Anti-Chinese legislation in Indonesia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.
Please improve this article if you can. (October 2006)

Discriminatory laws against Chinese Indonesian are laws, directives, or constitutions enacted by the government of Indonesia against Chinese Indonesian.

They proliferated under the New Order regime under former President Suharto's reign. Suharto was a strong advocate for Chinese assimilation rather than integration. As part of 1967's 'Basic Policy for the Solution of the Chinese Problem' and other measures, all but one Chinese-language papers were closed, all Chinese religious expressions had to be confined to their homes, Chinese-language schools were phased out, Chinese script in public places was banned, and Chinese were encouraged to take on Indonesian-sounding names.^[1] Most of this legislation were revoked following Suharto's fall from power in 1998. [1]

1 Peraturan Pemerintah 10/1959
2 127/U/Kep/12/1966
3 Other examples
4 Anomalies and exceptions
5 Current practice
6 Notes
7 External links

[edit] Peraturan Pemerintah 10/1959

Peraturan Pemerintah 10/1959 (Government Directive No. 10/1959) was the law directive issued by Indonesian government against Chinese Indonesian to close their businesses by 1 January 1960 and forced them to relocate in urban areas. This directive was approved by former President Sukarno.

Although the regulation merely mentioned that only "foreign citizens" were required to do the relocation and closure of business, the law was effectively targeted against the Chinese Indonesians. The reason was that at that time was that Chinese Indonesians were never acknowledged as proper citizens of Indonesia and always considered as foreigners. Despite a lot of protests from Chinese Indonesians, which unfortunately all failed due to the lack of political power in the congress, the government executed the directive anyway. Although the sanctions specified in the directive were only property confiscation, fines, and forced relocation, in practice, many offenders were brutally executed and their businesses were confiscated. For example, the enforcement that triggered the 1967 incident in Western Kalimantan took the life of 42,000 Chinese Indonesians. They were accused to be separatists who wanted to establish a Chinese nation in Western Kalimantan.^[2]

Alarmed by the news of the early unfortunates, many Chinese Indonesians started mass exodus to China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Singapore. Those who stayed were forced to re-register themselves as Indonesian citizens by renouncing their alleged Chinese citizenship regardless of the valid Indonesian citizenship they may already have had. In addition, the terror intensified the urgency to do away with their Chinese names and adopt Indonesian-sounding ones.

This law is the most highlighted of anti-Chinese legislation in Indonesia.

[edit] 127/U/Kep/12/1966

127/U/Kep/12/1966 was an Indonesian law passed in 1966 that requires Indonesian Chinese to change their names to Indonesian-sounding names. It is considered to be part of the anti-Chinese legislation in Indonesia.^[3] The resident Chinese community in Indonesia resented it because it forced them to lose their traditional family name. However, some thwarted the government efforts to some degree by incorporating their Chinese name into their new Indonesian name.^[4] For example, the Chinese family name "Tan" was easily embedded in the Indonesian name "Sutanto".

[edit] Other examples

Cabinet Presidium Instruction No. 37/U/IN/6/1967, which prohibits further residency or work permits to new Chinese immigrants, their wives, or children; freezing any capital raised by "foreigners" in Indonesia; closure of "foreign" schools except for diplomatic corps and their families; the number of Indonesian students must be the majority and in proportion to "foreigners" in any state schools; and that implementation of the "Chinese issue" will henceforth be the responsibility of the minister for political affairs.
Presidential Instruction No. 14/1967 (Inpres No. 14/1967) on Chinese Religion, Beliefs, and Traditions, which effectively ban any Chinese literatures and cultures in Indonesia, including the prohibition of Chinese characters. Although Chinese names are not explicitly mentioned, "newly naturalized" Indonesian Chinese were strongly advised to do so. (Annulled by former president Abdurrahman Wahid in Keppres No. 6/2000; annulment supported by former president Megawati Soekarnoputri in Keppres No 19/2002 by declaring Chinese Lunar New Year as national holiday)
Resolution of the Provisional People's Consultative Assembly No. 32, 1966 (TAP MPRS No. 32/1966), which effectively banned the use of Chinese characters in newspapers and magazines.
Presidium Directive No. 240/1967 (Inpres No. 240/1967) which mandates assimilation of "foreigners" and support the previous directive of 127/U/Kep/12/1966 for Indonesian Chinese to adopt Indonesian-sounding names.
Home Affairs Ministry No. 455.2-360/1988 on Regulation of Temples, which effectively and severely restrict building or repairing Chinese temples.
Circular of the Director General for Press and Graphics Guidance in the Ministry of Information No.02/SE/Ditjen-PPGK/1988, which further restrict the usage of Chinese language and/or characters.
Instruction of the Ministry of Home Affairs No. X01/1977 on Implementing Instructions for Population Registration and the confidential instructions No.3.462/1.755.6 of the Jakarta government January 28, 1980 both authorize special codes in national identification cards to indicate ethnic Chinese origin. The code was "A01" prefix.
Cabinet Presidium Circular SE-06/Pres-Kab/6/1967 on Changing the Term China and Chinese, requires the usage of the term "Cina" (which is considered a derogatory term by many Chinese Indonesians) instead of "Tionghoa" (as ethnic Chinese refer to themselves).

[edit] Anomalies and exceptions

There are exceptions to laws and regulations that ban the use of Mandarin. The use of Mandarin in traditional Chinese medicine prescriptions, for example, is not prohibited, since the legal proceedings related to this case have been suspended after lobbying made to the Attorney General (Jaksa Agung) of Indonesia by INI (Ikatan Naturopatis Indonesia)

[edit] Current practice

Although some of this legislation has been revoked or is no longer applicable, much of it still persists in practice. For an example, the requirement of Chinese Indonesian, including their Indonesian born descendants, to possess nationalization or repatriarchization certificates in order to obtain legal documents.