Tjahjono Rahardjo[2] and Siti Rahma Mary Herwati[3]
Abstract
Kampung Jayengaten is a settlement located in the centre of Semarang. Its emergence was a result of Semarang’s growing importance as one of the most important economic and political centres in Java. The success of Semarang as a port and as a centre of trade and administration by the beginning of the twentieth century brought with it an influx of people, most of whom were Indonesians from all parts of Java and the outer islands. These people settled in former rural villages which have become densely built up areas; what is now known as kampungs (unplanned, spontaneous urban settlements), such as Kampung Jayengaten. With the expansion of Semarang’s urban area these kampungs became physically (if not economically and socially) inseparable from the city. During the Suharto regime, which saw big business as the key to economic development, kampungs were often demolished (and their residents evicted) to be replaced by economically more profitable uses, such as toll highways, factories, office blocks, shopping malls, hotels, etc. Though Suharto has already been deposed for more than a decade, such evictions continue to happen in Indonesian cities. This paper looks at how Jayengaten came into being, as an outcome of Semarang’s urbanisation, and describe how the same urbanisation process later caused the disappearance of Kampung Jayengaten and the eviction of its residents.
Keywords: Jayengaten, Semarang, kampung, land conflict, housing, eviction.
Background
There is no agreement on when Semarang was first settled. According to some sources, in the 9th and 10th century the area of present day Semarang was already a harbour serving the Indic (‘first’) Mataram kingdom whose centre was in the interior of Java. Other sources say that Semarang was founded by the semi-legendary Ki Ageng Pandan Arang who was granted the right to settle in the area by the Sultan of Demak in the 15th century (Pemerintah Daerah Kotamadya Dati II Semarang, 1979).
In any case, Semarang became a significant port city only after Sunan Amangkurat II ruler of the Islamic (‘second’) Mataram kingdom ceded it in 1678 as part of debt payments to the United Dutch East Indian Company (Vereenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie - VOC). At that time, the VOC’s activities in Central Java was centred mainly in Jepara. However, Jepara’s harbour was facing serious silting problems, making it difficult for larger ships to land. The VOC decided to move its activities to newly acquired Semarang.
Besides being the centre of VOC trade activities in Central Java, Semarang later also became the seat of the Governor of the northeast coast of Java and the second military district (Stevens, 1986). Under Dutch rule, Semarang grew in importance as a trade centre and outstripped formerly important Central Javanese ports such as Juwana, Rembang, and the above-mentioned Jepara. By mid 18th century, Semarang had become one of the most important port cities in Java, second only to Batavia. Semarang was at that time, in the word of Stevens (1986), “a colonial port city par excellence.”
Semarang became the centre for the export of agricultural products from Central Java’s fertile interior, and for the import of manufactured goods from abroad. This raised the need for a reliable transportation system. The Groote Postweg (Great Post Road) was built through Semarang, and later an extensive railway network (including the first railway line in the Netherlands Indies, between Semarang and the Vorstenlanden) served the city as well.
As a trading centre, Semarang grew rapidly. In the beginning of the 19th century, its population was 22,000, less than half the population of Batavia (50,000) (Coté, 2002). By the mid 19th century Semarang had become “the largest commercial city in all Java” more important than Batavia (which did not have much hinterland trade) and Surabaya (which only became important after the advent of steamships) (Yoshihara, 1989). Not surprisingly, by the turn of the 20th century the population of Semarang had reached 97,000 people (Pemerintah Daerah Kotamadya Dati II Semarang, 1979). Its population in the 1930 census was given at about 218,000 people (van de Wetering quoted in Cobban, 1988).
This rapid population growth created its own problems. According to Cobban (1988):
“The success of Semarang as a port and as a centre of trade and administration by the beginning of the twentieth century brought with it an influx of people some of whom were Dutch but most of whom were Indonesians, indigenous people from all parts of Java and the outer islands. The native residential areas became more crowded than ever and living conditions in them worsened”
European urban development took place along the main thoroughfares, while the surrounding indigenous villages gradually came into private ownership as the city grew around them. As these formerly rural villages became more and more built up and lost their agrarian character, they evolved into what we know now as kampungs (Bagaers and de Ruijter, 1986). Overpopulation and overcrowding, together with lack of basic services (water, sewerage, drainage etc.) became characteristics of these kampungs.
Amongst the owners of private land (particular landerijen) in Semarang, two names particularly stood out. The first was Oei Tiong Ham (1866-1924) who made his fortune in the lucrative opium trade. But later, sugar would be the backbone of his business empire. Oei Tiong Ham would become the wealthiest person in Southeast Asia; when he died in 1924, he left an inheritance worth two hundred million guilders.
The other prominent landowner was Tasripin, a Javanese entrepreneur who mainly traded in copra and kapok. His business was successful and he became a very wealthy person. He then began to acquire vast tracks of properties and, next to Oei Tiong Ham, became one the most important private landowners in Semarang.
Before 1960 Indonesian land law comprised a mixture of adat (customary) law, Dutch colonial laws, Western civil law, and laws enacted by the Indonesian government from after independence. According to Van Kempen quoted in Cobban (1974), in Semarang, as well as in other cities in Java, after the incorporation of the urban municipalities in 1905 there was a large diversity of land tenure and usufruct rights. Besides the indigenous enclaves (the so-called Government kampungs), and the above mentioned private estates (particuliere landerijen), there were other categories of land.
Amongst them were the Vrij Landsdomein, land owned by the Government on which no usufruct rights were granted but which was sometimes given to the urban municipalities for use in the public interest, for example parks; Wakaf-grond, land owned by the Islamic religious community; Opstal, Government land on which the right to erect buildings was granted; land owned by the cities which had been given to them by the Government from land expropriated or purchased from private estates; parcels of land owned by private individuals; agrarian land; and another category of Government land over which Indonesians could exercise rights of usage on individual parcels.
Besides these there were also city kampungs built by the cities on land which they had in some way acquired. Semarang became quite famous in this respect with the development of well laid-out and well serviced low-cost settlements in the 1920s, the so-called ‘planned kampungs’ (which actually is a contradiction in terms as kampungs, by definition, are unplanned, spontaneous settlements), amongst them Kampung Mlaten, designed by Thomas Karsten, one of the leading colonial architects and town planners.
In present day Indonesia, kampungs are still very dominant features of its cities. The capital Jakarta has even been given the nickname “Kampung Besar” (Big Kampung). There are two kinds of kampungs, namely kampung kumuh and kampung liar. Kampung kumuh or permukiman kumuh are poorly serviced settlements, while illegal settlements are called ‘kampung liar’ or ‘permukiman liar’. According to Yudohusodo, et.al. (1991) not all kampung kumuhs are illegal; but all kampung liars are, without exception, kampung kumuh. Their ‘illegality’ does not refer to the status of their makeshift shelters but to the fact that the plots of land are being occupied without the consent of their respective owners (which in many cases is the government itself).
These plots of vacant land are usually located in economically strategic areas, where informal income-generating opportunities are available (Sriyuningsih, 2001). According to Aloysius Soewondo, a social worker who has worked amongst Semarang’s urban poor for more than three decades, this conforms to the priorities of the poor. Soewondo believes that the primary concern of the poor is on how to make a living and to survive in the city, not in acquiring a house (Rahardjo, 2002).
The residents of permukiman liar are not registered as citizens of the city (which in Indonesia must be verified with the possession of an identity card or kartu tanda penduduk (KTP) issued by the respective local authority).[4] They are not organised into community and neighbourhood units (rukun warga and rukun tetangga)[5] of which every household (at least theoretically) should be a member. Even if they are, their organisations do not enjoy official recognition. More seriously, they are caught in a vicious circle. Having no officially recognised address they cannot obtain a KTP; having no KTP, they cannot gain access to officially recognised housing (and, therefore, no formal address) (Rahardjo, 2006).
Under Suharto’s kleptocratic regime big business (many of which were rent-seeking companies well connected to the ruling elite) were seen key to economic development and were given favourable treatment, such as easy access to land. As a result, many people were evicted from the land they had been occupying for generations because it was need for economically ‘more profitable’ uses. Though Suharto has already been deposed more than a decade ago, such evictions continue to this day (Rahardjo, 2002).
This paper looks at a kampung in Semarang that has been the victim of such a development. The residents of kampung Jayengaten who had lived there for four generations had to move out to make place for the parking lot of a five star hotel. The city authorities felt that the establishment of this hotel was important to make Semarang attractive to investors. The main part of this paper is based on the material collected by Siti Rahma Mary Herwati for her master’s thesis at the Environmental and Urban Studies Programme, Soegijapranata Catholic University in Semarang
Tasripin[6]
As one of the richest persons in Semarang, there is relatively little information about Tasripin. There is no record available on where and when he was actually born. What is known is that Tasripin’s grandfather Saridin and his father Tarsimin were both tanners who supplied the Dutch East Indian Army with leather goods such as boots, saddles and harnesses. Tasripin continued this business and as it expanded the place where he lived became known as Kampung Kulitan (kulit = leather). Later, Kampung Kulitan became known as ’Tasripin’s kingdom’ because many of his relatives and descendants built their houses there. Even today, some of them still live in Kampung Kulitan.
Tasripin also dealt with other commodities, namely copra and kapok. From these businesses Tasripin became immensely wealthy, and he invested his profit in real estate. He became a landlord and collected rent from tenants living on his land. Together with the Chinese businessman Oei Tiong Ham, Tasripin was one of the largest private land owners in Semarang. In conducting his business Tasripin, like Oei Tiong Ham, did something unheard-of in those days for a non-European: he employed a Dutch lawyer to handle his legal affairs.
Tasripin’s properties were mainly located in the centre and northern parts of Semarang, namely in the following kampungs: Kulitan (where he and his extended family lived), Gandekan, Gedong Bobrok, Jayengaten, Kepatihan, Pesantren, Sayangan, Kebon Kenap, Wotprau, Demangan, Bang Inggris, Kampung Cokro and Kampung Bedug. Tasripin also owned several large houses along Karrenweg (now Jalan Komisaris Polisi Maksum) which was rented mostly by Chinese and Dutch tenants. Up to now, some of Tasripin’s many descendants (amongst them the ‘Kongsi 19’, a group comprising 11 sons and 8 daughters of Tasripin) still regularly collect land and house rents out of these properties. .
According to Budiman (1976) Tasripin had four fives. However, Tasripin did not practice polygamy. He took a new wife only after the death of the previous one. Tasripin himself lead a relatively simple life style, especially compared to Oei Tiong Ham who had at least eight wives, numerous concubines and 26 children.
Tasripin was a well known philanthropist and art connoisseur. He built wells in his own kampungs as well as in other kampungs to provide water for the inhabitants. He contributed to mosques in and out side of Semarang (even as far away as Makassar in Sulawesi). And as a person doing business in leather goods, Tasripin had a special interest in wayang kulit (shadow theater using leather puppets) and had several sets of high quality wayang puppets and gamelan ensembles.
Tasripin died on 9 August 1919 and his remains were buried at the Bergota Cemetery in Semarang. After his death many stories about him appeared, not all of them true. One of them is about how he became so wealthy by his discovery of the hidden treasures of Ki Ageng Pandan Aran, the semi legendary founder of Semarang.
Kampung Jayengaten:
a. Emergence and consolidation
According to Tio (2002), the many kampungs in Semarang have their own unique histories, yet their histories are interlinked. As a cosmopolitan city, inhabitants of the kampungs in Semarang are a mixture of various ethnic groups: Javanese, Arab, Chinese, Malay, and Indian.
Today some of these kampungs still exist, but they have became very dense (more dense than they were in the colonial period) and face even more serious environmental problems such as chronic flooding (caused by both hightide as well as rain), beside the lack of basic services. Most of them, however, are not clearly visible from the main roads anymore as they are hidden by the ‘modern’ development alongside the main streets. Some kampungs, such as Depok Tengah, Depok Barat and Gendingan (famous for its gong makers), located within Semarang’s Golden Triangle, have completely disappeared. Now, it is the turn of Jayengaten to be demolished.
The history of Kampung Jayengaten began in the 1890s when Tasripin - as the owner of the land – agreed to rent it to some tenants[7]. On this land, covering an area of about 5,440 square meters these tenants built their simple houses made of bamboo and wood. These first tenants later bequeathed these structures to their descendants. A few houses (but not the land, which was still owned by the Tasripin family) were then sold between 1905 and 1946. The present day (former) inhabitants of Jayengaten are third and fourth generation residents.
In April 1963 Tasripin’s daughter Nok Tas Aisiyah was granted a Hak Milik (roughly equivalent to a Freehold title in English common law jurisdiction), making her the legal owner of Kampung Jayengaten. In 1974, the land was sub-divided into three plots. Two plots (139 square meters and 116 square meters Hak Milik titles respectively) were sold; Aisiyah retained the remaining plot. Aisiyah again sold part of her land. This time it was sub-divided into five Hak Milik plots. Four of the plots were sold, Aisiyah keeping the remaining 4,210 square meters. In 1989, Aisiyah’s nine children, amongst them Tasliman and Taslimin, inherited the land. They then sold 136 square meter of their inheritance. The remaining 4,074 square meters continued to be rented by the tenants, but in 1996 Aisiyah’s heir sold the remaining land, including the houses on it, to Hendra Soegiarto.
Hendra Soegiarto is the president director of PT Gumaya Graha Mulia, a construction and property development company within the Gumaya Group. Soegiarto is a well-connected entrepreneur who plays a very pivotal role in the Jayengaten conflict.[8]
b. Conflict
Soegiarto gave Tasliman and his brothers and sisters IDR 20,000,000.- as down payment, with the balance of IDR 513,550,000.- promised to be paid after the houses had been removed. Subsequently, the tenants were ordered to leave Jayengaten (rather oddly) by the kepala kelurahan[9] of Kembangsari, and given IDR 200,000.- per household as “tali asih” (a kind of consolatory money). The tenants, however, refused to accept it.
Soegiarto’s lawyers then issued a legal notice ordering the inhabitants of Jayengaten to vacate the land they were occupying within ten days. The people again refused, on the ground that the rent agreement between them and Tasripin’s heirs was still effective. However, the problem was that there was no written agreement (though such unwritten rent agreements are allowed under Indonesia’s Civil Law) except for one entered jointly by Achmad Masudi and Umar Djunadi with the heirs of Tasripin (Amat Tas Gondo Tedjomojo and Nok Tas Aisijah) dated 10 August 1962. This written document stipulated that the monthly rent is IDR 166,- per month, but there is no mention when the agreement would terminate. However, it does say that the tenants will agree to leave if the owner need the land, under the condition that they are given a three months notice.
The residents of Jayengaten still have the receipts of the rents they have been paying. The oldest receipt dates from 1918 and the most recent from 1994. Some of the rent money is annually collected by the Tasripin family, others every two years and five years (using a system called ambilan, from ambil: to take, to collect). After 1994, however, no one from the Tasripin family has come to collect the rent money. The residents also have building permits for their houses and pay property taxes and other related taxes as well (all using their own names).
The possession of the above mentioned documents indeed do not proof that the inhabitants are the owners of the land. The documents, plus the fact that they possess KTPs, however, does proof that they are legal inhabitants - not illegal squatters - and their settlement, though perhaps overcrowded and lacking some basic services, is not a kampung liar or permukiman liar. For that reason, their tenancy can not be terminated arbitrarily by the land owner; any changes in the agreement should be made by both sides: the tenants as well as the landowner. Furthermore, the building permits are evidences that they are the owner of the house structures; Tasliman or any other members of his family do not have the right to sell these houses.
After the ten days had passed and the people still had not moved out, Soegiarto’s lawyers filed a criminal lawsuit accusing the 23 residents of Jayengaten of illegally occupying his land. With remarkable swiftness the police immediately made them suspects. By filling a criminal instead of a civil lawsuit, Soegiarto wanted to criminalise the people by making them be seen as land grabbers (Herwati, 2009).
Meanwhile the residents of Jayengaten filed a lawsuit at the State Administrative Court. They demanded the annulment of the building permit to build a hotel adjacent to Kampung Jayengaten issued to PT Gumaya Graha Mulia[10]. The reason given is that the Mayor of Semarang had issued the permit before an environmental impact analysis had even been conducted. The defendant in this case was the Mayor of Semarang. Soegiarto’s lawyers requested to interfere in this case. The request was granted and PT Gumaya Graha Mulia became the second defendant. This allowed Soegiarto and his lawyers to team up with the Mayor’s lawyers to keep the building permit from being canceled (Herwati, 2009).
On 10 May 2005 and 2 June 2005 the criminal court found the residents guilty. Their statuses were now illegal occupants of the land were their houses stood. The residents appealed to the Supreme Court for cassation. Meanwhile, PT Gumaya Graha Mulia started construction of the hotel, despite the fact that the administrative court had not given its verdict. This was the beginning of “non-legal strategies” by Soegiarto and PT Gumaya Graha Mulia in their efforts to drive out the residents of Jayengaten (Herwati, 2009).
In April 2005 the first concrete piles were driven into the ground. Heavy equipments started to arrive. Construction works continued around-the-clock. This had a serious effect on the daily life of the community of Jayengaten. The unceasing vibration of the 30 meter piles being driven into the earth have caused walls to crack and ceilings to fall down. The sound of the equipments frightened the children and made it difficult for them to concentrate in their studies. Lodgers, who provided extra income for some residents, began to move out from the neighbourhood (Herwati, 2009).
It was also discovered that the wells, the community’s main sources of water, contained sulphides (minerals composed of several metals combined with sulphur)[11]. The residents suspected that the source of the sulphides was waste water leaking from the hotel project. In any case, their wells were rendered useless and the people had to depend on vendors for their water supply (Herwati, 2009).
The people of Jayengaten did not just fight in court. They, facilitated by the Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Semarang (Semarang Legal Aid Institute), forged alliances with students and other civil society organizations. Together with these groups they conducted demonstrations, petitioned local legislators, made statements published by the media, and publicly declaring that they would not take part in the up coming general elections.
In December 2005 the Supreme Court rejected the cassation of Abdul Hadi, one of the appeallees found guilty by the lower court. In August 2006 Abdul Hadi asked for a review. This, however, was not continued because PT Gumaya Graha Mulia/ Hendra Soegiarto asked for a mediation process. The contesting parties agreed not to continue with the review process[12]. After several meetings in May and June 2006 mediated by the Vice Mayor of Semarang, it was agreed that the residents will be given compensations of IDR 1,200,000. - per square meter floor area of their houses.
c. Eviction and terror
Not long after receiving compensations, the 45 households left Jayengaten. Some moved to other places within Semarang, others outside of the city. Before they left, however, the held a simple farewell gathering, inviting some people from outside the kampung. Amongst them was the Vice Mayor who gave a farewell speech.
This, however, was not the end of the story. Besides the 45 households that have already left, there are still five households who remain in Jayengaten. These are those who own their land as well as their houses, unlike the tenants who only owned their houses.[13] They remain an obstacle in the development of the hotel’s car park.
On 16 January 2007 PT Gumaya Graha Mulia closed the access road to the remaining houses, leaving only a 1 meter wide path of the formerly 3.5 meter wide street[14]. In response to protests, Soegiarto’s lawyer maintained that the road is part of the land sold by the Tasripin family and therefore Soegiarto has the right to close it. A fence was later built around the remaining houses, virtually isolating and imprisoning the residents[15]. These acts of terror was all meant to make life difficult for the people, which Soegiarto hopes will eventually compel them to sell their properties to him. Up to now, however, the residents have not given up their property.
Meanwhile, the people who have moved out still have an emotional attachment with Jayengaten. The women try to meet there at least once every two months. In fact, the people feel that the bond between them has become even stronger after going through difficult times together (Herwati, 2009). However, they also have sad stories to tell. Some of the older people who were born and lived nearly all their lives in Jayengaten found it difficult to adapt to their new homes and became ill after the had to move. The most tragic story is the one about the person who still comes everyday to Jayengaten and just sits near the entrance gate of his former kampung (Herwati, 2009).
Conclusion
The story of Jayengaten is by no means unique. Such cases have happened for a long time (and still happen) all over Indonesia, not only in large urban areas but also in remote villages. It can be said that this is a legacy of the Suharto era. As mentioned earlier, Suharto saw big business as the key to economic development. Therefore, private investors were given preferential treatment. Now, despite the political changes in the last decade, the ruling elite, down to those at the kabupaten and kota level still subscribe to this view.
At best, they genuinely believe that bringing in more investments will automatically bring welfare to the people. Their concept of welfare is, however, limited to a purely economic perspective. They believe that more investments will in turn will lead to more locally generated revenues (pendapatan asli daerah - PAD) and employment opportunities[16]. Worst, however, is when attracting more investment is seen as an opportunity to enter into shady dealings with investors. In such cases, the self-interests of those in power, in collusion with those who have money, will undermine all other considerations (such as the interests of the effected communities and of environmental conservation). Given the fact that – despite “Reformasi” - Indonesia’s bureaucracy is still seen by many as being high-handed, inefficient and notoriously corrupt, the second possibility certainly cannot be disregarded.
In any case, government officials tend to see land and natural resources only in economical terms. What is mainly in their minds is how to exploit these potential assets. This often causes conflicts with the people who live and depend on the land for their living. The people see land as more than just a production factor. They see land as having cultural, social, emotional and even spiritual siginifances.
As an example, we can look at the controversy surrounding the proposed cement factory in Sukolilo district, Central Java. Its proponents claim that during the factory’s construction it will at least directly employ 1000 local people each month (though somewhat less when the factory starts operating). The need for food stalls (warung), boarding houses and other small businesses will bring in more money and create more job opportunities. Its opponents, however, point out to the ecological risks of exploiting the limestone hills at Sukolilo for cement production. With the destruction of the limestone hills, they fear that 47 out of the total 87 underground springs will dry up as well. Furthermore, they predict that more qualified outsiders (and not local people) will most probably fill the newly created jobs.
One particularly strong opponent is the Sedulur Sikep community. This community are followers of Ki Samin Surosentiko (1859-1914) who led a passive non-violent resistance against the colonial government.[17] His followers, amongst other things, are only allowed to cultivate the land and may not enter into other trades. The Sedulur Sikep community feel that saving the limestone hills and its springs is vital if they are to keep their way of life. In addition, the Sedulur Sikep community have calculated that half a million people are now employed annually in farming, much more than that promised by the cement factory.
Even more dramatic is the copper mine conflict in Papua. The copper-rich mountain range the Dutch call Erstberg is believed by the local Amugme tribe as being their mother. The mountain range is their source of life and, therefore, sacred. So when the government in Jakarta, with the help of foreign investors, started mining the copper this was naturally met with violent opposition by the Amugmes.
The Kampung Jayengaten case may not be as spectacular as that of the Sedulur Sikep community or the Amugme tribe in Papua. But the same pattern is apparent. In Jayengaten, like in the other cases, the government only sees the economic potentials of the kampung, and seems (or chooses) to forget that for the kampung people it has a much more significant meaning, beyond purely economic considerations.
It is not surprising, therefore, that the Gumaya hotel project should face such strong resistance.
References
Bogaers, E and P. de Ruijter (1986) ‘Ir. Thomas Karsten and Indonesian Town Planning’, in PJM. Nas (ed.), The Indonesian City, Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Foris Publications.
Budiman, A. (1976) ‘Tasripin’, Suara Merdeka, 3 August 1976
Cobban, J.L. (1974). ‘Uncontrolled Urban Settlement: The Kampong Question in Semarang (1905-1940)’in: Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde, 130 (1974)4: 403-427.
Cobban, J.L (1988). ‘Kampungs and Conflict in Colonial Semarang’ in: Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, Vol. 19, No. 2 (1988), pp. 266-291
Coté, J. (2002) ‘Searching for Semarang: Nation, Urban Memory, and Cultural Heritage’, in W. Logan (ed.), The Disappearing ‘Asian’ City, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Herwati, S.R.M. (2009) Kemajemukan makna ruang: Strategi legal dan no-legal spatial dalam penggusuran kampung Jayengaten, Semarang, Indonesia: Program Magister Lingkungan dan Perkotaan – Universitas Katolik Soegijapranata (unpublished master’s thesis).
Jellinek, L. (1995). Seperti Roda Berputar: Perubahan Sosial sebuah Kampung di Jakarta, Jakarta, Indonesia: LP3ES.
Pemerintah Kotamadya Daerah Tingkat II Semarang (1979). Semarang, Masa lalu, Masa sekarang dan Masa Mendatang, Semarang, Indonesia: Pemerintah Kotamadya Daerah Tingkat II Semarang
Rahardjo, T. (2002). The nature, Extent and Eradication of Homelessness in Developing Countries: Indonesia, Report for the CARDO/ESCOR project on homelessness in developing countries, Semarang, Indonesia: Centre for Urban Studies, Soegijapranata Catholic University.
Rahardjo, T. (2006). ‘Forced eviction, homelessness and the right to housing in Indonesia’, Paper presented at the conference on Homelessness: A Global Perspective, New Delhi, and 9-13 January.
Sriyuningsih, N. (2001). Profil Kemiskinan dan Gender Kota Semarang, Semarang, Indonesia: Urban Management Programme.
Stevens, T (1986) ‘Semarang, Central Java and the World Market 1870-1900’ in PJM. Naps (ed.), The Indonesian City, Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Fortis Publications.
Tio, Jongkie (2002). Kota Semarang Dalam Kenangan, Semarang, Indonesia.
Yoshihara, K. (1989) ‘Oei Tiong Ham Concern: The First Business Empire of South East Asia’, Southeast Asian Studies, Vol. 27, No. 2, September 1989, pp: 137-155.
Yudohusodo, S. and S. Salam (1991). Rumah untuk Seluruh Rakyat, Jakarta, Indonesia: Unit Percetakan Bharakerta.
[1] Paper presented to the International Conference on the Urban Kampung, Surabaya, 19-22 January 2010
[2] Program Magister Lingkungan dan Perkotaan, Universitas Katolik Soegijapranata Semarang, e-mail: tjahjono_rahardjo@yahoo.com
[3] Lembaga Bantuan Hukum (LBH) Semarang, e-mail: rahma_lbh@yahoo.com
[4] The State Ministry of Popular Housing Decision No. 06/KPTS/1994 aptly sums this up in the following statement: ‘without a home or a permanent place to stay it would be difficult for a person’s existence to be recognized (to have a KTP)’. (tanpa rumah atau tempat bermukim yang tetap keberadaan seseorang secara formal sulit diakui (memiliki KTP)) Rahardjo, 2006).
[5] These organisations are a legacy of the Japanese occupation period (1942-1945) when they were used to organise the people in war efforts (Jellinek, 1995). In 1969 Ali Sadikin, the governor of Jakarta at that time, revived them to promote community participation in the city’s development. A rukun tetangga (RT) consist of around 30 households, while a rukun warga (RW) consist of around 10 RTs.
[6] The authors are indebted to journalist Rukardi Achmadi for sharing his knowledge of Tasripin.
[7] As there are no written contracts or agreements between Tasripin and the tenants, their identities are unknown.
[8] Besides being president director of PT Gumaya Graha Mulia, Hendra Soegiarto is also director of PT Gumaya Mina Mulia, a fish processing company, also part of the Gumaya Group. PT Gumaya Mina Mulia was involved in the municipality’s controversial ‘modern’ fish market project which proofed to be a total failure.
[9] The head of an urban village unit, the lowest level of government within an urban municipality in Indonesia
[10] The actual hotel building is not built on the former Kampung Jayengaten. The painful irony is that the kampung and its inhabitants had to make place for the new hotel’s car park.
[11] Laboratory test report, Bapedalda Kota Semarang (Herwati, 2009)
[12] The other 22 cassation appealees agreed to take part in the mediation process because they felt that after the rejection of Abdul Hadi’s cassation, there was little chance their cassation would be accepted by the Supreme Court. The fact is that the Supreme Court had issued a decision on February 2006 (received by the lower court in Semarang in June 2006) which approved the 22 resident’s appeal for cassation. Ironically, the 22 appealees did not know that at that time. They where only informed two years later.
[13] Later one of landowners the sold her property to PT Gumaya Graha Mulia.
[14] This process was watched over by premans (thugs) hired by Soegiarto.
[15] Initially a metal fence was built; later it was replaced by a 2.5 meter high concrete wall.
[16] What the extra revenue will be used for is often unclear, while the employment opportunities open to the local people are only menial, low paying positions.
[17] After Indonesia’s independence the Sedulur Sikep community remained critical towards the new government. They refused to adhere to one of the five officially recognised religions, to send their children to state sanctioned schools, to use the national language, and to follow government instructions on ‘modern’ farming methods. Instead, they jealously maintain their close spiritual connection to the land, using organic farming methods. They also kept using their own educational system and the egalitarian Low-Javanese language. This is why they are considered ‘troublesome’ by government officials. And, until recently, it was virtually impossible for them to get a KTP.
No comments:
Post a Comment