One of the glories of Indonesia is the hundreds of cultures, ethnicities, and languages spread through the islands.
But this is a problem when it comes to law.
Adat
The most obvious—and lesser—problem is adat, the local customary laws which a community can use to overrule written law.
As explained in (ref.), the idea of adat in the HIR owes more to the German Romantic movement than to practical law.
But also considering that the Dutch were more concerned with imposition of the HIR to ensure economic control
while relying on or inventing rajas and sultans for social control,
the idea of adat is a form of “do whatever you want on these local issues, we don’t care.”
Since there is no written definition of adat, a judge or village committee can simply say “this is adat” to justify any
decision they make and it would be hard to oppose their claim.
Adat weakens the rule of law throughout Indonesia, but for most expatriates it is a minor concern unless you are living or doing
business in a rural village environment.
Ethnicity
The bigger problem is ethnicity. Welding together a diverse archipelego of ethnicities into a single national identity has been a difficult job.
The national motto Bhinekka Tunggal Ika or “Unity in Diversity” has been only partially successful. Many Indonesians
identify more strongly with their own ethnic group than with the nation as a whole.
Many Indonesians explain the hierarchy of loyalties as:
- Family and extended family,
- village,
- ethnic group,
- professional identity—for instance police, lawyers, judges, etc.
- the nation.
The idea of “rule of law” or “fairness” is not on this list. Many Indonesians would
be mystified at the proposal that “rule of law” is somehow connected to love of country.
When expatriates meet Indonesians and the discussion turns to law and fairness, marriages and partnerships, both sides
assume there is a meeting of minds and values.
Not necessarily so. But the differences are not apparent until the time comes for appeal to civil or criminal law to enforce
whatever the expatriate thinks has been previously agreed. At that point, witnesses and government officials may decide that
the hierarchy of loyalties above is more important than the dry technicalities of law.