaza and then into Wae Weer, and along Wae Weer right up to Wae Mokel. From there it continues east to Wae Mokel towards Ngngga, Tango and Taor and covers all the Lodok (ethnic group area) MOBONS (Mokel, Bolur, Nangge and Sewul).3 According to the administrative land borders determined by the government, Kampung Manus and Kampung Ngusus are included within Desa Rana Mbeling. Kampung Rembong and Kampung Mukun are included in Desa Golo Meni. Meanwhile, Kampung Deru, Pedak and Podol are included in Desa Mokel. The composition of each of these three administrative villages is not determined by geographical divides; rather they are based on ancestral links (clans). As a result, the Manus clan's actions (outlined above) were opposed by the Deru and Mukun clans as well as Kampung Rembong which is located within Desa Golo Meni. 1 Interview No. 27, Yosef Juni, Head of BP3 (Agency for Educational Assistance) and Mukan Adat Forum, and Interview No. 20, Flavianus Garing, Resident. 2 Interview No. 27, op cit. 3 Interview No. 20, op cit. Researchers: Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 64 Not Just a Matter of Communal Land Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Peter Manggut 2. School Land ­ Community Health Centre Land ­ Village Office Land WhenManggaraiwasstillruledbyaKing(KingBagung),theDutchEastIndiesGovernment worked alongside the Catholic Church to clear away an area of land to build an elementary school (See Box 2). "The elementary school was built in Taga and the teacher's name was Major. However, it was later moved to Songi." Yosef Juni, Head of BP3, SDK Mukun II and Mukun Adat Forum Box 2: 16th Century Administration Around the 16th century, when Sultan Goa and Bima had authority over Manggarai, the following system was used to distinguish administrative units: Kingdom ­ Kedaluan ­ Gelarang ­ KampungAt that time, Manggarai was ruled by King Todo. There were 39 kedaluan under the king, each of which was ruled by a dalu. Meanwhile, the gelarang was below the kedaluan, and had the task of bridging the gap between the interests of the kedaluan and the interests of the community. The kampung was below the gelarang, and were led by a kampung head. This was also the case for Kedaluan Manus. In 1921, the Manus clan relinquished some of their land and handed it over to Dalu Nderas. As a result, the elementary school was moved from Songi to Mukun. However, according to another respondent, it was not just the Wau (clan) Manus, but all four wau, namely, Manus, Ngusu, Mukun and Deru who relinquished the land.4 This land was relinquished during a "Kepok Adat Ceremony" using the Rosang law (Rosang: spit which has already left your mouth cannot be licked again). This is a type of adat oath, and at the same time a curse: "Sei lait kole ngaseng mata ribok" [whoever tries to lick it up will die of a curse]. Only after the land had been relinquished and handed over could they start to construct the Mukun elementary school on it. The Mukun elementary school became the main school in Kedaluan Manus.5 On 22April 1956, the Manus clan relinquished a piece of their land for the construction of a community health center. This piece of land measured 65 x 51m and was located east of the foodball field (See Box 1). In 1957, Dalu Manus (Domi Perenta) moved the Hamente Manus office from Ketal to the location which had been set aside for the construction of the community health center, just east of the football field. 4 Interview No. 27. 5 Ibid. Researchers: Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 65 Not Just a Matter of Communal Land Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Peter Manggut On 19 May 1974, Father Frans Galis, the Mukun parish priest and Head of one branch of SUKMA(FoundationforCatholicSchoolinginManggarai),heldameetingwiththeHeadof the Board of Parish Priests,AndeAnggal, the Head of POM SDK Mukun I,Yan Dima, the HeadofPOMSDKMukunII,themanageroftheMukunHealthCenter,aswellasrespected communityrepresentatives. Duringthismeetingtheydecidedthatthelandfortheschooland thelandfortheCommunityHealthCenterwouldbeswappedover.6 The land was swapped because the German missionaries had only been given 65 x 51m of land to build the community health center, yet they required one hectare of land.7As a consequence of this decision, on the 29 May 1983, the Golo Meni Village Council held a meetingwiththeparishpriestsaswellas41GoloMenicommunityleaders. Inthismeeting they decided that the land which had been relinquished on 22April 1956 would be used for theMukunmarket. Inaddition,theyproposedthatthelandmeasuring65x51mbedivided into two parts, one measuring 47 x 45 m which could be used for a market and the other measuring45x18mwhichcouldbeusedfortheGoloMeniVillageOffice. However,itwas eventually decided that the whole 65 x 51 m would be used as a market space; meanwhile, theGoloMeniVillageOfficewouldbemovedtoBukitGoloMeni,nexttotheCommunity HealthCenter.8 But the process of switching the land allocated for the school with the land allocated for the communityhealthcenter,andalsotheproposalwherebythelandallocatedfortheschoolbe used for a market and Village Office did not involve the Manus people who originally relinguishedtheland. ThusthisisthecomplexbackgroundtoDesaGoloMenilandconflict. 3. The Conflict Over the Land for the School, Desa Golo Meni Village Office and Market On26April1991,anumberofrespectedfiguresfromtheManuscommunity,namely,Yohanes Maras,MartinusGhasa,AntonMandurandYosefPatangsignedastatement,relinquishing thelandjusteastofthefootballfield(thelandusedfortheschool)sothatitcouldbeusedfor a market. However, on 4 May 1991,Avent Padu, anadat leader, wrote a letter rejecting the relinquishmentoftheland. Thismattercametoaheadmadeintoamarket.whentheAMPI members were clearing the land just east of the football field to be Right in the middle of clearingthearea,awholegangofManuspeoplearrived. 6 Interview No. 20. 7 Interview No. 23. 8 Interview No. 38 and Interview No. 21. Researchers: Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 66 Not Just a Matter of Communal Land Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Peter Manggut After this incident, theVillage Head of Golo Meni made a report and sent it to theCamat of KotaKomba,buthedidnotrespond. Hethenmadeasecondandthirdreport,buttherewas stillnoreactionfromthe Camat. During his Easter visit in 1992, Gaspar Ehok, the Bupati of Manggarai made a visit to the disputedland. Aftersurveyingthesite,hemadenocommentatall. Hejustpromisedtosend the Camat of Kota Komba to Mukun. The Camat, Ben Lahur, did make a visit to the location,butheonlymeasuredthelandfortheVillageOffice. "When Barnabas Jangga replaced Yosef Jama (who was sick) as Task Manger in Desa Golo Meni, they had just received funds to renovate the Village Office. Just after the renovation had got underway on 14 October 2002, Nyonya Sofia Bro9 arrived on the scene with some of the Manus people. They immediately intercepted the laborers who were working and even stopped them from continuing their work." Barnabas Jangga, Task Manager in Desa Golo Meni In an effort to follow up their sabotage effort, Sofia Bro and a number of Manus people constructed a wall against the front of the Village Office.10 The Golo Meni community was angered by the actions of Sofia Bro and her Manus associates, and therefore decided that they wanted to meet them face to face, but Barnabas Jangga, the Task Manager to the Village Head prohibited them from doing this.11 The task manager of Golo Meni reported Sofia Bro and a few of the Manus people, including, Martinus Ghasa, Yan Natas and Agus Jamung, to the Head of the Police in Wae Lengga. After receiving the report, Silvinus Jerandu, the Head of the Wae Lengga police came and carried out an investigation. He met with both parties and then he made the following statement: "Indeed something was damaged, and a fence was constructed in the vicinity of the Village Office." 9 Nyonya Sofia Bro is the widow of Lambert Landung. Lambert Landung was the son of Sapang, the man who signed the declaration to relinquish the land for the community health center on 22 April 1956. 10 Barnabas Jangga reported that "The Manus people, alongside Sofia Bro also broke down the wall that they had made and built a fence inside the Village Office," Task manager for the Village Head, Interview No. 22. 11 Interview No. 22. Researchers: Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 67 Not Just a Matter of Communal Land Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Peter Manggut Healsorequestedthatthetwoparties(DesaGoloMeniandSofiaBro)producesomesortof evidencetoprovetheirownershipoftheland. SofiaBrowasabletoshowseveralpiecesof evidenceprovingownershipoftheland. Nevertheless,theVillageHeadofGoloMeniwas unabletoprovethatthelandwheretheVillageOfficehasbeenbuiltwasactuallypublicland, becauseNobertAnggalandAndeAnggalwerestilllookingafterthetwooriginalmapsused intherelinquishmentofthelandon22April1956.12 Years later, Barnabas Jangga started to meet with respected community figures from Golo Meni to discuss alternative dispute resolution mechanisms generally. At this time problem overthelandforthevillageofficeaswellasthelandforthemarkethadstillnotproperlybeen resolved.13 These discussions became the impetus for the formation of the Mukun Adat Forum, whichaimedtoresolvealldifferentkindsofdisputes,including,disputeswhichtake place within the family unit. Therefore, at the beginning of January 2003, the Mukun Adat Forum was established.14 This adat forum did not involve the Manus and Ngusu and as a result the Manus people concluded that "this must be a land matter!"15 One of the Manus' most respected figues, Paulus Ndarung, stated: "On 4 January 2003, we almost made it into a problem like the one in Lendo.16 We prepared our machetes, spears and weapons to go to war on the disputed land. But, the Manus people were still scared of the law. They are not of the same opinion as me or don't think the same way as me." Paulus Ndarung, former Village Head, Community Leader and Manus land owner 12 See Diary, Peter R. Manggut, May 6, 2003. 13 Interview No. 23. 14 The structure of the Forum is as follows: Head: Yosef Juni; Deputy Head: Yan Pawo; First stand-by Deputy Head: David Ngge; Second stand-by Deputy Head; NobertAnggal; Secretary I: PetrusAlo Dando; Secretary II: Dion Din Sait; Treasurer I: Simon Sulu; Treasurer II: Emanuel Darmo. The Forum strucuture also includes a Financial Division, Human Relations Section and Security Division. See Interview No. 27. 15 Interview No. 23. 16 Conflict over the Lait-Lendo land in Desa Gunung, Kecamatan Kota Komba which occurred on 2 November 2001. A verdict was announced in court, but after this it was also resoved through a war which left three people dead. Researchers: Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 68 Not Just a Matter of Communal Land Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Peter Manggut Meanwhile,YosefJunireported "On that same day (4 January 2003), the Mukun and Rembong people (Desa Golo Meni) as well as the Podol people (Desa Mokel) were ready. We were determined. But, the Manus people didn't come." Yosef Juni, Ketua BP3 SDK Mukun II, Head of Mukun Adat Forum As a result of the situation, the Golo Meni community, who had been fired up by the people from Kampung Rembong, prepared themselves and went on the alert, ready for an attack by the Manus people.17 They said: "Just let it be known. When the Manus people arrive, then we will attack" Father Tarsi Atok, Assistant Parish Priest, Director of Mukun School Then on 6 January 2003 the Teno elders and Manus Community Leaders, representing the Manus people, wrote a statement which was sent to the Head of the Mukun Catholic Primary School BP3, which ordered the Mukun I and Mukun II Catholic Primary School houses, situated on "land owned by Manus people", to be destroyed.18 They were given one month, until 6 February 2003, to destroy the houses. 4. The Efforts of the Church to Act as a Mediator The tension which emerged in January 2003 caused the Mukun, Rembong and Podal groups to challenge the Manus people but simultaneously urged the respected Golo Meni community figures to hold meetings and find a peaceful solution. Father Tarsi Atok (Assistant Mukun Parish Priest) initated the mediation process in an effort to avoid bloodshed. He invited several respected Mukun community members to try and find a solution to the dispute.19 During their discussions they decided that it would be best that several of the respected Mukun community figures go and meet with the Manus community. As a result, three Mukun representatives and Father Tarsi Atok left to find Paulus Ndarung (the most respected Manus figure and adat leader). The three Mukun figures greeted Paulus Ndarung using the adat practice of Kepok, an adat tradition whereby tuak (a homemade alcoholic drink) is presented as a gift. They 17 Interview No. 23. 18 Interview No. 28, Paulus Ndarung, former Kades, respected community figure and Manus land owner. 19 Interview No. 23. Researchers: Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 69 Not Just a Matter of Communal Land Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Peter Manggut werealsoreceivedwiththeappropriateadatprocedure. FatherTarsiopenedtheconversation bysaying: "I am a priest. We want to know exactly what it is that the Manus people want." Ande Anggal, Head of Mukun Parish, community leader Paulus Ndarung answered this question in an interview held on 17 May 2003. "We only want the Mukun people to acknowledge the communal land of the Manus people according to the borders which were determined by our ancestors. We want to know why the land that our ancestors relinquished for public use is being misused? And, finally, if the Mukun people don't acknowledge that we have the communal rights to the land, then one day we will attack" Paulus Ndarung, former Village Head, Community Leader Paulus Ndarung's answer highlights three key issues in the Desa Golo Meni land case: First, the land which was relinquished in 1921 was the communal land of the Manus people. Therefore, it would seem that by not inviting them to the meetings, whereby decisions as to how the land would be used, indeed undermined their authority. Second, the Manus people did not agree with the decision made by the Golo Meni community because the land was not going to be used in the way that the Manus people had intended it to be. This means that they did not agree that the land for the community health center be swapped with the land designated for the Village Office and market. Third, Desa Golo Meni is not the sole owner of the Mukun market.20 Father Tarsi Atok returned to Mukun and held a meeting with the respected Mukun figures. Father Tarsi showed them Paulus Ndarung's letter dated 6 January 2003, and explained that: "This is what the Manus people want; acknowledge their communal rights!" Ande Anggal, Head of Mukun Parish, Community Leader 20 See interview with Father Tarsi Atok, 17 May 2003 as well as Adam Satu's informal interview with Avent Padu in Ruteng, 11 May 2003. Researchers: Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 70 Not Just a Matter of Communal Land Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Peter Manggut There was no long and detailed discussion at that time. Everybody who was there and participating in the conversation acknowledged the Manus people's communal rights totheland,andtheneverybodyreturnedtotheirownhomes,eachwiththeirownperspective onthediscussion.21 Followingthis,FatherTarsi,GeradusRaduandFransAkammetwithPaulusNdarungin Pam(DesaRanaMbeling),toannouncethat: 1. ThepeopleofDesaGoloMeniacknowledgedandacceptedtheManuspeople'scommunal rightstotheland. 2. They are prepared to sit down together to renegotiate the market levies. After hearing that the Golo Meni community had recognized the Manus people's communal rights to the land in Desa Golo Meni, Paulus Ndarung said: "The land in Desa Golo Meni which our ancestors relinquished in the interest of building a school only measured 100 x 75m." Pater Tarsi Atok, Assistant Parish Priest, Director of Mukun School With this change of heart, Father Tarsi immediately responded, "I can only listen to your demands Bapak, it is up to the head of the local diocese to accept or reject your demands."22 On 9 May 2003, Paulus Ndarung sent a messenger to meet with Father Tarsi to ask how his discussion with the head of the local diocese was progressing. FatherTarsi responded, "You'll have to wait for a while because I am currently busy organizing the Junior High Scool National Exams. I have left the matter in the hands of Priest Kanis at SUKMA."23 Father Tarsi promised that the meeting would be held after Easter 2003, but until now there has not taken place.24 21 Interview No. 23. 22 Ibid. 23 Interview No. 39, p. 3 24 Interview No.23, p. 15 Researchers: Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 71 Not Just a Matter of Communal Land Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Peter Manggut Presently,theManuspeoplecangotoGoloMeniwithoutanyproblems,andthesamegoes for the Golo Meni people visiting Manus. There were no signs of tension at the Easter celebrationsin2003. TheManusandMukuncommunitiesarestillwaitingforthemeeting whichwilldeterminewhetherthehostilitiesbetweenthemwillberesolvedonceandforall. EverybodyiswaitingforameetingwherebytherespectedfiguresfromboththeManusand Mukuncommunitysitdowntogetherandsolvethedisputeoverthepubliclandandtheland allocatedfortheschool,finallyreachingasolutionwherebothpartiesarehappy. Researchers: Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 72 Not Just a Matter of Communal Land Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Peter Manggut Case Chronology: Not Just a Matter of Communal Land Date Event 1921 The Manus clan relinquished some of their land and handed it over to Dalu Nderas to be used for a school. 22April 1956 The Manus clan relinquish a piece of their land for the construction of a community health center by German missionaries. 19 May 1974 The Mukun parist priest and manager of the Mukun Health Center, as well as others meet to swap the school land for the Community Health Center land. 29 May 1983 The village council decides to use the land relinquished in 1956 for a market, as well as the village office. However in the end it was decided the 1956 land would be used for the market only, and the village office would move next to the Community Health Center. 26April 1991 A number of respected Manus community figures relinquished land (again) for the market. 4 May 1991 Avent Padu, an adat leader, rejected this relinquishment. Easter 1992 Bupati of Manggarai visits disputed site and promises to send the Camat to resolve the land dispute. Around Easter A number of Manus people contruct a wall around the 1992 disputed land. Around Easter The Head of Police in Wae Lengga carries out an 1992 investigation. 4 January 2003 Respected community figures from Golo Meni meet to discuss alternative dispute resolution mechanisms generally. These discussions were interpreted as a hostile attempt to grab land by the Manus people, and prepared for war. 6 January 2003 Manus leaders order that the school land be destroyed in one month. January 2003 Father Tarsi Atok initiates mediation to avoid bloodshed. 9 May 2003 Manus leader request status of the negotiations from Father Tarsi. Father Tarsi responds, saying they will have to wait until he is finished organizing the high school national exams. 17 May 2003 Manus people demand that their communal rights to the land are acknowledged. Researchers: Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 73 Who Owns Mbondei Land? Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur Who Owns Mbondei Land? A Case of Change and Ambiguity Triggering Conflict Summary The Mbondei land ownership dispute involves the Kisol Seminary Pius XII, a community group from Kelurahan Tanah Rata who had joined together with an NGO named HIMASTAN1, and the Motu Poso ethnic group land owners. This dispute was triggered by the actions of members of HIMASTAN, lead by Anggalas, who distributed and began cultivating the land in June 2002 without the knowledge of the Motu Poso ethnic group, that is the land owners; and the Kisol Seminary Pius XII, who have been the physical holders of the land since 1967. Although interestingly this owner-holder status is hotly debated and seems to change depending on the current local political climate.The Mbondei land ownership dispute resulted in unrest and fear amongst the wider community, land owners, cultivators, the Kisol Seminary as well as other community members in Tanah Rata. The adat functionaries and both the Kelurahan Tanah Rata, as well as the Kecamatan Kota Komba governments have made a number of attempts at resolving the dispute. However, their efforts have failed to satisfy all parties, including the Kisol Seminary Pius XII as well as the group of cultivators and the wider community in Kelurahan Tanah Rata. 1. HIMASTAN: Revealing the Ownership of Mbondei Land The Mbondei land conflict began in 2002 which also sparked debate over the status of the MbondeilandwhichhadbeenrelinquishedtotheKisolSeminaryPiusXIIbytheMotuPoso land owners John Sari and Hubertus Dua in 1967. InJune2002,137membersofHIMASTANandnineothercommunitymembersfromTanah RataundertheleadershipofAnggalasdistributedandbegancultivatingMbondeiland,which hadupuntilthatpointbeenusedforherdinglivestockownedbytheKisolSeminaryPiusXII. ThislandwasdistributedandcultivatedwithoutinformingandconsultingwiththeMotuPoso 1 HIMASTAN is a working group which was formed to facilitate occupations and develop cooperation to ensure that people do not act on their own wishes and instead follow regulations. The acronym is derived from its members, that is: (1) The Tanah RataAssociation of Farmers in Search of Justice and Brotherhood; (2) Association of Farmers in Search of Justice; and (3) Association of Farmers and Tanah Rata Adat. HIMASTAN was established in 2002 with the following organisational structure: Head, Anggalus; Deputy Head, Kanis Samin; and Secretary Vinsen Jiu. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 74 Who Owns Mbondei Land? Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur ethnic group land owners or the Kisol Seminary Pius XII who had controlled and utilised thelandsince1967forherdinglivestockownedbytheKisolSeminaryPiusXII. TheMotu Posoethnicgrouplandowner,Tony,perceivedtheactivitiesofthegroupofcultivatorslead byAnggalasasaviolationofadatandgovernmentlaw. Meanwhile,theKisolSeminaryPius XIIconsideredtheactivitiesofAnggalas'sgrouptobeanillegaloccupationoflivestockland owned by the Kisol Seminary Pius XII. As a result, on 19 June 2002Tony, PriestAlbertus SimonfromtheKisolSeminaryPiusXII,AntonandDusorderedthecultivatorstoceasetheir activitiesandreturntotheirhomes. "Cease your activities and return to your homes; we will hold a meeting on 22 June 2002 because your activities violate adat law and government law." Tony, Motu Poso land owner and Luruh Secretary In addition to this verbal warning, on 25 June 2002 Priest Albertus Simon from the Kisol Seminary wrote a letter to the Tanah Rata Lurah (Village Chief) reporting the actions of the groups actions (see Box 1). In the letter, PriestAlbertus Simon described the activities being carried out by these people and expressed a desire for the problem to be resolved. Box 1: Priest Albertus Simon's Letter to the Lurah, 25 June 2002 "As the head of the area at the kelurahan level we would like to inform you of a problem we are experiencing which relates to a number of people illegally occupying our (Kisol Seminary Pius XII) livestock land in Bondey. These people have marked out our livestock land and cut down trees which were planted there. Their actions are clearly increasing. We have not talked directly to these people. We believe that you as an elder to us all who live in the Tanah Rata area can assist with resolving this problem. Therefore, we strongly hope that the actions of these people will cease as soon as possible. We believe that a firm approach and strong action from you can resolve this conflict." In Response to this series of events the Tanah Rata Community Empowerment activity was held by the Motu Poso land owners and adat functionaries. "We don't have to go through the adat legal process and we acknowledge the status of Tony as the Motu Poso ethnic group land owner; this applies whether our activities at Mbondei are right or wrong." Anggalus, Head of HIMASTAN Researchers:Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 75 Who Owns Mbondei Land? Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur However, the cultivators lead byAnggalas did not want this and continued to cultivate the land. Moreover,in2003theyenjoyedcropsproducedfromthecultivatedlandinMbondei. ThisencouragedothermembersofthecommunitytomarkoutanddistributeMbondeiland. AccordingtoWilhelmusAnggal,inDecember2002agroupofresidentsfromDusunLeke, KelurahanTanahRatawenttoMbondeiandmarkedoutland. Then,inMarch2003another groupofresidentsfromDusunKisol,TanahRatadidthesamething. Incontrasttothegroup before them, these two groups are related to the Motu Poso ethnic group land owners. In addition,someofthepeopleamongthesetwogroupswereMotuPosolandowners. However, not all the members of the two groups have cultivated the marked out land.2 However, accordingtoAnggalastheycultivatedthelandatMbondeibecausetheywereorderedbythe Motu Poso ethnic group land owner, that isTony.3 Themotivationandpurposeofeachgroup(HIMASTAN,LekegroupandKisolgroup)for markingoutanddistributingthelivestocklandvaries. ThemotivationoftheLekeandKisol groups is not just to own the land in Mbondei but more importantly to prevent people from outsideKelurahanTanahRatafromdistributingandcultivatinglandinMbondei. Therefore manyofthemembersofthetwogroupsjustmarkedanddistributedMbondeilandbuthave not yet cultivated or put it to use. In addition, the recent marking out and distribution of Mbondei land by these two groups (Leke and Kisol groups) is due to the fact that they do notagreewiththeactionsofHIMASTANwhocontinuetocultivateandworkMbondeiland even though the Kota Komba Kecamatan Government has forbade them to (see Box 4 below). The future effect of the presence of these two groups in Mbondei is tensions and possiblebloodshedbetweenthegroupsinvolvedinthislanddispute. The distribution and cultivation of Mbondei land by HIMASTAN aimed to demand the realisation of the 2000 Motu Poso Adat House Deliberation. In the 2000 deliberation Tony, as the Motu Poso Land Owner, clarified the status of Mbondei land as follows: "Around 1967 Mbondei land was relinquished by adat elders, John Sari and Ignas Ingga to the Kisol Seminary Pius XII with Usage Loan status not Ownership status remembering that a discussion had not been held with and agreed upon by the community in the sub-village (kampung). This land was to be divided to the community for "Ana-Mbu kita sedhi" (for our grandchildren). Therefore it is not wrong for the Mbondei land to be distributed to the community." 2 Interview No. 12, Wilhelmus Anggal and Interview No. 17, Male FGD. 3 Interview No. 12. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 76 Who Owns Mbondei Land? Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur Inthedeliberationitwasagreedthateachmemberwhoreceivedlandwouldpayaregistration fee of Rp 80.000 and one chicken. However, the agreement reached between 2000 and June 2002 is yet to be realised, even though 21 members of HIMASTAN have paid their registrationmoney. FurthermoreitcontradictsthelaterstatementbyMotuPosolandowners, inameetingwiththeCamatthatreconfirmedtherelinquishmentoflandtotheSeminary(see Box 4 below). Box 2: HIMASTAN's Reasons for Distributing and Cultivating Mbondei Land: a. Because in 2002 part of the Mbondei land was distributed by the Motu Poso ethnic group land owners to people from Kota Ndora, Kecamatan Borong. Why were people from outside Kelurahan Tanah Rata given land while we (HIMASTAN) weren't?4 Similarly according to Yan Piala the occupation of the livestock land owned by the Kisol Seminary in Mbondei relates to the relinquishment of land owned by the village of Tanah Rata to people from the village of Kota Ndora (Kecamatan Borong) by the Camat (Tanah Rata was controlled by Karol R at the time).5 b. The expansive piece of land owned by the Seminary is for raising cattle, while we need cultivation land to increase our family income.6 c. We want to ascertain the ownership status of the Kisol Seminary livestock land; the boundaries, what year it was relinquished and by whom.7 d. On 9 January 2000 we went to house of the Motu Poso land owner, Tony, to request land and were told we would be given land around Mbondei. However, this is yet to happen.8 2. Ownership or Usage Rights? "This land is not owned by the Seminary, but rather they have short- term usage rights: there is a large population here (Watunggong) and the land will be distributed to the community regardless of their origins" Tony, Motu Poso land owner 4 Interview No. 12. 5 Interview No. 13. 6 Anggalas in Notes from the Clarification Meeting Regarding the Cultivation of Livestock Land Owned by the Kisol Seminary in Mbondei and the surrounding area, with Anggalas and his friends on 5 August 2002, at the Kota Komba Camat Office Hall. 7 Ibid. 8 Vinsen Jiu in Notes from the Clarification Meeting Regarding the Cultivation of Livestock Land Owned by the Kisol Seminary in Mbondei and the surrounding area, with Anggalas and his friends on 5 August 2002, at the Kota Komba Camat Office Hall. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 77 Who Owns Mbondei Land? Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur "In 1967 Bondei was relinquished for the herding of seminary livestock by Ignas Ingga and John Sari through "Kapu Manuk Kele Tuak"9 to our parents."10 ThelandwasrelinquishedtoSeminaryPiusbytheMotuPosoethnicgrouplandownersJohn Sari and Ignas Ingga as a place for the Kisol Seminary Pius XII to herd their livestock. The relinquishingofMbondeioccurredasaresultofarequestfromBrotherArnol,whorepresented theKisolSeminaryPiusXII,though"KapuManukKeleTuak"toaMotuPosoethnicgroup landowner. BrotherArnolaskedforusagerightstoMbondeilandforherdingcattleowned by the Kisol Seminary Pius XII (See Box 3). Box 3: The Land in Question The land relinquished for the seminary livestock was approximately 50 hectares.11 However one hectare for the cattle yard was relinquished as an area to be under the ownership of the seminary. The relinquishing was carried out through adat. The boundaries were: East: Alo Wae lako; West: Tinggi Mboe; North: edge of Poco Ndeki forest; and South: Sawu Ocean."12 The parties involved in the Mbondei land relinquishment to the Kisol Seminary Pius XII process in 1967 are set forward by Yan Piala as follows: "At the time I was still the Rongga Koe region and witnessed the relinquishment of the land to the seminary through adat. The land owner was John Sari. In addition, community members such as the Village Head of Dalu Bintang, Sub-Village Head, Motu Poso land owners and Sui ethnic group land owners also attended the ceremony. Rona (wife-giver) and Wina (Wife-receiver) were also present at the adat ceremony. Yan Piala Priest Lorens Sopang stated: "Because the relinquishment was carried out through adat there is no written documentation as has been demanded by certain parties. Adat in Manggarai still has legal power and is official" Priest Lorens Sopang 9 Kapu Manuk Kele Tuak means to bring a Chicken and Palm Wine in order to make a request to a respected person through adat 10 Interview No. 14. 11 Informants such as Yan Piala (former Head of Rongga Koe witnessed the relinquishment in 1967), Kanisius Kaja and Priest Lores Sorang were not definite about the size of the land relinquished. 12 Interview No. 12. Compare with Yan Piala, Interview No. 13; Kanisius kaja, Interview No. 14, Priest Lorens Spang, Interview No. 15, FGD, Interview No. 17 and Tony, Interview No. 35. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 78 Who Owns Mbondei Land? Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur RegardingthestatusofMbondeiland,Kasistated: "We know that Mbondei land is from our elders, relinquished to the Seminary by our elders to be used for herding cattle. Mbondei is not just for the Seminary's animals but also for the animals owned by the people of Tanah Rata. The Seminary can, the community can put their animals on Mbondei land. The usage status does not make the Seminary the owner of 700 hectares. It is not possible that 700 hectares was relinquished to the Seminary." Kasi In contrast to Tony and Kasi, Yan Piala who witnessed the relinquishment of Mbondei land to the Seminary in 1967 by the Motu Poso land owner said: "I will reiterate that the relinquishment was legal. There is no two ways about it. The land is owned by the Seminary full stop" Yan Piala From the above statements it is clear that the status of Mbondei land is very important to the Kisol Seminary Pius XII as well as members of HIMASTAN lead by Anggalus and other community members from Kelurahan Tanah Rata, such as the Leke group and Kisol group. For the Kisol Seminary if the Land Relinquishment in 1967 by the land owners includes the Relinquishment of Ownership Rights to Mbondei Land then the Seminary would have been given full power to utilise the land without restriction. According to Law Number 5, 1960 regardingAgrarian Regulations, Ownership Rights is the strongest and most complete right. In contrast, for HIMASTAN and other members of the community if the status of the land is Usage Rights, as stated by Tony and Kasi, then there is an opportunity for them to own and cultivate the land. The question is only when this opportunity will arise. The reason for this ambiguity is because when the land was relinquished to the Kisol Seminary Pius XII by the Motu Poso land owners in 1967 the time period was not stipulated, the agreement was not written, and the people who relinquished Mbondei land have passed away. This latter position that the Seminary only has claim to usage rights is increasingly difficult to maintain as in the Meetings facilitated by the kecamatan government the Moto Poso heirs reaffirmed, in written form, the relinquishment of land (see Box 4 below). Researchers:Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 79 Who Owns Mbondei Land? Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur 3. The Role of the Adat Functionaries and the Government in the Resolution of the Dispute The Mbondei land ownership dispute between HIMASTAN and the Kisol Seminary Pius XIIhasresultedinunrestandfearamongthecommunityandtheKisolSeminary,aswellas the Motu Poso Land Owners and members of HIMASTAN. Therefore, various parties including adat functionaries and the government, that is both the Kelurahan Tanah Rata government and the Kecamatan Kota Komba government, have attempted to resolve the problem. At the AdatCommunityEmpowermentmeetingon22June2002attheKelurahanhall, the adatfunctionariesandMotuPosolandownersrequestedthatthecultivatorsleadbyAnggalas writeastatementannouncingthattheywouldnotcontinuetheiractivitiessothattheutilisation ofthelandcouldbeordered. Thecultivatorsrejectedthisidea. AccordingtotheMotuPoso land owners Tony and Kanisius Kaja, and the adat functionaries Anton and Dus, it was extremelyimportantthattheyhadaStatementfromtheCultivatorssothattheycouldorder thelandforthecommunityandtheherdingofcattleownedbytheseminary.13 However,ina harsh toneAnggalas stated: "we don't need to write a statement and we will continue to work. We will ignore the warning from the lurah and Motu Poso adat functionaries."14 Therefore,TonyorderedtheillegaloccupiersofMbondeiland: "pleaseceaseyouractivities at Mbondei and leave."15 Because the dispute could not be resolved at the kelurahan level, the problem was taken to the Camat of Kota Komba (see Box 4). Box 4: The Steps Taken by the Kecamatan Government were as follows:16 1. On 22 July 2002 a warning letter was issued to the group of cultivators demanding that they immediately cease all cultivation on the livestock herding land owned by the Kisol Seminary Pius XII and wait for further resolution to this problem at the kecamatan 13 Interview No. 35. 14 Ibid. 15 Ibid. 16 Camat Report regarding the Handling of the Mbondei Herding Land Problem between the Kisol Seminary Pius XII and Anggalus, and his friends (group of cultivators); Notes from the Clarification Meeting about the Cultivation of Cattle Herding Land Owned by the Kisol Seminary Pius XII in Mbondei and the surrounding area, with the Kisol Seminary and other parties involved; Notes from the Mbondei Land Problem Resolution Meeting Between the Kisol Seminary and the group of cultivators/Anggalus's friends; WilhelmusAnggal, format 11,Anggalus, format 12, Kasi, format 14 and Tony, format 35. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 80 Who Owns Mbondei Land? Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur level. However, according to Albertus Simon's report through a letter dated 29 July 2002, the group of cultivators did not adhere to the warning. 2. On 5August 2002 a meeting was held with the group of cultivators to clarify the cultivation of Mbondei land and the surrounding area. 3. On 7 August 2002 there was a meeting with the Kisol Seminary and other parties involved such as the Motu Poso land owners and Tanah Rata adat functionaries. During the meeting an agreement was reached which was set forth in a form of a Statement from the Motu Poso Land Owner Heirs confirming the relinquishing of land in 1967. 4. On 10 August 2002 there was a meeting held between the Kisol Seminary Pius XII, the Motu Poso land owners and Tanah Rata adat functionaries Kasi, Frans, Tony, the Tanah Rata Lurah Secretary, Bene, Klemens, Oris, Peter, Dus and the group of cultivators lead byAnggalus. In the meeting the group of cultivators wrote a statement which said: a. The group of cultivators will adhere to the letter of warning from the Camat b. The land will be returned to its original state c. The group of cultivators will find a solution through the correct channels in line with prevailing legal norms/procedures. 5. However, the statement from the group of cultivators was later withdrawn by the group of cultivators with the reason that they only wrote the statement because they were forced to by the Camat. In addition, the group of cultivators rejected the statement of affirmation about the relinquishment of land which was written by the Motu Poso land owner heirs on 7 August 2002 Following this, the Kecamatan Kota Komba and the Kabupaten Manggarai governments also attempt to resolve the Mbondei land problem. The Civilian Police and Staff from the National Unity and Social Protection Agency as well as the police went to the location on several occasions to meet with the HIMASTAN leader. However, up until now the cultivators are still working the land. This has opened up the opportunity for other members of the community in Tanah Rata to mark out and distribute Mbondei land in line with their own wishes. Thus as it stands with the dispute unresolved the there are multiple groups attempting to claim, distribute and cultivate the land, including the HIMASTAN group as well as the more recent Leke and Kisol groups. Similarly the Kisol Seminary Pius XII is concernedthatbynotassertingtheirrighttohavethelandreturnedtensionandconflictcould occuramongstthosecommunitymembersthatdidnotreceivelandandthosethatdid. Therefore itseemsthatsomelegitimateinterventionisrequiredinordertopreventbloodshedbetween thevariouscommunitygroupsinTanahRata. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 81 Who Owns Mbondei Land? Kelurahan Tanah Rata, Kecamatan Kota Komba, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur Case Chronology: Who Owns Mbondei Land? Date Event 1967 The Kisol Seminary Pius XII began using the land for herding livestock. 2000 The Motu Poso Adat House Deliberation. This was agreed but is yet to be implemented. June 2002 Members of an NGO, HIMASTAN, occupy land used for herding livestock by the local seminary. 19 June 2002 Priest Albertus Simon from the Kisol Seminary Pius XII, Anton and Dus ordered the cultivators to cease their activities and return to their homes. 22 June 2002 At the Adat Community Empowerment adat functionaries and Motu Poso land owners requested that the cultivators, lead by Anggalas, write a statement announcing that they would not continue their activities. The cultivators reject this idea. 25 June 2002 Priest Albertus Simon sends a letter to the Lurah expressing his objection to HIMASTAN's actions. 22 July 2002 A warning letter was issued to the group of cultivators, by the kecamatan government, demanding that they immediately cease all cultivation and wait for further resolution to this problem at the kecamatan level 5 August 2002 Meeting held by the kecamatan government to clarify the land in dispute. 7 August 2002 A meeting including the Kisol Seminary and other parties such as the Motu Poso land owners and Tanah Rata adat functionaries is held. During the meeting an agreement was reached confirming the relinquishing of land in 1967 10 August 2002 A meeting is held which includes all disputing parties, a statement is agreed upon that the cultivators will abide by the kecamatan's letter, (see Box 4 above). Shortly after The cultivators reject this previously agreed upon statement. December 2002 A different group of community members begin marking out land for themselves. March 2003 Again another group begins marking out land. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Peter R. Manggut, Yan Ghewa; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 82 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa Hostility Between the Satar Teu and Kadung: Lingko1 or "Protected Forest?" Summary "...We [the Kadung and the Satar Teu] argued at length in front of the Kapolsek [head of the kecamatan police] because there was nobody [from Satar Teu] who could clarify exactly when lingko Liang Muit2 [owned by the Kadung] was made into a forest reserve and when lingko Watu Aji3 became the possession of the Satar Teu..." Anton Sear This case describes a protracted conflict over a forest on the border of two kampung within the one village, Desa Satar Pundaung. The status of the land and resource was questioned when a group of farmers from one village removed some trees to expand their rice fields. Initially the conflict focused on the use status of the forest but as various attempts at resolution failed the core issue became one of ownership. Attempts were made by various respected institutions, including the Village Head, the church, the Camat and the Bupati's office. Although maintaining dialogue and thus preventing open violence, they largely failed due to perceived biases and lack of commitment of the intervener. Less than full participation in the process and an inability to simultaneously address both the use and ownership interests of the disputing parties were other important factors.The dispute has not completely polarized the two communities against each other; with some residents seeing the issue as administrative dispute, whereas others identifying with their kampung in an "us versus them" sense. In addition the conflict has had negative environmental impacts, causing erosion on the steep slopes between the kampungs. 1. Introduction: The Two Kampungs Share a Border Satar Teu and Kadung are two kampung (hamlet) in Dusun Wae Rea, Desa Satar Punda, KecamatanLambaLeda,KabupatenManggarai.4 KampungSatarTeuissituatedinafertile 1 See Box 1. 2 Lingko Liang Muit is the communal land (part of the protected forest) which the Kadung people claim to own. 3 Lingko Watu Aji is the communal land (same piece of land in the protected forest which the Kadung people claim to own) which the Satar Teu people claim to own. The Kecamatan Lamba Leda government know the area as Watu Aji. In short, Lingko Muit, Lingko Watu Aji and Watu Aji Forest/ Mountain are all used to refer to the same piece of land. 4 Satar Teu and Kadung are the names of the kampung. They are also used to refer to the people who live in the kampung. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 83 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa valleywhichhasanasphaltroadrunningthroughit,connectingReo,SatarPunda,Dampek, Golo Mangung, Golo Munga and Benteng Jawa, the capital of Kecamatan Lamba Leda. Meanwhile,KampungKadungislocatedonthetopofalimestonemountain;2.5kilometers west of Kampung Satar Teu. Asmall river, Kali Satar Teu, separates the two kampung. ThereisasteepandnarrowpathwhichconnectsKampungSatarTeuwithKampungKadung. KampungSatarTeuisthegovernmentadministration,economicandeducationalcenterfor the southern part of Desa Satar Punda. The village head of Desa Satar Punda is an original SatarTeuresident. Hestilllivesin Satar Teu and carries out all his official government duties from Box 1: Lingko ­ a piece of communal land. home. It could be said that his This specific piece of land resembles a spider, with a house doubles as his office. The round circle in the middle, and then what looks like the legs of the spider around the edge. The leg parts, bustling kiosks which line both known as moso, have been divided up amongst the sides of the road and the melodic villagers. A protected forest is a forest which has voicesofthechildrenfromthelocal been set aside for conservation. Both the flaura and SDK(CatholicPrimarySchool)in the fauna are protected, and therefore cannot be Satar Teu enhance the lively chopped down or taken out of the forest. atmosphere which is evident throughout the day in the kampung. Meanwhile, Kadung is a small kampung, with a population of around 200 people, or 40 households. There are not any kiosks in the kampung,nor is there a school. For this reason theKadungpeoplebuytheirdailyrequirementsinReo,andthechildrenfromthe kampung go to school at SDK Satar Tue or the primary school in Reo. The SatarTeu and Kadung people know each other well. They are not only neighbors, but they are also related to one another: "... the Satar Teu and Kadung people are very close. If there is an adat (traditional/customary) ceremony in Satar Teu, the Kadung people are invited as meka ceki (honored guests)." Katrina Imo, Women's FGD in Satar Teu, "... the Kadung and Satar Teu are still related through woe nelu (inter- marriage)" Deddy Sear Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 84 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa Unfortunately, in 1998, the intimacy and strong bonds which had been forged between the twoneighboringkampungweresuddenlybrokenwhentheKadungpeopledrewtheirswords and challenged the SatarTeu people to a fight. "You [the Satar Teu] have no right to prohibit us from clearing and dividing up the lingko [Lingko Liang Muit] because the Kadung people own this lingko. For this reason, we have the right to clear and divide..." Deddy Sear and Anton Sear Meanwhile,theSatarTeupeoplealsoclaimedthattheyweretheownersofthesamepieceof land. 2. History of the Kampungs The Kadung people explained that their ancestors are from Teker, near Benteng Jawa, the capitalofKecamatanLambaLeda. TheirancestorsleftTekerin1918andmovedtoMencaer forseveralyears. Indeed,Mencaerofferedaprosperouslivelihoodandapositivefuturefor theKadungpeople'sancestorswhohadforyearslivedincrowdedandwearyingconditions inTeker. Mencaersuddenlyofferedthemalargeexpanseoffertileland. However disaster struck in Mencaer. People began to die without any good reason, as did their livestock. Mencaer no longer provided the opportunities of previous years. Mencaer was no longer a pleasant place to live. It had become too kolang (hot). The Kadung people's ancestors therefore decided to move Watu Lempe, only a ten minute walk to the west of Mencaer. In Watu Lempe, the Kadung people's ancestors established their new kampung. They named their new kampung Kadung.5 Nowadays, the kampung is better knownasKampungKadungLama(OldKadungKampung). Itisnolongerinhabitedbecause between 1937 ­ 1940, the Kadung people's ancestors moved to the top of the hill and established a new kampung which they also named Kadung. They moved to the top of the hillforstrategicreasons,allowingthemtomonitortheirlandthatwasmadeupofthirtylingko.6 Inaddition,theSatarTeupeoplewouldoftencomeandkillthelivestockintheiroldkampung.7 The Kadung people moved their kampung 500m away from the Kampung Kadung Lama becausetheyrealizedtheimportanceofsurveillance,andtheywerealsoresentfulofthefact thattheSatarTeupeoplewouldoftenstealtheirlivestock. 5 Kadung derives from a name of a type of resin tree which covered the majority of the Watu Lempe landscape at the time. 6 Interview No. B5-525, Anton Sear. 7 Ibid. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 85 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa Meanwhile,respondentsfromSatarTeuexplainedthatin1936someoftheirancestors,left Kampung Nawang, Desa Nampar Tabang, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, and headed towards Laci. From Laci they moved to Weleng, where they stayed for a while, before moving to Nderu, and then Satar Teu. They have remained in Satar Teu ever since. In the same year, fiveoftheSatarTeu'sancestorsboughtthericefieldsinSatarTeufromtheBimanese. "The south part of the rice field backs onto the forest [Watu Aji] which constitutes the border between the Kadung people's lingko [and the Satar Teu peoples'rice fields]." Deddy Sear OneSatarTeurespondentexplainedthatbefore1936,oneoftheKadungpeople'sancestors, Hokka, left Teker and went to Nawang where he requested gendang (drums) and lingko in Satar Punda.8 The forest covered slopes ofWatuAji mountain are extremely steep (75 degrees in places), andthereforeinthe1940s,inanefforttopreventerosionandprotectthewatersourcewhich islocatedonthemountain: "... Lopo Pantar and Lopo Sambu, representing the Kadung people, and Hendrik Bagung,YasintusAnok, Lopo Joka andYahyaTambo, representing the Satar Teu people, made an agreement. They agreed that the Kadung people owned the part of the Watu Aji forest which backed directly onto the cicing (border of a lingko), meanwhile the Satar Teu's rice fields were part of the forest reserve..." Deddy Sear The agreement was validated by the Kecamatan Lamba Leda Mantri Kehutanan9 in the 1980s. From that time, until Hendrik Bagung passed away in 1993, both the SatarTeu and KadungpeopleobeyedtheagreementmadetoprotecttheWatuAjiforest. Theyneveronce triedtoclearordividetheforestlandforagriculturalpurposes. 3. All that is Left of the Watu Aji Forest is a Memory: A Result of the Nio Locang? AbarrenslopeisallthatremainsofonepartoftheWatuAjimountainside,whichwasonce coveredinthickforestandvarioustypesofvegetationwhichweregreenasemeralds. White 8 Interview No. B5-513, Markus Doraemon. 9 Mantri kehutanan ­ forest conservation official at the kecamatan level. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 86 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa sedimentary rocks which sparkle under the sun's rays and unordered tracks where water used to flow in the rainy season lie agape, replacing what used to be lush green forest. InthepasttheKadungandSatarTeupeopledidnotchopdownthebigoldtreeswhichgrew ontheslopesoftheWatuAjiMountainbecausetheyknewthathadtheyofcutthemdownthe Satar Teu River would have dried up and their rice fields would have died. The forest has beenprotectedforanumberofyearsinanefforttopreservethevillager'swatersourcewhich comesfromthemountainsandflowsdowntheSatarTeuRiver. "The Watu Aji forest is a forest reserve which belongs to Desa Satar Punda. The ancestors of the Satar Teu and Kadung people agreed to make it into a forest reserve tens, or even, hundreds of years ago" Comment from Women's FGD Box 2: Nio locang AccordingtoSemBadui,arespondentfrom Nio locang is a type of adat obligation which KampungSatarTeu,anagreementhadbeen indicates that the land which a person is madetoensurethatownersofthericefields working on does not actually belong to wouldnotcutdownthetreesontheedgeof them, rather it belongs to the clan. Nio locang normally includes a chicken and tuak theforestinanefforttopreventerosionand (local alcohol) and must be presented by damage to their fields. The owners of the the moso (piece of the lingko land which rice fields were only allowed to cut the has distributed by the tua teno to certain bushesdownina100mradiusaroundtheir individuals) owners to the tua teno. fieldstopreventmicefromeatingtheircrops and deter wild pigs.10 However, in 1998 the SatarTeu people began to cut trees down in theWatuAji forest. The same forest which the Kadung people call Lingko Muit, the communal land of the Kadung people. TheKadungleadersdidshowanyhostilityaftertheyheardaboutwhattheSatarTeupeople had done to the Kadung lingko. During the same year, three messengers from Kampung KadungweresenttomeetwiththeSatarTeutea teno11 (ritual land leaders) and request that they instruct the SatarTeu villagers who had cut down the trees and cleared parts of Lingko Muit to pay the nio locang to the Kadungtua teno (See Box 2). The Kadung people waited 10 Interview No. B1-511. 11 The tua teno are the ritual land leaders. They have the right to divide up the lingko land between the residents. They are also represent the kampung in land cases [against another kampung or at court] which involve a lingko. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 87 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa three years, yet the Satar Teu villages still did not pay the nio locang. For this reason, the Kadung people reacted: "...in 2001, the Kadung people began to cut down the trees from the top of the mountain in Lingko Muit [WatuAji forest]..." Anton Sear The SatarTeu people witnessed the Kampung Kadung residents clear away the trees from thetopofWatuAjimountain. AlltheadultmalesinKadungwentandcutallthetreesdown, both big and small, with their axes and machetes, leaving the slopes open and bare. The Kadungtuateno,KornelisKoko,arrangedandledthetreefellingexpedition. TheSatarTeu people,especially,thericefieldownersatthebottomoftheWatuAjiMountain,werefrightened bytheiractions. "The forest reserve was chopped down by the Kadung people and made into agricultural plots. We were scared that our rice fields would be affected by erosion." Michael Dua Setara It was quite natural for the Satar Teu villagers to worry about the possibility of erosion because their rice fields are located right at the bottom of the Watu Aji Mountain, and therefore, if the slopes were to erode, it would be their rice fields which would suffer. "... the hill has started to erode with the recent rain. Stones have fallen down and collected at the edge of the rice fields, including mine ..." Garius Simpu The rice field owners were worried by the possibility of erosion, and therefore, they went and saw the Satar Teu tua teno to request his advice on what to do. The Satar Teu tua teno suggested that the land owners report the Kadung people to the village head of Satar Punda for cutting down the trees in the nature reserve. "... the three of us who own the rice fields ... discussed and reported the tree lopping [by the Kadung residents] to the village head of Satar Punda ..." Markus Doraemon Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 88 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa 4. Resolution for the Sake of Reconciliation: First Attempt After receiving the report, theVillage Head of Satar Punda summoned the two Kadung tua teno to a meeting. The summons sent to the two tua teno requested that they come and make a statement regarding the felling of trees in the forest reserve, as reported by the Satar Teuricefieldowners. Thosefieldownerswhohadreportedthecasedidnotattendbutwere represented by their kampung's tua teno. The Satar Punda village secretary facilitated the meeting, and requested statements from the two Kadung tua teno. The statements given by the two Kadung tua teno contradicted the statement given by the Satar Teu tua teno. The Kadung tua teno said that the SatarTeu people had been working thelandinLingkoLiangMuit,whichisownedbytheKadungpeople. TheKadungtuateno therefore asked the Satar Teu tua teno for the Satar Teu rice field owners to admit that the land, which they made into rice fields (at the edge of their old fields), actually belongs to Kadung people. For this reason the Kadung people expected them to pay the nio locang each year. Nevertheless, the Satar Teu tua teno disagreed. They said that the Kadung peoplehadchoppeddowntreesintheforestreserve,andtherefore,theKadungtuateno are obliged to put a stop to the tree felling. Both sides made accusations about each other during the meeting. No agreements were made,therefore: "At the end of the meeting, the village secretary told them all to stop cutting down [trees in] the forest reserve (WatuAji) because their ancestors from Kadung and Satar Teu had for years never cut down or disturbed the forest." Garius Simpul The meeting was unsuccessful because a resolution was not found. In fact, it made the Satar Teu people increasingly nervous because the Kadung people just continued to fell the trees along the northern slope. In 2001 the Village Dead sent a letter to the Kecamatan Lamba Leda police in Dampek to report that the Kadung people had continued to cut down trees in the Watu Aji forest reserve. 5. Second Attempt The head of the Kecamatan Lamba Leda police summonsed the two Kadung tua teno and the Satar Teu tua teno to the kecamatan police station in Dampek. The summons also mentioned the names of the SatarTeu and Kadung people who were obliged to come to the Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 89 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa police station with the tua teno. The head of the Kecamatan Lamba Leda police requested statements from the Kadung and Satar Teu tua teno, and then proceeded to ask them a numberofquestions. TheHeadthepoliceaskedthetwoKadungtuateno aboutthehistory oftheLingkoLiangMuitandthereasonswhytheKadungpeoplehadcutdownthetreesin the forest reserve. The Satar Teu tua teno were asked why they had tried to stop the Kadung people. The Kadung tua teno, with the support of their Kadung representatives, answeredtheheadofthepolice: "...we cut the trees in the forest down because it's our lingko [the Kadung people's lingko], and we therefore have the right to clear and divide the land into agricultural plots as we like. If it is a nature reserve [protected forest], when was it decided? ...how big is it? Where are the borders? And who made the decision?" Kornelis Koko The head of the police did not answer the Kadung tua teno's questions, but turned his head towards the Satar Teu tua teno as if to request a response from them. The Satar Teu tua teno answered the questions, explaining that the Kadung people had annexed the Satar Teu's lingko, namely, Lingko Watu Aji.12 The Kadung people strongly disagreed with the Satar Teu tua teno on this matter, because according to their opinion, there was no such thing as the Watu Aji lingko. Although the Kadung people refuted their allegations, the Satar Teu people maintained that the Kadung people had not only cleared the WatuAji forest, but they had also expropriated their land. The head of the kecamatan police was unable to do anything. He only appealed for the Kadung and Satar Teu people to sit down together and negotiate the matter peacefully. The Kadung people immediately rejected his suggestion: "... because the dispute was getting more and more heated, the head of the kecamatan police separated us and then asked us to resolve the dispute peacefully. Those of us from Kadung didn't want to resolve it peacefully. Meanwhile, the Satar Teu just remained quiet." Garius Simpul and Anton Sear Fromthatpointonwards,thedisputebetweentheSatarTeuandtheKadungpeopleescalated. It started as a dispute over the felling of trees in theWatuAji forest reserve, but then turned intoadisputeovertheownershipofthelingko. TheKadungpeoplemaintainedthattheland wheretheforestreserveislocatedwasactuallytheLingkoLiangMuitwhichbelongstothe 12 Interview No. B5-526, Kornelis Koko. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 90 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa Kadung people. Meanwhile, the Satar Teu people maintained that the same piece of land was the LingkoWatuAji which belongs to the SatarTeu. Even though the head of the kecamatan police was unable to calm the two parties down, he was able to compose a concept for a peace treaty which he hoped both parties would sign. TheSatarTeudelegatessignedthedeclarationwhichdeclaredpeacebetweenthetwodisputing parties. However, the Kadung people once again rejected their efforts to make peace by refusingtosignthetreaty. "Because an agreement wasn't reached, the head of the kecamatan police told us to go back to our kampung and negotiate the allocation and usage right of the disputed land..." Kornelis Koko The Kadung people interpreted the police's appeal as a sign for them to continue clearing the land at the disputed location. Therefore, the Kadung villagers who received the moso at the disputed location: "... continued to cut down the shrubs and fell the trees on the lingko [Liang Muit]" Kornelis Koko The Satar Teu villagers became even more confused when they saw that the Kadung people had returned and continued to clear the land and fell the trees in the Watu Aji forest. They just kept cutting down the trees until almost the whole eastern slope was bare. For this reason, in September 2001, Radus Jammy, a resident of Satar Teu went to the Kecamatan Lamba Leda police station in Dampek and reported that the two parties had started to attack each other in the Watu Aji forest. 6. Apparently There is Meant to be a Fight Going On! On hearing the oral report from the resident of SatarTeu, the head of the kecamatan police got his staff together and headed towards the WatuAji forest. Once at the bottom of the WatuAjimountain,thepoliceheadandhisstaffsoundedthealarm,firingawarningshotinto theair,buttherewasnoresponsefromtheforest. Everythingwasquietwiththeexceptionof the sound of an axe against wood. The head of the police waited for a few minutes, but still everything remained quiet. He looked around the area, but he saw no signs to suggest that a scrimmage was taking place. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 91 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa He saw the SatarTeu residents working in the rice fields as normal, and the school children playingaboutintheplaygroundastheywouldonanyotherday. Forthisreasonhedecided togointotheforest. JustastheyapproachedthesteepslopesoftheWatuAjiMountainthey sawtwoKadungresidents,namely,FancyOdongandSimonJorro,cuttingdowntrees. The police head called the two over to where they were standing and asked, "There is apparently meant to be a fight going on between the Kadung and Satar Teu residents?" Kornelis Koko "... take a look for yourself, there are only two of us here doing what we are doing." Kornelis Koko The head of the Kecamatan Lamba Leda police appeared disappointed and started to walk towards Fancy Odong and Simon Jorro's hut to take cover from the sun. There, the police head appealed to the two men not to get involved in a violent outburst, but instead, to try and find a peaceful resolution to the dispute. After this, the police head and his staff returned to Dampek. After hearing that the kecamatan police had only requested that the two Kadung men try to avoid a brawl breaking out, the Satar Teu residents felt disappointed and just waited to see whether the police were going to take further action. They wanted the police to arrest the two Kadung men, and if need be, beat them till they were black and blue. But, the police head thought differently. He thought that the Satar Teu residents had lied to him, and even tricked him. The news that the police head had not taken serious action against the two Kadung men, who were caught red-handed cutting down the trees, spread rapidly. Apparently, he accepted a bribe from the two Kadung men. 7. Third Attempt: Village Head Proposes Ownership Transferred to Government Meanwhile,theKadungmensaidthataftertheyreturnedfromtheKecamatanLambaLeda police station in Dampek, theVillage Head of Satar Punda wrote a letter requesting the two Kadung tuateno and theirkampung representatives attend a meeting with the head of Desa SatarPunda. TheKadung tuateno,accompaniedbytheirrepresentatives,immediatelyleft forSatarTeu. OncetheyarrivedatthehouseofthevillageheadofSatarPunda,theheadof the kecamatan police proceeded to give them the concept document for the peace treaty andthenrequestedthattheysignit. ThedocumentdeclaredthatLingkoLiangMuitwouldbe Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 92 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa handed over to the government, and it would continue to be preserved as a protected forest. TheKadung tuatenoandtheirfiverepresentatives,again,refusedtosignthedocumentand call a truce. They then returned to Kampung Kadung. TheVillage Head of Satar Punda was offended by the behavior of the Kadungtuateno. He felt angry, and therefore, he threatened to send the concept document for the peace treaty back to the head of the Kecamatan Lamba Leda police. The residents of SatarTeu insisted thatheresolvethecasebetweentheKadungandtheSatarTeuresidentsassoonaspossible. He only gave a brief response to their pleas: "...the problem is out of my hands ... it's already in the hands of the kecamatan police, and therefore, I can't do anything." Garius Simpul After hearing his response, the Satar Teu residents went back to the Kecamatan Lamba Leda police station in Dampek and asked about the progress of the case with the Kadung residents. 8. Forth Attempt: Kecamatan Police In September 2001, the head of the kecamatanpolice once again summonsed the SatarTeu andKadungtuatenotoameeting. TheKadungtuateno,alongwithfourotherrepresentatives left to go to the meeting in Dampek, as did the Satar Teu tua teno and their community representatives. It was the second time that the tua teno and their representatives had to attend a meeting to discuss the same matter at the police station in Dampek. This time the police carried out an investigation. The police requested that tua teno from both kampung explainhowthepeacefulnegotiationswhichherecommendedinthelastmeetingweregoing. The Satar Teu tua teno still wanted to make peace, agreeing to the police's suggestion to carry out peaceful negotiations. Yet, the Kadung tua teno remained adamant that peaceful negotiations were not going to work. What's the point of making peace when the SatarTeu tua teno are not going to admit that the land being used by the SatarTeu residents actually belongs to the Kadung residents. Negotiations once again failed because the Kadung tua teno continued to reject the peace treaty, and what more, they were not willing to part with Lingko Muit. The head of the Kecamatan Lamba Leda police allowed the two parties to return home and wait for further action to be taken.13 13 Interview No. B2-528. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 93 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa 9. Fifth Attempt: Matters Goes to the Camat In the last week of September 2001, the SatarTeu tua teno, with the help of Philip Demma and Huber Lokas, wrote a letter to the Camat of Lamba Leda, reporting what the Kadung residents had done to the Watu Aji forest. On 1 October 2001, the Camat facilitated a meetingwiththeKadungandSatarTeuresidentsinBentengJawa,thecapitalofKecamatan Lamba Leda. The Camat chaired the meeting which was attended by the kecamatan secretary, section head of the kecamatan government, section head of, what was then, the PMD(CommunityDevelopmentAgency),theheadofthekecamatanpoliceandtheKapolpos (Head of Police Post) in Benteng Jawa. The Camat opened the meeting by explaining the benefits of the forest reserve for the community. HethenaskedtheKadungresidentswhytheyhadchoppedthetreesdowninthe WatuAji forest reserve. The Kadung residents responded to the Camat's question in the same way that they responded to the head of the Kecamatan Lamba Leda police's question inDampek: "...we never chopped Box 3: The 1 October 2001 Declaration: down the trees in the (1) That the disputed land, which is the forest reserve, would be forest reserve, we only handed over to the Kecamatan Lamba Leda government cleared the bushes and voluntarily, and following this, the land and any of its by- trees in our lingko, products would belong to the government. namely, Lingko Liang (2) That both the residents of Kampung Kadung and Kampung Muit. If for example Satar Teu would ensure that future generations would not Lingko Liang Muit has fight over, disturb or claim the land. been made into a forest (3) That the Kadung residents could plant crops for one reserve, when was this season (planting season 2001/2002) on the parts of the decided and by who? disputed land which they had cleared. After the 2002 Also, how big [is the harvest [approximatelyAugust 2002], the Kadung residents forest reserve] and would automatically relinquish the land to the Kecamatan where are the Lamba Leda government. borders..." Kornelis Koko (4) That the residents of Kampung Kadung would not be permitted to cut down the trees which remain standing on the disputed land. TheCamatdidnotanswer (5) That the Kecamatan Lamba Leda government would fence theirquestions. Instead,he off the land as of October 2002 to indicate its borders. requestedtheSatarTeutua teno provide their opinion on the matter. The SatarTeu tua teno told the Camat how in the 1940s, an agreement was made between the ancestors of the SatarTeu and the ancestors of theKadung. TheyagreedtomaketheWatuAjiforestintoareserve,whichwouldbepreserved Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 94 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa bybothparties. Yet,theKadungresidentshadsincegoneintotheforestandchoppeddown a large number of the trees. According to the Kadung residents, the SatarTeu resident also told the Camatthat the land whichtheKadungpeopleusedforcropswasactuallypartofLingkoWatuAji,whichbelonged to the SatarTeu: "the whole problem suddenly changed, it was no longer a matter of chopping down trees in the forest reserve, but a problem of land ownership between the Kadung and Satar Teu people" Kornelis Koko 10. Did the Camat of Lamba Leda Act Wisely? The Camatcouldseethateachpartywasnotgoingtobudge,andtherefore,hethreatenedto take serious action against the Kadung residents who had violated the law. The Kadung residents who thought they had done nothing wrong were disappointed with the Camat. They were of the opinion that the Camat had a tendency to take sides with the Satar Teu residents: "It was as if the Camat's statement confirmed that the Kadung people had committed an offense by cutting down the trees. It was just like what the village head of Satar Punda reported." Kornelis Koko To them the threat to take the matter confirmed these, whereas meanwhile, the Satar Teu residents supported the Camat, thinking that it would be best to resolve the case in the courts. The Camat came to a dead end because the Kadung and the Satar Teu residents each believedthattheywereintheright,andtherefore,werenotgoingtochangetheirstance. The Camat gave the Kadung residents a moment to think about the best way to resolve the dispute. After five minutes the Kadung residents came back into the meeting room with a proposition, "... in order to avoid blood being spilt, in other words, a duel to breakout between the Kadung and the Satar Teu residents, the delegates from Kadung have decided to hand the land over to the kecamatan government ..." Kornelis Koko Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 95 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa Theymadethisdecisionbecausetheyhadheardanumberofstoriesabouthowseveralland cases in Manggarai which had been taken to the courts had ended in a duel. They did not wanttheirfamiliesandrelativestosufferormeettheirdeathinbattle. The CamatputtheagreementinwritingandmadeboththeKadungandSatarTeudelegates signit. ThedeclarationwaswitnessedbytheCamatandhisstaff,theheadoftheKecamatan Lamba Leda police, and the Kapospol from Benteng Jawa. The Camat and the SatarTeu residents were satisfied with the results of the meeting. Meanwhile, the Kadung delegates returned to their kampung and reported what they had done. "... none of the [Kadung] residents agreed with the decision. Therefore, the Kadung residents wrote a letter to the Camat in an effort to reverse the agreement which they had already signed in front of the Head of the Kecamatan Lamba Leda police and the Camat." Kornelis Koko The Kadung people assumed that the dispute had come to an end because the Camat of Lamba Leda did not respond to their letter, nor did he build the fence as outlined in paragraph five of the 1 October 2001 declaration. 11. Two Years Later On 11 January 2003, the Kadung people built a fence between Lingko Liang Muit, which theyclaimedtobetheirland,andtheSatarTeuresident'sland. Theyinsertedwoodenfence postsallalongthewesternsideoftheSatarTeuresident'sricefields,meaningthattheSatar TeuricefieldswereincludedinLingkoLiangMuit. TheresidentsofSatarTeuwerebusywith a reception for the Bishop, and therefore, they could only watch from afar as the Kadung residentsseizedtheirfields.14 The Satar Teu residents could not bear to watch what was happening, and therefore, the Satar Teu tua teno ran home, took the gong from the rumah gendang15 and began to hit it repeatedly,signalingfortheSatarTeuresidentstogatherround. Intheblinkofaneyelidthe SatarTeuresidentshadfilledthebackyardoftheSatarTeutuateno'shouse. Theygathered 14 Interview No. B5-513, Markus Doraemon. 15 Rumah gendang ­ a house or hall where the tua teno and the respected adat figures have their meetings and make important decisions, including decisions about lingko. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 96 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa and heard the Satar Teutua teno officially announce that there were people trespassing on SatarTeu land.16 AssoonastheKadungpeopleheardthegongsound,andthenthethreatstoattack,theyfled inthedirectionofKampungKadung. Fortunately,theywereabletoescapeandavertaduel between the two kampungs. AftertheSatarTeuresidentssuccessfullyexpelledtheKadungresidentsfromtheirfields,they went and removed all the border posts, which the Kadung people had just erected. This happenedonanumberofoccasions. EverytimetheSatarTeuresidentsremovedtheposts, the Kadung residents would go back and put them in again. This continued to happen until onedaywhentheSatarTeuresidentsbecamesofedupwiththedebaclethattheydecidedto justleavethefencestanding.17 Aware that the dispute was becoming heated, three residents of SatarTeu requested that the village head of Satar Punda write a letter to the Camat of Lamba Leda in the hope that he wouldmakeavisittothelocationtoseewhatwashappening. Basedonthereportwrittenby thevillagehead: "the Camat and the Head of the Kecamatan Lamba Leda police made a visit to Satar Punda to take a look. After that they [the Camat and the head of the kecamatan police] left without saying anything, even though they signed the agreement [at the kecamatan office in Lamba Leda]." Garius Simpul The women in Kampung Satar Teu were also very disappointed by the fact that theCamat and the head of the kecamatan police did not take any action against the Kadung residents for putting up a fence along what they considered the border between their linkgo and the SatarTeuresident'sfields. "If the government was taking the whole issue seriously, the [Satar and Kadung] dispute would have been over and done with by now, but the Camat appeared not to care..." Women's FGD 16 Interview No. B5-513, Markus Doraemon, Interview No. B5-513, Garius Simpul and Interview No. B5-511,SemBadui. 17 Interview No. B1-513, Markus Doraemon. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 97 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa Meanwhile, the three SatarTeu residents, whose rice fields were fenced off by the Kadung residents,heldameetinganddecidedtoreportthedisputetotheBupatiofManggarai. They hopedtoexplainalltheattemptswhichhadmadetotryandresolvethelanddisputebetween the Satar Teu and Kadung residents, including the meeting facilitated by the Camat on 1 October2002. ThethreemenwenttotheKabupatenManggaraiofficeinRutenginFebruary 2003, but they were unable to meet with the Bupati in person because he was attending a meetingoftheDPRD(KabupatenParliament). Asaresult,theywereonlyabletotalktothe Kabupaten Manggarai assistant secretary. Unfortunately, after they had explained their objectives to the assistant secretary, they were told that it would be best that they meet with HeadoftheDivisionforVillageAffairs. However,hewasalsoinaDPRmeetingatthetime. OnestaffmemberfromtheVillageAffairsDivisiondidmeetwiththemandthenwentandhad a look for the letters from the Kecamatan Lamba Leda government about the Satar Teu- Kadung land dispute, but it would appear that there was not any. He was unable to do anything to help, except he did promise that he would send a telex as well as telephone the Camat of Lamba Leda.18 "We will consult with the Local Office of Forestry. We will ask the [staff from the] Local Office of Forestry to visit the location because the dispute concerns a forest/rice field reserve. You may go home now. Our integrated team from the local government will go and evaluate the situation with the kecamatan [government] and Local Office of Forestry." Markus Doraemon In an effort to confirm the promise made by the staff member from the Division of Village Affairs,theyalsowenttotheLocalOfficeofForestrywheretheymetwiththeDeputyHead of the department who had heard about their report. He also promised to make a visit to the locationwherethelanddisputewastakingplace.19 Afterthat,theyreturnedtoSatarTeuand begantoprepareforthevisitbytheintegratedteam,nevertheless: "...no integrated team turned up, rather the Bupati of Manggarai sent a letter to the Camat of Lamba Leda ordering him to take care of the matter. However, until today [when the research was taking place], the Camat had not taken heed of the Bupati's letter ... he has not taken further action. Garius Simpul 18 Interview No. B5-513, Markus Doraemon. 19 Interview No. B5-513, Markus Doraemon. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 98 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa The government (kecamatan and kabupaten) took no further action. The three Satar Teu mendecidedthattheyweredealingwithacriminalcasewhichneededtobeprocessedinthe courts. They went to both the kecamatan and kabupaten police where they told them how the Kadung residents had come and seized their land. However, their effort to process the casethroughthecourtscametoadeadendbecausethepolicewereunabletofileanaccusation against the Kadung residents without the Satar Teu residents producing a land certificate indicatingthattheyownedthedisputedland.20TheSatarTeuresident'seffortstoresolvethe casepeacefullysuddenlycametoastandstill. Withlittlehopeleft,theVillageHeadofSatarPundaconcludedthattheKadungresidentsno longertrustedhimbecauseinadditiontoowningaricefieldatthesiteofthedisputedland,he isalsoadescendentoftheSatarTeu.21 Whatelsecouldbedonetoresolvethedispute? The priests, and even the Bishop of Ruteng requested that the Kadung residents stop chopping down the forest. Yet, the Kadung residents had even ignored the voice of the church.22 12. When Peace is Rejected: What Happened to the Solidarity of Past Times? TheSatarTeuresidentsdescribedtheirrelationshipwiththeKadungresidentsthroughoutthe durationoftheconflictinthefollowingway, "The feeling is still quite normal because it's not like the Kadung people aren't close to us. We are all related through marriage. They take [marry] our relatives ...I personally [respondent from Satar Teu] am with someone from Kadung... " Markus Doraemon "Why be scared? The problem is at the office. Meanwhile, outside [the office] we are still related to the Satar Teu people. Some of them married Kadung people, and the other way round." Yeni Helas Indeed such expressions of intimacy relieved several people, nevertheless, what happened between the Satar Teu and Kadung residents has negatively impact on inter-kampung harmony. For example, on 11 January 2003, when the noble Bishop of Ruteng Mgr.23, EdwardSamuel,madeavisittoSatarTeu,notonepersonfromKadung(where100%ofthe 20 Interview No. B5-513, Markus Doraemo 21 Interview No. B1-530, Garius Simpul. 22 Interview No. B1-530, Garius Simpul. 23 Interview No. B5-526, Kornelis Koko. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 99 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa villagers are Catholic) attended Mass at the SatarTeu chapel, even though the Kadung and Satar Teu are part of the same parish, namely the Reo parish. Instead, on the same day the Kadungpeoplechosetobuildafencetoindicatethebordersaroundthedisputedland,only meters away from the SatarTeu chapel. Another indication of the abnormal feelingwithin the community became evident when the Kadung residents declined an invitation from the Satar Teu residents to attend the cepaceremony (a party held to thank God for the harvest) in 2002.24 Further,someKadungresidentsexplainedthattheywerehurtbythewaythevillagegovernment treatedthem: "We Kadung residents are like the wild kids. The government [staff] never came back here after we planed the lodok [division of land in a lingko] in Lingko Muit in 1999 ... also we didn't get any of the OPK (Special Market Operation, for the sale of cheap rice) for two periods because the village staff didn't come around to collect the money here [in Kadung] ... the Village Head used to often come to Kadung [but] now he's like a stranger to us ... why does he have to take the side of the Satar Teu [residents]?" Anton Sear 13. The Government Should... Accordingtotheauthor,theSatarPundavillagegovernmentwasprejudicedandhadatendency to blame the Kadung residents and consequently was inappropriate to act as a 3rd Party Mediator. Also, it would seem that theCamat of Lamba Leda forced the Kadung residents into a corner during the meeting on 1 October 2001, and, as a result, the Kadung residents became defensive and rejected efforts made to resolve the case peacefully.25 Supposing the Village Head of Satar Punda and the Camat of Lamba Leda played a more constructive role and acted more wisely and fairly during the meeting on 1 October, the Kadung residents may not have sent the letter to try and reverse the agreement. This could have meant that the land dispute between the SatarTeu and the Kadung residents may have finishedthere. 24 Junior High School 25 Refer to Krispinus M. Modes' statement, "The problem is between the church and the YPTL, meanwhile we heirs are only here to arbitrate, explaining the status of the church's land and its borders based on the stories told to us by our parents. Consequently, there are no problems for the heirs." See Interview No. 523. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 100 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa Meanwhile,theKabupatenManggaraigovernment'sindifferencetowardsthereportsmade bytheSatarTeuresidentscouldbelikenedtosettingatimebombwhichcouldexplodeany time. Itisthereforenotunreasonabletothinkthataviolentoutburstorduelwasgoingtotake placeatanygivenmoment. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 101 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa Case Chronology: Hostility Between the Satar Teu and Kadung Date Event 1918 The ancestors of the Kadung people left Teker (after a cholera and dysentery epidemic in the area). They searched for an empty expanse of land with enough water to fulfill their daily needs. 1936 ­ 1937 · Kadung people from Teker Lamba Leda went to Laci and requested lingko and gendang (drums) in Satar Punda from the head of the Nawang clan. The Nawang clan grant their request. 1940 ­ 1944 · Hendrik Bagung, Herry Ambot, and Tambo buy more rice fields (near the disputed land) from the Bimanese. · The rice field owners and the Kadung people made an agreement, prohibiting the felling or clearing of trees in the forest. 1970s The Head of the Local Office of Forestry, Herman Hatul, declared the Watu Aji mountain/forest a forest reserve (protected). 1989 When Fitalis Hemo (Kadung) relinquishes his position as head of RT (neighborhood unit) Kadung. The Kadung elders request that the tua teno (ritual land leaders) divide Lingko Watu Lempe between the residents. 1989 The Kadung residents divide the Lingko Watu Lempe land, ignoring the Village Head's prohibition. 1998 The Satar Teu started to cut trees down from the bottom of the hill. 1998 Lorens Ladam and Wilhelmus Toto (from Kadung) meet with the Satar Teu tua teno, Deddy Sear, to request that he tell the Satar Teu residents that they are obliged to pay the nio locang to the Kadung tua teno 2001 The Kadung residents became fed up that Satar Teu resident have not paid the nio locang, and therefore begin to fell the trees and clear the forest. 2001 The village head of Satar Punda reprimanded the Kadung residents who had started to clear the forest in Lingko Muit. 2001 The Kadung tua teno officially divided Lingko Muit into rectangular blocks which they then gave to six Kadung residents. August 2001 Four Satar Teu residents reprimanded the Kadung residents who had cleared the trees from the top of the mountain. 23 August 2001 Bene Raha (rice field owner) wrote a letter from all the Satar Teu residents to the village head of Satar Punda regarding the felling of trees by the Kadung residents in the forest reserve. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 102 Hostility Between the Satae Teu and Kadung Desa Satar Punda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author: Yan Ghewa 28 August 2001 The village head of Satar Punda handed the case over to the Kecamatan Lamba Leda police. September 2001 On the same day, the head of the Kecamatan Lamba Leda police and a number of his staff made a visit to the site where a fight had broken out. 8 Sept. 2001 The head of the Kecamatan Lamba Leda police held a second meeting with the Satar Teu and Kadung residents in Dampek. 27 Sept. 2001 The Camat summonsed the Satar Teu and Kadung tua teno and their community representatives to a meeting to try and resolve the dispute. 11 January 2003 The Kadung residents built a fence on the border of the Satar Teu resident's rice fields. February 2003 The rice field owners went to Ruteng, hoping to meet with the Bupati (District Head) of Manggarai and explain to him what had happened. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 103 Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land Desa Tengku Leda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP1 Land Summary The conflict over the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP (Junior High School) land involves both the Benteng Jawa Church and the YPTL (Tengku Leda Education Foundation). The conflict was triggered by both parties' desire to obtain a land certificate for the land in 2001. It was also fueled by their contradictory interpretations of the division of usage rights between the school and the parish in 1956, as well as the division of assets between the SDK (Catholic Primary School) and the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP by the Benteng Jawa parish priest, Peter Geradus M. Mollen in 1978.The village head of Tengku Leda and the Camat of Tengku Leda have made an effort to resolve the dispute. Nevertheless, the outcome has not satisfied a number of parties, including Stafanus D. Asong, the former head of the YPTL managerial board. The YPTL managerial board was eventually dissolved after a meeting was held by the Camat of Lamba Leda on 14 January 2003. Nobody was killed as a result of the conflict; however two teachers were injured after being beaten by the masses outside the Camat's office in Lamba Leda on 14 January 2003. This case is particularly interesting as it indicates how the ambiguity of land ownership can be manipulated and become embroiled in local politics and feuds. In the conclusion the author of the case study notes how the distinction between the land usage rights and ownership rights is at the core of the ambiguity and hence the conflict. 1. Land Certification: Drawing the Curtains on the Status of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land "Bapak Achmad Mbolang handed the land over in 1931. He was a wise man; he gave the land to the mission. It is taboo for us to rehash the past."2 Achmad Djamal 1 Junior High School 2 Refer to Krispinus M. Modes' statement, "The problem is between the church and the YPTL, meanwhile we heirs are only here to arbitrate, explaining the status of the church's land and its borders based on the stories told to us by our parents. Consequently, there are no problems for the heirs." See Interview No. 523. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 104 Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land Desa Tengku Leda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur In1931,thedalu3 ofLambaLeda,UmarAchmadMbolang,orallyagreedtohandovertwo lingko owned by the wa'u4 who lived in the golo or beo5,namely,Lingko Pong Jengok and LingkoWatangTonggangtowhatwasthentheChurch/Mission. Thislandtransactionwhich tookplacein1931wasauthenticatedonpaperin1960bythesame daluandeighteenother heads of kampung or gelarang.6 In addition to using the land in the interests of the church, the land was also used for educational purposes. Based on the results of a musyawarah (meeting where decisions are made based on consensus) with the community, government and the Benteng Jawa Church/Parish, on the 26 September 1956,7 the land usage rights were divided up between the Church/Parish and the school. As a consequence of this, in 1967, a portion of the school's land, became the site for the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP. The Camat of Lamba Leda, Pius Musa (the founder of the SLTP), and the Benteng Jawa Parish Priest, Father Petrus Rahmat, agreed for the land to be used by the SLTP, provided thatitwouldonlybetemporary,whileanewpieceoflandwasfound.8 Problems began to surface in 1978 when one of the SDK buildings began to collapse. The Head of the BP3 (Board of EducationAssistance) at the Benteng Jawa SDK,Aleksander Muda,sentalettertotheYPTL,requestingthattheygivetheSDKbuilding,whichtheSLTP had borrowed in 1967 and had used until now, back to the SDK. After receiving the letter, theHeadoftheYPTL,KlemensKabursentalettertotheBentengJawaParishPriest,Father Geradus M. Mollen, requesting that their assets be divided up amongst the SDK and the SLTP. Father Geradus M. Mollen took heed of the letter from the Head of theYPTLand immediately divided up their assets, that is, the land where the school is located and the buildings,betweentheSDKandSLTP. ThisdivisionofassetsbecametheYPTL'sgrounds forclaimingownershipoftheSt.PaulusBentengJawaSLTPland(SeeBox1). 3 (Bimanese) Leaders of large area in the pre-Dutch administrative system. In the hierarchy they sat below the King, and above the Gelarang. 4 Wa'u is the male decedents of a common ancestor and also means clan, or to descend, See Robert Lawang; Land Conflict in Manggarai, West Flores; UI Press, p. 56. 5 Beo/golo are the traditional villages or settlements in Manggarai which normally consist of one wa'u. 6 Gelarang are the leaders of administrative regions in the pre-Dutch administrative system. They sit below the dalu. 7 According to Stefanus D. Asong the land was divided between the church and the school in 1958. 8 Interview No. 520, Rinus Ruba. See also Interview No. 521, Karlos Mbada, indicating that the church's land and the SDK building belonged to YASUKMA and was only used temporarily for educational activities while they waited for the construction of a special SLTP building. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 105 Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land Desa Tengku Leda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur Box 1: Initial 1978 Response to the Division of Land The BP3 SDK did not make a fuss over what the Parish Priest, Father Geradus M. Mollen had done. This is because the Parish Priest was also the Branch Head of YASUKMA [Manggarai Catholic Community's Schooling Foundation] within the Church/Parish. The Parish Priests are responsible for all educational activities within the YASUKMA catholic schools in their Church/Parish. The problem of the SLTPland ownership became even more apparent in 2001 when the Head of YPTL, Stefanus D.Asong, sent a letter9 to the BPN (National LandAgency) in Manggarai, requesting certification of the St. Paulus SLTPland. His reasons for doing this included: Firstly, according to Stefanus'understanding of `the division of the usage rights between the school and the church' on 26 September 1956,10 the land was not provided solelyfortheSDK,butalsoforothereducationpurposes,includingtheSLTP. Secondly, in 1978, the Benteng Jawa Parish Priest, Father Geradus M. Mollen drew up a document to acknowledge the division of land and buildings between the Church/Parish and theYPTL. ThedocumentclarifiedthattheSt.PaulusBentengJawaSLTPbuilding,locatedontheland owned by the church, was indeed intended for the SLTP.11 Thirdly, in 1982, Frumens Iso (oneof DaluUmarAchmadMbolang'sdescendents)fencedofftheSLTPlandandclaimed that the land belonged to his parents. The Camat of Lamba Leda resolved the problem by makingtheYPTLcompensateFrumensIsowithRp.1million. TheYPTLagreedtopaythe compensation, and as a result they suddenly felt that they owned the SLTPland. Fourthly, Law No. 18, 2001 on `Foundations' has been formulated to explain the status of assets, including,landownedbyafoundation. Inaccordancewiththelaw,themanagerialboardof the YPTLas the supervisors of the SLTP, hoped to obtain an explanation about the legal ownership status and the borders of the SLTPland. And fifthly, both the Church/Parish and theYPTLwantedclarificationonthestatusandbordersofthelandeachofthemwastyingto claim. ThecertificationprocessoftheSLTPlandunderthenameoftheYPTLwasdelayedbecause theBentengJawaChurch/ParishsentanobjectionlettertotheVillageHeadofTengkuLeda. Intheletter,theyrejectedthecertificationofthelandunderthenameoftheYPTLanddemanded 9 Filed by YPTL as No. 433/H 21 10 20/YPTL D B 4/VII/2001. 10 Stefanus D.Asong stated, "In the history of the church and SLTP land which covers the area between Wae Ngkono and Wae Buka ... the land was handed over by Dalu Umar [Pius Musa's father] in his letter in 1958. He mentions in his letter that the public land was divided between the school and the station or church. The land given to the school was intended for the SD (Primary School) and the SLTP. See Interview No. No. 502. 11 Interview No. 502, Stefanus D. Asong. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 106 Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land Desa Tengku Leda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur that the land be returned to the Church/Parish. Copies of the letter were also forwarded to the Kabupaten Manggarai BPN in Ruteng, the Camat of Lamba Leda in Benteng Jawa and the Bishop of Ruteng in Ruteng. The Church/Parish considered the following factors in formulatingtheirobjectionstothecertificationoftheSt.PaulusSLTPlandunderthenameof theYPTL. Firstly, based on their understanding of the division of usage rights of the land which took place in 1956, the land would remain an asset which belonged to the diocese. Secondly,asanassetofthediocese,anychangestothestatusofthelandmustbeauthorized by the Bishop. For this reason, according to Priest Lambert Jalang, the Parish Priest at the time,andRinusRuba,theHeadoftheDPP(ParishPastoralBoard),thedocumentdraftedby Father Geradus M. Mollen in 1978 regarding the division of assets between the SLTPand SDKisinvalidbecauseitisinconflictwiththeCatholicChurch'sregulations. Meanwhile, according to the Camat of Lamba Leda,Andreas Embong, Father Geradus M. Mollen's document is not legally binding (See Box 2).12 Furthermore, they explained that in their objectionletterthattheBentengJawaChurch/Parishdidnotjustrejectthecertificationofthe SLTPlandunderthenameoftheYPTLanddemanditsreturn,buttheyalsowantedtheSLTP toeithershutormove. Box 2: Father Geradus M. Mollen's Letter on the Division of Assets According to Rinus Ruba, the document drafted by Father Geradus M. Mollen on the division of assets between the SLTP and SDK in 1978 was awkward and quite amusing because it was made by the YPTL and signed by the Benteng Jawa parish priest, Father M. Mollen without the agreement or knowledge of the Benteng Jawa SDK BP3 (Agency for Educational Assistance). The Benteng Jawa SDK BP3 was the party who recommended that the YPTL return the SLTP building to the SKD.13 2. Collusion and Nepotism: Commitments Neglected in theAdministration of the YPTL and the SLTP "The St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTPis managed by theYPTL, which has a managerial board prone to change. In addition to the constantly changing managerial board, theYPTL's policy and programs also change frequently." Krispinus M. Modes "While Pius Musa was the Head of the YPTL, the YPTL never laid claim to the land, where the SLTP is located. This is because as the founder of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP, [Pius Musa] knew the exact status of the land." Rinus Ruba 12 Interview No. 502, Stefanus D. Asong. 13 Interview No. 520. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 107 Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land Desa Tengku Leda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur ThecontroversyregardingthecertificationoftheSLTPlandwhichinvolvesboththeYPTL and the Benteng Jawa Church/Parish is actually the accumulation of a number of problems which emerged within the administration of both theYPTLand SLTPbetween 1992 and 2003. StefanusAsong has been the head of theYPTLsince 1992. The St. Paulus Benteng SLTPwas founded based on the cooperation of the Kecamatan Government, the Church/ Parishandthecommunity.14 ThechurchplayedalargeroleintheestablishmentoftheSLTP. The Benteng Jawa Parish Priest, Father Petrus Rahmat did not only provide them the land andtheBentengJawaSDKbuildings,buthealsohelpedtobuildthreehousesfortheteaching staff. The SLTP is managed by the YPTL. It was established in accordance with the existing regulations at the time, and authorized by a notary public in 1974. However, the Benteng Jawa Church/Parish is not mentioned in the official YPTL establishment document, even though a number of the assets used by the SLTP are owned by the Church/Parish. In spite of everything that happened, one respondent, Krispinus M. Modes, a descendent of the original land owners, was not all that persistent in his efforts to lay claim to the school land. Furthermore, after Pius Musa (Krispinus M. Modes'father) passed away, they never became involved in the administration of the YPTL and the SLTP's educational policies. Krispinus M. Modes stated: "We have no desire to become involved in the administration of theYPTL, because in the official establishment document [from the notary public] it is clear that the YPTL does not belong to only a few people, but it is owned by the whole Kecamatan Lamba Leda community. For this reason, we are conscious of the situation and do not feel as if we own the YPTL or the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP," Krispinus M. Modes Meanwhile,inrecentyears,theHeadoftheYPTL,StefanusD.Asongformulatedanumber ofpolicieswhichhavedeviatedfromtheoriginalobjectivesoftheSLTP. TheChurch/Parish and theYPTLare no longer able to work together. In addition, the managerial board of the YPTL,thegovernment,communityandthechurchnolongerrespectandvalueoneanother, noristheresoundcommunicationrunningbetweenthem. Infact,itisthecompleteopposite; 14 According to Amis Machmud (Interview No. 522) each resident of Kecamatan Lamba Leda was required to contribute Rp 25, which was collected in installments over a period of three years so that the SLTP could be established. However, according to Yosef Timbuk, Bernadus Radu and Paskalis Jodat (Interview No. 10) the residents of Lamba Leda each had to contribute Rp. 3,500, one wooden beam and one house plank so that the SLTP could be opened in 1967. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 108 Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land Desa Tengku Leda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur theyaresuspiciousandhavesomeprejudiceviewsoneachanother. TheYPTLneverinvolves theChurch/ParishintheformulationofpoliciesorprogramswhichrelatetotheSLTP. They didnotevenconsultwiththeChurch/Parishwhentheytriedtoobtainalandcertificateforthe SLTPlandunderthenameoftheYPTLin2001.15 Onerespondent,AmirMachmudclarified: "After Stefanus D.Asong became the Head of theYPTL, the administration and management of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTPchanged, diverging from the original agreement made in 1967, that the SLTP was owned by the whole Kecamatan Lamba Leda community and managed jointly by the Kecamatan Lamba Leda government, the Benteng Jawa Church/Parish and the whole Kecamatan Lamba Leda community. It was as if Stefanus D.Asong's family intended to claim personal ownership of the school. As descendents of the original owners, we do not feel satisfied by Stefanis D. Asong's leadership because only teachers from Congkar and Larantuka are employed, meanwhile we are not taken on."16 Amir Machmud Rinus Ruba substantiated Amir Machmud's statements by saying that: "The Head of the YPTL, Stefanus D. Asong did not act democratically when it came to his everyday duties. For example, he would hire teachers and other YPTL staff without consulting with any of the other people on the YPTL managerial board. The teachers who were hired did not have the qualifications which were required, and he would always put his own family first." Rinus Ruba 3. The Cause of the Conflict Between the Church and the YPTL The land ownership conflict began as a result of a divide in the managerial board of the YPTL, namely, between the Head, Stefanus D. Asong and his Secretary, Rinus Ruba (who was also the Head of the Benteng Jawa Parish Pastoral Board). This took place when they were both competing for the top position in theYPTL. Their squabble for the position as Head of theYPTLresulted in Rinus Ruba being moved from the Benteng Jawa SDK,whichismanagedbyMarselinaAsi,StefanusD.Asong'srelative,totheSDI(Presidential 15 Interview No. 521, Karlos Mbada 16 Interview No. 522. Refer also to Karlos Mbada's statement (Interview No. 521) indicating that when Stefanus D. Asong became the Head of the YPTL, the government, YPTL managerial board, community, and the church no longer cooperated, particularly in regard to the administration of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 109 Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land Desa Tengku Leda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur DirectivePrimarySchool)inBeaNanga. ThemovecausedRinusRuba'srelationshipwith StefanusD.Asongtobecomeinharmoniousandunhealthy. AccordingtoStefanusD.Asong, another consequence of the move was that Rinus Ruba, in the capacity of the Head of the BentengJawaParishDPP(ParishPastoralBoard),wrotealettertotheYPTLtoensurethat theYPTLwould only be given the authority to manage the SLTPuntil the end of the 2002/ 2003financialyear. Afterthis,thechurchwouldbegivencontroloftheadministrationand management of the SLTP. Another informant, Karlos Mbada, disagreed with this claim, statingthattheChurch/ParishwasnotintendingtotakeovertheSLTP,butrathertheywere only hoping to clear up the status of the church land where the SLTPis located. InameetingheldwithrespectedfiguresintheBentengJawaChurch/Parishonthe25October 2003,theBishopofRutengsaid: "... the core of the problem between the YPTL and the Benteng Jawa Parish is a personal problem based on family sentiments which has spread to encompass the SLTP." Another informant, Karlos Mbada, stated: "... the problem is actually very small when there is mutual respect and communication between the YPTLmanagerial board, church, government and community." KrispinusM.Modesexplained: "The problem is between the church and the YPTL, meanwhile we heirs are only here to arbitrate, explaining the status of the church's land and its borders based on the stories told to us by our parents." 4. The Conflict Resolution Mechanism Anumberoftheproblemsmentionedaboveresultedindifferencesofopinions,concurrent claimsfortheland,andadisputebetweentheChurch/ParishandtheYPTLovertheownership status of the SLTP. All of this caused a precarious atmosphere and general restlessness withinthecommunity. TakingtheproblemsbetweentheYPTLandtheBentengJawaChurch/Parishintoaccount, theCamatofLambaLedaandanumberofotherrespectedcommunityfiguresinKecamatan Lamba Leda and DesaTengku Leda made an effort to resolve the conflict using a peaceful Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 110 Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land Desa Tengku Leda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur familystyleapproach. On2August2001,thevillageheadofDesaTengkuLeda,EdyKomeng, facilitatednegotiationsbetweenthetwodisputingparties. First,theYPTLacknowledgedthat the land, where the SLTPis located, belongs to the Church/Parish. This confession meant that if theYPTLhad the desire to construct a new building on the disputed site, they would first have to consult with the owners of the land, namely, the Benteng Jawa Church/Parish. Second,theYPTLindicatedthattheywouldnotobjecttothecertificationoftheland,which is used for the SLTP's educational purposes, under the name of the Ruteng diocese. ThemanagerialboardoftheYPTLwasnotfaithfultotheagreementtheymadeon2August 2001. Thiswasprovenwhen,in2002,theyweregivenRp.30millioninvoluntarycontributions (Imbal Swadaya) to construct a new class room at the site of the SLTP. At that time, the Head of theYPTL, Stefanus D.Asong built the classroom on the land owned by the church (where the SLTPis located) without first asking permission from the Church/Parish. As a result,theBentengJawaParishPriest,FatherLambert,interceptedthetruckcarryingallthe buildingmaterialintothevillage. Nevertheless,theYPTLpaidnoattentiontoFatherLambert Jalang'sactions. Infact,theYPTLjustcontinuedtoconstructtheirnewclassroom. Forthat reason,theChurch/Parishissuedaletter,prohibitingtheYPTLtobuildonthechurch'sland. Furthermore,theydecidedthattheYPTLcouldonlyusetheChurch/Parish'slanduntilJuly 2003. However,becausetheYPTLdidnottakeheedoftheprohibition,theChurch/Parish, through the Benteng Jawa Parish DPP, requested that the Camat of Lamba Leda facilitate a meetingwiththeChurch/ParishandtheYPTL. 5. 14 January 2003 Incident: The Final Blow in the Conflict Between the Church and the YPTL? In line with the request of the Benteng Jawa Parish DPP, the Camat of Lamba Leda held a meeting on 14 January 2003 in the kecamatan office in an effort to resolve the conflict between the Church/Parish and theYPTL. The Camat of Lamba Leda chaired the meeting which was attended by the Kapolpos (Head of the Police Service Post) in Benteng Jawa, Babinsa (Noncommissionedlawenforcementofficer),adat leaders,stafffromtheCamat's office,theYPTLmanagerialboard,DPP,BentengJawaParishCouncil,twomembersofthe DPRD (Kabupaten Parliament), the Head of the SLTP, severalYPTLteachers, two priests from the Benteng Jawa Church/Parish as well as the descendents of Dalu UmarAchmad Mbolang. Inaddition,therewerealsoseveralothermembersofthecommunitywhocameto the kecamatan office to look on from outside. The Camat of Lamba Leda briefed the people in attendance and then recapitulated some of themainpointsfromthemeetingwhichwasfacilitatedbythevillageheadofTenkuLeda,Edy Komeng,on2August2001. Afterthat,the CamatallowedboththechurchandtheYPTLto Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 111 Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land Desa Tengku Leda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur read a statement and express their thoughts. The Church/Parish representatives explained that the land, where the SLTPis located, is owned by the Benteng Jawa Church/Parish and thattheywouldbereclaiming usagerightsintheverynearfuture. Meanwhile,theHeadof the YPTL, Stefanus D.Asong read out a statement which consisted of four main points. Firstly, that theYPTLhad attended the meeting to show their respect for the Kecamatan LambaLedagovernment. Secondly,thattheYPTLwouldmaintaintheirancestor'sfightto establishandruntheSLTP. Thirdly,thattheYPTLwasopposedtothemusyawarah,because they had already been to a musyawarah which had raised the same issues, nevertheless all thepreviousagreementsmadewerenotbinding. Fourthly,thatifanypartyfeltthattheyhad been inconvenienced or disadvantaged by the establishment of the SLTP, then it would be advised that they take the matter to court. After reading the statement he left the meeting room, followed by two teachers from the foundation, namely, Rikus Aso (Stefanus D. Asong's son) and Dami Endok. Achmad Djamal (a member of the YPTL managerial board) was quite shocked that Stefanus D. Asong left the meeting room. He stated: "... I was so embarrassed; this is the first time I've experienced such a thing in my life ... a leader who behaves as he does. He showed no respect whatsoever for the Camat. I'm so embarrassed. But, the other people at the meeting didn't care about him [Stefanus D.Asong] ... the meeting just kept going." Meanwhile,AchmadDjamalalsodescribedtheatmosphereinroomwhenStefanusD. Asongleftthemeeting: "I [Achmad Djamal] saw that the other members of the managerial board had suddenly become confused. They started looking my way. I decided that I would remain in the room. I was concerned that if I were to leave the room, the situation may have turned nasty and blood may well have been spilt. My concerns turned into reality. A few moments later we heard a scream outside the room, right in front of the kecamatan office. The two St. Paulus SLTP teachers were being beaten up." Another respondent, Ferdi Manus added that he heard people being beaten: "The people at the Camat's office thronged around to witness the spectacle. They screamed and ran here and there, until eventually the atmosphere became quite tense." Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 112 Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land Desa Tengku Leda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur RinusRubaandAmirMachmudexplainedthatoncethey(StefanusD.Asong,RikusAsoand Dami Endok) had stepped outside the meeting room, they were ambushed by a group of villagerswhowereoutsidelookinginonthemeeting. Themembersofthecommunitywho were standing out the front of the kecamatan office requested that they go back to the meeting, but they did not want to. Eventually, a scuffle broke out between the villagers and Dami Endok and RikusAso. At first they were just pushed around when they refused to returntothemeeting,however,beforelongithadturnedintoafight. ThetwoSLTPteachers were beaten by the masses until they had bruises all over their face and body. In fact, Rikus Aso was injured quite badly and at one stage he even had blood coming of his nose.17 RinusRubaandAmirMachmud'sversionofeventswasquitedifferenttowhatDamiEndok described "After reading out the foundation's statement, the Head of the YPTL, Stefanus D.Asong, left the meeting room. Once he was outside the Camat's office, he [Stefanus] was suddenly ambushed by the masses. For this reason, Sius Doro [Babinsa] and I [Dami Endok] stood up and left the meeting room to try and intervene, stopping the masses from beating Stefanus. D. Asong. But, in doing this I was suddenly targeted and beaten by the masses until I fell down." Dami Endok accepted what had happened as fate, and therefore, he did not think about taking revenge or even taking the incident further. Different to Dami Endok, RikusAso reportedtheincidenttothepolice. Theyhavetakennoactionuntilnowanditwouldseem that the problem has been disregarded. Theatmosphereoutsidethekecamatanofficedisturbedthecourseofthemeetingwhichwas taking place inside. For this reason the Camat stopped the meeting temporarily. Kapolpos and Babinsa broke up the fight and then lectured the community members who had been involved. They then continued with the meeting. Finally the ancestors of Dalu, Achmad Mbolang,andthemembersofthemanagerialboardoftheYPTL,whowerestillinvolvedin themeeting,decidedtodissolvethewholemanagerialboardundertheauthorityofStefanus D.Asong and form a board of caretakers to manage the SLTP. Both the ancestors of the Dalu and the remaining members of theYPTLmanagerial board did not trust Stefanus D. 17 According to Stefanus D. Asong, Rikus Aso and Dami Endok were tortured and beaten, until they were swollen and bruised, by the masses outside the meeting room. The reason they were beaten had something to do with the musyawarah which had been facilitated by the Camat of Lamba Leda. Interview No 502. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 113 Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land Desa Tengku Leda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur Asong'sleadershipanymore,especiallyafterhehadwalkedoutofthemeetingsoabruptly. Everybody at the meeting agreed to the formation of theYPTLBoard of Caretakers. ThemembersoftheYPTLmanagerialboardwhowereleftinthemeetinggaveastatement whichincludedthefollowingmainpoints. First,thatthelandwheretheSLTPislocateddoes indeedbelongtotheBentengJawaChurch/Parish,asindicatedbytheagreementsignedon the2August2001. Secondly,thattheyweregoingtoofficiallydissolvetheYPTL,sayingthat itnolongerhadthelegalrightstomanagetheSLTP,andhenceforth,theYPTLwasstripped of its authority. Thirdly, that they were prepared to have the government select a board of caretakerswhowouldberesponsiblefortheadministrationandmanagementoftheSLTPas ofthedaytheyissuedtheirstatement. ThewholeYPTLmanagerialboardsignedthestatement. TheYPTLmanagerial board's statement was supported by the ancestors of the Dalu, who alsomadeastatementwhichraisedthefollowingsimilarpoints: First,thattheSLTPlandis ownedbythechurch;second,thattheteachingandlearningactivitiesoftheSLTPwouldnot be disrupted, provided that it is under the guidance of the Church/Parish; and third, that a boardofcaretakersbeestablishedimmediately.18 According to Andreas Embong, the Camat of Lamba Leda, not only did everybody in attendanceagreewiththedecisionsmadeonthe14January2003,butsodidthedescendents of the Daluas well as the members of the oldYPTLmanagerial board. This meant that the conflict over the SLTPwhich involved theYPTL, had been resolved. For this reason there shouldhavebeennomoreproblemsregardingthestatusoftheland. However,accordingtoStefanusD.Asong,theresultsofthe musyawarahonthe14January 2003 were by no means final. According to his opinion, the conflict over the SLTPland between the Benteng Jawa Church/Parish and theYPTLhad not actually been completely resolved. The reasons for this included: First, the Head of theYPTLmanagerial board did notreceiveacopyofthedecisionsmadeduringthemeeting;andsecondlyuntilnowthetitle ofHeadcaretakerhasnotbeenofficiallytransferredfromStefanusD.AsongtoKrispinusM. Modes. StefanusD.Asong'sattitudeishighlightedinhislettertotheBupatiofManggarai19 whichoutlineshiscriticismsoftheCamatofLambaLeda,particularlyinregardtothemeeting 18 In the sum the following decisions were made during the meeting based on the statements and declarations given by the YPTL managerial board and the ancestors of the Dalu: Firstly, the YPTL managerial board under the authority of Stefanus D.Asong would be dissolved; secondly, a board of caretakers would be formed to manage the SLTP and that the caretaker board would be made up of: Head (Krispinus M. Modes); Deputy Head (Karlos Mbada); Secretary (Yanto B); and Treasurer (Klemens Kabur). 19 Letter filed as: 1/YPTL/V/2003, 15 May 2003. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 114 Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land Desa Tengku Leda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur which was held on 14 January 2003 in an effort to resolve the conflict over the status of the SLTPland (See Box 2). Box 2: Stefanus D. Asong's Criticisms of the Camat The letter to the Bupati criticizing the Camat's resolution attempts included: 1. The Camat did not act as a good facilitator or arbitrator and was unable to formulate a satisfactory agreement for both parties; 2. The Camat was biased and had a tendency to favor the interests of the Parish Council, disadvantaging the YPTL; 3. The Camat always blamed the YPTL, especially in regard to the employment of staff and board members; 4. Without due reason, the Camat considered all of the YPTL's letters and documents void; 5. The Camat was not concerned about the incident whereby two SLTP teachers were tortured and beaten outside of the kecamatan office on 14 January 2003 even though he was chairing the meeting; and 6. The Camat did not follow the proper procedures which needed to be followed to dissolve the YPTL managerial board and form a temporary board of caretakers. Copies of Stefanus D. Asong's letter were forwarded to the Head of the Manggarai Local Office of Education and Culture in Ruteng as well as the Bishop of Ruteng. Until now, neither the Bupati nor the Bishop have responded to Stefanus' letter. It wouldthereforeappearthattheconflictovertheownershipstatusoftheSLTPlandhasyetto beresolvedcompletely,inthesensethatnotallpartieswhoareinvolvedintheconflictareyet to accept the most recent decisions. 6. The Impact of the Conflict TheconflictcausedariftbetweentheChurch/ParishandStefanusD.Asongaswellasseveral SLTPteachers. Stefanus D.Asong and these teachers would rarely go to church after the incident. Similarly,Stefanus'familywouldrarelyparticipateinprayergroupsorotherchurch activities. Also, since 14 January 2003, Stefanus D.Asong, who is a civil servant at the Kecamatan Lamba Leda office, has not been to work and for this reason his wage has been withheld. Teaching at the SLTPhas not however been interrupted throughout the whole saga. The teachers,withtheexceptionofRikusAso,havecontinuedtoteachastheywouldnormally. Until now, RikusAso has not gone back to the SLTP. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 115 Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land Desa Tengku Leda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur RinusRuba,theHeadoftheBentengJawaParishDPP,explainedhisrelationshipwithStefanus D.Asongandhisfamily, "My family's relationship with Stefanus D.Asong's family has deteriorated a great deal recently, even though our families are still related. We [Asong's family and Rinus Ruba's family] don't go and visit each other any more, and they [Stefanus D. Asong's family] don't invite me to their family ceremonies, even though they used to consider me a respected family member. They now think that I had been plotting against them, or that I was the mastermind behind the land conflict between the YPTL and the Church/Parish, because I am the Head of the Benteng Jawa Parish DPP. I am often terrorized, verbally abused and considered to be lacking in experience ("Tekur cai Retuk lawo cai bao" - the turtledove and mouse which were just born; meaning that he is lacking in experience). The conflict has also polarized the community at large. There are people in the community who support the Church/Parish, and there are others who support theYPTL. For this reason, the outcome of the conflict is very much dependent on the Bupati's response to Stefanus D.Asong's letter dated 15 May 2003. We will just have to wait and see what happens. 7. Conclusions: Distinguishing Usage and Ownership Rights According to the author of this case study, in order to reach a more satisfactory and final resolutiontothiscase,theactualmeaningof`thedivisionofusagerights'ofthelandowned bytheChurch/MissionbetweentheChurch/Parishandtheschoolin1956needstobesought. Similarly,therealmeaningandintentionsbehindthedivisionofassetsbetweentheSDKand theSLTPbytheBentengJawaParishPriest,FatherGeradusM.Mollen,in1978alsoneeds tobepinpointed. Theactualmeaningofthesetwoeventswillhelptoexplainwhothelegal ownerofthelandis;theChurch/ParishortheYPTL. Itiscrucialtofindoutwhohasownership rights to the land to ensure that the case is resolved properly and fairly. The`divisionofusagerights'ofthechurchorChurch/Parishlandin1956canbeinterpreted inatleasttwodifferentways,eachwithadifferentconsequence. Thefirstinterpretationonly relates to the usage of the land. This would mean that the Church/Parish would still have ownershiprightstotheland. Thesecondinterpretationdoesnotonlyrelatetothedivisionof theusagerights,butalsoownershiprights. Thiswouldmeanthatthelandwhichwasdivided betweentheChurch/ParishandtheSLTPwouldbeownedbyeachofthesepartiesrespectively. If this was the case, both the school and the Church/Parish would each have the right to obtainacertificatefortheirrespectiveparcelsofland. Nevertheless,exactlywhatismeant Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 116 Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land Desa Tengku Leda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur by`theschool'remainsamystery. IsitjusttheSDK,ordoesitalsoincludetheSLTP? Ifwe look at what has actually happened in practice over the years, and the division of assets betweentheSDKandSLTPbytheBentengJawaParishPriest,FatherGeradusM.Mollen, in 1978, it would seem that the division of church land in 1956 related only to the usage rights andnottheownershiprights. TheBentengJawaChurch/Parishremainedthelawful ownersoftheland. Similar to the `division of land usage rights' in 1956, there is also two different ways to interpret the division of assets between the SDK and the SLTP in 1978. The first interpretation only relates to the utilization of the assets. This would mean that the Church/Parish still owns the assets, including the SLTPland. TheYPTLwould therefore not have the authority to register the land under their name. The second interpretation not only relates to the utilization of the assets, but also the ownership of the assets. This would mean that the managerial board of the SDK, namely, the Church/Parish or YASUKMA and the management board of the SLTP, namely the YPTL, would have equal rights to the assets. Furthermore, it would mean that the SDK managerial board has the ownership rights to the piece of land being used by the SDK. Likewise, theYPTL wouldhavetheownershiprightstothelandbeingusedbytheSLTP. Unfortunately,noneof theresearchershavebeenabletoconfirmthemeaningofthe1956`divisionofusagerights' andthe1978`divisionofassets'becausetheywereunabletogetacopyofeitherofthetwo documents. In addition, only Father Geradus M. Mollen would be able to explain exactly what was meant by the division of assets in 1978. In order to resolve the case properly, a statement and explanation of the division of assets needs to be taken from Father Geradus M.Mollen. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 117 Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land Desa Tengku Leda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur Case Chronology Conflict Over the Ownership of the SLTP Land Year Event 1931 The Dalu of Lamba Leda, UmarAchmad Mbolang made an oral agreement and handed over two pieces of land to the Church/Mission. 26 Sept. 1956 The usage rights of the land previously given to the church by Dalu Umar Achmad Mbolang were divided up between the school and the Church/ Parish [Rinus Ruba's version]. 1958 Achmat Djamal's version: Dalu Umar Achmad Mbolang authenticated the 1931 land relinquishment in writing. 1960 1931 land transaction was authenticated on paper by the Dalu and eighteen other Gelarang (administrative head). 1967 St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP established. 1974 YPTL was officially established in accordance with the regulations and authorized by a notary public. The YPTLconsisted of a care taker, namely, the Camat of Lamba and an advisory and managerial board. 1978 · The Benteng Jawa SDK BP3 sent a letter to the YPTL, requesting that they give the SDK building, which they had borrowed since 1967, back to the SDK BP3. · The YPTL responded to the letter by sending a letter to the parish priest, Father Geradus M. Mollen, requesting that their assets be divided up between the SDK and the SLTP. · The Benteng Jawa parish priest, Father Geradus M. Mollen, signed a document authorizing the division of assets between the SDK and SLTP. 1980 Benteng Jawa parish priest, Father Damo Djanggu, told the YPTL about his desire to manage the SLTP, but the YPTL did not allow it. 1982 · Frumens Iso [one of Dalu UmarAchmad Mbolang's descendents] fenced off the SLTP land and claimed that it was his parent's land. · The Camat of Lamba Leda resolved the problem by making the YPTL compensate Frumens Iso with Rp. 1 million. 1992 · Stefanus D. Asong was instated as the Head of the YPTL Managerial Board, replacing Mikael Bolang who had passed away. Claims that the YPTL became fraught with collusion and nepotism. · A split occurred amongst the descendents of the Dalu: some of them became members of the YPTL managerial board while others did not. 1999 The descendents of the Dalu and the Benteng Jawa Parish DPP asked the Camat to invite the YPTL to a meeting to discuss the problems with the management and administration of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP. 2000 · The DPP and the Parish Council wrote a letter to the YPTL, requesting that the return the SLTP land to the Church/Parish. · The Head of the YPTL, Stefanus D. Asong, announced that the land, where the SLTP is located, belongs to the YPTL. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 118 Conflict Over the Ownership of the St. Paulus Benteng Jawa SLTP Land Desa Tengku Leda, Kecamatan Lamba Leda, Kabupaten Manggarai, Flores Author:Agus Mahur 2001 · The YPTL sent a letter to the BPN [National LandAgency], requesting certification of the SLTP land, under name of the YPTL, through Prona (National Land Certification Program). · The Benteng Jawa DPP sent a letter to the village head of Tengku Leda objecting to the certification of the SLTP land under the name YPTL. Copies of the letter were forwarded to the BPN and the Bishop of Ruteng. 2 August 2001 The village head of Tengku Leda, Edy Komeng, facilitated a meeting with the YPTL, DPP, Parish Council and the Benteng Jawa parish priest, to discuss the dispute over the SLTP land. October 2001 The SLTP were given Rp. 30 million in voluntary contributions (Imbal Swadaya) to construct a new class room. December 2001 Priest Lambert Jalang met with the Bishop of Ruteng to talk about the church's land which was being used by the SLTP. 2002 · The Parish Priest, Father Lambert Jalang, attempts to disrupt the construction. · The SLTP teachers held a meeting to discuss Father Lambert Jalang's actions. · The YPTL planned to hold a meeting to discuss the status of the SLTP land, but it was cancelled. · Meeting held at the Camat's office with the parish priest, YPTL and the Camat. · Invitations to a meeting to discuss the status of the SLTP were announced at the church. · The YPTL's responded by saying that they did not want to lay claim to the church's land and that they just wanted to negotiate on good terms. · The Head of the Kabupaten Manggarai Office of Education and Culture came to the SLTP and filled out the guest book, saying `utilize the funds as instructed in the proposal'. 25 October 2002 · The Bishop of Ruteng arrived in Benteng Jawa to attend a meeting with his religious followers, DPP, Parish council, respected community figures and the descendents of the Dalu. December 2002 The DPP sent a letter to the Camat just before, and just after, Christmas, requesting that he hold a meeting to discuss the status of the SLTP. 14 January 2003 · Meeting held at the kecamatan office, and attended by government officials, the DPP and Parish Council, YPTL, teachers, adat leaders, two members of the Kabupaten Manggarai DPRD, Kapolpos, Babinsa, and the parish Priest. · Two teachers were beaten by the masses outside of the meeting room. 15 January 2003 Stefanus D. Asong met with the Benteng Jawa parish priest to show his support for the decisions made in the meeting on the 14 January 2003. 15 May 2003 Stefanus. D. Asong wrote a letter to the Bupati of Manggarai, criticizing the actions of the Camat. Researchers:Agus Mahur, Yan Ghewa, Peter R. Manggut; Co-ordinators:Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 119 Who is Entitled to the Land? Desa Magepanda, Kecamatan Nita, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus Who is Entitled to the Land? Controversy Over Land Ownership Summary When Maria Pingga ("Mingga"), the childless widow, passed away, she left no will to indicate who would lawfully bequeath the rice field which she had owned for her whole life. As a result, the land became the center of a dispute, when Mateus Jogha, Mingga's younger sibling's father in law, and Fransiska Kora, Mingga's granddaughter in law both laid claim to the land. When violence resulted appeals were made to both the military and the police, but they declined to become involved in a civil land case. The case was initially dealt with at the village level, involving elements of both the government and adat system. However it ended in the courts in Kupang and the land, in dubious circumstances, was awarded to Mateus. Interestingly, according to adat law neither party was entitled to the land but rather the step-son who no longer lived in the area. 1. Background MagepandaisoneofseveralvillagesinKecamatanNita. Theexpanseoffarminglandwhich is Desa Magepanda is located approximately 27 km from the capital of Kabupaten Sikka, Maumere. Thecommunityismadeupofpeoplefromseveraldifferentethnicgroups,including: Lio,thelargestethnicgroupandtheoriginalinhabitantsofthearea;Krowe,theoriginalethnic groupfromMaumere;andBugis,theoriginalinhabitantsofSouthSulawesi. Therearealso peoplefromanumberofotherethnicgroupswhohavemarriedintothecommunityandwho liveinthevillagebuttheirnumbersarenotverylarge. Theregionisknownasaresettlement areabecausepriortothe1960stheareawasonlyusedasahuntinggroundforwildbuffalo.1 Between 1967 ­ 1975, the village government ordered the Mboa, Jitabewa, Woloara, Lelebata, Wualadu and KojabewacommunitiestomovedowntotheplainsofMagepanda. In addition, the Krowe community from Nita, Tilang and Koting also started to resettle in Magepanda. In1968,fortyBugisfamiliesfromKabupatenWajo,SouthSulawesifledtothe 1 In 1972 - 1973, the Kabupaten Sikka government implemented a resettlement program, building 72 simple houses on the expanse of land which is Desa Magepanda for members of the community who previously lived in the mountainous region. Refer to Interview No. 606 and 629. Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 120 Who is Entitled to the Land? Desa Magepanda, Kecamatan Nita, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus regioninanefforttoescapetheturmoiloftheKaharMuzakarrebellion.2 RomanusSawe,the first village head of Magepanda also explained the mass migration of people to the region which resulted in a new look for Desa Magepanda in 1966. "At approximately the beginning of 1967, they approached the ria bewa (ritual land leaders) and publicized [the program] to the community. We [village apparatus] talked to the ria bewa on a number of occasions and went into the field together [Kampung Woloara-Lelebata]. There we explained how important it was that they move to the new village [Magepanda], and how orderly and regulated the new kampung was. Some of the people who were living in the mountains were invited to go and see [the village] first, and then we measured our land. The community helped to measure [the land], and then the borders were marked with long pieces of bamboo and wooden stakes, so that were visible from far away." Romanus Sawe, former Village Head In Lio culture, the people from the mountainous regions and the other regions outside of Kabupaten Sikka who were yet to own a home or land in the resettlement area were called fai walu ana kalo.3 The ria bewa4 gave each of them land that they could work to make a livelihood for themselves. The land given to each of the newcomers became theirs to keep andpassdowntotheirgrandchildren.5 Mingga was just one of a huge number of transmigrants who joined the mass exodus of peopletoMagepanda. ShewasfromKampungWolara,inthemountainousregionandwas given a piece of land under her own name which she then cleared and made into a rice field 2 Kahar Muzakar was the leader of a movement in South Sulawesi which insisted that the Republic of Indonesia accept his group, namely, the Indonesian freedom fighters as their own separate division of the IndonesianArmed Forces (TNI). His demands were rejected, and therefore, in 1950 he began to rebel. In 1953 he declared his movement as part Kartosuwirjo's campaign to form an Islamic state, which is also often referred to as DI/TII. The situation in South Sulawasi became unstable during this rebellion. Refer to FGD with the Bugis Bajo community, Interview No. 622. 3 Literally, fai walu ana kalo means widows and orphans. But, symbolically, fai walu ana kalo means the everyday people who do not hold a position in the adat institution, do not own land, and in general, are newcomers to the area. Compare this to Interview No. 625 and 650. 4 Ria bewa is a Lio term which is used to refer to the highest adat, and ritual land leader in the Lio region. The Ria bewa is appointed by the Mosalaki (adat land leaders on a more localized level). He is chosen to coordinate all the Mosalaki. Compare Interview No. 650, 625, 607 and 608. 5 Even though the land recipients became the lawful owners of the land which they were given by the ritual land leaders, they were still obliged to show their gratitude. First, they had to give a set amount of their mie are (first harvest) to the ritual land leader. Following this they are obliged to make a contribution at adat ceremonies, in the form of a pig, chicken, moke or something similar. Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 121 Who is Entitled to the Land? Desa Magepanda, Kecamatan Nita, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus before other people from her kampung arrived and started to clear some more land for rice cultivation. "Before, Mingga would help us with the planting and harvesting. She saw how good our harvest was, and therefore, she asked if she could clear a plot for herself. At that time, my husband had cleared four large plots. He was the only one who had rice fields there at the time. Nobody else had cleared the land to the north, south, east or west for rice cultivation. For that reason, when the judge asked me whether I knew who I shared a land border with, I explained that I didn't know because at that time it was all pretty much still forest land." Rosa Sina, Magepanda, 25 June 20036 Mingga came to Dusun Kampung Baru along with a number of members of her extended family from the mountains. She lived together with her younger siblings family (Mingga's family),andMateusJogha,Mingga'ssoninlaw. Mingga'syoungersiblinghadalreadydiedin Woloarabeforetheyleft,andMinggaherselfwasnotgettinganyyounger. Mingga'sextended family who were at the time living under the same roof, included Thres and her husband, Mateus Jogha,Angelina and her grand children, Fransiska and Patris, as well as Mingga herself. Angelina, Fransiska and Maria worked the rice field that she had been given. Meanwhile,MateusJoghaandhisfamilyworkedtheirownricefieldwhichsharedanimmediate boarderwiththeirGrandmother'sricefield(seeBox1). Box 1: The Relationship Between Maria Pingga and Mateus Jogha's Family Ancestors Penga (dead) + Mingga (dead)-----Maria Pingga (dead) + Seto (dead) Ambo (M) + Angelina Dhesa (F) Thres (F) + Mateus Jogha (M) ........+ Katharina Dhasi (F) Yohanes Sare (M) + Yustina (F) Patris (M) Fransiska Kora (F) Elisabeth (F) Ardianus (M) 6 See Interview No. 613, Rosa Sina was a witness in Mateus Jogha and Fransiska Kora's land case which took place in the Maumere District Court in 2000 ­ 2001. Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 122 Who is Entitled to the Land? Desa Magepanda, Kecamatan Nita, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus MateusJoghaprovidedhisownopinionsonlivingtogetherintheonehouse. "I looked after them until they passed away. I looked after Rida [Fransiska Kora] and her mother [Dhasi]. They all used to live with me, yet they have all turned on me now [challenging him again]." Mateus Jogha, Magepanda, 19 June 2003 2. Once the Land Owner Ceased to Exist MateusJoghafeltthathewasresponsibleforthewholefamily,including,Angelina,Katharina, Fransiska Kora and Patris. Therefore, after Mingga passed away, he began to manage the wholefamilyaswellasthericefieldwhichMingga,AngelinaandFransiskaKorahadbeen workingonsincetheymovedtoMagepanda. He ordered his son,Yohanes Sare, and his wife,Yustina, to work the land which had been ownedbyMariaPingga. Meanwhile,AngelinaDhesa,FransiskaandPatrisweretoldtogo and work on his land. It was like they had swapped fields. One resident of Magepanda analyzedthesituationasfollows; "When Maria Pingga passed away, Mateus told Fransiska Kora to go and work on his land. Meanwhile, he ordered his own son, Yohanes Sare, to go and work on Maria Pingga's land. I knew that it was a ploy he had devised to seize Maria Pingga's land. After doing this Mateus Jogha pawned the land which his son was using [Maria Pingga's land] and at the same time, reclaimed his own land which was being used by Fransiska Kora. When Maria wanted to go and start work on Maria Pingga's land again, she wasn't able to because Mateus had already pawned the land." Darius Siku, Deputy Head of the BPD, 18 June 2003 3. Mateus' Loyalties Lay Elsewhere In 1990, Mateus pawned Mingga's land, depositing it with a Bugis man namedAli.7As a result,YohanesSareandYustinanolongerhadanylandwhichtheycouldusetocultivaterice. Mateus, therefore, took it upon himself to remedy the matter, requesting his own land back fromAngelinaandherchildren,FransiskaandPatris,sothathe,andhischildren,Philipusand Yustinawouldhaveaplotoflandwhichtheycouldusetocultivatericeonceagain. Thereal issuebegantoemergeatthispointbecauseFransiska,whohadjuststartedafamily,wasnot impressedwithhowthelandwasbeingdisputed. 7 See Interview No. 613. Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 123 Who is Entitled to the Land? Desa Magepanda, Kecamatan Nita, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus "The dispute began in 1993. There was a meeting at the village level to decide that the land would be divided between Maria Pingga's granddaughter, namely, Fransiska, and Mateus Jogha's son, namelyYohanes Sare, by the ritual land leaders." Fransiska Kora, 19 June 2003 In1998and1999,MateusandFransiskaarguedfrequentlyinthericefields.Mateuswould often come and try to expel Fransiska and Patris from the field, but the two of them would pretend that he was not even there. Fransiska and Petrus' obstinacy infuriated Mateus, and therefore,heeventuallyrequestedtheinvolvementofthevillagemilitaryapparatus,namely, Babinsa.8 "In 1999, around 5 February, he [Mateus] sent Babinsa down to visit us [Fransiska, Patris and her relatives]. They came and forced us to hand the land over to Mateus Jogha. We didn't want to. `This is our land,' we said. Then, Pak Feliks from Babinsa began to punch and kick Patrisius. He [Patris] was bruised and his face and feet wounded." Fransiska Kora, 19 June 2003 Patrisius, the victim of the violence, also complained about the interference and actionsofthemilitary. "We are stupid, and we don't have any capital. People can hit us. I still remember, he [Pak Feliks] hit me 31 times. On 7 February, we reported the incident to the Maumere District Military Command because we were scared that it may happen again. When we arrived, the military official gave us some medicine and tried to calm us down. They said that they don't have the authority to deal with civil cases. The military official also gave us some money [transport money] to get home...." Patrisius Ngura, relative of Fransiska, 19 June 2003 Afterhearingthatthemilitarywereunabletoresolvetheproblem,FransiskaandPatrisreturned toMagepandaandreportedtheincidenttothevillagegovernment. "Around 30 February 1999, the village head invited us [both parties] to dinner, in an effort to make peace at his house [the village head's house]. We are all family, and therefore we should divide the land up between us. This is our grandmother's land. The meeting was set to be held, but they didn't attend [Mateus and his family]." Fransiska Kora, 19 June 2003 8 Babinsa is the smallest unit within the Armed Forces. These units remain in the villages; in the past years their numbers have been decreasing rapidly. Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 124 Who is Entitled to the Land? Desa Magepanda, Kecamatan Nita, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus According to Matues, he did not attend the meeting that had been arranged by the village apparatusforthefollowingreason: "There was once a meeting arranged at the village, but I didn't want to attend because they (the village head and the adat leaders) wanted to divide up the land. I didn't agree". Mateus Jogha, 4 July 2003 EversincetheincidentwherebyFransiskaandPatriswerebeatenupbyPakFeliks,Mateus Jogha,Yohanes Sare andYustina have been working the rice field which once belonged to MariaPingga. 4. The Fight Which Left Fransiska's Hand All Bloody Fransiska was not satisfied with the way the resolution process was heading because she believedthatitfavoredMateusJogha. Asaresult,in2000,shesummonedthecouragetogo outandstartploughingthericefieldwhichMateusJoghahadrecentlyreclaimed. Unfortunately, after she had finished ploughing the field,Yustina with the help of her father in law, Mateus Jogha went out and planted the rice seedlings in the freshly ploughed field. Fransiska was furious,andwhenitcametimetoharvesttherice,shegotintoafight.9 ThefightbetweenFransiskaandYustinainMariaPingga'sricefieldwasexplainedindetailby anumberofrespondents. "On 6 May 2000, we [Fransiska andYustina] got into a fight about the rice. We started to argue and then Carolina Yustina struck my hand, causing a large gash. I was taken to the Magepanda Puskesmas (Community Health Center) where my hand was stitched up. The gash was around 9cm long. Then we reported the incident to the Ndete police. But, the police didn't come out to the scene of the incident. They just took the evidence [sickle]." Fransiska Kora, victim, 19 June 2003 Yustina gave the following statement in regard to the incident in the rice field. "At that time [harvest time] in 2000, they [Fransiksa and five other members of her group] arrived and started to harvest the rice with their sickles. They also ruined one plot by cutting the rice down and then just leaving it scattered on the ground. I had just got home from the market when I 9 Interview No. 627. Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 125 Who is Entitled to the Land? Desa Magepanda, Kecamatan Nita, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus decided to go to the rice fields. When I got there, I saw that they had begun to harvest the rice in one plot. They also wanted to hit me, so I ended up in a fight.... I didn't strike Fransiska's hand, but I was scared because they were carrying sickles. I pulled the sickle towards the ground, but in doing this, it struck her hand. I didn't have a sickle. Then they reported me, even though I didn't intentionally cut her hand". Carolina Yustina, 24 June 2003 Fransiska reported the incident to the Ndete and Nita police posts. The police only got involvedinthedisputeasfarastoaskbothpartieswhathadhappenedandthentryandmake peace between them at the police station. They did not want to get involved in the land dispute, and therefore, they recommended that the land dispute be dealt with at the village because it was not a purely criminal case.10 Afterhavingreturnedtothevillage,FransiskaandPatrisdecidedthattheywouldresolvethe case through the courts. Fransika took Mateus Jogha to the Maumere District Court in December 2000. "We had been hit and beaten twice, so finally we decided that we would report the case to the court. It was because we weren't satisfied. We didn't care that we only had a SK (a Decree regarding the division of land), because the SK had been issued by the Department of Agrarian affairs. The land lord, [Paulus Soka] was a witness for me, as was the village head [Petrus Mbako] and Markus Kota [the former village head]. The case started in 2000, and ended in 2001. There was a court session almost once a week. There were about thirty hearings throughout the two years." Fransiska Kora, 19 June 200311 Theprosecutionmadetheircaseinnineteensessions,andfollowingthis,theaccusedmade theirdefenseinnineteensessions. In2001,MateusJoghapaidthreejudgesfromtheMaumere District Court Rp. 2 million to go and inspect the location of the disputed land. In 2002, the courtdecidedtorejectFransiskaKora'saccusations. Asaresult,Fransiskalodgedanappeal at the Kupang High Court. Nevertheless, they just reaffirmed the decision made by the MaumereDistrictCourt. 10 The police rarely want to get involved in land disputes because they find it very difficult to make a ruling. This is because written documents on land ownership are rare. Land ownership is relinquished and transferred based on an oral agreement. 11 See Interview No. 605, compare with the letter from the Maumere District Court. The letter explains that there were a total of 19 cases whereby the prosecution outlined their accusations, and 19 sessions whereby the accused put forward their defense. Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 126 Who is Entitled to the Land? Desa Magepanda, Kecamatan Nita, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus 5. The Winners Become Ash, the Loser Becomes Charcoal Whatdoesvictorymeanwhenthesizeofthesacrificeisgreaterthanthevictory? Thecourt decisionwhichfavoredMateusandhisfamilymaybeapersonalvictoryonitsown. However, has not Mateus experienced a huge material loss as a result? "The court costs amounted to more than Rp 10 million; preparing the letters and paying the lawyer. I just gave my lawyer money for petrol because he had his own motorbike. He was also trying to find a life for himself. I pawned the land to get the money. I used all the money on the court case, consequently we are only starting to work on the house again now." Mateus Jogha, 19 June 2003 FransiskaandanumberofotherresidentsofMagepandafeltdifferentlyaboutthecase. They feltthattheverdictwasunfairforanumberofreasons. Alllevelsofthevillagegovernment, including,theRT(headoftheneighborhoodunit)andthevillagehead,explainedthatMateus Jogha is not actually entitled to the land because the land should have been divided equally between them. If this was the case, why did Mateus Jogha win the court case? Fransiskahastriedtofindasimpleexplanationastowhyshelostthecourtcase. Inherview, she did not lose because she was not entitled to the land, but because of an administrative flaw. Shefeelsthatshestillhasachanceifsheisabletogetenoughmoneytogethertopayfor an appeal. "... the judge rejected our accusations, because we only had a photocopy of the SK12 [Decree], and therefore, the judge [Laurensius Sibarani] was unable to accept it. The original is in Kupang because it isn't at the local office of land affairs in Maumere. We lost because we didn't have a copy of the original. The defense won, and the plaintiff [Fransiska] incurred a fine.... We want to appeal, but we will have to pay Rp 1 million. Meanwhile, we have already had to pay more than six million worth of court costs over the last two years; for transport, administration and other things. I heard that Mateus pawned his land for Rp 21 million with Paulus Polce." Fransiska Kora, 19 June 2003 12 In this case the SK [Decree] was a map indicating the borders of the disputed land as well as the name of the owner. It was made by the local office of land affairs. It was Fransiska's grandmother, Mingga's name on the SK. Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 127 Who is Entitled to the Land? Desa Magepanda, Kecamatan Nita, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus Thecourtdecisionwasalsocriticizedbynumerousparties,suggestingthatMateushadonly won because he had bribed the court with money. The ria bewa tended to explain this in moredetail. "We had already discussed [the matter] at the RT (neighborhood level), dusun and village office. According to adat and history, Mateus Jogha was not entitled to the land. But, he is very stubborn; he wouldn't listen to anybody. He just continued to work the land. Eventually, the case was taken to court. I was surprised that Mateus won the case. I'm just guessing, but there was probably money involved. Kita doi ho'a, kalah, demi doi bhondo menang (those of us who don't have any money tend to lose, but those of us with lots of money always come out on top)." Paulus Soka, 4 July 2003 Ibu Rosa Sina also expressed her astonishment at the verdict. "I heard that Mateus Jogha won. How could he have won? ...Maria Pingga has a granddaughter who was with her at all times, so how could Mateus have won? I'm shocked that he won! I haven't heard the results of the appeal in Kupang or Jakarta. I haven't been following the case lately. The problem is that I work in the fields in Mautenda, Kabupaten Ende." Rosa Sina, 25 June 2003 BapakMarkusKota,theformervillageheadofMagepandaalsodeploredthefactthatMateus Jogha was so stubborn that the case had to be taken to court. "Mateus won in court, yet according to my opinion he actually lost. He pawned his land just to pay for the court costs. Now, he hardly owns any land. In addition, Mateus can't ask for Fransiska's help if he ever needs it. The scary thing is Mateus pawned his land for between Rp 10 ­ 20 million. When will he be able to pay that much money back? Soon, people are just going to take all his land". Markus Kota, 4 July 2003 Yustina, the woman who got into a fight with Fransiska also expressed similar sentiments and regret. "We used to be united but now it has all fallen apart. This is what I regret..." Carolina Yustina, 24 June 2003 Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 128 Who is Entitled to the Land? Desa Magepanda, Kecamatan Nita, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus 6. Peace Still Hangs in the Shadows So, this is what happened in the case which took place between two residents of the quiet villageofMagepanda. Thecourtdecisionhasputanendtothecasetemporarily. Nevertheless, neither party feels completely satisfied with the results. The relationship between the two familieshasbecomedistantandeffortstoreunitethefamilieshaveyettobemade. "Until now, Fransiska's family and Mateus Jogha's family have not spoken to each other. Fransiska no longer has any land that she is able to work because of the court ruling.... Both Fransiska and Mateus have both sacrificed a lot of money, although Mateus has sacrificed a lot more than Fransiska." Darius Siku, 18 June 2003 ThecourtsdecisionmadelifeextremelydifficultforFransiska,themotheroffivechildrenand wifeofapublictransportdriver,andthereforeshemadearadicaldecision. "We don't want to talk to Mateus' family anymore. What's more, my uncle [her mother's brother] is dead. My grandmother is also dead [2001]. Maybe my grandmother died as a result of stress. They've sucked our blood, and therefore, we can't make up now." Fransiska Kora, 19 June 2003 MateusJoghaalsoadmittedthathisrelationshipwithFransiskahascometoastandstill. "My relationship with Fransiska is normal; we have grown apart and we don't acknowledge each other or talk to each other if we meet somewhere." Mateus Jogha, 19 June 2003 Nobody knows when or if their relationship will improve. Nowadays, Mateus Jogha, the seventyyearoldwidower,livesinasemi-permanenthousewhichhasbeenbuiltslowlyover the years. The windows and doors are still covered over with curtains as it waits to be finished. When he was asked why the house had not been finished, he contemplated the question for a moment before explaining that he had used most of his money to pay for the court case.13 13 See Stanis'Diary, 19 June 2003; Compare to Interview No. 606. Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 129 Who is Entitled to the Land? Desa Magepanda, Kecamatan Nita, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus Case Chronology: Controversy Over Land Ownership Date Event 1966 First Village Head, Petrus Mbako, elected to lead the `new look' Desa Magepanda. 1969 - 1975 Information about the proposed resettlement of people from the mountainous regions to the flatter lands of Desa Magepanda. In 1970, Maria Pingga was given a plot of land by the ritual land leaders which she then cleared and made into a rice paddy. Maria Pingga worked her land with Yohana and Fransiska until she passed away. 1980s Maria Pingga passed away. Fransiska and Yohana continued to grow rice on Maria Pingga's land. 1985 Mateus Jogha ordered his children, Yohanes Sare and Yustina to go and work on Maria Pingga's land. Meanwhile, he ordered Fransiska to work on his land. It was like they swapped rice fields. 1990 Mateus Jogha pawned the land owned by Maria Pingga, secretly depositing it with Ali. 1993 Problem emerged when Mateus Jogha and his son Yohanes Sare tried to reclaim the land which was being used by Fransiska. Meeting was to be held at the village office to resolve the issue peacefully, but Mateus Jogha did not agree with their suggestions. 1993 - 1998 Fransiska and Patris continued to cultivate rice on Maria Pingga's land, but were continually expelled by Mateus Jogha. 5 February 1999 Babinsa official [unit of the Armed Forces at the village level], arrived at the disputed land after being called by Mateus Jogha. He punched and expelled Fransiska and Patris from the rice field. 7 February 1999 Fransiska and Patris reported the incident to the Maumere District Military Command, but they were told to go back to the village and resolve the dispute there. They reported the incident to the village head once back in the village. 30 February 1999 Head of Desa Magepanda, Petrus Mbako, tried to resolve the land dispute by asking both parties to come for dinner, but Mateus Jogha did not want to attend. Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 130 Who is Entitled to the Land? Desa Magepanda, Kecamatan Nita, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus 6 May 2000 Fight between Fransiska and Yustina (Philipus'wife and Mateus Jogha's daughter) in Maria Pingga's rice paddy. Fransiska ended up with a gash to her hand. Fransiska was taken to the Puskesmas [Community Health Center] in Magepanda and then she went to the police post in Ndete and Nita to report the incident. The police recommended that the village administration resolve the dispute. A Few Weeks Fransiska took Mateus to the Maumere District Court. Over Later thirty court sessions in total. The trial took place between 2000 and 2002. 5 February 2002 The Maumere District Court decided to reject Fransiska's accusations, meaning that Mateus Jogha won the case. 22 February 2003 The Kupang High Court reaffirmed the decision made by the Maumere District Court, rejecting Fransiska's accusations. This meant that Fransiska lost once again and Mateus Jogha was given the legal rights to work the disputed land, which he has been doing until now. Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 131 Unrest on the Border Desa KotingA, Kecamatan Maumere, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus Unrest on the Border: Conflict Over Village Administration and Mass Registration of Land Claims Summary This administrative conflict, between the residents of Dusun Gere, Desa Koting A and the residents of Dusun Poma, Desa Takaplager, over the border between the two villages has incited varied responses from a number of different parties. The conflict lay dormant for dozens of years in the peaceful surrounds of Dusun Gere, until 23 May 2001, when there was a mass registration of villagers land in the dusun. Several households refused to become citizens of Dusun Gere, the majority of which live along the border of the two villages. Quite coincidentally, a number of these households are newcomers in the area which consequently became politicized and fueled identity differences. There have been numerous parties involved in the dispute resolution process, including the Camat, Bupati and the local Father, which have tended to complicate rather than complement one another.The case study demonstrates the difficulty of ascertaining fixed agreeable boundaries, necessary for a "modern" land registration system, and the conflict this process can trigger. Further it shows how easily ascriptive identities can be manipulated so as to potentially incite violence. 1. Background For the majority of the community who live in Kabupaten Sikka, the reallocation of village borders has not only impacted positively on their lives, for example, improving access to servicesprovidedbythevillagegovernmentandincreasingtheamountofdevelopmentfunds forthelocalcommunity,butithasalsohadseveralnegativeeffects. Afewexamplesofthese negative effects include increased difficulties in determining the borders between regions, problems with the status of the residents as well as problems with determining the borders betweenvillages. Inaddition,villagerswholiveintheborderregionshaveoftenbeenforced tobecomepartofavillagewhichisperhapsforeigntothem. Theseproblemsareoftenmade worsebythereallocationofseveralvillages'bordersinarelativelysmallarea. Thiscancause villageborderstobecomeunclear. Thevillageheadofanewlyestablishedvillagehasdescribed theproblemswhichresultfromthereallocationofvillageborders. Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 132 Unrest on the Border Desa KotingA, Kecamatan Maumere, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus "I feel that the reallocation of village borders is indeed a positive thing, but if they are not properly thought out, there will be a whole range of negative outcomes. When the borders of this village were drawn up, I myself became involved in such a case." Gerardus Goli, Head of Desa Takaplager, 17 May 2003 Inaddition,theformerheadofLedaleroSeminary,FatherJohnAria,alsocomplainedabout thereallocationofthevillageborders. "Take us for example [community from Ledalero abbey]; we are squeezed in between three villages, namely, Ribang, Takaplager and KotingA. The borders are unclear, but, what is clear, is that the communities have certain interests and will therefore fight for them." Another respondent explained that it is not just the reallocation of village borders, but the partitioning of the kecamatan which has caused problems for residents who live on or near thevillageborders. "It is indeed quite strange because Kecamatan Maumere includes Desa Koting A, yet the Camat's (sub-district head) office is so far away [Nele]. Koting A is closer to the Camat's office in Nita." John Aria, former Director of the Ledalero Seminary, 21 May 2003 In terms of distance, it would be far more practical if KotingAwas included in Kecamatan Nita as it administrative centre is only about 2 km away, whereas Kecamatan Maumere's centreisapproximately8kmaway. Inadditiontotheproblemswhichhaveresultedfromthedivisionofregions,thereallocation ofvillageborderscanoftencausedisputes,becausepeoplewillencouragetheborderresidents tojoinacertainvillage,whichinturn,canresultininter-villageconflict. "The village head of Takaplager forced them to register so that the population figures in the initial report were in suit. If he hadn't done it, he wouldn't have had a large enough population." Yoseph, resident, 17 May 2003 The perspectives outlined above indicate that the reallocation of village borders can cause numerousproblems,notonlyproblemsrelatingtoadministrativeaffairs,butalsosocialproblems forresidentswholiveonorneartheborderregions. Oneexampleofthenegativeeffectsof Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 133 Unrest on the Border Desa KotingA, Kecamatan Maumere, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus impulsive reallocation of village borders can be seen in KotingA. The problems with the village borders and the demographic status of eleven families has become a topic of hot debate between the residents of Desa KotingAand DesaTakaplager, and furthermore has impactedonanumberofotherpartsofcommunitylife. 2. When the Land was Measured... The National Land Certification Project (PRONA) was carried out in several villages in Kabupaten Sikka in 2001. Desa Takaplager is one of those villages which took part in the project. ThevillageheadofTakaplagertookadvantageoftheprojecttohelptheresidentsof hisvillageobtainlandcertificates. ElevenfamilieswhoarecitizensofDesaTakaplager,but liveintheDesaKotingAregionregisteredfortheirlandtobemeasuredinDusunGere. Of those eleven families, seven of them are newcomers to the area from Kabupatens Ngada, FloresTimurandLembata,whiletheotherfourfamiliesarefromKotingA. Inthefirststage of the program, the village head ofTakaplager arrived (23 May 2001) to measure three (of the eleven families) plots of land. However, when the land was about to be measured the villagersfromDusunGerearrivedenmasseandprohibitedthemfromdoingso. The23May2001incidentleftitselfimprintedinthemindofthevillageheadofTakaplager whowastryingtohelpthevillagersofDusunGeremeasuretheirland. "In May 2000, there was a mass program to register the villagers in Gere, right at the time that we were measuring the land belonging to those three families.... Because three of my constituents who also live there requested that their land be measured, four government officials from the local agrarian office and I went into the field. I met with the head of Dusun Gere to request permission for us to measure the land of my constituents who live in his region. He didn't give us permission. This resulted in the head of Dusun Gere and the head of Dusun Pomo having an argument over whether or not the land in Dusun Gere should be measured. Because we were disallowed, the officials, head of Dusun Poma, head of the RT [neighborhood unit] and myself went inside one of the villager's houses to drink a cup of tea or coffee. At this point, the head of Dusun Gere returned home. However, suddenly we heard the sound of a gong being beaten several times and then the masses arrived in front of the house. They were carrying knives, machetes, wood, sticks and stones and the head of the dusun was standing in front of them all. They shouted, `Gere will become the second Kalimantan [this is at the time of the Sampit-Madura incident in Kalimantan].' After this we went to Theodorus' house to have lunch. While we were eating, even more people came and gathered outside of his house. Wulandari's car was Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 134 Unrest on the Border Desa KotingA, Kecamatan Maumere, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus even parked out the front with all the people who had got a lift in it. After we had finished eating, we returned to the main road [road between Ende and Maumere]. [On our way back to the main road, when they were still on the dirt road] the masses came and blocked off the road with bamboo, then got their car and drove it at high speed towards us. But, suddenly FatherAndreas Sawu, from the Catholic Seminary, arrived on the scene on his motorbike. He parked his bike right in the middle of the road, blocking their car and making it stop. We were then able to return safely, and continue measuring the plots of land in the village until approximately 7pm. That afternoon the masses fenced off seven of my villager's houses [seven of the disputed households] and ordered them not to go outside or damage the fences. Eventually, I told Bapak Herman to go and tell the Nita police about the situation in Dusun Gere. They did go and report to the police, but they didn't report the incident as I suggested they should. That evening the police patrolled Dusun Gere. The situation was reasonably calm until a letter arrived from the PMD (Community DevelopmentAgency) stating that a meeting was to be held at the Dusun Gere meeting hall." Gerardus Goli, Village Head of Takaplager, 17 May 2003 Box 1: Land Certification · Nowadays, land certification is important for the community. A land certificate can be used to prove land ownership in a court of law. As a result, land certificates are frequently used as collateral at the bank or as a guarantee to use the services of a pawn shop. · The National Land Certification Project implemented by the Kabupaten Sikka Office of Land Affairs in 2001 was the first step taken to help the community obtain land certificates. In addition to the inexpensive process, Rp. 30,000 per plot of land, the villagers only had to report to their village head.1 ForthecommunityofDusunGere,KotingA,themassregistrationofvillagersconstitutesan accumulationoftheirfrustrationtowardsseveralvillagerswholiveinDusunGere,butwhodo notwanttoacknowledgethemselvesascitizensofDusunGere. Asaresult,theyprohibited severalofthevillagersfrommeasuringtheirland. "The issue is where they live. This problem has been going on since 1997 [election census], but it still hasn't been resolved. There are people who live in Koting A, but refuse to join. They continue to hold on to their status as residents of Desa Takaplager, Kecamatan Nita." Petrus Pengo, Respected member of the Gere community, 17 May 2003 1 Interview No. 50. Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 135 Unrest on the Border Desa KotingA, Kecamatan Maumere, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus Meanwhile,therearesomeotherresidentsofDusunGerewhofeeldisappointedforanother reason. This can be seen from the statement given by the Head of Dusun Gere, Bapak MateusNira: "In approximately 1989, there was some kerja bakti (villagers will work for free on some village project as a public service done in the interests of the community) in Dusun Gere. However, those villagers didn't want to participate. They just stayed at home. We [the residents of the dusun] were fed up with them. But, we remained calm and didn't do anything to them." Mateus Nira, Head of Dusun Gere, 14 May 2003 Nevertheless,thefamilieswhowereprohibitedtomeasuretheirlandhaveadifferentopinion, andfeelthattheproblemonlysurfacedaftertheywereprohibitedtomeasuretheirland. "The problem emerged as a result of people wanting to measure their land [for the national land registration program in 2001]. If they weren't going to measure them all, it would have been better for them to do nothing." Markus Soba, Head of the BPD in Takaplager, 19 May 2003 Similar to Markus Soba's opinion, a villager from Dusun Poma, Desa Takaplager, namely Bapak Ambrosius Soi stated: "From the beginning I organized [the administration] it all in Desa Nita, and there were no problems. This problem with the regions [village borders], is a government affair, between one government and another government. There were no problems with the villagers in the past. We didn't have to deal with things like borders." Ambrosius Soi, Respected community figure, 19 May 2003 BapakKonsalesDase,alocalvillager,expressedthesamesentiments: "In the past everything was just normal. We could meet with the other villagers. If there was an event or ceremony we would visit each other." Konsales Dasa, villager, 15 May 2003 3. They Have their Own Reason! When the eleven families were asked why they did not want to become citizens of Dusun Gere, Desa KotingA, Kecamatan Maumere, but hoped to continue to retain their status as Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 136 Unrest on the Border Desa KotingA, Kecamatan Maumere, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus citizens of Desa Takaplager, they answered that for years and years they had been part of DesaTakaplager, Kecamatan Nita. "I am a newcomer [to the area]. When I first arrived I lived in Nita, this was around1980,andIlookedforworkthere. IamactuallyfromEndeoriginally, but then moved. I am an entrepreneur; I sew [clothes and various styles of bags]. In 1982, I bought the land here from a person from Koting [he points to his house]. That is the Takaplager border [points to the road in front of his house]. I built this house in 1985. Because I have been in Nita for so long [before this in a rented house], I'm used to organizing all my affairs in Nita .... Why didn't we join with Koting? Because we are used to the services [in Nita] and it is easier. We have been tens of years [in Nita], so it makes things difficult. The KotingAvillage office is a long way from here." Konsales Dasa, villager, 15 May 2003 In addition to Bapak Konsales, another head of a household also described his experience. "In the past, it was not as densely populated as it is now. This [Dusun Gere] was still paddocks [empty except for crops]. There was no road, school or even electricity. We used to have a business, so we got electricity and water facilities. We want to unite with them." Maximus Kango, villager, 19 May 2003 4. Something Behind the Incident Therewereseveraldifferentreactionsfromanumberofdifferentpartiestothebriefincident which took place in May 2001. Several groups have different interpretations of why the houses of the seven new-comers were fenced off. One of the people whose house was fencedoffstated: "We are little people. We are new-comers, even if we did want to rebel, we wouldn't be able to. Then, the Dusun Head just came and built a bamboo fence, just like a door. But, only in front of seven houses, all of whom are newcomers. We don't know why!" Konsales Dasa, villager, 15 May 2003 Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 137 Unrest on the Border Desa KotingA, Kecamatan Maumere, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus Inaddition,oneresidentofDusunPomaexpressedhisopinion: "I suspect that it is because we are almost all newcomers. From an economic perspective, we are doing quite well. There are some who have kiosks, there are others who have small businesses, [all different types of businesses].... It's all about the desire to work. Even though I have a piece of land, I have no desire to work. However, because the newcomers don't have any land, and because they are in a different area [they are not in the place where they grew up], they have the desire to work." Markus Soba, Head of the BPD, Desa Takaplager, 19 May 2003 P.JohnAria,CatholicSeminary,keepingwiththesentimentsoutlinedabove,hasalsoasked "Why are so many of the new-comers kiosks demolished, and things stolen from them, meanwhile nothing ever happens to the kiosks owned by the land lords [people who have owned land for a long time]. What's going on?" Contrary to the views of the new-comers, one man from Dusun Gere has said that he has oftenhelpedtheelevenfamiliestoresolvetheirproblems. "What I have observed until now, I have helped them to resolve their problems on numerous occasions, so why don't they want to become a part of Koting A? We are still trying. There was one incident which took place on 7 November 1997, where somebody came and had a punch up with Marianus Kasa, but we [from Dusun Gere] were the one's who resolved it. The same goes for Om Meus [Konsales Dasa]. He reports to us if his house gets robbed." Petrus Pengo, respected community figure, 17 May 2003 InadditiontothispositiveportraitoftheGerepeople,theheadofDusunGerehasconveyed anevenmoreextremepictureofthestepshisvillagershavetakenwhenfacedwiththeeleven families. "If there is a funeral and prayers, they come and so do we. If it wasn't Dusun Gere, I'm sure that they would be killing each other, whatsmore those of them who are not original inhabitants here..." Mateus Nira, Head of Dusun Gere, 17 May 2003 Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 138 Unrest on the Border Desa KotingA, Kecamatan Maumere, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus 5. Planned Peace The threats against the new-comers from the villagers in Dusun Gere resulted in strained relationsbetweenthetwogroups. Therefore,P.JohnAria,DirectoroftheLedaleroSeminary, took action and sent a letter to the Head of Dusun Gere. The Head of Dusun Gere recalled theincident. "Father JohnAria sent a letter to the village head of KotingA, and forwarded copies to the dusun heads. He requested that the village government create peace. On that same day, the police arrived from Nita because those eleven households reported the incident. But, the police only came and looked around. Mateus Nira, Head of Dusun Gere, 14 May 2003 Box 2: Why Did Father John Aria Become Involved? A few of the families whose demographic status was being disputed in Dusun Gere are staff at the Ledalero Seminary. In addition, one of the seminary units is made up of the university students from STFK Ledalero who also live in Dusun Gere. Their seminary unit is known as Efrata. The mass registration of villagers which took place on 23 May 2002 was carried out in opposition to the land registration program which several of the families were involved in, including a few of the Ledalero staff. Not only was Father John Aria concerned by the situation in Dusun Gere, but so were the higher levels of government, especially the regional government. With the help of Yoseph and Vicient from the office for social and political sciences, they tried to initiate a meeting between the relevant parties. On 6 July 2001, the meeting washeldattheDusunGeremeetinghall. The Camat ofMaumere,secretaryofKecamatan Nita,VillageHeadsofKotingA,RibangandTakaplager,aswellasrepresentativesfromthe police, and the houses which were fenced off by the masses, all attended the meeting. The VillageHeadofTakaplagerwhowasinattendancesaid: "During this meeting we will not only talk about the problems which have occurred, but we will also touch on the problem regarding the border between Kecamatan Maumere and Kecamatan Nita. For the seven households, I would like to say that I am handing the choice over to you. If you want to be included in Takaplager, I will accept your choice, or if you want to be included in Koting A, I am willing to let you do as such." Gerardus Goli, Head of Desa Takaplager, 17 May 2003 Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 139 Unrest on the Border Desa KotingA, Kecamatan Maumere, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus AtthattimetherewerethreefamilieswhowantedtobeincludedinKotingA,namely,Herman Heri from Larantuka, Bei from Bejawa, and Feliks from Nele. The other families did not answer when they were asked. OnevillagerfromPomahasadifferentopinionaboutwhythethreefamiliesbecamepartof KotingA. "There were heads of households who only joined because they were scared. They felt threatened. There were three heads of households who were forced to become part of KotingA... they agreed during the meeting which was held approximately two weeks after the incident. There was a letter from the village requesting that KotingAmake peace. I deliberately didn't attend the meeting because I hadn't done anything wrong. Why should I go? So we didn't want to go. Those three heads of households attended." Maximus Kango, villager, 19 May 2003 6. Meeting About Village Control Tendayslater,on16June2001,thefirstassistanttotheBupatiheldameetingattheBupati's office. ThevillageheadofKotingA,TakaplagerandRibangaswellasanofficialfromBPN (NationalLandAgency),headoftheofficeforvillageregistration,arepresentativefromthe community unity and protection office (Kesbanglimas), head of Dusun Poma and Dusun Gere, and the section head of the Kecamatan Nita office all attended this meeting. At that time,thefirstassistanttothe Bupati,ViatordaSilvasaid: "For those people in the community who still have a valid KTP [Residence Identification Card] from Nita, they will continue to use it until it runs out. After that, they will have to organize a new KTP in Desa Koting A." Viator da Silva, First Assistant to the Bupati of Sikka, 19 May 2003 Unfortunately,thecommunityperceivedthestatementmadebythefirstassistanttotheBupati tomeanthattheyweregivenpermissiontoremaincitizensofDesaNita,nowDesaTakaplager, after the reallocation of village borders, and continue to live in KotingA. 7. Several Families Still Choose Takaplager There are still several families who do not want to be part of KotingA. Instead, they have chosentoremaincitizensofDesaTakaplager. Thereasonthattheygiveforremainingmembers ofDesaTakaplagerremainsthesame,namely,bettergovernmentservices. Eventhoughthey Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 140 Unrest on the Border Desa KotingA, Kecamatan Maumere, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus are quite adamant that the services are better there, such services are not as easy to get as they used to be. It is as if one resident has almost lost hope. "Here [Desa Takaplager] the services are close. They are much further away in Koting A. If it's night time it is truly expensive. Here, they provide quick service, whatsmore if it is urgent. But, people reject us in Nita, then they reject us in Koting A. If this is the case, there is no need for me to organize everything ... I will not go to Koting A for whatever reason, because this is such a serious problem. The problem of safety is a serious one. You don't need a vehicle to get to the police station quickly." Marianus Kasa, resident, 19 May 2003 Untilnow,theyhaveshownafirmdesiretoremaininDusunPoma,DesaTakaplager. When theHeadofDusunGeretriedtogetregistrationinformationfromanumberoffamilies,forthe village and kecamatanrecords, they refused. "I [Head of Dusun Gere] went to [the] 11 households but they did not want to be registered. Theodorus, and Om Matheus said that the Head of Desa Takaplager had not transferred authority over to the Head of Desa Koting A. So I told the village head that those 11 households didn't participate in the registration." Mateus Nira, Head of Dusun Gere, 14 May 2003 InApril 2002, several of the families stated that they had already been included in the Desa Takaplagercensusforthe2004elections. Theyalsofeltthatconflictregardingthestatusof villagers was also taking place in Desa Ribang (neighboring village) and DesaTakaplager. TherearecitizensofDesaTakaplagerwholiveinDesaRibang,butreceivedcertificatesfrom DesaTakaplager. "We heard that Om Donatus lives in Desa Ribang, but he was able to organize his affairs in Desa Takaplager. Why can't we? We want justice." Bartolomes, village resident, 15 May 2003 However,inresponsetoanumberofvillager'sdesirestoremainpartofDesaTakaplager,the Head of Dusun Gere stated: "We are not going to force them. If they don't want [to obey], it's better that they leave, but their land will stay here. They won't be allowed to live here." Mateus Nira, Head of Dusun Gere, 14 May 2003 Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 141 Unrest on the Border Desa KotingA, Kecamatan Maumere, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus Meanwhile, Bapak Petrus Pengog, who was also interviewed, expressed his outrage in the followingstatement. "They bought the land from the Koting people. All the land is from Koting. The people of Kampung Gere feel that if they [the 11 households] do not follow the regulations, there is no point of having regulations at all. We [villagers from Dusun Gere] won't follow the rules anymore either if the Bupati [government] does not insist that they obey the regulations. If they don't, we'll just kill them." Petrus Pengog, respected community figure, 8 May 2003 Furthermore these conflicts over village boundaries are not confined to Desa KotingAand DesaTakalager. The Head of Desa Takaplager stated: "These sorts of disputes don't just happen between Koting A and Takaplager, but they also take place between Koting B, Koting C and Ribang. There are also citizens of Koting A who live in my village [Takaplager], for example in Nampung Kabor, there isAli's family,Agu's family, Udin's family as well as Neri's family. In addition, there are also two families in Habi Tedang, namely, Rofinus and Yoseph's families." Gerardus Goli, Head of Desa Takaplager, 17 May 2003 Untilnow,thisopenconflictbetweenthevillagersofKotingAandthevillagersofTakaplager hasnotflaredupagain. Nevertheless,thelatentconflict,relatingtolandborders,continuesto exist. Furthermore,thevillagershavelosttheirfaithinthegovernmentbecausetheydidnot take firm action to resolve the case. Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 142 Unrest on the Border Desa KotingA, Kecamatan Maumere, Kabupaten Sikka, Flores Author: Stanis Didakus Case Chronology: Unrest on the Border Date Event 1980s The "newcomers" arrive in the village, buying land and building their own houses. 1989 Some of these "newcomer", whose administrative status is contested, do not participate in Dusun Gere community volunteer work. 1997 An election census results in some disagreement of the administrative status of 11 households. 2001 The National Land Certification Project (PRONA) is carried out in several villages in Kabupaten Sikka, including the disputed boundary land between Dusun Gere and Desa Takaplager. 23 May 2001 The Village Head of Takaplager arrives to measure three (of the eleven families) plots of land, villagers from Dusun Gere arrive en masse in protest. Father Andreas Sawu arrives calms the crowd. Shortly after Father John Aria requests that the village government of Desa Koting A, the village of Dusun Gere, make peace. 16 June 2001 The First Assistant to the Bupati held a meeting at the Bupati's office. The village head of Koting A, Takaplager and Ribang as well as an official from BPN (National Land Agency), head of the office for village registration, a representative from the community unity and protection office (Kesbanglimas), head of Dusun Poma and Dusun Gere, and the section head of the Kecamatan Nita office all attended this meeting. There is some misunderstanding regarding the statement made by the First Assistant. 6 July 2001 A meeting is held at Dusun Gere's hall in an attempt to resolve status of land, those in attendance include: The Camat of Maumere, secretary of Kecamatan Nita, Village Heads of Koting A, Ribang and Takaplager, as well as representatives from the police, and the houses which were fenced off by the masses April 2002 Several of the families stated that they had already been included in the Desa Takaplager census for the 2004 elections. Researchers: Don dela Santo, Stanis Didakus and Olin Monteiro; Co-ordinators: Adam Satu and Jessica Gilmore Translator: Kristen Stokes 143 References Aragon, Lorraine V. (2001), `Communal Violence in Poso, Central Sulawesi: Where People Eat Fish and Fish Eat People', Indonesia, Vol. 72, pp. 45 ­ 79. Asia Foundation (2001), `Citizens'Perception of the Indonesian Justice Sector'. Jakarta: AsiaFoundation. Barron,Patrick,RachaelDiprose,DavidMadden,ClaireQ.Smith,andMichaelWoolcock (2004),`DoParticipatoryDevelopmentProjectsHelpVillagersManageLocalConflicts:A Mixed MethodsApproach toAssessing the Kecamatan Development Project, Indonesia'. CPR Working Paper No. 9. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. Barron,PatrickandDavidMadden(2004),`Violence&ConflictResolutionin"Non-Conflict" Regions: The Case of Lampung, Indonesia'. Indonesian Social Development Paper No. 2. Jakarta:World Bank. Barron,Patrick,ClaireQ.Smith,andMichaelWoolcock(2004),`UnderstandingLocalLevel ConflictPathways:Theory,Evidence,andImplicationsfromIndonesia'.CPRWorkingPaper No. 19.Washington D.C.: World Bank. Barron, Patrick, Kai Kaiser, and Menno Pradhan (2004), `Local Conflict in Indonesia: Measuring Incidence and Identifying Patterns'. Policy Research Working Paper No. 3384. Washington,D.C:WorldBank. Barron,PatrickandJoanneSharpe(forthcoming),`CountingConflicts:UsingNewspapers to RecordViolence in Indonesia'. Mimeo. Jakarta:World Bank. Bertrand, Jacques (2004), Nationalism and Ethnic Conflict in Indonesia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bowen, John R. (2003), Islam, Law and Equality in Indonesia: An Anthropology of Public Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Deininger, Klaus (2003), Land Policies for Growth and Poverty Reduction. Washington, D.C: World Bank/Oxford University Press. Fitzpatrick,Daniel(1997),`DisputesandPluralisminModernIndonesianLandLaw',Yale Journal of International Law, Vol. 22, p. 171. Fitzpatrick, Daniel (2002), Land Claims in East Timor. Canberra:Asia Pacific Press. 144 Edmunds,DavidandEvaWollenberg(2002),"DisadvantagedGroupsinMultistakeholder Negotiations'.ProgrammeReport.Bogor:CIFOR. Homer-Dixon,Thomas (2001), Environment, Scarcity and Violence.Princeton: Princeton UniversityPress. HRW(1997),`CommunalViolenceinWestKalimantan'.AsiaReport,NewYork. HRW(2002),`Breakdown:FourYearsofCommunalViolenceinCentralSulawesi'.Vol.14, No. 9C, New York. ICG(2000),`Indonesia'sMalukuCrisis:TheIssues'.IndonesiaBriefing.Jakarta/Brussels. ICG (2001), `Communal Violence in Indonesia: Lessons from Kalimantan'.Asia Report No. 19. Jakarta/Brussels. ICG (2002), `Indonesia: Resources and Conflict in Papua'.Asia Report No. 39. Jakarta/ Brussels. ICG (2003), `Indonesia: Managing Decentralization and Conflict in South Sulawesi'. Asia Report No. 60. Jakarta/Brussels. vanKlinken,G.(2002),`Indonesia'sNewEthnicElite'.InHenkSchulteNordholtandIrwan Abdullah (eds.) Indonesia in Search of Transition.Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar. Markakis, John (1998), Resource Conflict in the Horn of Africa. London: Sage Publications. McCarthy,John(2004),`ChangingtoGray:DecentralizationandtheEmergenceofVolatile Socio-Legal Configurations in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia', World Development,Vol. 32, No. 7, pp. 1199 ­ 1223. Peluso, Nancy Lee and Michael Watts (eds.) (2001), Violent Environments. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Prior, John Mansford (2003), `The Church and Land Disputes: Sobering Thoughts from Flores'.Mimeo.Maumere:CandradityaResearchCentrefortheStudyofReligiouandCulture. Rinaldi,Taufik (2003), `When Natives become Guests in their own Land:ACase Study on LandDisputesinLampung'.InternalMimeo.JusticeforthePoor.Jakarta:WorldBank. 145 Ross,MarkHoward(1995),`InterestsandIdentitiesinNaturalResourceConflictsInvolving Indigenous People', Cultural Survival, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 74 ­ 76. Salih, Mohamed (1999), Environmental Politics and Liberation in Contemporary Africa. Dordrecht:KluwerAcademicPublishers. Smith,ClaireQ.(forthcoming),`TheRootsofViolenceandProspectsforReconciliation:A CaseStudyofEthnicConflictinCentralKalimantan,Indonesia'.Jakarta:WorldBank. de Soto, Hernando (2000), The Mystery of Capital. New York: Basic Books. Stephens,Matt(2002),`IndonesianLandLaw'.InternalMimeo.JusticeforthePoor.Jakarta: WorldBank. Swain, Ashok (1993), Environment and Conflict: Analysing the Developing World. Report No. 37. Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University. Varshney,Ashutosh,RizalPanggabeanandMohammadZulfanTadjoeddin(2004),`Patterns ofCollectiveViolenceinIndonesia(1990­2003)'.WorkingPaper04/03.Jakarta:UNSFIR Wijardjo, Boedhi and Herlambang Perdana (2001), Reklaiming dan Kedaulatan Rakyat. Jakarta: YLBHI and RACA Institute. World Bank (2004a), Village Justice in Indonesia: Case Studies on Access to Justice, Village Democracy and Governance. Justice for the Poor. Jakarta. WorldBank(2004b),`ModesofConflictResolutionintheMinangkabauNagari'. Internal Mimeo. Justice for the Poor. Jakarta. WorldBank(2004c),`BacktotheFuture:RegionalAutonomyandanUncertainAdatRevival'. Internal Mimeo. Justice for the Poor. Jakarta. WorldBank(2003),`LandManagementandPolicyDevelopmentProject­Indonesia'.Jakarta, availableatwww.worldbank.or.id. 146