SURVEY REPORT ON CITIZENS' PERCEPTIONS OF THE INDONESIAN JUSTICE SECTOR Preliminary Findings and Recommendations
TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword 3 Executive Summary 5 METHODOLOGY 17 FINDINGS 21 1. Ranking Legal Issues Among the Major Problems Facing Indonesia 23 2. Citizen Knowledge of Rights, Law, and the Legal System 25 3. Perceptions of the Justice Sector 30 4. General Awareness of Legal Institutions 33 5. Knowledge of the Role and Procedures of Legal Institutions 35 6. Gender Sensitivity 48 7. Problems Facing the Justice Sector 50 8. Rating the Performance of Legal Institutions 52 9. Perceptions of Justice Sector Institutions 53 10. Actual Experience with the Legal System 58 11. Preferred Means of Dispute Resolution 63 12. Musyawarah 70 13. Police 73 14. General Court 76 15. Future Course of Action 79 16. Sources of Information on the Law 80 DEMOGRAPHICS 84 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 91 i
FOREWORD This report presents the preliminary findings and recommendations of a survey study on citizens perceptions of the Indonesian justice sector, conceived and developed by The Asia Foundation and conducted by ACNielsen. The justice sector broadly defined to include the judiciary, law enforcement agencies, administrative tribunals, legal education institutions, the legal profession, and civil society organizations that focus on legal issues has a critical but as yet unfulfilled role to play in Indonesia s democratic transition and economic development efforts. Substantial investments have been made in diagnostic studies of the justice sector and in the development of the courts, the police, and other legal institutions. The legal assistance and advocacy work of nongovernmental organizations has to a limited extent been informed by participatory assessments of beneficiary needs. In contrast, the national legal reform agenda has been determined primarily by lawmakers, senior government officials, legal professionals, and other high-level stakeholders, with few opportunities extended to ordinary citizens to register their needs and expectations or to actively participate in legal reform efforts. The socially and economically disadvantaged have been particularly far removed from the reform agenda, despite the fact that present weaknesses in the legal system have serious implications for their rights, basic security, and opportunities to participate in economic development and public affairs. As an important planning tool in The Asia Foundation s comprehensive law program, the study was designed to gather information on citizens' perceptions and experience as prospective beneficiaries or actual clients of the justice sector. It focuses on the choices that Indonesians make in resolving legal disputes, including: their basic legal knowledge base; their familiarity with the role and procedures of the courts, police, and other formal institutions; the factors that influence their preference for formal or alternative solutions to legal problems; and their level of satisfaction with chosen courses of action. The study builds on the Foundation s experience in conducting similar research on voter knowledge, citizen perceptions of the democratic process, and the legal system in Indonesia, Cambodia, and Pakistan, and on ACNielsen s extensive experience in conducting survey research. The study is intended to serve as a program planning tool to assist the Foundation and other donors to refine their law program strategies to best serve the needs and interests of ordinary citizens as clients of the justice sector. It is also intended to serve as a reference source of interest to development organizations, legal scholars, and other observers of legal reform efforts. The preliminary findings and recommendations of this first study of its kind to focus specifically on citizens perceptions of the Indonesian justice sector are by no means exhaustive. There is a wealth of information and insights yet to be plumbed from the quantitative data. It is hoped that the findings and recommendations will serve as a foundation on which follow-up research, public dialogue, and program activities will build. iii
The Foundation is grateful to Farquhar Stirling, Achala Srivatsa, Miriam Rustam, Eko Wicaksono, and their colleagues at ACNielsen for their work in conducting the survey research. We also wish to thank the many Indonesian and international legal specialists who informed the design of the study and who have waited patiently for the results. Finally, we extend special thanks to the U.S. Agency for International Development for its generous financial support for the research, and to the more than 1,700 citizens who graciously gave their time to participate in the qualitative and quantitative phases of the study. The Asia Foundation Jakarta August 2001 iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Methodology The research study was conducted in two phases: qualitative and quantitative. The qualitative research included a combination of semi-structured, in-depth interviews and focus group discussions involving community and religious leaders, NGO workers, academics, journalists, business people, legal professionals, and individuals with experience as parties to lawsuits. It informed the design of the quantitative research questionnaire. An AC Nielsen survey team administered the questionnaire among 1,700 male and female respondents over 18 years of age, in equal number. The questionnaire included a combination of open questions and set lists from which respondents selected responses that best matched their views or experience. The geographic sampling included urban, semi-urban, and rural communities in Jakarta and five provinces: East Java, Central Java, West Java, North Sumatra, and South Sulawesi. Findings 2.1. Ranking Legal Issues Among the Major Problems Facing Indonesia: Rising consumer prices and the increasing cost of living headed the list of most serious problems facing Indonesia today, cited by 35 percent of respondents. The additional problems included a mix of political, security, and related economic concerns, including political leadership, the risk of public demonstrations and riots, job security, and government economic policies. While specific legal issues did not rank among the leading problems cited by respondents, several of the problems cited, including security concerns, have an implicit legal dimension. 2.2. Citizen Knowledge of Fundamental Rights, Law, and the Legal System 2.2.1 Fundamental Rights: Fifty-six percent of respondents were unable to provide a single example of a right to which they are entitled. The few examples cited included the right to fair treatment under the law, the right to a secure living environment, and the right to legal protection. Male respondents were generally more aware of fundamental rights than female respondents. In general, urban residents demonstrated better knowledge of fundamental rights than their semi-urban or rural counterparts. For example, 67 percent of urban respondents were able to identify a right, versus only 33 percent of rural respondents. 2.2.2 Justiciable Disputes: Criminal matters, including burglary, assault, fraud, and petty theft, dominated the types of disputes that respondents identified as being subject to legal action. These were followed by a mix of civil disputes, including legal title to land, unlawful eviction from property, and uncompensated expropriation of land. With the exception of divorce, few respondents regarded family and personal law issues such as domestic violence and consumer protection as being subject to legal action. 3
2.3 Perceptions of the Justice Sector: Respondents' perspectives on a series of random observations drawn from the qualitative study reflect a diversity of views and expectations regarding the justice sector, the national legal reform process, and the changes brought by democratic reform. Positive expectations: 87 percent 1 of respondents believe that the legal system can be improved. 85 percent agree that ordinary citizens can help the government to make the legal system fairer. 63 percent of respondents believe that the government cares about the views of ordinary citizens Unfulfilled expectations: 57 percent of respondents believe the legal system is as corrupt as it has even been. 51 percent of respondents feel that the legal system does not protect them 47 percent of respondents expected that the Wahid government would bring changes in the law, but found that this was not the case 46 percent believe that reformasi has not changed the legal system, while 48 percent considered themselves powerless to affect it. Preferences: 62 percent of respondents would avoid going to court at all costs 69 percent reject vigilante justice as an acceptable means of dealing with crime 2.4 General Familiarity with Legal Institutions: Respondents were most familiar with community leaders 2 and the police (confirmed by 99 percent and 98 percent of respondents, respectively). Religious leaders (93 percent), the armed forces (88 percent), religious courts (86 percent) followed these, and general courts (80 percent). Less familiar institutions included legal aid agencies (50 percent), the National Human Rights Commission (43 percent), and other NGOs. Respondents were largely unfamiliar with the National Ombudsman Commission (NOC) and Badan Arbitrasi Nasional Indonesia (BANI), at 5 percent respectively. 2.5 Familiarity with Institutional Procedures: Respondents were most familiar with the procedures for bringing problems before local community and religious leaders (93 percent and 74 percent respectively). A substantial gap separated community and religious leaders from the police (57 percent), religious courts (33 percent), legal aid agencies (26 percent), and general courts (25 percent). Respondents were least familiar with the procedures for the armed forces, the National Human Rights Commission, the NOC, other NGOs, and BANI. 1 Unless otherwise indicated, most of the percentage figures that follow represent multiple responses by individual respondents. 2 Comprising a combination of appointed and voluntary local leaders, including Rukun Warga, Rukum Tetangga, and Kepala Desa or Lurah). 4
2.6 Gender Sensitivity: Respondents identified a woman s family, her husband s family, and community leaders as the most reliable sources of gender sensitive legal support for women. They had little confidence in the capacity of formal legal institutions and officials to sensitively deal with cases involving the rights and interests of women. 2.7 Problems Facing the Justice Sector: Respondents identified corruption as the leading cause of problems facing the legal sector (cited by 18 percent of respondents). Other causes identified included lack of resolution of cases (16 percent); lack of professional skills among the staff of legal institutions (7 percent); excessive government interference (6 percent); and low standards of professional ethics (5 percent). Twenty-seven percent of respondents were unable to account for the problems facing the legal system. Respondents ranked the general courts (cited by 29 percent of respondents), religious courts (27 percent), BANI (20 percent), and police (18 percent) as the institutions that have the most critical role to play in the future of the legal system. 2.8 Performance Ranking: Respondents' perception-based 3 ranking of the performance of various institutions was generally consistent with their level of familiarity with the functions and procedures of those institutions. Religious leaders and religious courts received the highest performance ranking. Community leaders and the general courts followed these. The lower ranks included the armed forces, legal aid agencies, the National Human Rights Commission, other NGOs, and the police. BANI and the National Ombudsman Commission ranked lowest on the scale. In fairness to the latter two institutions, their low performance ranking should be viewed as a reflection of respondents' lack of familiarity and contact with them, as opposed to the actual quality of services provided (See also 2.9). 2.9 Citizen Perceptions of Individual Institutions: Respondents were asked to associate a series of institutional attributes drawn from the qualitative research with various legal institutions. Their responses were analyzed using a perceptual mapping technique that grouped institutions according to common associations. The mapping exercise yielded three categories of institution: CATEGORY ATTRIBUTES ASSOCIATED INSTITUTIONS Ineffective Effective Unreliable, disrespectful, arrogant, risky, corrupt, apt to demand a bribe, ignores human rights, serves the wealthy Trustworthy, does job well, timely, helpful, the first to go to with a legal problem Police, general courts Community leaders, religious leaders, religious courts Unknown Unnecessary National Ombudsman Commission, BANI 3 As opposed to actual experience 5
2.10 Actual Experience with the Legal System 2.10.1 Common Problems: The most common disputes that respondents have recently faced are: petty theft (cited by 10 percent of respondents), domestic and community violence (9 percent), fraud (5 percent), personal injury resulting from a traffic accident (5 percent), and divorce (4 percent) 2.10.2 Choice of Formal Action, Informal Solutions, or No Action: Sixty-three percent of respondents had experienced a justiciable legal dispute of some kind. The majority (57 percent) pursued a solution through non-formal means, while 18 percent took formal action and 32 percent did nothing. Among the 57 percent who pursued informal solutions, 99 percent opted for musyawarah (in some cases, as one of several actions taken). Among the 18 percent who took formal action, 70 percent sought police assistance and 38 percent filed court cases. As the percentage totals attest, some respondents pursued a combination of police assistance and court action. Among those who pursued alternatives solutions, the primary reasons cited for not taking formal legal action included: a belief that formal action would be a waste of time (cited by 33 percent of respondents); the prohibitive cost of going to court (21 percent); cultural values (16 percent); and fear of losing face (13 percent). Reasons cited by those who took no action whatsoever included lack of knowledge of what to do (ranging from 24 percent of urban respondents to 47 percent of rural respondents) and the belief that the problem was not sufficiently important to be taken up by the police or the court; that too much time would be required to reach a solution; that action of any kind would damage relations with the other party or cause problems for the families involved; that the costs would be too great; and that there was insufficient evidence to support a claim. 2.10.3 Comparing Satisfaction Levels: Among those who opted for musyawarah, police assistance, or formal legal action through the general court, satisfaction levels were highest for the court, followed by musyawarah and the police: Institution Satisfactory Fair Unsatisfactory General Court 85 percent 6 percent 8 percent Musyawarah 83 percent 12 percent 7 percent Police 52 percent 33 percent 15 percent 6
Musyawarah: The primary reasons cited by respondents who opted for musyawarah include: the prospect of maintaining community harmony (58 percent); consistency with traditional practices (38 percent); and low cost (18 percent). Urban residents tended to be slightly more satisfied with the outcome of musyawarah. Among the 7 percent who were not satisfied with the outcome, the primary reasons cited were: failure to settle the dispute; inadequate clarification of issues; inability to tell their side of the story; and the effect of vested interests on the outcome of the case. Police: Respondents who sought police assistance cited a number of factors that weighed in their decision. Forty-one percent expected a fair decision; 24 percent knew where the police station was located; 22 percent did not know what else to do; and 16 percent had general trust in the police. Rural respondents were slightly more satisfied with the performance of police than their urban and semi-urban respondents. Among the 15 percent who were not satisfied with police assistance, 33 percent reported that the case took a long time to resolve, while 28 percent reported that they had to pay more money than they expected to settle their claim. General Court: Among those who filed court cases, 31 percent believed that they had no choice but to pursue the matter in court; 27 percent expected a fair decision; 27 percent followed the advice of relatives; and 10 percent had general trust in the legal system. Rural respondents were slightly less satisfied with the experience of going to court. Among the 8 percent of respondents who were not satisfied with their court experience, 72 percent reported that they were unable to get a fair decision; 69 percent indicated that it took a long time for the case to be resolved; 49 percent felt that the judge was not impartial; and 28 percent found that the court case exacerbated the conflict. One hundred percent of dissatisfied female respondents reported that they could not get a fair decision, versus 29 percent of male respondents. 2.11 Sources of Public Information on the Law 2.11.1 General Information: The majority of respondents rely on television as a primary source of general information about law and the legal system (79 percent). Radio and newspapers follow television (49 percent and 48 percent respectively). A few respondents continue to obtain information from traditional sources such as family or friends (27 percent), neighborhood or community meetings (17 percent), and local religious centers or organizations (10 percent). 2.11.2 Specific Information: Television also ranks as the primary source of information on specific legal issues, followed by newspapers, family and friends, and radio. Television, newspapers, and radio are particularly popular among urban respondents, while residents of semi-urban and rural communities more frequently rely on family and friends. Among those who depend on television as a source of information, the most popular programs are SCTV Liputan 6 (SCTV News at 6), Patroli,, and Derap Hukum. 7
2.11.3 Responsibility for Providing Information on Laws and Regulations: The majority of respondents (60 percent) believe that community leaders have primary responsibility for informing the public about laws and regulations. They are followed by the national government (50 percent), the courts (31 percent), religious leaders and the press (25 percent respectively), and the President (18 percent). There is a general consensus that that those primarily responsible are doing a good job in their information-sharing role. Respondents ranked religious leaders as the most effective information providers (78 percent). 3. Analysis and Recommendations The recommendations drawn from the survey findings are grouped under three objectives: 1. To promote increased public understanding of fundamental rights, law, and the legal system 2. To strengthen the capacity of formal legal institutions and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms to meet citizen needs 3. To enhance the quality and scope of legal assistance services available to citizens. Advancement of these three objectives will in turn contribute to improved public access to justice and help to facilitate informed public participation in national law reform efforts. While certain needs are particularly urgent, and some activities will lay the groundwork for those that follow, there is no strict order of priority in which the recommended program actions should be undertaken. The objectives are mutually reinforcing, so that progress in meeting one objective will in turn help to advance overall efforts to improve the quality of justice as experienced by ordinary citizens. Knowledge of law is most valuable when it is converted into concrete action. Efforts to educate citizens about the law, strengthen the capacity of legal institutions to meet public needs, and improve the quality of legal support services available to disadvantaged populations should ideally be guided by the concept of legal empowerment, or the use of law to increase the control that the poor, women, and other disadvantaged groups exercise over their lives. 4 The most advanced legal empowerment initiatives go beyond simply educating people. They provide the disadvantaged with opportunities to apply the knowledge or skills imparted to advance their legal interests, including taking action that secures or enforces their rights and improves their well being. 4 For a detailed analysis of legal empowerment from which several of the recommendations are drawn, see the sevencountry study on Legal Empowerment: Advancing Good Governance and Poverty Reduction, which The Asia Foundation recently completed on behalf of the Asian Development Bank. 8
Objective 1: Promote Increased Public Understanding of Fundamental Rights, Law, and the Legal System Until all citizens achieve a basic understanding of fundamental rights and the law, there is little prospect that even the most technically successful legal reform initiatives will meet their full potential to benefit ordinary citizens, particularly the poor, women, and other socially and economically disadvantaged populations. RECOMMENDATIONS: Apply proven information-sharing strategies and techniques to educate citizens about rights, law, and the legal system: Legal institutions, government agencies, and civil society organizations should make every effort to increase public understanding of law through a combination of proven methodologies and promising experimental techniques. These may include, inter alia, radio and television, publications, the performing arts and popular culture, information and communications technology (ICT), and targeted training to meet the specific needs of women, rural residents, and other specific beneficiary groups. Raise public understanding of the roles and procedures of formal institutions and ADR mechanisms: Public education should provide citizens with a sound knowledge of: (a) the functions of various legal institutions, and the procedures to be followed to bring a case before them; (b) the role and responsibilities of police, judges, administrative agents, and other public officials; (c) the informal mechanisms and procedures to which citizens can turn as an alternative to the formal system; and (d) the factors that should inform the choice of venue for resolution of a particular problem. Focus on unfamiliar institutions: Special efforts should be made to raise the profile and role of institutions of which citizens presently have minimal knowledge. These include the National Ombudsman Commission, the National Human Rights Commission, legal aid organizations, and other NGOs that provide legal assistance services of various kinds. Understanding the Legal Dimension of Broader Development Constraints: In addition to equipping citizens to diagnose and resolve the "conventional" legal problems that they most frequently confront, information programs should also help them to understand the more subtle ways in which the law affects their lives. RECOMMENDATION: Help citizens to understand the legal dimension of administrative and other public decision-making procedures: Public education programs should help to raise awareness of the legal dimension of broader development and governance constraints that citizens would otherwise not consider from a legal perspective. As a minimum, all citizens should understand that public officials are bound to responsibly perform their legally prescribed decision-making powers, and be familiar with the administrative and other procedures through which they can ensure that public decision-making powers that affect the rights and interests of individuals and communities are responsibly exercised. 9
Equipping Key Legal Information Providers to Better Serve Citizen Needs: As a complement to new or refined information delivery mechanisms, there is a need to strengthen the information-sharing capacity of the institutions and individuals on which Indonesians presently depend for information on the law. RECOMMENDATION: Provide public officials with the resources needed to fulfill their legal informationsharing role: Public education initiatives should include corollary support to enhance the information sharing capacity of public institutions and officials. Judges, government officials, legal professionals, and others who are responsible for providing citizens with information or advice should be routinely provided with copies of laws and regulations, judicial decisions, professional guidelines and practice bulletins, and other legal resource materials, as well as other professional development opportunities. The police, courts, and other public institutions should be encouraged to establish public information centers, websites, and other mechanisms to provide information to citizens. These information-sharing efforts should be guided by the special information needs of women, the rural population, those with no formal education, and others who presently have minimal knowledge of the formal justice system. Freedom of Information: Freedom of information goes hand in hand with legal reform. Legal and judicial reform initiatives should be grounded in an enabling environment that simultaneously facilitates access to information and mobilizes public demand for greater accountability and transparency in public decision making. RECOMMENDATION: Join the call for a freedom of information law: To advance public demand for greater freedom of access to information, civil society organizations, the private sector, and the donor community should add their voices to the growing demand for freedom of information legislation. Objective 2: Strengthen the Capacity of Formal Legal Institutions and Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms to Meet Citizen Needs Formal Institutions: The survey results indicate that, in general, Indonesians have much lower confidence in the courts, police, and most other formal institutions than they do in alternative dispute resolution mechanisms (although the majority of respondents who actually took cases to general court were satisfied with the experience). There is a need to strengthen the capacity and public image of formal institutions and public officials. RECOMMENDATIONS: Educate the public on the role of legal institutions: The courts, police, and other formal institutions should make every effort to provide the public with information on their institutional role and responsibilities through a variety of media and institutional 10
mechanisms. In particular, education initiatives should be guided by the special information needs of women, the rural poor, those with no formal education, and others whose knowledge of the formal justice system is particularly poor. Address corruption and other problems that tarnish the public image of legal institutions: Institutional development efforts should place particular emphasis on the factors that respondents cited as cause for low public confidence in the integrity of legal institutions. All formal institutions should take steps to restore reputations tarnished by corruption, failure to resolve cases, and low professional standards. In particular, the police and general courts should address their reputations for being corrupt, disrespectful and unreliable. The practices and experience of popular institutions such as religious courts should be further studied as potential models for the reform of those in which public confidence is low. Raise Public Awareness of and Confidence in Institutional Reform Efforts: Support for the institutional development of the general courts, police, the legal profession, and other key institutions should include innovative public relations components designed to candidly report on progress made, with a view to raising public confidence in particular institutions and the legal system in general. The print and broadcast media should provide thoughtful, informed reporting on legal reform issues, the steps that are being taken to address them, and the positive stories that can be told of modest achievements as reform efforts proceed. Informal Mechanisms: The research findings affirm that the majority of citizens prefer informal solutions to their legal problems over formal actions. As in many countries, alternative dispute resolution offers compelling time and cost advantages over the formal legal system. The national legal reform agenda should include efforts to enhance and expand proven ADR mechanisms. Further research on public preferences and experience will inform ADR program design, and help to determine the relevance in the Indonesian context of some of the key concerns that are typically raised about ADR. 5 RECOMMENDATIONS: Conduct research on public preferences and satisfaction levels: Follow-up research should determine whether reported preferences for ADR over formal legal action simply reflect the relative advantages that musyawarah and other ADR mechanisms offer over the courts, police, or other formal procedures (such as being faster, cheaper, or more consistent with local cultural values), or whether public preferences are more deeply rooted in the quality of the experience and the resolution reached. Target specialty areas: Alternative dispute resolution has proved particularly effective in the context of specialty areas such as environmental mediation. Government agencies and civil society organizations should explore further opportunities to apply ADR methodologies to resolve disputes. 5 Examples include the respective views that: (1) ADR may undermine judicial efforts; (2) ADR programs do not set precedent, refine legal norms, or establish broader community or national standards, nor do they promote a consistent application of legal rules; (3) ADR programs cannot correct systemic injustice, discrimination, or violations of human rights; (4) ADR programs do not work well in the context of extreme power imbalance between parties to a dispute; and (5) ADR settlements do not have any educational, punitive, or deterrent effect on the population 11
Combine the strengths of formal and informal procedures: Given the popularity and efficiency of ADR mechanisms, opportunities should be explored to combine formal and informal dispute resolution in appropriate circumstances, drawing on the respective strengths of the two systems. 6 Gender Sensitivity: Traditional gender biases and cultural values hinder the ability of women to sustain legal claims, resulting in a loss of confidence in the capacity of the legal system and the commitment of legal officials to serve the needs and interests of women. As the research findings attest, Indonesians have low confidence in the gender sensitivity of the general courts and other formal institutions. RECOMMENDATION: Include a gender component in every legal reform strategy: Every legal reform strategy should include a gender component that takes the legal needs and interests of women into account. Formal institutions should establish gender units to review present gender policies and practices and take steps to ensure that proceedings and personnel are sensitive and responsive to women's rights. Legal institutions should seek the advice and cooperation of leading women s organizations. Objective 3: Enhance the Quality and Scope of Legal Assistance Services Available to Citizens While increased public knowledge of law and improvements in the technical capacity and professional integrity of legal institutions and officials are essential to improve the quality of justice experienced by Indonesians, they are not sufficient to ensure consistent public access to justice. Additional mechanisms are needed to serve as a bridge between disadvantaged citizens and the justice sector. Legal aid organizations have for many years played an important role in assisting citizens to advance their legal rights, yet only 50 percent of respondents were aware of their role. Fewer still were familiar with the work of other organizations that provide legal support services such as education, counseling, ADR, or legal advocacy training. RECOMMENDATION: Raise the public profile and strengthen the institutional capacity and geographic outreach of legal service organizations: Steps should be taken to raise the public profile, geographic outreach, and institutional capacity of legal service organizations. Support should be provided to legal aid and other civil society organizations to strengthen the scope and quality of the legal education, counseling, paralegal support networks, and other legal assistance services that they provide, and to expand their geographic outreach to areas that are inadequately served at present. 6 The recommendation section of the main report includes some examples of Asia Foundation program initiatives in this an other areas. 12
To date, the majority of Indonesian legal service organizations have focused on a combination of individual client services and national-level advocacy initiatives. While work of this kind is critically important, legal service providers should follow the lead of organizations that have begun to focus on "second generation" legal service roles, guided by the goal of legal empowerment. Opportunities exist to expand and intensify the role of community legal service organizations in assisting the communities that they serve to apply legal knowledge to advance their legal and broader governance interests through direct engagement with local administrative officials and other public decisionmakers. RECOMMENDATION: Support legal empowerment efforts that advance broader governance reform and development efforts: Legal empowerment strategies are most effective when linked with other aspects of development. Some strategies may have a strictly legal focus, combing legal education with legal aid and other support services. The most effective strategies take integration a step further, combining legal work with activities that address broader community development or governance issues, such as community organizing, group formation, livelihood development, or participation in civic affairs. Support should be provided for initiatives of this kind, whose potential has yet to be fully explored in Indonesia. Conclusion: The Value of Public Participation in Law Reform Legal empowerment efforts contribute to institutional reform by mobilizing public interests and expectations that are often neglected by more narrowly focused efforts to strengthen formal institutions. Institutions generally, and legal and bureaucratic institutions in particular, tend to resist change. While Indonesia's legal institutions have come under increasing pressure from domestic reformers and the international community, they continue to operate with minimal sense of accountability to, or pressure from, the general public. Support for public education, development of institutional and professional capacity to identify and respond to citizen needs, and improved public access to legal services will help to bring a broader participatory dimension to national law reform efforts. As their knowledge, capacity, and confidence increase, Indonesians will gain greater control over their lives by learning how to effectively interact with a range of legal and governance institutions and to actively participate in public decision making processes rather than waiting for opportunities to be extended to them. 13
METHODOLOGY 15
1. Overview The study was conducted in two phases: qualitative and quantitative. The qualitative phase employed a combination of semi-structured, in-depth interviews and focus groups to explore public understanding of law, perceptions of the justice sector, and the factors that citizens take into account in choosing among the various formal and informal mechanisms available to resolve legal disputes. The qualitative research helped to define the legal issues that matter to ordinary Indonesians and the expectations that citizens hold concerning the impact of law and legal reform on their lives. The qualitative phase informed the design of the quantitative research instrument, identifying key issues to be explored in further depth and the terminology to be used in framing the questionnaire. The qualitative research was conducted in August-September 2000, with the quantitative research following in February 2001. 2. Sampling The qualitative sampling included 48 in-depth interviews with community and religious leaders, NGO workers, business people, journalists, lawyers, and individuals who had been involved as parties to a lawsuit, together with 18 focus group discussions. AC Nielsen researchers administered the quantitative research questionnaire through face-to-face interviews with 1,700 male and female respondents (in equal number) over the age of 18.
Table 1 - Geographic Distribution of the Sample LOCATION MAIN CITY SEMI URBAN RURAL TOTAL Jakarta 200 - - 200 Surabaya 100 - - East Java - 100 100 300 Semarang 100 - - Central Java - 100 100 300 Bandung 100 - - West Java - 100 100 300 Medan 100 - - North Sumatera - 100 100 300 Makassar 100 - - South Sulawesi - 100 100 300 TOTAL 700 500 500 1700 The quantitative research was designed to provide a representative sampling of the Indonesian population. It was conducted in Jakarta and five provinces. Respondents were drawn form urban, semi-urban, and urban communities in East Java (including Surabaya), Central Java (including Semarang), West Java (including Bandung), North Sumatra (including Medan), and South Sulawesi (including Makassar).
Table 2: Urban and Rural Classification Each basic criterion is measured in numeric value as follows: POPULATION % OF FARMING NUMBER OF DENSITY HOUSEHOLDS URBAN FACILITIES VALUE less than 500 less than 95-1 500-999 91-95 0 2 1000-1499 86-90 1 3 1500-1999 76-85 2 4 2000-2499 66-75 3 5 2500-2999 56-65 4 6 3000-3499 46-55 5 7 3500-3999 36-45 6 8 4000-4999 26-35 7 9 more or equal to 5000 less or equal to 25 more or equal to 8 10 Criteria for the inclusion of urban communities included - a population density of at least 5,000 persons per square kilometer - no more than 25 percent farming households - at least eight major facilities such as hospitals, schools, cinemas, banks, motorways, or electrical utilities. The basic criteria were assigned numeric values. A desa was classified as urban if it had a total value of 23 or above, and rural if the total value was less than 17. Those between 17-22 were classified as being in the process of transition from rural to urban status (semi-urban).
Table 3: Geographic Structure! The survey design was as follows: Province Kabupaten Kotamadya Kabupaten Selection of urban area Kecamatan Kecamatan Selection of rural area Desa Desa Desa Desa Desa Desa RT RT RT RT RT RT RT 5 Interviews per RT The following steps were followed in the multi-stage, random selection process: Step 1: Kelurahan/desa (village-sized urban and rural administrative units) were selected by AC Nielsen statisticians in Jakarta using a Master Frame of all kelurahan/desa provided by Biro Pusat Statistik (National Statistics Office), with probability proportionate to population. Step 2: Rukun tetangga (neighborhood administrative units) were selected by random-number interval method. ACNielsen interviewers in the field prepared lists of rukun tetangga based on information provided by the local kelurahan office. Step 3: Households were randomly selected by interval method. Step 4: Respondents 18 years of age and older were randomly selected at the household level. Where households had more than one eligible respondent, interviewers made the selection based on a Kish Grid of random selection, applying a 50:50 male-female selection quota.
3. Pilot Testing of Survey Questionnaire The draft survey questionnaire was pilot tested on a sampling of respondents with varying levels of education and different professional backgrounds. The pilot testing helped to ensure that the concepts presented and the terminology used in the questionnaire could be understood by all respondents. Through simplification of the language and concepts used and reduction of the number of questions, the average time required for respondents to complete the test was reduced to a reasonable length of approximately 40 to 60 minutes. 4. Interviewing Respondents Following the selection of an individual respondent, the interviewer requested his or her permission to be interviewed. If the individual was not available on the first visit, the interviewer made two follow-up calls to ensure a minimum of substitution. The interviewer provided some basic background on the nature of the questionnaire, asked some preliminary questions designed to disqualify certain respondents, and then proceeded with the questionnaire.
1. Ranking Legal Issues Among the Major Problems Facing Indonesia Table 4A: Most Significant Problems Confronting Indonesia Q7A. What do you feel is the most significant problem confronting Indonesia at present? Leading Problems Escalating prices/cost of living 35 Political leadership Public demonstrations/riots 12 14 Job security Government economic policies 7 7 Security/personal safety 3 Political instability 2 Tables Ref. 11B The qualitative study confirmed that Indonesians face a variety of social and economic problems. While many of those interviewed in the qualitative study expressed firm views regarding the problematic state of the justice sector, they did not rank legal issues among the most serious problems faced on a day-to-day basis. This perspective was confirmed by the quantitative study. Respondents were invited to chose among 23 sample problems provided in a set list, or to identify other issues that were not included in the list. From their responses, the list of most significant problems was produced. Rising consumer prices/increasing cost of living headed the list by a substantial margin, cited by 35 percent of respondents. Twenty-five percent of male respondents ranked rising prices/increased cost of living as the most significant problem, versus 44 percent of female respondents. The additional problems covered a range of political, security, and related economic concerns.
Table 4B: Most Significant Problems Confronting Indonesia (comparing urban, semi-urban, and rural communities) Q7A. What do you feel is the most significant problem confronting Indonesia at present? Leading Problems Escalating prices/cost of living Political leadership 15 15 14 Public demonstrations/riots 12 10 9 Job security 6 11 7 7 Government economic policies 9 5 3 Security/personal safety 3 3 1 2 3 Political instability 31 39 35 RURAL (n=505; N=50031) SEMI URBAN (n=504; N=37031) URBAN (n=702; N=13620) Tables Ref. 11B While there was striking consistency in the views of urban, semi-urban, and rural respondents, the rising cost of living posed a marginally greater problem for those living in urban and semi-urban communities. Members of the urban population were slightly more sensitive to problems associated with government economic policies and to the consequences of political instability. Although specific legal rights and access to justice issues did not rank among the most serious problems identified, several of problems cited (including personal security and national leadership) have an implicit legal dimension. Later findings suggest that many respondents lack the necessary basic knowledge on which a more sophisticated understanding of this kind would build.
2. Citizen Knowledge of Rights, Law, and the Legal System a) Fundamental Rights Table 5: Citizen Knowledge of Fundamental Rights Q8. As a citizen, you have many rights, including the right to take legal action in cases of theft, violence, or injury to person or property. Can you give other examples of such rights? Right to take legal action 22 Right to receive fair treatment 10 Right to live in security Right to protection under the law Right to private ownership Right to freedom of expression Right to be considered innocent until proven guilty Right to be represented by a lawyer 5 5 4 3 3 2 Don t know 56 Tables Ref 13A. Fifty-six percent of all respondents were unable to provide a single example of a right to which they are legally entitled. Among these sixtysix percent of female respondents were unable to provide an example, versus 45 percent of male respondents. Ninety-seven percent of respondents with no formal education were unable to provide an example. The percentage declined to 11 percent among those with higher education. Among the few examples that respondents provided, the majority of those cited were the very ones provided as illustrative examples in framing the question. Examples freely cited by respondents included right to fair treatment under the law, right to a secure living environment, and right to legal protection. For the majority of examples cited, women were less aware of the particular right than men.
Table 6: Citizen Knowledge of Fundamental Rights (comparing urban, semi-urban, and rural communities) Q8. As a citizen, you have many rights, including the right to take legal action in cases of theft, violence, or injury to person or property. Can you give other examples of such rights? Right to take legal action Right to receive fair treatment Right to live in security Right to protection under the law Right to private ownership Right to freedom of expression Right to be considered innocent until proven guilty Right to be represented by a lawyer Don t know 16 24 7 14 12 5 6 4 3 7 6 4 5 3 2 10 1 5 4 1 2 3 33 39 RURAL (n=505; N=50031) SEMI URBAN (n=504; N=37031) URBAN (n=702; N=13620) 51 66 Tables Ref. 13A On balance, urban residents demonstrated a better knowledge of fundamental rights than their semi-urban or rural counterparts. For example, 67 percent of urban respondents were able to provide an example of a legal right, versus only 34 percent of those from rural areas. Urban respondents were substantially more familiar with the concept of the right to freedom from violence and discrimination and the right to freedom of expression than their urban or semi-urban counterparts.
b) Justiciable Disputes Table 7A: Citizen Knowledge of Justiciable Issues Q9. Among the list of examples provided, which do you think could definitely or possibly be basis for legal action, and which are unlikely to lend themselves to legal action. Victim of burglary 72 21 6 1 Assault by other parties 68 23 6 3 Accused of committing a crime 65 25 8 3 Arbitrary arrest or detention Fraud Land title disputes Victim of petty theft Eviction from property Harassment by the police or military Land taken without compensation for development projects 63 27 5 5 62 30 6 2 59 30 7 5 58 30 11 1 57 32 8 3 56 28 8 7 56 31 7 6 DEFINITELY POSSIBLY UNLIKELY DON'T KNOW Tables Ref. 14 Criminal matters dominated the list of disputes that respondents clearly understood as being subject to legal action. These included burglary, assault, other criminal actions offenses, fraud, and petty theft. They were followed by a mix of civil disputes, including legal title to land, eviction from property, uncompensated expropriation of land, and purchase or sale of land. In every case, awareness of the justiciable nature of a problem increased in accordance with education levels.
Table 7B : Citizen Knowledge of Justiciable Issues Q9. Among the list of examples provided, which do you think could definitely or possibly be basis for legal action, and which are unlikely to lend themselves to legal action. Divorce 54 31 12 3 Selling or buying property 47 36 10 8 Inheritance 44 37 16 3 Treatment in those held in detention 41 36 12 12 Personal injury in a motor vehicle accident 40 45 12 3 Injury to others resulting from a motor vehicle accident Child custody/maintenance 38 37 42 42 16 17 4 4 Traffic violation Administrative difficulties/problem with government agencies Dispute with neighbors over boundaries of land/property 36 35 34 40 42 45 19 17 19 DEFINITELY POSSIBLY UNLIKELY DON'T KNOW 5 5 2 Tables Ref. 14 With the exception of divorce, substantially fewer respondents considered family and personal problems to be subject to law. These included: divorce (cited by 54 percent of respondents); inheritance (44 percent); child custody (37 percent); domestic violence (12 percent); and consumer protection (13 percent). In the case of domestic violence and divorce, women were less aware that the issue could be the basis for legal action. The dominant perception of family law disputes as non-justiciable reflects the historical tendency of Indonesian citizens and law enforcement officials to treat violence against women and other domestic conflicts as private family matters to which the law does not extend. Also noteworthy is the low awareness of the justiciable nature of administrative problems (notwithstanding the administrative dealings represent one of the most common bases of interaction between ordinary citizens and government agencies), cited by only 35 percent of respondents. While there was little variation in awareness as between urban, semi-urban, and rural respondents, knowledge of the actionable nature of administrative problems increased with education levels.
Table 7C: Citizen Knowledge of Justiciable Issues Q9. Among the list of examples provided, which do you think could definitely or possibly be basis for legal action, and which are unlikely to lend themselves to legal action. Harassment at work Obtaining government permits/business licenses 31 29 38 42 21 16 10 12 Dangerous working conditions 28 44 18 10 Involuntary termination from work 28 38 25 9 Contract enforcement in business dealings 26 47 17 10 Collection of business debts 26 44 27 4 Purchase of defective merchandise 13 39 44 4 Domestic and community violence 12 33 53 2 Neighborhood quarrels 9 35 55 1 DEFINITELY POSSIBLY UNLIKELY DON'T KNOW Tables Ref. 14 Respondents were least aware of the right of legal action with respect to consumer purchases of defective merchandise, domestic and community violence, and neighborhood quarrels.