TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Prabowo's leadership: Balancing centralization and the future of Indonesia’s democracy
Prabowo's big-tent leadership approach hearkens the pre-Reform top-down governance model and signals a regression toward centralized authority, leaving a question as to whether he can rise to the challenge of strengthening Indonesia's pluralistic, inclusive democracy toward sustainable governance.
Change text size
Gift Premium Articles
to Anyone
Share the best of The Jakarta Post with friends, family, or colleagues. As a subscriber, you can gift 3 to 5 articles each month that anyone can read—no subscription needed!
A voter places his ballots into a ballot box on Nov. 27 at a polling station in Sitaro, North Sulawesi, during the 2024 simultaneous regional head elections in 37 provinces and over 500 regencies and municipalities. (Antara/Yegar Sahaduta Mangiri)
P
resident Prabowo Subianto’s recent idea to abolish direct regional head elections has sparked nationwide controversy. However, a fundamental and more critical question arises: To what extent does Prabowo trust the foundational principles of Indonesia's democratic system and his own leadership?
Since the fall of Soeharto's New Order in 1998, Indonesia's democracy has been built on the principles of decentralization and direct electoral participation. The adoption of a presidential system, combined with the "one man, one vote" approach, has enabled the country to navigate its diverse archipelagic challenges, including differences among ethnic, religious and interest group across regions.
This system has fostered a direct relationship between citizens and local leaders. Saeful Muljani, in the Akbar Faisal Uncensored podcast, highlighted that the presidential system was more stable and sustainable compared to parliamentary systems, or the People’s Consultative Assembly appointing leaders. Opposition and criticism under the presidential system have functioned proportionally since the presidency of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono without the capacity to destabilize the government, as parliamentary systems often do.
Decentralization in particular has empowered local democracy and participation. Whether realized or not, direct elections for a president and regional heads have mitigated the risks of oligarchy in a democratic political system.
In his book Iron Law of Oligarchy, Robert Michels observed a tendency for power to become concentrated in the hands of a few in all organizational systems, from political parties to labor unions and civil society groups. By distributing power and decision-making closer to the people, decentralization has improved governance, enhanced public service delivery and promoted political inclusion.
President Prabowo’s proposal to strip citizens of their right to directly elect their governors, regents and mayors risks undermining this democratic trajectory. By centralizing the authority to appoint regional leaders in the hands of politicians, the system risks becoming more isolated, less accountable and increasingly oligarchic.
In the democratic context, such centralization often stifles innovation, impedes accountability and disempowers local communities. This marks a regression toward the top-down governance model that many Indonesians fought to leave behind.
