JAKARTA — Indonesia is witnessing a controversial shift in its governance model as revisions to the TNI Law allow active military personnel to hold civilian positions within the government. This development has raised alarms among thinkers and citizens alike, highlighting a recurring debate about the separation of military and civilian authority in a democracy.
At a press conference on March 22, 2025, Karlina Suppelli, an esteemed Indonesian philosopher and astronomer, expressed her distress regarding this legal revision. "Saya akan menyampaikan saja kegelisahan seperti nurani yang mendesak-desak ketika membaca naskah akademik itu," said Suppelli, articulating her anxiety over the implications of the TNI Law revision.
According to Suppelli, military personnel have already begun occupying positions in civilian ministries based on presidential policy, long before the new law received official endorsement. She pointed out that what is essential now is not merely the action itself but the legal legitimacy that needs to be incorporated within the TNI Law. "Ini kan cara berpikir yang sangat berbahaya," she cautioned, referring to the 'post-factum' reasoning behind these placements where actions precede legitimate frameworks.
This revision is viewed critically not only for its practical implications but also for the mindset it embodies—a concerning shift that recalls a past where military influence dominated civil governance. The military, which had gradually been relocating from political affairs following the reforms of 1998, now finds itself once again in an advantageous position within the government structure.
On a broader scale, the author's viewpoint in another article discusses the risks of this shift. The legislative change enables military personnel, who until now had to retire from active service to serve in the public sector, to retain their uniforms while taking on civilian responsibilities. Some advocates argue that this is a practical solution given the complex challenges facing national security—ranging from cyber threats to geopolitical conflicts.
However, the author warns that beyond the bureaucracy's apparent efficiency, the principle is at stake: how sustainable is democracy when the lines between military and civilian roles become increasingly blurred? Measuring the maturity of a democracy involves evaluating civil-military relations closely, which, when mishandled, lead to undermined freedoms and rights.
Historically, countries like Myanmar and Thailand have faced dire consequences from military integration into civilian governance, demonstrating that such adjacency often ends in coups and civil suppression. As incursions into civilian governance fragilize democratic norms, the question emerges: will Indonesia, with this revision, inadvertently tread a similar path?
Additionally, there are pressing concerns regarding accountability. As Suppelli points out, mechanisms intended to hold civilians accountable in positions of power may not be equally applicable to military officials. This creates a troubling dynamic, where military personnel might escape the scrutiny that civil alike face when comprising a government post.
The narrative echoes Samuel P. Huntington’s insights in his seminal work, The Soldier and the State, which emphasizes that military leaders should remain under civilian authority. The gradual acceptance of military personnel in civil roles can be perceived as a hazardous trend that could dismantle the fundamental tenets of democracy.
In closing, the revisions to the TNI Law are more than simple bureaucratic adjustments; they pose a critical challenge to Indonesia's commitment to upholding democratic values. Will the nation continue to champion civil supremacy, or are we unwittingly allowing military ideologies to re-enter arenas previously vacated for civilian governance?
Ultimately, the balance between military and civilian powers is a pillar of democratic integrity. As Indonesia navigates this transformative period, public vigilance and dialogue are paramount to safeguard the freedoms that many fought for in the waves of reform witnessed over two decades ago.
