Demokrasi Desa di era otonomi daerah :: Studi demokratisasi desa dan dinamika politiknya di era otonomi daerah

LUWIHONO, Slamet, Dr. Partini

2007 | Tesis | S2 Sosiologi

Penelitian dengan judul “Demokrasi Desa di Era Otonomi Daerah, Studi Demokratisasi Desa dan Dinamika Politiknya di Era Otonomi Daerah” ini memfokuskan penelaahan pada proses demokrasi desa dan dinamika politiknya di era otonomi daerah berdasar UU No. 22 Tahun 1999. Penelitian ini dilakukan di Desa Reksosari, Kecamatan Suruh, Kabupaten Semarang, Jawa Tengah. Penelitian ini mengurai dua pokok permasalahan: (1) Bagaimana proses penataan institusi demokrasi di desa dan dinamika politiknya di era otonomi?, dan (2) Bagaimana partisipasi sosial-politik masyarakat desa dan peranan elite desa dapat memberikan kontribusi bagi demokratisasi desa? Metode yang yang digunakan adalah Grounded Research dengan pendekatan deskriptif-analitik yang lebih menekankan penggunaan data kualitatif. Penelitian ini diarahkan untuk mendeskripsikan serta memberi penjelasan tentang gejala-gejala demokratisasi desa dan dinamika politiknya, yang meliputi relasi-relasi kekuasaan di desa antara ekskutif, legislatif, dan masyarakat desa dalam proses menuju demokrasi tersebut. Meskipun dalam realitas kepemihakan studi peran elite desa tidak dapat dihindari karena kuatnya dimensi aktor dalam perubahan demokrasi, namun dalam studi ini analisis aktor (elite) ditempatkan pada posisi yang sama dengan analisis masyarakat. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa penerapan regulasi sistem pemerintahan dari sentralistis ke sistem desentralisasi, telah memberi peluang bagi tumbuh kembangnya demokrasi di desa. Terjadinya demokratisasi desa di era otonomi daerah diawali dilakukannya penataan ulang lembaga politik desa (Badan Perwakilan Rakyat/BPD). Proses penataan lembaga demokrasi ini diwarnai dinamika politik yang meliputi pencalonan, problem representatif, penguatan BPD, masih adanya ketidakpercayaan masyarakat kepada anggota BPD, dan lain-lain. Peran elite, terutama kepala desa yang terbuka dalam perguliran awal demokratisasi desa cukup positif dan menjadi faktor pendorong meningkatkan partisipasi politik masyarakat. Meskipun tidak sampai terjadi oligarki elite. Partisipasi masyarakat yang terjadi tidak hanya partisipasi politik tetapi sudah sampai pada bentuk partisipasi sosial. Dan partisipasi yang ada sudah bukan lagi partisipasi yang dimobilisasi tetapi sudah dalam bentuk partisipasi yang otonom dalam level partisipasi kemitraan dan pendelegasian kekuasaan. Bergulirnya demokratisasi desa di era otonomi masih dalam batas demokrasi prosedural dan belum menyentuh pada demokrasi substansial. Penekanan pada aspek prosedural dalam perkembangan awal demokratisasi di desa ini tampak dengan pembentukan lembaga formal desa drop-dropan dari pemerintah supra desa dan bukan berkembang dari inisiasi masyarakat desa ini. Peran negara yang dominan yang ditandai dengan pembentukan regulasi yang mendasari pembentukan lembaga demokrasi formal serta peran kepala desa sebagai aktor penentu (fasilitator) pembentukan lembaga politik tingkat desa di lokasi penelitian merupakan tanda-tanda praktek demokrasi prosedural. Ketimpangan demokratisasi yang lebih berat ke prosedural ini terjadi karena belum ada konsolidasi dua demokratisasi, prosedural dan substansial.

This research entitled “Village Democracy in Regional Autonomy’s Era, A study of village democratization, and its political dynamic in regional autonomy’s era” was focused in comprehending the village democracy process and its political dynamic in regional autonomy’s era based on The Law No. 22 the year of 1999 (UU No. 22 tahun 1999). This research was accomplished in Reksosari Village, District of Suruh, Region of Semarang, Central Java. This research described two main problems: (1) How was the process of democracy institutions’ arrangement and its political dynamic in autonomy’s era? And (2) How could the villagers’ social political participation give contribution to the village democratization. Thus, the method used was Grounded Research with descriptive-analytic approaches, which concentrated more on applying qualitative data. The study was escorted to determine and gave explanations about village democratization and its political dynamic’s symptoms included power relations in the village among the executives, the legistavies, the ordinary villagers in the process towards the democracy. Although in reality the study of tendency, the elite villagers could not be avoided because the strength of actor’s dimension in a democracy changing, nevertheless in this study, the analysis actor (the elites) had been sited equal to the analysis villagers. As a result, this research proved that the application of the government system from centralization to decentralization had provided chances to the village’s growth. Village democratization in regional autonomy’s era happened initialed by re-arranging the village’s political organizations [village legislative board /Badan Perwakilan Desa (BPD)]. The process of this democracy organization re-arrangement was decorated by political dynamic. The roles of the elites, mainly the head of the village who behaved openly in the beginning of the village democratization transformation were positive and it became a supporting factor to increase the society’s participations in politic field. Even though elite oligarch was not occurred. The society’s participations happened were not only in politic but also in form of social participation. Furthermore, the participation had no longer been mobilized but it was already in form of an autonomy participation on the level of partnership participation and power delegation. The transformation of the village democratization in autonomy’s era was still on the rank of procedural democracy and had not reached to a substantial democracy yet. The focusing on procedural aspect in the early development of democratization in the village was shown in the building of the dropped formal village institutions from the superior government and was not exploited from the villagers’ initiations. The majority role of the government which was indicated by establishing regulation for forming formal democracy institutions and the role of the village’s head as the determiner actor (facilitator) of building political institutions on village level at the research location was some signs of procedural democracy. This imbalance democracy that tended to procedural aspect happened due to the absence of two democratizations’ consolidation, procedural and substantial.

Kata Kunci : Demokratisasi Desa,Otonomi Daerah, democracy, autonomy, participation, and the village’s elites