Reflections on the Human Condition - Api-fellowships.org

368 SESSION VI
peasants in land occupation cases in the countryside.
The situation was evident at Cibenda, not less obvious
at Ciècèng. Another turning point took place in May
2000 when ex-president Abdurrahman Wahid who
claimed ‘to be none better than him about what the
poor need’ stated that ‘40 percent of plantations’ land
should be returned to the people’. 12 The statement was
interpreted as a ‘presidential decree’ before peasants
took their own hands to occupy the land, a quick move
that matched to the preparatory period when most
of the peasant groups (over 60 percent) in the three
districts in eastern West Java where SPP works started
the organizing and land occupation activities in 1999,
one year after the regime change.
The difference of both peasant groups in reacting to
the Reformasi refers to the timing of the intervention
of the student-led NGOs in the districts. Though
land disputes in both villages had started to hit the
peasant communities earlier during the past regime’s
time, the organizing activities directed by the NGOs
took place one earlier than the other, not in a parallel
period. Cibenda started in August 1998 and the other
over one year later in December 1999. Two reasons
may be offered for it, first, the remoter location of the
Ciècèng than the Cibenda villages that it took longer
time to relate the peasant concerns to the town-based
NGOs, and secondly, unlike at Ciècèng there was a
student activist who hailed from Cibenda village and
related his co-villagers’ problems to a senior movement
organizer who later helped the student group to set up
an organization for the specific purpose in supporting
the Cibenda peasants. The presence of “organic leader”
made the peasant concerns quicker being channelled
into organixed activities.
Role of State Actors
Similarities
a) District councillors.
Only the district councillors
tend to be willing to help the peasants by
recognizing their grievances. The councillors
also take role as “supporting witnesses” to the
peasants’ cause in negotiation meeting with the
plantation and government officials who support
the plantation.
b) Land agency.
In both cases the state land agency
at the district level (BPN) did not perform any
helpful role, as they were normally expected to be
supporting land reform program, even in Cibenda
case, their role was almost negative since the
agency officials were even individually involved in
Ref lections on the Human Condition: Change, Conflict and Modernity
The Work of the 2004/2005 API Fellows
the land grabbing scheme.
c) Government attorneys.
In both cases they supported
the local establishment’s interests.
d) Police.
Police used their main assigned tasks to
maintain order by implementing criminal law. In
case of peasants breaking the law, such as burning
hatchery building (Cibenda), damaging police’s
trucks (Ciècèng), police sought to arrest them.
Differences
a) Administration officials
i. During the land occupation struggle.
In Cibenda
case, the peasants almost could not fight against
high-profile moves of the officials because their
position is fairly weak. While in Ciècèng case, the
peasant group could still rely their interests on the
lowest level of state actors i.e. the village head, at
least he maintained to be truthfully neutral.
ii. After the land occupation.
The Ciècèng peasants
won the election of the village head and village
councils, though the challenges were abound
because at the district level, such leaders in the
lowest level of bureaucracy were pitted against
other neighbouring village heads and the
government-appointed sub-district head. Cibenda
peasants failed in 2004 attempt to enter into the
election arena of the district councillors for lack
of internal supports from the umbrella peasant
organizations. 13
Role of Social Actors
The NGO’s Role through Organizing Activities
The role of the intervening NGOs to the peasant
communities may be said “minimal” in both cases.
It is apparently normal in the framework of program
implementation if the peasant group is strong enough,
the NGOs need not intervene the peasant community
organizing activities. However, interviews with
organizers reveal that in the latter development why
they face less fervour of the peasants is that apart from
institutional difficulties on the part of the NGO as
they lacked adequate concept of post-land occupation
activities, they also lack financial resources to support
the travel to remote areas in the district.
The difference between the NGOs’ roles in both cases
relates mainly to the existence and non-existence
of ‘organic leader’ from among the peasants. The
involvement of the NGO in Cibenda case was therefore
almost better assisted in their work to respond the land
dispute in the village by doing organizing and mass