Creation of justice is not only the responsibility of the state. Most of Indonesia seeking to resolve their legal issues through the informal sector or non-state justice system. Non-state
justice is often considered as an alternative dispute resolution, but
in reality is the main medium for most of the poor. Perhaps as much as 90 percent of the disputes handled by the institution of non-state. In
this case, "non-state justice" is a "dispute resolution at local level"
- arbitration and mediation conducted by village chiefs, traditional
leaders, community leaders and religious leaders, often based on
tradition, but not infrequently these disputes resolved subjectively by community leaders without reference to state law or customary law. Dispute resolution mechanism chosen by most people of Indonesia as follows:
reality of justice in Indonesia is run not in the courtroom in the big
cities, but in the village hall across the archipelago
Passage of non-state justice (non-state justice) will greatly impact on social stability and welfare of the poor
dispute settlement is not a comprehensive and coherent system, but a
series of processes that are run by an influential party.
In fact, social norms and power that usually determines the outcome of dispute resolution at local level
Restoration of community harmony is a key objective underlying the judicial settlement of disputes by non-state
Goal to maintain harmony also underlie the sanctions imposed by non-state justice system
For most cases small and lightweight, informal justice is an appropriate and effective process.
Overall, non-state popular justice, reflecting its strength, as a result people are satisfied with the informal justice actors
Popularity of non-state justice is the natural response of the state''s inability to meet the public demand for justice. But it also reflects the characteristics in them that actually fit the local conditions. Non-state justice inherent in the political and social realities at the local level.
of disputes by using reconciliation mechanism has advantages over
tradition-based mechanism that is initiated by the State. In this case there are 5 (five) strengths of traditional approaches to conflict transformation, namely:
§ The traditional approach feasible to replace the fragility and state failure in resolving conflicts
§ The traditional approach is not centered approach in the State so as to create legitimacy
The traditional approach puts the time factor as an important factor in
the settlement of the conflict depends on cultural context, in addition
to the process-oriented approach tadisional
§ The traditional approach to open space for participation in a thorough and comprehensive. In other words each person is responsible for finding solutions of conflict resolution
§ The traditional approach focuses on psycho-social dimensions of conflict transformation and spiritual
Community choices for informal dispute resolution mechanisms with the local knowledge base as follows:
§ Easily accessible, fast and cheap
§ Maintaining social harmony
§ Based on the authority and legitimacy of local
People prefer non-state justice authorities primarily because the
actors in the rural environment to solve problems and implement the
Despite this tradition-based conflict reconciliation approach contains flaws as follows:
§ Unable to stop the violence for a long time
§ Sometimes conflict with universal human rights standards
§ Having a limited space to apply
§ This mechanism can be used for a regime to maintain its continuity (status quo)
§ Open space for abuse of power
This is because among other things:
The absence of clear norms and structures and the absence of upward and downward accountability lead to such abuse.
Women are underrepresented in institutions of dispute resolution in rural areas.
Disputes between ethnic and sectarian communities is a tough problem and difficult to solve.