Abstract
Can legal remedies act as a line of defence against dispossession? Although the legal system in Indonesia very rarely yields the outcomes that scholars and activists seem to prefer, “The Perils of Legal Formalism,” in addressing widespread conflicts caused by the expansion of oil palm plantations, argues that it can. Yet, the political economy of Indonesia’s “extractive regime” has long relied on violent and legal dispossession. A Poulantzian Marxist analysis of law provides firmer ground for understanding the ineffectiveness of law by itself in reforming society. Peterson, Bedner, and Berenschot’s (2025) puzzlement at the formalistic decisions of Indonesian judges and incompetence of plaintiff lawyers representing displaced communities reveals their individualist, law-centric approach and a reluctance to abandon the liberal myths of rule of law and autonomy of the legal system from “the rest” of society. Optimistic reformist efforts may offer the veneer of legitimacy in rule of law while actually strengthening the extractive regime and the power of dominant actors who benefit from it. Against such wishful thinking, a rare case of effective mobilisation in West Sumatra illustrates how legal action can only be impactful if deployed in combination with power built over time by collective actors.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call