In the midst of criticism from many parties regarding the opening ceremony of the Paris 2024 Olympics, I see an important message being conveyed, which is the importance of creating inclusive spaces for marginalized communities, such as indigenous communities. The opening of the Olympics, held outside the stadium for the first time, presented a theatrical scene of the French Queen Marie Antoinette being guillotined. This scene seems to remind us that power should not be tyrannical and oppressive, especially towards marginalized communities. From this Olympics opening, I believe it is important for us to discuss the inclusive power space in every state policy.

I will take a learning point from indigenous communities. Amid the global recognition of indigenous communities, Indonesia is struggling to fulfill its promises to uphold the rights of indigenous communities over their land, culture, and natural resources. There are at least six crucial issues faced by indigenous communities in Indonesia today. First, the recognition and protection of rights to customary land. Indigenous communities often face conflicts with companies and the government regarding their claims to their customary land. Certification and official recognition of customary land and forests are often difficult to obtain, making them vulnerable to land grabs by third parties. Second, legal protection and human rights. Indigenous communities often lack adequate access to the justice system and legal protection. Third, the loss of culture and identity. Fourth, limited access to education and healthcare. Fifth, discrimination and social stigma. Sixth, environmental damage caused by industrial activities.

Laying the Foundation for Sharing Power

The noble ideals in the preamble of the 1945 Constitution are aimed at creating social justice for all Indonesian people. To realize a just social order, a system of ownership and management of natural resources that can accommodate the interests of the community, both economically and culturally, is needed.

The system of ownership and management of natural resources should also place the people as the main actors. This principle must be based on respect for human rights, justice, cultural diversity, and ecosystem sustainability.

Policies on the ownership and management of natural resources should be based on the belief that the people have the ability to govern themselves. These policies should be guided by a spirit of respect for the people’s ability to make good choices according to their beliefs. The policies should not only aim to achieve a just social order but also to structure a system of ownership and management of resources that places the people as the main actors. The constitutional basis for such policies is the starting point for understanding the regulation foundation concerning marginalized communities, including indigenous communities.

Three Inclusion Spaces

Currently, the state has created at least 47 regulations at the level of laws, government regulations, presidential regulations, ministerial regulations, and 461 local legal products regulating the existence and rights of indigenous communities. Among these hundreds of regulations, there is a fundamental question: to what extent has the quality of policies accommodating the needs of indigenous communities been implemented? Another question arises: if the Indigenous Community Law is enacted today, will the policy always be in favor of indigenous communities? What guarantees that the state will not create other legal products that overlook the existence and rights of indigenous communities?

In the current regime that manipulates procedural law as it is now, I believe that what needs to be discussed is not only the achievement of regulations. The existence of a value system—economic, political, legal, and cultural—within the regulations is crucial. Thus, it is not merely a descriptive-analytical explanation of statutory regulations (law in the book). The value system also addresses how the law is implemented within indigenous communities (law in action) and takes legal action first.

In carrying out legal actions, it would be better to reorganize the organization. As mentioned by philosopher Karl Popper (1966) as piecemeal social engineering. This term refers to achieving social change through incremental improvement, step by step, and part by part. The process of legal action with a piecemeal approach can be divided into three inclusion spaces. First, the recognition inclusion space. This means full recognition of the indigenous community’s rights of origin. Second, the subsidiarity inclusion space. This space means the establishment of local authority and decision-making for the community’s own interests. Third, the citizen inclusion space. This space applies to the context of public service fulfillment.

These three inclusion spaces, if realized, can provide autonomous space for the people. Thus, in applying the principles of communal living, the process of change can proceed as Tan Malaka said: “clash, clash, and… form.”

Agung Wibowo

Full article: https://totheweb.com/learning_center/tools-convert-html-text-to-plain-text-for-content-review/