2) West Papua first to roll out digital IDs for indigenous Papuans
3) Indonesia is killing the spirit of Papua's Special Autonomy, militarization is rampant
4) Indonesia’s Suharto was no ‘hero’ To call him a national hero is a slap in the face for those who suffered and died under his autocratic rule
---------------------------------
Indonesia’s Constitutional Court has issued a landmark ruling prohibiting active police officers from holding civilian government positions. Still, the implementation of the decision has sparked controversial discussions as thousands of police officers remain in posts across ministries and state agencies.
Constitutional Court Decision Number 114/PUU-XXIII/2025, delivered on 13 November 2025, struck down provisions that had allowed active members of the Indonesian National Police (INP) to occupy civilian positions through assignments from the National Police Chief. The ruling mandates that police officers must resign or retire before taking up positions outside the police structure. Thousands of police officers in civilian roles
The scale of police placement in civilian positions has expanded dramatically in recent years. According to official data, 4,351 police officers held positions outside the National Police in 2025, including 1,184 officers at senior ranks. This represents a significant increase from 2,822 officers in 2024 and 3,424 in 2023.
High-ranking officers occupy prominent positions across government, including secretary-general positions at multiple ministries, inspector-general posts, and leadership of agencies such as the National Counterterrorism Agency. In March 2025 alone, the National Police Chief issued six telegrams assigning 25 high-ranking and mid-ranking officers to various ministries and institutions.
Conflicting government responses
As of late November, only one officer had been withdrawn from a civilian position. National Police Chief General, Listyo Sigit Prabowo, recalled Inspector General Raden Prabowo Argo Yuwono from the Ministry of Cooperatives and Small and Medium Enterprises on 20 November 2025, describing it as demonstrating commitment to the ruling.
Concerns over selective compliance
Constitutional law experts and civil society observers have demanded to fully implement the decision. Currently, the government appears to be “cherry picking” which Constitutional Court decisions to follow, implementing only those that serve its interests while ignoring rulings with significant public importance.
Observers note that Constitutional Court decisions are final and binding, taking immediate effect.
Police analyst Bambang Rukminto warned that continued delay represents an unconstitutional practice and undermines the rule of law. The placement of officers in civilian roles has continued year after year due to weak oversight by Parliament’s Commission III, which handles law enforcement matters.
Rights and governance implications
The
Constitutional Court’s decision followed a petition from advocate Syamsul Jahidin and student Christian Adrianus Sihite, who argued that the practice violated citizens’ constitutional rights to fair access to employment. With approximately 7.46 million job seekers in Indonesia as of August 2025, civilian positions occupied by active police officers reduce opportunities for qualified civilians to obtain government posts.
The practice of positioning active police officers in prominent civilian positions creates significant conflicts of interest. Civil observers argue that the placement serves as a tool of political control, allowing those in power to extend influence across government agencies while compromising police independence. They warned that official non-compliance with court rulings undermines legal culture and public respect for the law. Without mechanisms to enforce compliance with Constitutional Court decisions, the independence and accountability of Indonesia’s judiciary are at stake.
Path forward uncertain
The National Police has formed a working group to review the Constitutional Court decision, but no timeline has been announced for withdrawing officers from civilian positions. Some officials have suggested that certain agencies with law enforcement functions, such as the National Narcotics Agency and National Counterterrorism Agency, may still require police personnel.
Parliament’s Commission III has established a working committee on police reform that will provide recommendations for revising the Police Law to align with the Constitutional Court ruling. However, critics note that the same parliamentary body failed to exercise adequate oversight as the practice expanded over the past decade.
As debate continues, civil society groups emphasize that the Constitutional Court’s ruling represents an opportunity to restore the police force to its constitutional mandate of protecting and serving the community while ensuring fair access to public employment for all citizens.
—————————————
2) West Papua first to roll out digital IDs for indigenous Papuans
November 21, 2025 13:15 GMT+700
Manokwari (ANTARA) - West Papua has become the first of six provinces in Indonesia’s Papua region to roll out digital resident IDs (IKD) specifically for Indigenous Papuans, the Home Affairs Ministry said Friday.Director General for Population and Civil Registration Teguh Setyabudi said in Manokwari that the initiative could set an important precedent for other provinces in the region.He noted that digitalising administrative and bureaucratic services is a core element of President Prabowo Subianto’s national development agenda under the eight “Asta Cita” missions.“West Papua has shown that digitalisation is not limited to major urban centres. This progress offers crucial momentum for Indonesia,” Setyabudi said.He stressed that digitising Indigenous Papuan identity data is meant to strengthen inclusive civil registration services while improving accuracy and validity.“Accurate data on Indigenous Papuans is essential to prevent misidentification and ensure government programmes are properly targeted,” he said, adding that all local governments in Papua are required to update and manage Indigenous population records responsibly.He said population data governance underpins public services nationwide, including social assistance, education, health care and spatial planning.Setyabudi added that Indonesia had digitised the identity data of 16,807,143 residents as of November 4, reflecting steady progress in the government’s digital transformation push.“IKD does more than replace physical ID cards. It offers encrypted security, biometric integration, accessibility and fast verification,” he said.West Papua Governor Dominggus Mandacan said the shift to digital civil registration aims to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of public services.“IKD for Indigenous Papuans ensures that all residents have proper access to civil registration,” he said.He added that the provincial government will intensify coordination with district administrations, traditional leaders and religious organisations to expand IKD coverage.“This is an important step toward more transparent and responsive governance,” he said.Related news: Ministry accelerates implementation of digital ID for public servicesRelated news: Consistent startup guidance crucial for digital transformation: govtTranslator: Fransiskus S, Tegar Nurfitra
Editor: Rahmad Nasution
——————————————————————
A google translate.
Original Bahasa link
3) Indonesia is killing the spirit of Papua's Special Autonomy, militarization is rampant
November 21, 2025 in Opinion Reading Time: 3 mins read
0
Author: Admin - Editor: Admin
By: Yan Christian Warinussy
On November 21, 2001, the Government of the Republic of Indonesia, under the leadership of President Megawati Soekarnoputri, officially (legally) ratified Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 21 of 2001 concerning Special Autonomy for Papua Province.
The law consists of 24 chapters and 79 articles, which more or less regulate a number of important matters for maintaining relations between Jakarta and Papua following the uproar over demands for Papuan independence in 1999-2000.
This important moment, marking the process of the Papuan people's demands for the right to self-determination, was marked by the arrival of 100 representatives of indigenous Papuans at the State Palace in Jakarta on February 26, 1999. Team 100, the name of the group concerned with indigenous Papuan affairs, met directly with the then Head of State, President Bacharuddin Jusuf Habibie.
What political aspirations did Team 100 convey to then-President Habibie of the Republic of Indonesia?
Essentially, give us, the indigenous Papuan people, the opportunity to determine our own destiny.
The contemplation process lasted a year, until the enactment of the 2001 Special Autonomy Law.
A note from one of the members of the Assistance Team for Drafting the Papua Special Autonomy Law at the time, Dr. Ir. Agus Sumule, in his book: "Searching for a Middle Path for Special Autonomy for Papua Province," published in 2003 by PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama, Jakarta, on page 10, states: "Special Autonomy can be used as a way to accommodate and process the aspirations of the Papuan people within the context of the Republic of Indonesia's legal system.
Furthermore, Special Autonomy can be seen as the most peaceful response currently available to the antagonistic relationship between the majority of Papuans and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia."
As an advocate and human rights defender who received the international John Humhrey Freedom Award in 2005 in Montreal, Canada,
I believe that Indonesia's Special Autonomy policy is expected to address the emergence of a "quasi-state" situation in Papua, with Indigenous Papuans as the key subjects. This means that Papuans' basic or fundamental rights are protected. All past processes and events (prior to the 1963 integration) provide political space for discussion and peaceful resolution.
In all economic and development activities in Papua, Papuans are the primary and foremost subjects. Symbols of the struggle for self-determination, such as the Morning Star Flag, should be given a representative place within the implementation of the Papua Special Autonomy Law. They should not be used as a "tool" to accuse Papuan resistance groups of treason or separatism.
Militarization, as a form of violence, as a reminder of Papua's Passionist Memories, must be ended by strengthening domestic security institutions such as the police. This is starkly contradictory, as Papua remains a Military Operations Area (DOM). The entire territory of Papua is dominated by the military.
The expansion of the New Autonomous Region into six provinces is currently asymmetrical with the development and strengthening of military installations. This sets a poor example and is inconsistent with the basic principles of the Papua Special Autonomy Policy itself. Yet, the 2001 Papua Special Autonomy Law provides absolutely no regulation on militarization in Papua. In fact, with the enactment of the new policy, Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 2 of 2021, the authority of the Provincial and Regency/City Governments in Papua to regulate governance, development, and the economy and finances has been "reduced."
This is a crucial issue for the state to reflect on. Likewise, it is important for the (indigenous) Papuan people to reflect on today's facts, which demonstrate the widespread marginalization of indigenous Papuans politically, economically, and even socio-culturally.
The removal of Article 28 of the 2001 Papua Special Autonomy Law concerning Local Political Parties is evidence of the marginalization of indigenous Papuans' political rights, which deserves evaluation.
The state has clearly committed a substantial violation of the contents of the considerations in letter e of the 2001 Papua Special Autonomy Law. Various cases of alleged gross human rights violations, such as those in Wasior, Paniai, Wamena, Biak, Manokwari, Sorong, Jayapura, Serui, Nabire, Merauke, and other locations in Papua, have not been addressed by the state in accordance with the mandate of Articles 45 and 46 of Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 21 of 2001 concerning Special Autonomy for Papua Province. (*)
Yan Christian Warinussy is an advocate and human rights defender who received the international John Humhrey Freedom Award in 2005 in Montreal, Canada.
—————————————————————
4) Indonesia’s Suharto was no ‘hero’ To call him a national hero is a slap in the face for those who suffered and died under his autocratic rule
Indonesian President General Prabowo Subianto — accused of war crimes — has officially declared his former father-in-law, Suharto, a national hero.
By Terry Friel Published: November 17, 2025 12:10 PM GMT
It is a move that has sparked controversy and unnecessarily reopened wounds in a country that has more than enough problems at the moment.
Last week, around 100 people gathered in Jakarta to protest Suharto’s nomination, while nearly 16,000 have signed an online petition asking the same.
That is a tiny response and does not reflect the heated anger on social media.
Suharto's legacy, unlike the 74-year-old Prabowo’s, is mixed and murky. Prabowo has achieved little more than free meals for school children.
Suharto, who like many Indonesians used only one name, did make some life-changing improvements for ordinary people.
As the only Australian journalist allowed into the country in the early 90s, I witnessed Pak Harto (Father Suharto) at his height. In East Timor, I also saw Prabowo at his worst.
I was called back by Reuters in 1998 to report on Suharto's violent downfall and watched the chaos of people — many Christian Chinese — being killed in rioting fueled by the Suharto family and their military.
I stayed on through another three years of failed governments and civil chaos.
Suharto did great things. And also things that would today be described as war crimes, such as the invasion of East Timor, now the independent nation of Timor-Leste, and widespread human rights abuses from fiercely Muslim and independence-driven Aceh in the far northwest to strongly Christian West Papua in the far east.
But he consolidated a national language across 700 dialects over more than 17,000 islands and a population now approaching 300 million.
General Suharto also oversaw the mass killing of up to one million “communists” — basically, anyone he considered a political opponent — mostly ethnic Chinese, after his rise to power in 1965, when he led the military to crush an alleged communist coup attempt.
Pak Harto's Orwellian "New Order" did deliver dramatic economic growth over several decades, lifting millions out of poverty.
His "roads and bridges" policy built vitally needed infrastructure, which helped ordinary people and businesses, and investment.
But the cost was high.
The national hero award is an annual affair, meant to honor individuals for their contributions to the country.
On Nov. 10, the late Suharto was among 10 new names added to the list, in a ceremony presided over by Prabowo.
But under Suharto, dissent, free speech, and thought were crushed. So was the media. I was allowed in under a government-to-government deal that also allowed a journalist from Indonesia’s national news agency Antara into Australia.
But I was so tightly monitored and tapped that someone from the security forces once phoned me to ask how to spell the name of the person I had just interviewed by phone.
Under Suharto, opposition was not tolerated.
Which meant that when he fell, there was no one capable of leading the country.
He was succeeded by some good, but grossly incompetent, people in years of instability.
These included Megawati Soekarnoputri, daughter of the country's first president, Soekarno.
And Gus Dur — Abdhurrahman Wahid — a beloved and affable Islamic cleric who loved to spend hours chatting with visitors.
So, now we have another strongman: Pak Harto's son-in-law, in charge of the most important nation and biggest economy in Southeast Asia and the most populous Muslim country on Earth.
General Prabowo is accused of
atrocities during his command of special forces in East Timor in the 1980s and 1990s.
Like his father-in-law, he crushes all dissent.
But unlike his father-in-law, Prabowo cannot control the media, especially in the age of TikTok, Instagram and Facebook and social media.
To call Suharto a national hero is a slap in the face for those who suffered and died under his autocratic rule.
Prabowo thinks and acts like his father-in-law in the age of social media. But the world has changed.
Many Indonesians have taken to the web in anger.
Suharto, who died 17 years ago in disgrace, deserves to be recognized for his achievements. And judged for his crimes.
He is no national hero.
Nor is his son-in-law.
*Terry Friel was, for a time, the only Australian journalist allowed into Indonesia when even temporary visits were banned.He lived there for seven years, on separate postings for Australian Associated Press and Reuters, under Suharto and through the bloody violence and riots during Suharto's downfall in 1998 and the turmoil that followed. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official editorial position of UCA News.
------------------------------
