Some believe removing the threshold would ensure representation for all parties in parliament.

Meanwhile, others, including those in the Indonesian House of Representatives (DPR), argue that having more parties could negatively affect the effectiveness of parliamentary work.

Alfath Bagus Panuntun, an expert on politics and government from Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM), highlighted that the debate centers on two main aspects: democratic inclusivity and government effectiveness.

Panuntun explained that proponents of removing the threshold argue that the votes of smaller parties that fail to reach the 4% threshold are wasted and left unrepresented in parliament. 

“If we calculate it, the votes discarded from smaller parties could reach a significant percentage,” he said on Wednesday, Feb 5, 2025.

On the other hand, Panuntun acknowledged the concerns of those in the DPR who opposed the removal. 

He noted that a higher number of parties would make managing diverse political interests more challenging, potentially affecting the effectiveness of DPR operations. 

“More parties would increase the workload related to faction management, task distribution, and overall DPR performance,” he explained.

Panuntun pointed out that the 4% threshold is not arbitrary but a compromise between democratic inclusivity and government effectiveness. 

“Previously, the threshold was 3.5%, but it was raised to 4% in the 2017 Electoral Law revision. This figure aims to balance political representation with governmental stability,” he said.

He argued that maintaining or even increasing the parliamentary threshold could help clarify party ideologies. 

“With a higher threshold, political parties need to have clear ideologies and programs. Otherwise, it becomes difficult to differentiate one party from another,” Panuntun added.

However, Panuntun noted that the general public does not place much importance on the threshold itself. 

“What matters is that the DPR functions properly, remains open to criticism, and genuinely works for the people,” he stated.

He emphasized that the DPR’s effectiveness should be a top priority. 

The legislative process and government oversight could run more smoothly with fewer, more structured parties. 

“We must avoid a situation where the system serves the interests of politicians rather than the people,” he stressed.

In conclusion, Panuntun reiterated that every policy has its pros and cons. 

However, in the context of Indonesia, he believes it is better to maintain or even raise the parliamentary threshold to improve government effectiveness. 

“This policy should be based on the current needs of the public. If we want an effective DPR, then the current threshold should be maintained or increased,” he concluded.

Author: Rahma Khoirunnisa  

Editor: Gusti Grehenson  

Post-editor: Lintang

Photographs by: Donnie and Kompas

Artikel UGM Expert Suggests Maintaining Parliamentary Threshold to Ensure DPR’s Effectiveness pertama kali tampil pada Universitas Gadjah Mada.

Retailers wishing to continue selling the subsidized LPG must change their status to a distribution point or Pertamina’s official distributor, with a one-month deadline.

UGM economist Dr. Fahmy Radhi criticized Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources Bahlil Lahadalia’s policy, calling it a blunder.

On the contrary, the policy could harm small traders by making it more difficult for consumers to obtain the LPG, which goes against President Prabowo’s commitment to support small people. 

“Retailers have been small traders and small shops earning a living by selling the 3-kg LPG. The ban on retailers selling it will put them out of business,” he said at the UGM campus on Feb. 3, 2025. 

As a result of the ban, grassroots entrepreneurs lose their income. They revert to unemployment and fall back into poverty. 

These small businesses can’t change their status to a distribution point or official Pertamina distributor, as purchasing 3-kg LPG canisters in bulk requires a substantial investment. 

“This policy is also troublesome for consumers, most of whom are poor, as they will have to travel far to buy the subsidized LPG at distribution points,” he explained.

Dr. Radhi reiterated that the ban goes against President Prabowo’s commitment to supporting low-income people, both grassroots entrepreneurs and consumers, the majority of whom are impoverished. 

This policy harms grassroots traders and must be revoked as it burdens the poor. 

“The policy to ban retailers from selling 3-kg LPG must be canceled. Prabowo must reprimand Bahlil for this blunder so that similar policies do not happen again,” he urged.

Author: Agung Nugroho

Post-editor: Lintang

Photo: Harian Jogja

Artikel Government’s LPG Retail Sale Ban Harmful to Small Traders, UGM Economist Says pertama kali tampil pada Universitas Gadjah Mada.

Some of the ongoing programs were inherited from the previous cabinet, the 2019-2024 Onward Indonesia Cabinet. 

“It’s not easy (to implement inherited programs) because not all of them are Prabowo-Gibran’s initiatives,” he said during a discussion organized by UGM’s Center for People’s Economy Studies titled ‘Predictions for the Future of Economic and Political Democracy in the New Government’ at UGM’s Inter-University Center (PAU) Building, UGM Graduate School, Friday, Jan. 31, 2025.

The 2025 economic development targets are expected to reduce extreme poverty. Unemployment rates are also targeted to decrease while the human capital index rises. 

Dr. Dumairy believes that economic growth and equitable income distribution must accompany these development targets for them to be achieved. 

“Economic development priorities must be paired with economic growth. However, the current situation shows that growth priorities are less constitutional,” Dr. Dumairy remarked.

He suggested that Indonesia’s economic development should emphasize nationalistic principles, with the government able to reorganize control over economic resources such as mining and land. 

Additionally, downstream processing schemes can be made more inclusive so that the public can also benefit from the results. 

“The people must reap the benefits,” he said.

UGM political sociologist Dr. Arie Sujito highlighted that the government has yet to seriously address the performance of Indonesia’s national health insurance BPJS Kesehatan. 

Therefore, reform in the healthcare service system is needed to address inequities in claims and ensure more efficient management. 

“There should be no injustice in the healthcare system,” he stressed.

Furthermore, Dr. Sujito pointed out that education’s high cost makes it difficult for the public to access it, while inadequate budget allocations only exacerbate the situation of human resource development in the country. 

Universities, as educational institutions, should focus on improving the quality of education rather than engaging in projects that may lead to conflicts of interest, such as involvement in mining activities. 

“Excessive democratization in education could lead to inter-campus competition over mining, creating traps in the future,” he said.

However, Dr. Sujito remains optimistic that this situation can be managed if society, particularly students, consolidates to push for change. 

If people become complacent with the current conditions, economic transformation and political democracy will be difficult to achieve. 

Conversely, a student movement with strong consolidation will drive democratic transformation, as seen when students protested to demand the cancellation of the 12% VAT. 

“I believe students can be potential agents in supporting democratic transformation,” he concluded.

Author: Tiefany  

Editor: Gusti Grehenson  

Post-editor: Lintang

Photo: Freepik

Artikel UGM Experts Call for Economic and Democratic Reforms in Indonesia’s New Government pertama kali tampil pada Universitas Gadjah Mada.

However, the General Elections Commission (KPU) recorded that 38 regions—37 regencies/cities and one province—have only a single candidate and are at risk of running against an empty ballot box if no other candidate pairs (passion) register by the KPU’s deadline.

Dr. Mada Sukmajati, Chair of the Undergraduate Program in Politics and Government at UGM’s Faculty of Social and Political Sciences (Fisipol UGM), stated that a single candidate in 38 regions is unsurprising. 

According to him, this number appears larger due to the simultaneous Pilkada elections across Indonesia. In fact, the number of single candidates in these Pilkada elections has increased over time. In 2015, there were three single candidates. This number rose to nine in 2017, 16 in 2018, and 25 regions had single candidates in the 2020 elections. 

“The difference is, back then, Pilkada was not held simultaneously, so previous elections cannot be compared to the 2024 Pilkada, which is being held all at once,” Dr. Sukmajati told reporters on Monday (Sep. 23).

The Madiun-born academic explained that while the number may not have increased significantly, the context behind the emergence of these single candidates must be examined. For example, single candidates in mining regions could be an early indication of collusion among most political parties, potentially backed by financiers behind these candidates. 

“If the candidate is elected, it could lead to compensations owed to the financiers, possibly related to mining or natural resource management in that region. Such areas are prone to political corruption, such as eased mining permits and issues regarding environmental sustainability and resource governance,” he said.

The second impact of Pilkada with a single candidate is the risk of mobilizing civil servants to ensure the candidate’s victory. Dr. Sukmajati, who also served as a panelist in the First Presidential Debate of 2024, mentioned that this risk is higher in regions where the single candidate is the incumbent. 

He noted that bureaucratic politicization in this way contradicts the spirit of bureaucratic reform in Indonesia, jeopardizing principles of meritocracy, professionalism, and good governance.

Empty Ballot Campaign

Dr. Sukmajati also views the presence of a single candidate as a sign of political parties’ failure to fulfill their fundamental function of nominating their own cadres for Pilkada.

He commented that political parties are not ready and, as a result, are unable to provide an alternative for the public. Moreover, the candidate selection process does not involve the public, making political parties reluctant to make breakthroughs or open up spaces for public participation in their nomination processes.

Another contributing factor is transactional politics, where candidates must pay large sums to secure a nomination. This makes it increasingly difficult for the public to put forward their own candidates, especially in regions dominated by political dynasties. 

“The dominance of incumbents and political dynasties in certain areas further contributes to the emergence of single candidates,” he added.

Nevertheless, the public can still actively participate in the 2024 Pilkada, particularly during the campaign and voting stages. For this reason, Dr. Sukmajati believes KPU has a crucial role in setting detailed regulations allowing the public to campaign for an empty ballot. 

“The KPU has not explicitly regulated campaigning for an empty ballot. While this is not prohibited, there are also no clear guidelines if it is done. Therefore, I believe the KPU needs to address this issue immediately,” he added.

Dr. Sukmajati’s statement refers to how the KPU will regulate public campaigns for an empty ballot, given its status as equivalent to a single candidate. The principle of equal competition in elections requires regulations on empty ballot campaigning. 

Moreover, according to Dr. Sukmajati, the public’s lack of involvement in the process may lead to resistance against the candidate political parties offer. An empty ballot has defeated a single candidate in Indonesia’s electoral history. 

Dr. Sukmajati mentioned that there was a social movement to campaign for the empty ballot at that time, which is why regulations need to accommodate the public’s voice.

Thus, Dr. Sukmajati concluded that all parties must contribute to ensuring a fair Pilkada, with the public remaining the central focus. This is an opportunity for the people to elect leaders based on visions and missions that directly impact their daily lives, such as education and healthcare.

He cited the example of current conditions in the regencies and cities of Yogyakarta, which are closely tied to urban issues such as traffic congestion and flooding and issues affecting agricultural communities, such as the conversion of green land into housing, fertilizer problems, and farmer welfare. 

Additionally, young people today are struggling to find decent housing and jobs. 

“Now is the time for the public to take action to avoid losing this election opportunity, as political education is unlikely to come from the candidates or political parties themselves. Young people, in particular, can help educate others through digital or direct activism,” Dr. Sukmajati urged.

He stressed that the younger generation has a strategic role in promoting political education for voters, especially now that change in the regions is possible. 

“These movements can be simple, starting from grassroots communities, family, and close friends, or by creating educational content about Pilkada on social media,” he concluded.

Author: Lazuardi

Editor: Gusti Grehenson

Post-editor: Afif

Photo: Freepik

Artikel Single Candidate in 38 Regions, Political Parties’ Failure to Nominate Their Own Cadres pertama kali tampil pada Universitas Gadjah Mada.