Suchergebnisse

The dominant perceptions of the academic literature on relations among security and law enforcement institutions in Indonesia tend to be negative. In part, academic works on the past behaviour of security forces in some of Indonesia's conflict areas inform the perceptions of the literature. Research on conflict zones often suggests that unclear boundaries of jurisdiction and poor internal command and control frustrated the efforts to coordinate security forces in such areas. While these conclusions may be accurate in places that are or were riven by high conflict, this article questions if such conclusions are accurate for the large parts of Indonesia that have only experienced low levels of security problems. The evidence presented in this article suggests that coordination and an effective division of labour does exist among government security agencies in a low conflict environment. This article outlines relations between the three primary law enforcement and security actors the National Police, territorial units of the Indonesian military and regional government in three district case studies in Yogyakarta. This article finds that while agencies at the sub-national level are highly autonomous, their autonomy does not present an obstacle for cooperation. In the case studies presented, government law enforcement and security actors acknowledge jurisdictional boundaries between one another. Where inter-institutional cooperation does take place, regional government plays an important, facilitative role. Despite this, the Indonesian police remain the lead agency in combating most threats to order and stability. (Contemp Southeast Asia/GIGA)

The dominant perceptions of the academic literature on relations among security and law enforcement institutions in Indonesia tend to be negative. In part, academic works on the past behaviour of security forces in some of Indonesia's conflict area; inform the perceptions of the literature. Research on conflict zones often suggests that unclear boundaries of jurisdiction and poor internal command and control frustrated the efforts to coordinate security forces in such areas. While these conclusions may be accurate in places that are or were driven by high conflict, this article questions if such conclusions are ac curate for the large parts of Indonesia that have only experienced low levels of security problems. The evidence presented in this article suggests that coordination and an effective division of labour does exist among government security agencies in a low conflict environment. This article outlines relations between the three primary law enforcement and security actors -- the National Police, territorial units of the Indonesian military and regional government -- in three district case studies in Yogyakarta. This article finds that while agencies at the sub-national level are highly autonomous, their autonomy does not present an obstacle for cooperation. In the case studies presented, government law enforcement and security actors acknowledge jurisdictional boundaries between one another. Where inter-institutional cooperation does take place, regional government plays an important, facilitative role. Despite this, the Indonesian police remain the lead agency in combating most threats to order and stability. Adapted from the source document.