How Indonesia can rebuild trust before the next election

Gas shortages, poisoned school meals and rising insecurity in Indonesia reveal a widening gap between government and people, writes Kurniawan Arif Maspul.

INDONESIA’S DEMOCRACY carries unique moral weight in the region. This is not just an election system, it is a promise rooted In Pancasila – faith, humanity, unity, negotiation and social justice – a covenant that aims to hold together more than 270 million lives spread across thousands of islands.

This promise sounds fragile now. In the first year of President Prabowo Subianto’s administration, the distance between the democratic ideal and lived reality has become painfully visible, not in abstract theory but in gas queues, poisoned school lunches, flooded villages, and the growing perception that power is disappearing. drifting away from the people he claims to serve.

Public confidence is not quietly waning. It is wearing out in full view. Surveys cited by Indonesian research institutes roughly show that: 72 percent 80% of respondents rate the government’s performance as poor or very poor. This figure alone would shake any democracy; It has regional ramifications in Southeast Asia’s largest. Indonesia is no ordinary state struggling with reform fatigue. ASEAN’s anchor is the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, a G20 member and a bridge between the Global South and developed economies. When trust collapses here, the tremors are felt far beyond Jakarta.

Much of the anger stems from decisions that directly interrupt daily life. Sudden ban on subsidized 3kg LPG cylinders for small traders – later reversed – caused shortages, panic buying, and at least one reported death while in line. The missteps in energy policy did not end there. Controversial nickel mining permits on ecologically sacred Raja Ampat islands spark anger until the president’s intervention forced a retreat. Think-tank scorecards gave the energy minister the following information: lowest The performance rating in the cabinet’s first-year review is an indictment not just of competence but also of judgement.

Economic concern clashed with moral outrage. Indonesia’s Corruption Perceptions Index score sits 37 out of 100 signals deep-seated corruption and weak enforcement. Nearly three-quarters of citizens surveyed believe law enforcement has deteriorated; Nearly half think anti-corruption efforts are ineffective. These figures are important because corruption in Indonesia is not an abstract sin. This manifests itself in regressive taxes, bloated parliamentary privileges and a widening gap between political elites and ordinary households already squeezed by food and fuel prices.

The symbolism is just as damaging as the content. The flagship Free Meals Program for schoolchildren and pregnant women, designed to signal compassion and redistribution, instead became a national embarrassment. thousands He reported that he had food poisoning. Student protesters held banners equating ‘free food’ with poison during demonstrations marking Prabowo’s first year in office. In flood-affected areas, ministers posing with sacks of rice were met with scorn rather than gratitude, reinforcing the perception of choreographed empathy rather than genuine solidarity. Political communication experts described these moments seem excessive and contrived, eroding trust rather than building it.

This discontent hits your heart pancasila. The fourth principle of ideology: democracy guided by wisdom through deliberation requires consultation, humility, and consensus. Fifth: Social justice for all Indonesians requires equitable reduction of policy burdens. Constitutional scholars describe Pancasila as Indonesia’s grundnorm, the foundation from which all legal and political authority derives. Legitimacy is depleted when governance appears exploitative, privileging elites while ordinary citizens absorb shocks.

The pattern is not unique to Indonesia. Across Asia, from the Philippines to Thailand, democracies are grappling with the same dilemma: centralizing power for efficiency while eliminating participation. What makes Indonesia different is its history of reform. The collapse of Suharto’s New Order showed Even after decades of authoritarianism, this renewal is possible. This memory now serves as both warning and hope.

International observers are watching the incident closely. Analysts warned That Prabowo’s strongman instincts and military background risk rekindling authoritarian reflexes. Human Rights Watch criticized the branding of street protests as a threat to national security and called such rhetoric irresponsible. For foreign investors and diplomatic partners, the rule of law and transparency are not moral luxuries; these are prerequisites for trust. From BRICS participation to climate leadership, Indonesia’s goals are based on democratic credibility as well as economic scale.

Comparisons clarify the picture. While Indonesia once stood out as a pluralist success story in the Muslim world, stagnation now risks placing it alongside declining democracies; therefore increasing inequality and weakening institutions delegitimize Completely democratic government. Reported increases in parliamentary salaries approaching 100 percent over the past decade contrast sharply with stagnant real wages for workers. This is the anatomy of what political economists call “extractive institutions,” and history shows where this path leads.

But the remedy is written in Indonesia’s own philosophy. gotong royong (mutual cooperation) is not nostalgia; It is a guiding policy. Deliberative decision-making, meaningful consultation and genuine power-sharing can still rebuild trust. Anti-corruption institutions like the KPK need political support rather than restriction. Progressive taxation and targeted social protection would ease the cost-of-living pressures fueling the protests. Strengthening local governments and civil society will bring democracy closer to where it belongs.

This is an important moment for Australia and the wider region. A self-reliant, democratic Indonesia would stabilize Southeast Asia. A resentful, introvert brings uncertainty. Canberra has long referred to Indonesia as a strategic partner; partnership now means paying attention to the quality of Indonesian democracy, not just its strategic fit.

Indonesia’s social contract is not beyond repair, but it is undeniably strained. The streets have already made up their minds. Whether the state listens and responds with the language of justice, humility, and inclusion will determine whether Pancasila remains a living guide or devolves into ceremonial rhetoric. The choice is not between power and democracy. Indonesia’s history shows that enduring power always comes from the consent and trust of its people.