adatlaw, distribution of the estate can commence
even while the parents are still alive. Whenever the
children are in need of resources,the transfer of the
property can be pursued. Nor is this regarded as a
gift, because, when the parent dies, the child who
had received the wealth before will not receive any
further share of the estate. The main point of con-
cern therefore lies in the variable of social justice
among family members, since the main considera-
tion is not how soon the wealth can be divided but
how the estate can be used to the maximal benefit
of all family members (especially children and any
surviving parent) on an equal basis.The position of women
In practical terms, the adatlaw of inheritance is
inseparably linked to the clan system embraced in
the community. For this reason, women can play a
key role in division of the estate. Here, the proce-
dure of transferring the estate in adatlaw theore-
tically follows a particular pattern depending on
how the community organizes its clanship, whether
along patrilineal, matrilineal, or parental lines
(Hadikusuma 1991, 63–146).
In the patriarchal system, where a man is re-
garded as the head of the family, it is only the sons
who are, theoretically, allowed to inherit the estate
from the deceased. This means that women are
marginalized, since the daughters or female mem-
bers of the family will only receive shares if they
happen to be the widow of the deceased or daugh-
ters who are entitled to be considered as sons by
virtue of marriage. This pattern is found in some
places that preserve the patriarchal system of clan-
ship, such as that in Batak (North Sumatra), Lam-
pung (Sumatra), Bali, and Rote Island in Eastern
Nusa Tenggara. In many instances, the patriarchal
pattern of the inheritance is characterized by a pref-
erence for designating the agnatic son – in many
places the first-born son in the family – as the one
responsible for the future of the whole of the fam-
ily, especially when the father may be very old or
incapable of taking care of the family, or even
deceased. Here, the sense of the wealth as capital
for the economic well-being of the family is very
strong, and it is the son who seems to be the one
expected to take on the economic burden. The pref-
erence shown to the son by entrusting him with the
property is usually understood as giving him the
means to discharge his responsibility. Thus in prac-
tice the estate is not to be divided among the heirs
in advance but placed under the authority of the
first-born son and kept undivided until all the heirs
marry and establish their own families, at which420 law: customary
time they usually need their share of the estate in
order to get started in life. This is but one of two
types of collective inheritance in adatlaw. The
other is what is called the mayorat system, in which
the estate is not divided but instead placed under
the collective authority of all agnatic sons and not
just the first-born, to be used as a resource for the
family’s well-being.
By contrast, in a matrilineal system of inheri-
tance, women take precedence in division of the
estate, in keeping with the tradition in matrilineal
society where the female is the locus of authority
within the family. In some matrilineal adatcircles,
such as in Minangkabau (West Sumatra) and some
regions of South Sumatra, the mother and her fam-
ily exercise leadership so that only relatives on the
mother’s side manage and share the estate of the
deceased (Rajo Penghulu 1994, 113–18). Thus
what we find in matrilineal collective inheritance is
that the entire network of relatives on the mother’s
side retains authority over the estate and enjoys the
right to benefit from it at the direction of a single
female heir. In some places, this kind of manage-
ment of the estate is common practice as regards the
ownership of land originally owned by the prede-
cessors of the mother’s family. As in the patriarchal
method, the mayorat system applies here too,
although in the matrilineal model the first-born
daughter takes responsibility along with the first-
born son of the family, so that the two relatives
work together to preserve the estate for the sake of
the family’s welfare.
In contrast to the gender-based underpinnings of
these two models, the parental system prescribes
that both sons and daughters have equal rights to
the estate. Thus whereas in patrilineal or matrilin-
eal communities either only men or only women
control the inheritance (with the consequence that
gender alienation may then result from such a
framework), the parental system sees no point in
differentiating between the two sexes, and assigns
them equal rights in the succession. In consequence,
the estate in the parental inheritance model de-
volves not only on the heirs on the mother’s or
father’s side, but on all descendants of either sex.
The children or heirs of the estate are therefore not
viewed as belonging to one side of the family or the
other, but are equally entitled to inherit from either
parent. This is the system that is most commonly
found in the adatlaw of inheritance in the Indo-
nesian archipelago. In the adat-based communities
of Aceh and North Sumatra, most regions in South
Sumatra, Java, Madura, Kalimantan and Sulawesi,
as well as in most of the eastern archipelago, the