The History and Current Development of Indigenous People Movements in Indonesia

Tulisan ini didasarkan pada suatu arguman bahwa diskriminasi terhadap masyarakat adat merupakan fakta dinamika interpretasi kebijakan yang ada. Maka dari itu kehadiran Gerakan mayarakat adat seperti AMAN (Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara) menawarkan solusi atas pelanggaran terhadap hak-hak masyarakat adat, serta sebagai wadah diskusi tentang kemungkinan ancamanancaman lainnya. Tujuan dari gerakan masyarakat adat adalah menegakkan kebebasan beragama untuk mempromosikan kesetaraan hak-hak masyarakat adat, khususnya terkait pentingya tanah adat bagi mereka. Dalam satu sisi, negara mengakui dan menghargai hak-hak masyarakat adat, namun di sisi lain mereka dituntut dengan persyaratan yang sulit dalam mewujudkan hakhak mereka.


Introduction
Indigenous religions have lost their rights and religious freedom; this is related to their land rights. However, land for indigenous peoples is part of the most important identity that marks its existence. Since the 1998 reformation, many laws and regulations have been issued to recognize the existence and rights of indigenous people's lands, natural resources and other basic rights (Arizona, 2013), but the principles are not actualized in legal norms as a condition for the realization of legal goals, namely justice. The portrait of the law, which only pays attention to the principle of no intolerance without accommodating the principle of equality, has actually become the beginning of discrimination and intolerance (Armiwulan, 2015).

AMAN (Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara) movement reported that during 2020
there were 40 cases of discrimination or intolerance against indigenous peoples, most of these cases had happened in previous years, but continued to happen because it never got a solution.
This indicates that discrimination is an everlasting matter for Indigenous religion. In addition, the involvement of indigenous movements such as AMAN aims to establish religious freedom as a means to promote indigenous religious rights, particularly the importance of indigenous territories. They have surveyed over ten million hectares of potential land claims, listed claims into online interactive maps, and otherwise stated that claims amount to over 40 million hectares of national-forest (Fisher, 2019).
The problems experienced by indigenous peoples have given the impression that they are not citizens who have rights that are actually guaranteed in the constitution (Arizona, 2013). This is a disaster for indigenous religious groups. In another context, a similar point was made by Makau wa Mutua (1999) in Limitations on Religious Rights: Problematizing Religious Freedom in Africa and America that addressed human rights, constitutional, and other legal bases for religious freedom and the protection of indigenous religions in Africa.
So far, studies on discrimination against indigenous religions have tended to analyze the indigenous religion paradigm, reinterpretation religious practice, self-identification of indigenous people and articulating indigenous religion. A study at articulating indigenous religion shows that articulation is not just a connection but a process of simplification, boundary-making as well as creating connections (Slack, 1996). In addition, Li (2000) uses this theory to demonstrate how certain groups in Indonesia come to identify themselves as Satya Widya : Jurnal Studi Agama Vol. 4 No. 1 2021P-ISSN : 2623-0534 E-ISSN : 2655-1454 | 14 indigenous during moments at which global and local agendas have been con-joined in a common purpose, and presented within a common discursive frame, thus realigning the ways they connect to the nation, the government, and their own, unique tribal place, is the contingent products of agency and the cultural and political work of articulation.
Apart from previous research, this paper aims to complete the subjective dimension in the analysis of AMAN's involvement as an umbrella that protects Indigenous people's rights.
Equally important, this paper maps out the forms or manifestations of discrimination on the rights of indigenous people's lands, as well as analyzes the factors or conditions that cause discrimination. The answer to this question is a subject that allows religious freedom to be understood as a means to promote indigenous religious rights and the importance of land for indigenous religion. This paper is based on an argument that discrimination against indigenous religion is a fact of the dynamics of existing policy interpretations. Therefore, the presence of indigenous people movements such as AMAN, offers solutions for indigenous rights' violations, and it also serves as a place for discussion on existing and possible threats upon indigenous communities.

Research Methodology
This writing is a descriptive analysis that describes, explains and analyzes the situation and conditions experienced by Indigenous Religions and adat movements to promote indigenous land rights. It is due to the fact that the discourse on discrimination against indigenous people has been, is temporary, and will continue to take place in this country, as long as their status and rights have not been officially and fully guaranteed by law and implemented throughout the territory of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia.
In line with that, the data needed to answer these questions is secondary data obtained from relevant literature, including textbooks, journal articles, documentation, research institute data and related agency data. One major factor of utilizing these data is the regulations on Covid-19, which limit the access to experiences of live subjects, including the indigenous communities and the members of adat movements. This paper concerns about the effort of adat movements in advertising equal religious rights for indigenous communities in Indonesia. The following section discusses scholars' works with regard to three main variables that are examined in this paperthat is, religious freedom and human rights, the importance of land, and indigenous people movements.

Religious Freedom and Human Rights
In 1948, the United Nations issued the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Article 2 suggests that "Everyone is entitled to all rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, and political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status". In another article, article 18, it is said that "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship, and observance". The second variable, customary land, is inseparable from the first feature. At the very heart of religion is worship. In indigenous context, worship often includes their customary land. What is meant by land is a sacred place, including, land, lake, river, or any particular "subject" on their land such as trees and rocks. The availability to access their land equals to religious freedom, one of the main concerns of human rights discourses. Oftentimes, their land vanishes due to what so-called humans' needs, which is interchangeable with the term humans' greed. Another issue lies within the position of the land itself which is sometimes situated under the government's supervision, which Collins discusses in his piece, Sacred Sites and Religious Freedom on Government Land (Collins, 2003). He adds that when a sacred land belongs to an indigenous community, the construction of a dam on their river, the Katun River, due to their spiritual connection with it. Scientists later discovered that building a dam would put particular fish species and medical plants in danger. However, religious beliefs could also contribute to the destruction of environment as portrayed in, for instance, the construction of religious stone statues in Easter Island, which deforested and depopulated the island. It also provides political basis for indigenous communities to be independent and selfgovernment. Today water resources are extracted and exploited for commercial purposes.
It is amusing that even to drink humans need to pay certain amount of money. The success of the Ogoni people, the Kalahari Bushmen, and the Awas Tingni, in securing their rights to their water is an example to counter this phenomenonthat is, water is not to be contested, but to be preserved.
The notion of establishing equal rights for indigenous communities has led to the birth of indigenous people movements. These movements consist of the indigenous people themselves and those who stand by them voluntarily. Hodgson's article,

Comparative Perspectives on the Indigenous Rights Movement in Africa and The
Americas, compiles and analyzes the dynamics of indigenous rights movements in both continents (Hodgson, 2002). In the Americas, legal rights and protection have been given to most indigenous communities, yet the struggle to maintain such accomplishment seems far from an end. Brazilian Indians had actually been granted protection and legal rights until the new policy forced them to revise their images and identities. It encouraged any Indians belonging to local parties to advocate the nation instead of their own kinds.
This was due to the claim, which was made by Brazilian politicians and advertised to public by the media, that the Indians had become pawns of foreign parties, which wished to exploit the natural resources. The Alaskan natives were utilized as a political tool by timber clearing and pulp production companies to achieve their goals. They helped the locals to regain their lands only to manipulate the government's restriction of timber harvesting on state lands. Since the lands no longer belonged to the state, they faced almost no problems to exploit the natural resources.
On contrary, the indigenous people movements in Africa were born to help them gain recognition from their own states. Pan-San indigenous movement in southern Africa was established to challenge the international model of indigenous, which separated "incorporated San" from "segregated San". The latter was easily recognized due to being similar to other indigenous, while the former was issued not to meet the international standard; thus, their rights were not granted. In northern Tanzania, local tribes such as Maasai, Barabaig, and other hunter-gather groups were prohibited to form alliances by the state, the donors, and even the transnational indigenous rights movement. The problem of representative was one of the main contributions to this arising difficulty.

Indigenous People Movement
In

Indigenous Customary Land's Expropriation
Since the beginning of the independence of Indonesia, indigenous communities have suffered from recognition, even during the colonial period. Thus, it results in discriminationthat is, rights as citizens will only be granted when they belong to the recognized religions. Such discrimination takes various forms such as marriage registration, access to public services, and property or land's seizure. To avoid wide,  The expropriation of indigenous people's lands is suggested to be a response to modernity. Modern lifestyle requires modern people to adjust with new needs that did not exist in the previous era such as shampoo, toothpaste, and instant foods, which contain palm oil in them. Without these items, people would feel their daily needs are somewhat lacking. Utilizing products of nature, as how indigenous people always do, forces modern people to reconsider the possible danger or threat of such products to their Third, it allows mining companies to run their own laws and policies and even expand their territories. Therefore, should indigenous communities wish to protest, the local government cannot facilitate them.

State Funds the Expropriation of Customary Land
This paper maps out the forms or manifestations of discrimination against indigenous religions' lands, based on what AMAN has explained that the ratification of presidential regulation (Perpres) no. 66 of 2020 in lieu of Presidential Decree No. 102 of 2012 concerning funding for land acquisition for development in the public interest in the context of implementing national strategic projects deserves to be questioned formally and materially. As a Presidential Decree that was born in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic situation, public participation in its formulation did not occur, even though this is an important requirement in the process of forming legislation.
Before this Presidential Regulation was issued, the process of recognizing and protecting indigenous people and their rights to their territories was held hostage through various overlapping regulations. It is seen from the president's yell for solidarity of indigenous people to face the threat of food crisis, such as "overcoming the food crisis".
Yet, it can only be assumed if farmers and indigenous people control and freely cultivate lands in customary areas to anticipate food crisis, which describes the discontinuity of ideas in the midst of weak protection which will have implications for the faster process of expropriation of customary land.
Based on data from the Ministry of Environment and Forestry's Directorate General of Planning (July, 2017), out of a total of 122 million hectares of forest areas that had been designated, an area of 87 million hectares or 86.80% had been designated as permanent forest areas. This means that less than 14% of forests, whose stages were still being appointed, were subject to conflicts which could be resolved through the mechanism regulated in Presidential Decree 88/2017. From the analysis of AMAN (2017), it was found that there were at least 1.62 million hectares spreading over 609 indigenous communities that were threatened with resettlement because they were in conservation areas. Moreover, with the enactment of Presidential Decree No. 66 of 2020, the threat of resettlement is getting real. It forces displacement which is legitimized by laws and regulations under the guise of national strategic development.
The expropriation case of customary land of the Pubabu-bisapae people has occurred in recent years. In 2020 the East Nusa Tenggara provincial government led directly by the Governor stated that the land and forest belonged to the East Nusa Tenggara provincial government. There was an invitation to socialize the government's plan for the development of the Basipae cattle lands, but this was not carried out because it was refused by Pubabu-bisapae. However, this did not reduce the government's decision to evict the lands belonging to the Perbabu-bisapae. The government even made a statement in which the community had agreed to be relocated.
During the incident, the government brought a team consisting of the Police, the Mobile Brigade (Korps BRIMOB), the Municipal Police (SATPOL PP) and the Indonesian National Armed Forces (TNI). The community tried to block and put up a fight. However, the government team succeeded in evicting 3 families who lived in a building that the government claimed as their assets. Their belongings were forcibly removed and then the team fenced the area with police lines.
Based on the existing case, AMAN stated that the position that the seizure of customary land in the name of national strategic project development resulted in conflict and impoverishment for indigenous people based on the Presidential Regulation needed to be revoked. They urged the president and the Peoples' Representative Council of Indonesia (DPR RI) to immediately ratify RUU into UU that provides a comprehensive process of recognition, protection and fulfillment of indigenous people's rights.

Conclusion
Discrimination upon indigenous communities in Indonesia yet includes in a long-awaited list of the nation's problems to be solved, and one of the issues is their rights concerning their lands. Besides, society get down the cases of Indigenous people only in their recognition. One of the most important findings from this paper is that AMAN as one of the indigenous people or adat movements was established in order to advocate and defend the rights of indigenous people. This is parallel to the vision of Indonesia, which can be concluded from the tenets of