Indigeneity and the State in Indonesia: The Local Turn in the Dialectic of Recognition

Abstract

When the indigenous peoples’ movement emerged in the 1990s and grew stronger in the wake of reformasi, people formally termed “backward” and “primitive” suddenly emerged as political actors. This article traces the relationship between the state and the idea of the original, sometimes referred to as the autochthonous, sometimes as the indigenous, in Indonesian history and analyses how these relationships are reflected in legislation on land issues, the major concern of recent indigenous movements. In a second step, the article deals with current political strategies of the indigenous movement (AMAN), concluding that the movement is shifting its efforts from the “centre” (national legislation), to the provinces and the margins, a process we term the “local turn” in the indigenous people’s movement in Indonesia. By drawing on the example of Enrekang, South Sulawesi, the contribution shows how peraturan dearah (local regulations) provide a basis for recognition within the margins of the Indonesian nation state.

Legal Protection of Indigenous Community in Protected Forest Areas Based Forest City

“…This provision has derailed the implementation of the constitutional mandate, requiring fulfilling the original or customary rights of the Indigenous people. 29 The regulation of Job Creation did not correct this situation as it renewed the forestry law and retained Article 67 (2) of the forestry law that suggests the inauguration of indigenous people through Regional Regulations. This provision has derailed the implementation of the constitutional mandate, requiring fulfilling the original or customary rights of the Indigenous people.…”

Paradoxes of indigeneity: identity, the state, and the economy in Indonesia

“…Through such an identity, the “we” ( kami ) became a subject as it declared its ability to withhold recognition of the state. Consequently, the state appeared in AMAN’s view as a condition of the very existence of masyarakat adat , and the two entities of masyarakat adat and the state ( negara ) emerged as simultaneously constitutive to each other and as their respective negations (Tamma and Duile 2020 : 276–277).…”

“…In 2013, the Court ruled in favor of AMAN and decided that adat forest is not state forest. The state had to recognize adat land ownership, and this is also the case with land not in permanent cultivation on which adat communities claim their hak ulayat (Bedner and Arizona 2019 : 423–424; Tamma and Duile 2020 : 279). It is not surprising that indigenous activists intensified their relations with the state and its institutions.…”

“…On 30 December 2016, 13,000 hectares were handed to nine indigenous communities in a ceremony in the state palace (Affif and Rachman 2019 : 454). Some more communities followed in 2018, but Jokowi’s promise in the 2014 election campaign that by 2019 12.7 million hectares would be redistributed to indigenous communities was not fulfilled by no means at all (Tamma and Duile 2020 : 280). Indigenous activists had to deal not only with the slow process of land allocation but also with a task that shifted their struggle to the level of the regencies ( kabupaten ).…”

“…In local languages, this area is often referred to as Massenrempulu which was also the name of a federation of petty kingdoms and translates literally as “at the edges of the mountain.” Besides the Enrekang ethnic groups in the central part of the regency, there are two more groups, namely the Maiwa in the southern, lowland part, and the Duri which dwell the northern upland up to the borders of Toraja. All groups are of Muslim faith which distinguishes them from the Toraja, but in terms of language especially the Duri share similarities with the Toraja (Batong 2007 ; Hadrayani and Karim 2019 ; Tamma and Duile 2020 : 281).…”