Once seen as an independent institution representing the business community, Kadin now appears entangled in political rivalries, with the recent ousting of chairman Arsjad Rasjid and the appointment of Anindya Bakrie during a government-backed extraordinary congress on Sept. 14 being clear examples.

The government’s support for the congress, which Arsjad claims to have illegally violated the organization’s statutes and standing order, makes sense as Arsjad led the campaign team of opposition candidate Ganjar Pranowo, but the manner in which the change of guard was orchestrated is by no means acceptable.

Anindya is a son of Aburizal Bakrie, a former chairman of Golkar, one of the parties behind the nomination of president-elect Prabowo Subianto. Also present in the extraordinary congress were Investment Minister Rosan Roslani and People’s Consultative Assembly Speaker Bambang Soesatyo, who are also Golkar politicians.

Kadin is a nonpartisan organization, whose role is to bridge the private sector and the government, helping to shape economic policy and advocating for business interests.

But with reports suggesting that Anindya’s installation as chair was politically motivated rather than merit-based, serious doubts about Kadin’s neutrality and professionalism have arisen.

This loss of independence comes at a time when Indonesia’s economy needs stable leadership to navigate the uncertainties of global markets and post-pandemic recovery.

The underlying problem lies in the growing tendency of the Jokowi administration to consolidate power by influencing key organizations. Kadin is only the latest victim of this trend.

The political scuffles within the Golkar Party, which saw Airlangga Hartarto step down as party chairman and Energy and Mineral Resources Minister Bahlil Lahadalia take over, further illustrate how political maneuvering is bleeding into other sectors. These moves not only damage the credibility of these institutions, but also undermine their ability to function effectively.

The consequences of such interference are more than political. Investors and business leaders have long relied on Kadin to advocate for market-friendly policies.

However, the perception that Kadin’s leadership is being determined by political loyalty rather than competence could erode confidence, particularly among foreign investors, in Indonesia’s business sector.

Market jitters can follow if investors believe that political agendas are dictating decisions that affect the economy. Already, some business leaders have voiced concerns, calling for a swift resolution to the leadership dispute. They recognize that prolonged uncertainty could hinder economic policy-making and damage Indonesia’s investment climate.

This is a critical moment for Indonesia’s political and economic future. As a new government prepares to take over, the ruling coalition must recognize that political meddling in professional organizations like Kadin sets a dangerous precedent.

Such moves may offer short-term political gains, but they risk long-term damage to the institutions that support Indonesia’s economic growth. It is vital that Kadin be allowed to operate independently, with leadership based on merit, not just political connections.

The government needs to step back and allow Kadin to refocus on its core mission: Advocating for Indonesian businesses. The consequences of continued interference are too great to ignore.

Indonesia’s economic stability, investor confidence and the integrity of its institutions are at stake. A politically neutral, professionally led Kadin is essential for the country’s future, and the incoming administration should ensure it stays that way.

President Jokowi has said he is open to both camps of Kadin for peace talks. But how can we expect the government to act as an honest broker when Law and Human Rights Minister Supratman Andi Agtas has already prepared a draft of a presidential decree that acknowledges Anindya as the Kadin chair?

Indeed, the government needs to intervene to keep Kadin’s division from protracting. The only option for the government is to make sure the conflict is settled in accordance with the prevailing regulations and laws.

After all, a lack of legal certainty is a major obstacle to the country’s investment climate.