Prostitution and Human Rights in Indonesia: A Critical Systemic Review of Policy Discourses and Scenarios

This article considers policy making in practice focussing on case studies drawn from ethnographic research on prostitution in Indonesia carried out between 2012 and 2013 (this article is based on field research undertaken in Java, Indonesia, between November 2012 and 28 February 2013). Its theoretical underpinnings is that of ‘critical systemic heuristics’ which contends that policy making with respect to prostitution needs to take into account a range of factors and diverse views based on a process of ‘unfolding values’ and ‘sweeping in’ many variables before a decision is made. Applying ‘critical systemic approach’ or ‘critical heuristics’provides a means to test out the policy making ideas, as opposed to merely implementing the ideas of the powerful. The paper applies critical heuristic thinking to argue that the policy response ought to take into account the voices of those with a lived experience of poverty and prostitution, in order to protect their rights when making policy decisions.     

Re-framing Prostitution in Indonesia: A Critical Systemic Approach

This study applies critical systems thinking as a process to respond to and offer recommendations to address prostitution policy in Indonesia. The article addresses social, economic and environmental aspects of prostitution. The analysis centres on the way in which prostitution is framed by the different interest groups in Indonesia, and highlights the current crisis in policy-making praxis in Indonesia. The article develops a case for systemic policy praxis, and aims to: (1) Make a case for re-framing the issue of prostitution in the sense that it addresses the ‘capabilities’ prostituted women and children ought to have (see Sen in Development as freedom, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1999 and Nussbaum in Women and human development: the capabilities approach, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2000). (2) Re-frame the policy response to prostitution to address life chances and human dignity. (3) Assert that the lack of attention to a just and fair human rights for all is due to a policy-making gap where ‘systemic intervention’ is required to restore human dignity.