<![CDATA[Indonesian village governance research has expanded considerably since the enactment of Law No. 6 of 2014 on Villages, but it continues to treat the formal administrative apparatus as the effective locus of authority. This framing obscures a condition observable in many rural communities, including those of Bengkulu Province: the simultaneous operation of state-constituted administrative leadership and customary (adat) leadership, each with its own base of legitimacy, jurisdiction, and sanctioning capacity. This study addresses that gap through a qualitative case study of four villages in Bengkulu, applying a dual formal–customary power mapping frame that assesses both leadership systems across four analytical domains: authority domain, legitimacy base, decision-making influence, and areas of institutional overlap or conflict. Data were generated through in-depth interviews with village heads, village apparatus, consultative body members, and customary elders; direct observation of village deliberation forums and customary dispute settlement; four focus group discussions; and review of village governance documents. The findings show that the two systems are neither hierarchically ordered nor functionally equivalent. Formal authority is procedurally strong but normatively thin, controlling budget, documentation, and the interface with supra-village government; customary authority is procedurally weak but normatively thick, controlling social propriety, land boundary knowledge, and everyday dispute resolution. Communities route matters between the two according to a consistent, unwritten logic. Five zones of overlap are identified in which jurisdiction is genuinely contested, and six conditions are found to support productive coordination.]]>
Copyrights © 2024
