ITC Mangga Dua: A Double Whammy

rejected. The rejection led to interruption of electricity supply
to kiosks whose occupants/owners rejected the policy and
The dispute between kiosks occupants/owners of ITC
insisted to pay former service charge. The interruption
Mangga Dua and Alliance of Flat Occupants and Owners
occurred 3 (three) times, which was on July 18, July 19, and
(Perhimpunan Penghuni dan Pemilik Rumah Susun/PPPRS),
September 2, 2013.
developer, and management of ITC Mangga Dua Block 1A
The first interruption of electricity prompted hundreds of
started in 1994. One of the triggers was the arbitrary and
kiosks occupants/owners to come to see PPPRS officers,
burdensome policy formulated by PPPRS and management
developer, and management for an explanation on that
of ITC Mangga Dua for kiosks occupants/owners. Various
matter,
policies
occupants/owners
were
formulated
without
considering
kiosks
occupants’/owners’ opinions and consents.
but
they
were
not
without
willing
any
to
see
kiosks
acceptable
reason.
Eventually, a representative of kiosks occupants/owners who
was also head of trader cooperative group (koperasi
PPPRS ITC Mangga Dua was set up by PT. Duta Pertiwi
pedagang) of ITC Mangga Dua, Mardianta Pek, came to
(subsidiary of Sinar Mas Group), who then assigned PT.
PPPRS’s office to seek for solution for the interruption. At the
Jakarta Sinar Intertrade as part of its business line to manage
same time, window at the management’s office was broken,
ITC Mangga Dua. Duta Pertiwi, anak perusahaan Sinar Mas
which was believed to be purposefully broken by security
Group. PT. Jakarta Sinar Intertrade manages PPPRS by
guard of the office.
assigning its employees to be in charge of ITC Mangga Dua.
y
m
m
a
h
W
e
l
b
u
o
D
A
:
a
u
n
o
D
i
t
a
a
z
i
g
l
g
a
n
ITC Man ation Leading to Crimi ts
Their duty is to conduct maintenance to shared lands,
The management, who was represented by its employee,
portions, and possessions.
Benediktus Keban, criminalized the incident by insisting to
file for a criminal act violating Article 335 of Indonesian
The dispute reached its worst point when an increase of
Criminal
service
kiosks
Pidana/KUHP) and filed Mardianta Tek, Haida Sutami, and
completely
Suresh Karnani to North Jakarta District Police Commands
charge
was
occupants’/owners‘
n
a
p
u
c
c
Exploit
O
ua
D
a
g
g
n
a
to ITC M
brought
opinions,
about
which
without
was
(Kitab
Undang-undang
Hukum
1
with the allegation of posing threat, causing window of the
3. PPPRS meeting is never attended by the entire
Mode of Exploitation
management office to be broken.
Code
The above-mentioned three persons are head of PPPRS ITC
2
8. Collecting operator fee arbitrarily.
occupants/owners of ITC Mangga Dua, and 90% of the
9. Collecting parking rent to kiosks occupants/owners in
attendees are the managements’ employees. The
ITC Mangga Dua 1A, in spite of the fact that parking lot
meeting is attended by crew-cut thugs who will beat
is a shared space among kiosks owners.
Mangga Dua Block 1A established by occupants/owners
1. The management often acts arbitrarily in determining
the traders up anytime they state their questions or
10. Marking up electricity rate.
living in the area (there are two groups of PPPRS). They are
management fees. One of them is flat maintenance fee
interruptions. The result of the meeting decided by
11. Giving the gained income from any activities
now suspects of the case and will undergo proceedings.
charged to every trader (kiosks occupants/owners) and
meeting leader is absolute and cannot be intervened.
conducted in ITC Mangga Dua building (for example,
counter owner, namely 50% of service charge. But the
4. Floors and corridors of the building are rented by the
exhibitions, parking rent, rent from cell tower,
Since its presence in 1993, PPPRS established by PT. Duta
maintenance provided by the management is not
management to numerous counters to do their trading
advertorial display, jet pump water sold to food courts,
Pertiwi has never showed any transparency in its financial
worth the money paid by the trader and counter
activities, but without transparency in the financial
and counters rent fee) to outsourcing company.
statement regarding the running of ITC Mangga Dua Block
owners. The following is the actual conditions of ITC
statement regarding the rent fee. Floors and corridors
1A.
Mangga Dua Block 1A:
are meant for the visitors to walk around and to take a
occupants/owners in ITC Mangga Dua Block 1A to
a.
look at the traded things. But when the counters
socialize.
As a matter of fact, the officers of PPPRS established by the
Since 2008, the existing ACs are not replaced
into new and fine-working ones.
developer, in comparison with the one established by kiosks
b.
Floors are broken and left unrepaired
occupants/owners,
the
c.
Ceilings are broken
developer. This does not go in line with Act No. 20/2011 about
d.
Fire sprinklers are leaking; their pipes are rusty
Flat,
specifying
gained
that
there
authority
is
no
only
from
authority
to
be
emerged, the corridors of ITC Mangga Dua become
e.
Article 74, paragraph 2 mentions that, “authority from flat
building, making it looks dirty and disorganized.
owner to flat occupant is limited only in terms of occupation,
2. A subjective rise of basic electricity rate exceeding the
for example in determining the contribution fee for security,
one set by State Electricity Company (Perusahaan
housekeeping, and societal activity, not to be officer nor head
Listrik Negara/PLN) and maintenance rate without any
of the flat."
of the traders’ consent.
3
limitation
to
kiosks
5. Without any consent, permission, and responsibility to
14. Prohibiting kiosks occupants/owners in ITC Mangga
kiosks occupants/owners in ITC Mangga Dua Block
Dua Block 1A to conduct meetings with other owners.
15. Interrupting
electricity
supply
in
kiosks
public facilities and social facilities which are basically
occupants/owners in ITC Mangga Dua Block 1A as a
owned by kiosks occupants/owners.
punishment for not obeying orders and rules that are
established arbitrarily.
6. Collecting and arbitrarily rising service charge and
16. Imposing fine when kiosks occupants/owners in ITC
sinking fund.
Mangga Dua Block 1A delay to do and pay what is
7. Collecting 10% Value Added Tax to electricity and
ordered by PPPRS.
water.
4
putting
Dua Block 1A to pay electricity rate directly to PLN.
1A, the management added and built new units in
Cleaning service is not well-performed in the
and
13. Prohibiting kiosks occupants/owners in ITC Mangga
disorganized.
and are never replaced into new ones.
officers/managements of the flat. And the explanation of
12. Confining
5
6
17. Complicating the process of gaining permission, for
example the permission to reside for
18. Management activities are merely formality.
Mangga Dua kiosk insisted to know the details of arbitrary
Article 7, paragraph (2)
rise in price, who was then beaten up by the security guards
"The State Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right
and had his banner carried away.
of everyone to the enjoyment of just and favorable
conditions of work which ensure, in particular:
19. No report on building insurance fee paid by kiosks
occupants/owners of ITC Mangga Dua Block 1A for 20
A decent living for themselves and their families in
Fulfillment of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights
accordance with the provisions of the present Covenant;
years.
20. Borrowing money for as much as Rp. 100.000.000.000
Based on the aforesaid description, the acts of PPPRS,
(b) Safe and healthy working conditions;
(a hundred billion rupiahs) to outsourcing company,
developer, and management have violated the fulfillment of
under the name of kiosks occupants/owners of ITC
economic, social, and cultural rights. The followings are
Unlawful act of PPPRS, the developer,
Mangga Dua Block 1A.
details of the violated rights:
and management
Building Permit (Izin Mendirikan Bangunan/IMB),
1945 Constitution
As specified in article 6, paragraph (1) of the International
Report including description and Separation Act,
Article 27, paragraph (2)
Covenant of Ecosoc Rights which was ratified into Act No.
Cooperation
“Every citizen is entitled to work and decent living for
11/2005, that state parties of the Covenant recognize the right
humanity.”
to work, which includes the right of everyone to the
21. Hiding important documents of the flat, such as
Agreement
between
Regional
Government of Special Capital Region of Jakarta with
opportunity to gain his living. The act of PPPRS, developer,
former developer, to documents owned by kiosks
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
and
Rights [ECOSOC]
arbitrarily rendered kiosks occupants/owners in ITC Mangga
Article 6, paragraph (1)
Dua who works as traders unable to do their trading activity.
“The State Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right
Another consequence is economical loss the traders have to
The above-mentioned situation is made worse by the use of
to work, which includes the right of everyone to the
endure. The absence of electricity caused the kiosks to be
violence: a number of security guards attacked kiosks
opportunity to gain his living by work which he freely
dark, limiting the access of the traders (occupants/owners of
occupants/owners of ITC Mangga Dua Block 1A. The same
chooses or accepts, and will take appropriate steps to
flats) to their costumers.
thing happened in 2010, when an occupant/owner of ITC
safeguard this right.”
occupants/owner of ITC Mangga Dua Block 1A.
Anarchist Act
7
Meanwhile, the recognition of the right of everyone to enjoy
management
who
interrupted
electricity
supply
8
10
9
(November 21, 2006), who was later accused of
assertively delineate rights and obligations of those in
of dispute in the field of community housing (Art. 34
defamation (Article 310 and 311 of KUHP);
dispute. State must ensure that they are willing and able to
paragraph (1) Regulation of Minister of Community
perform their obligation and authority as has been regulated.
Housing No. 21/2010)
the just, healthy and favorable conditions of work seems to be
2. Complaint submitted by Winny to Readers’ Opinion of
ignored when the above incident took place. The absence of
Suara Pembaruan daily regarding the action of PPPRS
electricity supply caused discomfort, which was also
and the management of ITC Mangga Dua, who was
potential to develop into condition that threatens the safety
later accused of defamation by PT. Duta Pertiwi; Duta
of the traders.
Pertiwi;
1. National
Land
Authority
(Badan
Pertanahan
c. Deputy Assistant of Flat under Deputy of Formal
Nasional/BPN)
Housing has a duty in preparing materials in
a. BPN is responsible for issuing Certificate of Right to
3. Fifi Tanang was accused of defamation by PT. Duta
formulating policy and materials for coordinating
Land, based on its duty to govern and stipulate right to
policy
land (Article 3, letter g of Presidential Regulation No.
evaluating and composing report in the field of flat
10/2006)
(Art. 323 of Regulation of Minister of Community
The traders’ rights to express their opinion and consent about
Pertiwi (developer) after revealing the status of land
every kind of policy in ITC Mangga Dua are not fulfilled as
entitlement of ITC Mangga Dua; Duta Pertiwi (pihak
b. BPN has a duty to review problem, dispute, lawsuit,
well. This is the contrary to the provision of Article 77 of Act
pengembang/developer) setelah mengungkap status
and conflict in the field of land affairs (Art. 3, letter n of
No. 20/2011 about Flats, specifying that “In the case of PPPRS
hak atas tanah ITC Mangga Dua;
Presidential Regulation No. 10/2006)
implementation,
monitoring,
analyzing,
Housing No. 21/2010) 21/2010)
3. Provincial Government of Special Capital Territory of
Jakarta
4. Haida Sutami, Mardianta Pek, and Suresh Karnani who
c. In reality, the status of right to land is not an absolute
a. As specified in Art. 5 paragraph (1) Act No. 20/2011,
were accused of objectionable act in relation to an
HGB (Hak Guna Bangunan/Building Rights on Land),
Governor (on Province level) and Mayor (on regency
incident on Juli 18, 2013, as the expressed their
but HGB over HPL (Hak Pengelolaan Lahan/Rights to
level) have duty to provide guidance to flat. Gubernur
Criminalization by PPPRS and the management of ITC
complaints of electricity interruption. They were file
Land Management). BPN was expected to fully
ditingkat Provinsi dan Walikota di tingkat kabupaten.
Mangga Dua
for violating article 372, 378, and 167 of KUHP.
understand this matter. But in reality, it was neglectful
settling a matter regarding the interests of flat occupancy,
every flat occupant is entitled to express his/her opinion.”
b. This
in issuing the status of the right to land.
The followings are how the traders responded to acts of
2. Ministry
Obligation of State Institution
criminalization conducted by PPPRS and the management
of
Community
Housing
(Kementerian
Regarding this matter, the government plays the most
a. Kemenpera has a duty to guide the implementation of
1. Kho Seng Seng expressed his complaint on about what
important role. State holds the final responsibility to ensure
housing and housing estate (Art. 12 paragraph (1) Act
PPPRS and the management of ITC Mangga Dua did in
the fulfillment of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. In
No. 1/2011)
Readers’ Opinion section of Suara Pembaruan daily
relation to the above ITC Mangga Dua case, State must
11
includes:
Planning,
regulating,
controlling, and supervising (Art. 6 paragraph (1) Act
No. 20/2011)
Perumahan Rakyat/Kemenpera)
of ITC Mangga Dua:
guidance
c. Included in supervising are monitoring, evaluating,
and correcting (Art. 10 of Act No. 20/2011)
b. Providing legal assistance and assisting the settlement
12
13
14