The controversy began with a dramatic increase in land and building taxes (PBB), reportedly up to 250 percent, imposed without adequate public consultation. This sparked widespread outrage among residents, culminating in a massive protest that turned violent.

The situation escalated further when Pati Regent Sudewo, a Gerindra Party politician, was implicated in a corruption case involving railway infrastructure projects under the Transportation Ministry. Although he returned Rp 3 billion (US$185,566) to the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), the gesture did little to restore public trust.

What made matters worse was Sudewo’s public response. Instead of acknowledging the grievances of his constituents, he challenged them, stating he would not be intimidated even if 50,000 people took to the streets. Such rhetoric reveals a troubling disconnect between elected officials and the people they serve.

Governance is not merely about policy execution or administrative efficiency. At its core, it is a moral enterprise. Ethical governance demands transparency, accountability, empathy and a commitment to the public good. When these principles are abandoned, governance becomes a tool of domination rather than a platform for service.

To understand the depth of the crisis in Pati, we must turn to ethical theory. Immanuel Kant’s deontological ethics teaches us that individuals must be treated as ends in themselves, not merely as means to an end. In this light, the unilateral imposition of burdensome taxes without public dialogue violates the moral duty of government to respect the autonomy and dignity of its citizens. Utilitarianism, as articulated by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, offers another lens. It holds that the right action is the one that produces the greatest good for the greatest number. The Pati tax policy, which disproportionately harms low-income residents, fails this test. Instead of maximizing welfare, it exacerbates inequality and social unrest.

Aristotle’s ethics of virtue reminds us that ethical leadership is not just about rules or outcomes, it is about character. A virtuous leader embodies traits such as honesty, courage and compassion. Sudewo’s defiant stance and dismissive tone suggest a deficit in these virtues. Leadership devoid of moral character is not just ineffective, it is dangerous.