This article examines the implications of perceptions of an emergent crisis of flood risk for property rights in Jakarta. Jakarta faces devastating future floods due to climate change and other anthropogenic impacts, and the city has experienced severe flood events in recent years. State actors have responded with an aggressive infrastructural agenda that has led to evictions of numerous low-income communities. This has spurred a series of court cases, in which plaintiffs have argued that the evictions violated Indonesian law and specifically violated legal protections of autochthonous land claims. Based on an analysis of court and policy documents and interviews with key actors, this article finds that Jakarta’s crisis of flood risk has intensified what we refer to as the dialectic of state informality and has brought this dynamic to the center of urban politics. This dialectic is defined by contestation between two deeply antagonistic frameworks of planning action. On one hand, state actors and institutions assert their right to unilaterally define what is legitimate and just, and indeed to violate their own laws and regulations where they see fit, as necessary to address societal risk. On the other, communities and advocates argue that this assertion of state power has led to the systematic delegitimation and stigmatization of communities that do not accord with state developmental visions. This critique paradoxically positions informalized communities as proponents of the reassertion of the rule of law in the practice of urban planning.

本文探讨了雅加达洪水风险紧急危机对产权的看法的含义。由于气候变化和其他人为因素的影响，雅加达面临着毁灭性的未来洪灾，近年来该市经历了严重的洪灾事件。国家行为者以激进的基础设施议程作为回应，导致许多低收入社区遭到驱逐。这激起了一系列法院案件，在这些案件中，原告辩称，驱逐令违反了印度尼西亚法律，特别是违反了对土着土地索偿权的法律保护。根据对法院和政策文件的分析以及对主要行为者的采访，本文发现，雅加达的洪水风险危机加剧了我们所谓的国家非正规性的辩证法，并将这种动态带入了城市政治的中心。这种辩证法是通过计划行动的两个对立框架之间的竞争来定义的。一方面，国家行为者和机构主张其权利，单方面定义什么是合法和公正的，并且确实有必要在其认为合适的地方违反自己的法律和法规，以应对社会风险。另一方面，社区和拥护者认为，国家权力的这种主张导致了不符合国家发展视野的社区的系统化合法化和污名化。