In a pivotal parliamentary decision in Jakarta, Indonesia, lawmakers have unanimously approved modifications to the military law, enabling military officers to occupy a broader array of government positions without stepping down from their roles within the armed forces. This decision has emerged despite mounting resistance from pro-democracy and human rights advocates who express anxiety over potential threats to Indonesia’s relatively nascent democratic framework.
During a legislative session, all eight political factions present in Indonesia’s Parliament endorsed the proposed amendments. The legislative body remains largely under the influence of political groups allied with President Prabowo Subianto, a former military general with historical affiliations to Indonesia’s authoritarian past.
Under existing legislation from 2004, active military officers were permitted to engage in roles strictly connected to security, defense, and intelligence. However, the new changes aim to extend the military’s influence beyond purely defensive functions.
Once enacted, the revised law will permit serving officers to assume civilian posts without the obligation to resign, expanding their reach to include bodies like the Attorney General’s Office, the Supreme Court, and the Coordinating Ministry for Political and Security Affairs. This builds upon the existing law, which allowed military service members to partake in 10 ministries and state bodies, such as the Ministry of Defense and the National Intelligence Agency. The amendment increases this figure to 14 for activities not directly associated with combat roles.
Additionally, the draft incorporates a provision empowering the president to appoint military figures to other ministries as deemed necessary.
The overhaul of the law has sparked apprehension amongst pro-democracy groups and student activists, who express concern that the enhanced military roles could revive the “dual function” model experienced under Suharto’s dictatorship. In that period, military personnel were allocated legislative seats and numerous civilian roles from local governance up to ministerial positions. This system ultimately served as a means for Suharto to suppress political dissent.
Al Araf, leading Indonesia’s rights organization Imparsial, commented that the new law contradicts the spirit of reforms post-Suharto’s regime in 1998, which aimed to confine the military strictly to defense.
“The risk of returning to an authoritarian regime is high,” Araf warned.
Critics also raise concerns about the closed nature of the law’s development process, which they describe as lacking public engagement and being expedited unnecessarily. The latest iteration of the law was introduced in a rushed manner, subsequent to a formal recommendation from President Subianto. Activists noted clandestine meetings between legislators and officials held at an upscale hotel in South Jakarta in mid-March to discuss these revisions.
Dominique Nicky Fahrizal, a scholar at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Indonesia, suggested that the undemocratic crafting of the law might lead to severe counteraction.
“By exploiting loopholes in legal structures, autocratic practices compromise constitutional democracy,” Fahrizal elaborated.
In defense of the proposed changes, Defense Minister Sjafrie Sjamsoeddin, a retired high-ranking army official, argued that the law was meticulously considered and is vital for adapting the military to evolving geopolitical and technological landscapes.
In his statement after the law passed, Sjamsoeddin emphasized the importance of these changes in enabling the military to address both conventional and unconventional warfare effectively.
“We are committed to preserving the sovereignty of the Republic of Indonesia,” he asserted.
