Indonesia is currently facing a severe period of civil unrest, with protests escalating nationwide following the death of a motorcycle taxi driver struck by a police vehicle during a Jakarta demonstration, Affan Kurniawan. The situation has grown increasingly volatile, exemplified by protesters setting fire to a parliamentary building in Makassar and a subsequent blaze at a council building that resulted in at least three people being killed.
Significant demonstrations have been reported in major cities, including Bandung, Yogyakarta, Surabaya, and Medan, organized primarily by student groups, unions, and grassroots organizations.
The immediate trigger for this national outrage was the House of Representatives’ (DPR) highly controversial approval of a substantial allowance increase for its members. However, this event alone is insufficient to explain the scale of the response. It catalyzed the deep-seated anger that has been building among the Indonesian public over the course of President Joko Widodo’s ten-year administration.
Jokowi’s legacy: the infrastructure of autocracy
A defining legacy of Joko Widodo’s presidency is the deliberate construction of an institutional framework that enabled democratic decline. Under his administration, Indonesia’s democracy ranking fell significantly, a trend driven by the strategic weakening of key democratic pillars. The anti-corruption agency (KPK) was weakened through legislative revisions and the appointment of leaders lacking integrity, while the notorious ITE Law was weaponized to restrict civil liberties; Amnesty International Indonesia documented 332 cases of its use against ordinary citizens.
This process of democratic erosion was further advanced through the centralization of power. The swift amendment of the Constitutional Court Law ensured a judicial branch favorable to the executive and legislative arms, a move that later facilitated the controversial eligibility of Jokowi’s son for the vice presidency. Unlike the classic pattern, such as a coup that drastically changed the system, the decline in democracy happened slowly and went unnoticed by many people. This is precisely how executive aggrandisement works–democracy becomes merely an illusion. Meanwhile, the pillars of democracy are slowly being undermined and are waiting to collapse.
Prabowo Era: Accelerating the trend, not changing it
The budget efficiency plan implemented by the Prabowo administration has stirred economic and social tensions. To address fiscal pressures, spending cuts have been implemented for infrastructure development, including the new capital, Nusantara. These economic disruptions have fueled public unrest, culminating in widespread protests.
In February, just a month after the 100-day survey showed President Prabowo’s rising popularity, the Indonesian Student Executive Board Alliance participated in the Dark Indonesia protests across various cities. They demonstrated against major budget cuts that affected sectors like education to fund the Nutritious Meals Program.
In contrast to the optimistic 100 Days of Prabowo survey, the students’ protests reflect widespread dissatisfaction with government policies and fears about the country’s social support system and economic stability. The Dark Indonesia protest is one of the largest since the 1998 reform movement, which followed the end of the Suharto regime.
Read More: Sexism in Student Arrests and Maternal Activism Mothers Defend Their Children’s Struggles
Moreover, under Prabowo’s administration, the House of Representatives has passed into law the contentious revisions of the Indonesian Military (TNI) Law, which pose a serious threat to democracy, civilian supremacy over the military, and human rights in Indonesia. The bill could pave the way for bringing the world’s third-biggest democracy back to the draconian New Order era of former President Soeharto, during which military officers dominated civilian affairs.
Civil society space is diminishing, as evidenced by the rise of aggressive nationalism. This form of nationalism fosters suspicion, intimidation, and demands for unconditional loyalty to the state rather than promoting unity. President Prabowo and his supporters, both explicitly and implicitly, frequently express skepticism toward external influences, particularly non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and foreign-funded institutions, which are often labeled as foreign agents.
Another sign of aggressive nationalism is the attempt to control the historical narrative to perpetuate the legitimacy of those in power. The Ministry of Culture’s history rewriting project, for example, only includes two of the 12 cases of gross human rights violations that the National Human Rights Commission has investigated.
Read More: Period Pain for Women is Real, How to Deal With It?
Ahead of Indonesia’s 80th Independence Day celebrations, many people flew One Piece flags as a symbol of the people’s disappointment with the government’s performance. Instead of reforming itself to improve public trust, the government accused those who flew One Piece flags of treason.
On the other hand, the political opposition is practically paralysed. Almost all major parties support the government, leaving little room for oversight of power. Cases of intimidation are on the rise. Amnesty International Indonesia recorded 123 cases of attacks against 288 human rights defenders throughout 2024, including criminalisation, intimidation, and even attempted murder.
Meanwhile, the arrest of Deputy Minister of Manpower Immanuel Ebenezer in an OTT operation last August has further fuelled public anger towards the Prabowo administration, which initially guaranteed that its cabinet would be free from corrupt behaviour.
Political-Economic Foundations of Anger
In February, President Prabowo launched Danantara, a sovereign wealth fund designed to consolidate several state-owned enterprises. This ambitious initiative aims to boost the country’s economic growth, manage state assets, and engage in high-impact projects. However, critics have pointed to the lack of independent supervision and transparency associated with the fund. Since it operates directly under presidential control, national auditors are not allowed to provide oversight.
In March, the Indonesian Rupiah fell to levels not seen since the Asian Financial Crisis, and central bank intervention was needed to stabilise the currency after President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” announcement. While depreciation pressures have abated a little, the Rupiah is still one of the worst-performing emerging-market currencies this year. The stock market has also performed poorly.
Read More: ‘What I Inherited, What I Refused’ Reflections About Overcoming Misogyny
The lived reality for ordinary Indonesians is one of stark and worsening inequality. Research by Celios reveals a grotesque disparity: the wealth of the nation’s 50 richest individuals now equals that of its 50 million poorest. In this climate, local governments are imposing brutal tax hikes, with land and building taxes in areas like Cirebon soaring by nearly 1000%, crushing smallholders and families already struggling with a rising cost of living.
Meanwhile, high youth unemployment, rising cost of living, and widespread layoffs. When people in Indonesia struggle to fulfil their daily needs, allowances for the DPR have increased many times over the minimum wage. A number of responses from members of the House of Representatives, who have mocked and even insulted citizens in the midst of difficult economic conditions, have further fuelled the flames of anger because this is a great betrayal. The House of Representatives’ allowances were the ultimate symbol of this betrayal—the political class rewarding itself for a job not done.
Indonesia’s Deadly Unrest
The recent deadly protests across Indonesia are the direct outcome of three converging forces: economic anxiety due to unemployment and layoffs, the systematic erosion of democratic institutions, and the perceived hypocrisy of a self-enriching political elite. Citizens feel their stories are ignored and their cries for help are met with indifference from leaders who appear more concerned with their own privilege than public service.
President Prabowo’s response to the crisis represents a critical juncture. The administration has adopted a coercive strategy presented as legal action, rather than pursuing substantive accountability. This approach risks reinforcing a system of authoritarian resilience, in which democratic processes persist in form but not in substance. Such measures exacerbate societal divisions and do not address the underlying causes of unrest.
The nation now faces a defining choice: will civil society rally to defend the democratic principles of the 1998 Reformation, or will Indonesia revert to a New Order paradigm that values stability over civil liberties and popular sovereignty? The answer will determine the country’s political future.
