Election Interference: Controversial Appearance of the “Brown Party” in Indonesia’s 2024 Regional Elections

Should the Police be Under the Ministry of Home Affairs?

Editor

December 9, 2024

6–9 minutes

Democracy, Election Campaign, Elections, History, Indonesia, Joko Widodo, Jokowi, Jokowism, Law Reform, Megawati, News, Partai Politik, PDI-P, Police, Political Parties, Politics, Reformasi

Controversial Appearance of the “Brown Party” in Indonesia’s 2024 Regional Elections: Should the Police be Under the Ministry of Home Affairs?

By KompasTV’s TV Panel Talk Show “Satu Meja: The Forum”, December 6, 2024

KOMPAS.TV – The Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (or PDI-P) has claimed there is evidence of election fraud and police interference in nation-wide provincial and regional elections conducted across Indonesia on November 27, 2024, and in the presidential election held in February.

Indications of politicization and excessive use of police authority have triggered a national debate about whether the Indonesian National Police (or Polri) should be placed under the authority of the Ministry of Home Affairs, rather than the country’s President.

Many have objected to the proposal, claiming that the move would conflict with the democratic reforms won by Indonesia’s pro-democracy Reformasi movement in 1998. So what would be the advantages and disadvantages of the Indonesian National Police being placed under a different Ministry or institution? Watch the whole show at https://youtube.com/watch?v=tNH-hwxItPc&feature=shared.

Panel Discussion

The Indonesian National Police (Polri) finds itself at the center of a debate over its administrative structure, as stakeholders respond to allegations it has been politicized and used for political interference in the recent Presidential and Regional elections. Senior Kompas.com journalist, Budiman Tanuredjo, host of KompasTV’s popular flagship current affairs panel talk show “Satu Meja: The Forum”, brought together five experts to address the controversial idea of placing the Indonesian National Police administratively under the Ministry of Home Affairs (Kemendagri). Proponents argue the proposal would curb politicization, while critics warn it would represent a setback to hard-won democratic reforms secured in the late 1990s and early 2000s following the overthrow of the US-backed authoritarian New Order regime leader President Suharto.

Bambang Rukminto, a police analyst from the Institute for Security and Strategic Studies (ISESS), voiced strong opposition to the proposal to place Polri under the Ministry of Home Affairs. According to Rukminto, transferring Polri to Home Affairs or the Ministry of Defense would constitute a regression from the post-1999 reforms that aimed to depoliticize the police force. He described the current system, which places Polri directly under the President, as a critical safeguard ensuring its independence. However, Rukminto acknowledged the deepening problem of police entanglement in politics, highlighted by accusations of favoritism and election-related mobilizations. His solution lies in empowering the National Police Commission (Kompolnas), granting it greater oversight and autonomy to act as an effective watchdog.

On the other side of the debate, House Representative Adian Napitupulu, a prominent PDI-P politician, argued in favor of placing Polri under Home Affairs. Napitupulu accused Polri of operating as the Brown Party (Partai Coklat or Parcok), a reference to the brown uniform used by the police. He pointed to instances of police allegedly leveraging civil servants and local leaders to influence election outcomes. In his view, anchoring Polri within Home Affairs would provide better oversight and mitigate abuses of power. Napitupulu also dismissed claims that such a move would violate pro-democracy reform-era ideals, asserting that the reforms never explicitly precluded placing Polri under a government ministry. He called for an open debate and comparative studies to explore how similar arrangements work in other countries.

Muradi, politics and security academic at Padjadjaran University, cautioned against structural changes, advocating instead for internal improvements within the existing framework. He emphasized Polri’s unique role in maintaining public order, governance, and law enforcement—functions that differentiate it from the military. Muradi argued that placing Polri under Home Affairs could centralize too much power, potentially amplifying political interference, rather than curbing it. He described the current arrangement with Polri under the direct authority of the President as the most balanced solution, designed to minimize abuses while maintaining a focus on public service.

Hendarsam Marantoko, corporate lawyer, chair of non-governmental organisation Advokat Lingkar Nusantara (LISAN), and prominent figure in President Prabowo Subianto’s Gerindra Party, also expressed reservations about the proposed changes. While not dismissing the systemic issues facing Polri, Marantoko cautioned against basing major structural shifts on what he described as isolated incidents of misconduct. He argued that placing Polri under a politically affiliated government minister could exacerbate, rather than alleviate, the problem of politicization. Instead, Marantoko advocated for bolstering oversight mechanisms, including strengthening the roles of the National Police Commission and parliamentary committees, to address the systemic shortcomings.

National Police Commission Commissioner Ghufron Mabruri echoed the calls for enhanced oversight, but opposed the proposal to place Polri under Home Affairs. Mabruri emphasized that the National Police Commission has not received substantial complaints about police interference in the elections, though he acknowledged public perceptions of bias. He argued that shifting Polri’s administrative alignment would not guarantee a reduction in political influence. Instead, Mabruri proposed strengthening external and internal accountability measures, including granting the National Police Commission greater authority to act independently of Polri’s internal chain of command.

Despite differing perspectives, the panelists converged on the recognition of systemic problems within Polri, including allegations of political entanglements, misconduct, and a lack of accountability. While some see structural changes as necessary, others advocate for reforming internal mechanisms and reinforcing oversight institutions.

Summary

1. Bambang Rukminto (Police Analyst, ISESS)

Key Opinion: Strongly opposed the idea of placing Polri under the Ministry of Home Affairs (Kemendagri) or the Ministry of Defense, citing it as a regression from the reforms of 1999.
Rationale:
- Moving Polri to Kemendagri would undermine the independence achieved post-reform and risks increased political interference.
- The integration of police and politics has led to “political favoritism” within the institution, highlighted by allegations of police involvement in election mobilizations.
Suggested Solution:
- Strengthen Kompolnas (National Police Commission) as an independent oversight body to ensure accountability and professional standards within Polri.

2. Adian Napitupulu (Politician, PDI-P)

Key Opinion: Advocated for the placement of Polri under Kemendagri as a means to improve checks and balances.
Rationale:
- Accused Polri of acting as a “Partai Coklat” (“Parcok”) and leveraging its power for political purposes, including mobilizing civil servants (ASN) and village heads during elections.
- Believes that reform ideals did not explicitly prohibit such a move and emphasized the need to explore various structural reforms to prevent police misuse.
Suggested Solution:
- Open debates and studies on Polri’s placement within a ministry, citing global examples where police operate under ministries for accountability.

3. Muradi (Professor of Politics and Security, Universitas Padjajaran)

Key Opinion: Opposed moving Polri under Kemendagri, arguing it would centralize too much power and politicize law enforcement further.
Rationale:
- Emphasized Polri’s unique role in public order, governance, and law enforcement as separate from TNI’s (military) defense focus.
- Highlighted that the reforms have already positioned Polri optimally under the President, minimizing potential abuses.
Suggested Solution:
- Reinforce internal mechanisms to ensure Polri operates professionally and is held accountable without drastic administrative changes.

4. Hendarsam Marantoko (Corporate Lawyer, LISAN)

Key Opinion: Stressed that administrative changes should not be based on isolated incidents of misconduct but on comprehensive evaluations of Polri’s role.
Rationale:
- Believes that moving Polri under Kemendagri might increase, rather than reduce, political influence, particularly if the minister is affiliated with a political party.
- Argued that reforms should focus on strengthening checks and balances rather than altering structural alignments.
Suggested Solution:
- Enhance oversight mechanisms, including the roles of Kompolnas and DPR (Parliament), to address systemic issues in Polri.

5. Ghufron Mabruri (Kompolnas Commissioner)

Key Opinion: Opposed immediate structural changes, emphasizing a focus on enhancing oversight and control mechanisms.
Rationale:
- Kompolnas has received no substantial complaints about election interference but acknowledges systemic issues related to professionalism and neutrality.
- Stressed that moving Polri under Kemendagri does not guarantee reduced politicization.
Suggested Solution:
- Increase Kompolnas’s authority and effectiveness in overseeing Polri and push for external and internal accountability measures.

General Themes of Agreement and Disagreement:

Agreements:
- All members acknowledged the presence of systemic issues in Polri, such as overreach and politicization.
- The importance of professionalizing Polri and reinforcing accountability was a common thread.
Disagreements:
- The appropriateness of moving Polri under Kemendagri was divisive. Proponents argued it would reduce unchecked power, while opponents saw it as counterproductive.

This article is based on https://youtu.be/tNH-hwxItPc?si=vCPONMXfzhP5nwLX.

In related news: