Members of the Indonesian Military (TNI) and the National Police (Polri) were involved in an armed clash yet again on Sunday, apparently in a fashion that displays remnants – if not side effects – of the incomplete 1998 internal reforms of the military and the 2000 separation of the two forces.

The incident began in front of the Gorontalo regency's General Elections Commission (KPUD) office in the early hours of Sunday, as a group of Police's Mobile Brigade (Brimob) members were patrolling in a truck. An unidentified group of people suddenly pelted the truck with stones and bottles. Two of the Brimob members suffered head injuries and were rushed to a local hospital for treatment, while the rest were engaged in gun fights as they searched the area. Four men, identified as Army Strategic Reserves Command members, suffered gunshot wounds in the exchanges.

While we praise the leading figures of both the TNI and the Polri for taking immediate actions to prevent the clash from escalating, the lingering question is: Why should such armed clashes remain unabated?

First of all, both institutions need to thoroughly investigate Sunday's clash as both TNI and Polri have yet to identify its trigger, though it was obvious that the Brimob members' involvement was provoked. A complete investigation will help determine whether the clash was premeditated as part of a grand design to destabilize security at the local level that, if unsolved, could escalate into a regional or national level issue; or whether it was simply a physical clash and part of each institution's subjective esprit de corps.

For long-term purposes, a further investigation should be conducted to identify the core problems that have frequently led to such clashes, and simultaneously define the terms of reference and settlement options that can be used as permanent solutions to the problems.

Clashes between military soldiers and police officers have taken place recurrently, especially since the separation of the two institutions based on the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) decree in 2000. Since then, TNI officers have had less access to "extra financial resources" than their peers in the police, as businesses turn to them for protection following a law that defined the police as the country's sole law enforcement authority.

One case in point was the recent death of a Navy soldier at the hands of an angry mob. The soldier was reportedly defending a truck, which collided with a minibus in North Jakarta. In a later development, a spate of motorcycle-related violence broke out in North Jakarta, allegedly involving members of the TNI and Polri, although this has not been officially confirmed. And as investigators (either TNI or Police) have yet to examine the preceding cases of violence, the shooting of two soldiers by unidentified gunmen riding on a hatchback sedan in Central Jakarta early this month has added weight to the overall series of violence.

In Medan, North Sumatra, last December, a soldier and an officer from the North Sumatra Police were injured in a clash involving TNI and police officers. A number of police personnel were previously involved in a clash with soldiers in North Sumatra during a raid on a gambling den.

All these cases have shown that there are still problems with reforms, particularly in the TNI – not only regarding the prosperity of TNI soldiers, but also law enforcement efforts against TNI officers committing crimes.

While increasing soldiers' welfare should answer their prosperity problems, upholding transparency in law enforcement and ensuring prosecution of TNI officers for their wrongdoings remains a problem as they are currently only subject to military law and can thus only be tried in a military tribunal, fueling suspicions that the exclusive justice system will only prolong an environment of impunity for soldiers.

Internal reforms in the TNI have shown significant results. Yet, there are things that need improvement, including its welfare and law enforcement systems.