A Case of Mass Support on Unlawful Conduct? The Repeal of Legitimate “Goj*k” Ban

Unlawful
Not conforming to, permitted by, or recognized by law or rules:
“the use of unlawful violence”
“they claimed the ban was unlawful”

–oxforddictionaries.com

 

In light of the media coverage regarding the drama surrounding a minister’s decision to ban online order style “ojek” (consider it as a kind of taxi, but with motorcycle instead of car), I am interested to speak out (or write out) my opinion on that matter. First of all, rather than promoting the banal inquiry of whether online ojek is good or bad for the people as the only central point in the discussion, I deemed that it is a lot more necessary to point the discussion to cover a more diverse aspects relating to the topic; aspects that might include the enactment of the ban itself.

Legal Basis of the Ban

The letter of the ban. (source: nusantaraeconomics.com)

You can check the aforementioned documents of law and you will find that the reason of the ban is sound; these online ojek providers are generating profit by providing transport service without complying to existing rule regarding public transport provider. You might argue that the law is outdated and lagged behind current technological advancement, but such argument points out that the object of scrutiny are the sources (UU and PP), while the ban itself is a rightful derivative.

The Manner of the Repeal

And suddenly outrage occurred. To say it was a public outrage might be inaccurate; only online ojek-s and users of such sophisticated service were affected, which means the complaints came mainly from big cities and people with access to social media, which I believe did not represent the public. What an ignoble display of ignorance! They ignored the fact that, at that moment, those providers were violating the law, notwithstanding the absence of immediate victim. They lashed out because their convenience was bothered, even at the expense of everyone else. Instead of choosing the more rightful, though more onerous, path of revising the legal basis, they sued for the lifting of the ban; a lazy shortcut providing fast fix without curing anything. Eventually, the ban was repealed.

Am I overblowing this matter? I do not think I am. This phenomenon is a symptom of something worse; it is jeopardizing the integrity of rule of law. The few but loud are capable to influence the enforcement of law, with dubious ground and dubious means. It might be virtually victimless in this case, but when such pattern continues to emerge in other cases, larger consequences might follow.

And about the providers? Remember Q*ntas airline case in 2011? Beware! When this kind of service grabbed a bigger slice of our national economy, they might turn into our Q*ntas; forcing the government to comply with their terms with impunity. This case may serve as a presage for such future.

Will this post helps in doing justice to Mr. Jonan’s decision? Fat chance the answer is no. It is nothing but an opinion of an individual with minuscule influence. Nevertheless, for what it’s worth, it will be a note that this individual will not blindly adhere to the voice of the multitude, especially when that voice is in discord with his voice. The ban is lawfully enacted, and the manner it was forced to be repealed is perverse.

Vox populi, vox dei…but which populi; which people? which God?

P.S totally didn’t have time to check the grammar and structure. Life has been really hectic lately. Please help check it and report it through comment. Thank you!

That Odd One

Anton’s note: originally written in January 10th, 2014.

–

My junior told me a very interesting story some weeks ago; it was a story from her school day about her odd friend. Why was this person odd? Let me tell you the way I remember the two instances she mentioned to describe that person.

First story, it was an examination situation. What’s the first thing came to your mind when you hear high school examination? Cheating. And, yes, it was an organized cheating scheme. The smart students tried to finish the exam as soon as their intelligence allowed and they passed their answer to another students afterwards. This odd person refused to accept that cheating sheet and refused to pass it to people around. This odd person was quite a public enemy.

Second story, it was a normal school day. There was this particular hungry, if not starving, student in the middle of teaching session, and it was normal for school in Indonesia to prohibit food consumption while teaching session is in progress. And so the class conspired to smuggle some biscuits to this hungry student’s desk. The odd student took notice as the biscuits passed around and arrived at the hungry student’s desk, grabbed it before it was consumed, and reported the activity to the teacher. What a snitch!

Is this a kind of hero we all need in our society? The one who stand up at odds against the world.

Are They The Saints?

That’s the video from U2 ft. Green Day, a cover of the original song from The Skids. The video depicts the aftermath of catastrophe Katrina on New Orleans, with all the flood and destruction left, resulted in food and medical shortage, and so it shows how the people were in dire need of aid as soon as possible. Then, the video shows how the army sent to Iraq was redeployed to aid the suffering New Orleans, with the military personnel were given name “the saints”. The video ends the tale with letting the audience see “Not as seen on TV” sign while the vehicles fading to nothingness. Intriguing, isn’t it?

I am very interested at “The Saints” part. We can see that the title was given to the modern “men-at-arms”, soldiers with great strength and power, wielding fatal devices and controlling deadly arsenals, capable of putting many lives to end, or as the video has shown, are also capable of saving lives. They are entrusted with that power because they are “saints”, seen as perfectly wise and presumed will use the power for the greater good. But as the video showed: “Not as seen on TV”, it can also be translated as “Not as imagined”, it is possible that reality is in contrary to what we hope. There is no “saints”, not in this term. Everybody has flaws and misjudgments are not something extraordinary. There is a very great risk on putting deadly power on human and expecting that person to act for the good of all. It is possible the power will be used to harm unjustly whether  deliberately or not.

Now, the issue of whether death penalty should be used or not, in my opinion, is not different. Should we entrusted judges with the power to legally terminate lives? Can we trust them enough with it? As we’ve seen before, there is no “saints”. It is possible for judges, as they are humans, to make mistakes, and lives would be the cost. Can society accepts that cost?