How do poor communities in Indonesia defend their rights and interests and access justice? This study from World Bank Social Development Unit examines success factors in 18 case studies. It recommends a two-track strategy: (i) structural reforms by the government to address the endemic institutional weaknesses of the legal system and to enhance informal dispute resolution; and (ii) case-driven donor legal empowerment interventions that focus on building demand, providing facilitation, and creating small, visible examples of success.
The central finding was that community mobilisation and outside intervention could, in certain cases, overcome the influence of traditional power structures and institutions to aid poor communities. Nevertheless, the poorest and most marginalised groups in Indonesia’s villages rarely access even the most localised forms of justice.
The following findings emerged from the case studies, suggesting that villagers prefer informal resolutions and use the justice system only as a final recourse:
- Villagers perceive informal mechanisms to be cheaper, faster and easier to use than the Indonesian court system. Informal solutions are seen as more likely to contribute to social harmony than the disruptions resulting from use of the legal system.
- Whether villagers can indeed access the justice system depends on whether they can link their cases with legal aid NGOs, local authorities or the leadership of village development projects. Finding facilitators active with such organisations brings critical skills and information to bear on cases.
- Successful cases were those that made use of community facilitation, grassroots efforts, outside exposure, accountability and links between those seeking justice and appropriate organisations.
- The scrutiny of media and civil society actors helped bring about resolution, but could not guarantee it. Their chief contribution was to make it more difficult for law enforcers to engage in foul play and to encourage reformists already present.
- Cases that succeeded were those that attracted a wide range of constituents. When functioning well, the formal system brought cases into the public domain, involving a range of interested parties that village institutions could not.
This report recommends two sets of measures, one to the Indonesian government and the other to donors, NGOs and relevant institutions:
- The government should work to introduce structural reforms to the justice system to improve personnel quality and working conditions. These measures should be taken in tandem with improvement to accountability systems.
- Regulations concerning investigations need enforcing and strengthening, so that police and prosecutors become accountable for obstruction of justice through delay or lack of information provision.
- The government should value and uphold informal dispute resolution and connect communities and courts more closely.
- Donors and NGOs should consider an integrated, case-driven approach to empower villagers engaged with dispute resolution. Access to justice should not be considered in isolation, but as part of a larger effort of advocacy and community mobilisation.
- Village-level development programmes can play a useful role in ensuring access to justice for villagers. Such an approach, which would enhance local organising skills and ensure closer communication, would keep interventions local and broad-minded.
