President Prabowo Subianto delivers a speech at the 60th anniversary event of the Golkar Party in Sentul, Bogor regency, West Java, on Dec. 12, 2024. - Photo: Antara file
JAKARTA: Questions have been raised about whether President Prabowo Subianto’s order to slash ministries and agencies’ budgets is legal, with observers highlighting flawed procedures and a lack of public participation in the decision-making process.
In a presidential instruction (Inpres) issued on Jan 23, Prabowo ordered ministers, agency heads and regional leaders to cut a combined Rp 306.7 trillion (US$18.9 billion) in spending from their institutions’ 2025 budgets.
The Inpres did not specify the purpose of the budget cuts, but Prabowo’s administration is seeking additional funds to support the President’s flagship free nutritious meals programme and other costly initiatives.
The large-scale budget cuts consisted of Rp 256 trillion to be taken from ministries and agencies and Rp 50 trillion to be taken out of central government transfers to regional administrations.
Some observers welcomed the cuts to areas of spending considered excessive, such as official business travel.
But the decision also sparked widespread criticism, including from state officials who took to social media to express their frustrations and said the cuts would prevent them from performing their basic duties, including responding to public reports.
Activists have taken issue with the legal standing of January’s Inpres, with the Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI) arguing that the budget cut order violated the law.
It said a provision in the law governing the 2025 state budget stipulated that any adjustments to this year’s financial plan had to be deliberated by the House of Representatives.
“The proposed budget revision should be submitted by the government as a bill to amend the 2025 state budget, which needs to be approved by the House before the end of the 2025 fiscal year,” YLBHI chair Muhammad Isnur said in a statement on Tuesday (Feb 11).
“Any changes to the budget solely based on Prabowo’s recent Inpres are lacking legal foundation, misguided and constitutionally flawed,” he continued.
Constitutional law expert Feri Amsari of Andalas University concurred, saying that amending the state budget through a law revision would allow meaningful public participation.
Because of the Inpres’ questionable legal standing, Feri suggested that it “could be challenged in a state administrative court [PTUN].”
One-sided decision Regional Autonomy Watch (KPPOD) took issue with how the central government unilaterally decided to push for large-scale budget cuts without consulting with regional administrations.
“Local administrations [and legislative councils] should have been involved in the decision-making, given that the cuts to regional transfer funds will create a significant challenge for regional leaders and their regions’ fiscal sustainability,” Herman Suparman of KPPOD said.
He also questioned the decision to reallocate regional transfer funds to finance the Prabowo administration’s priority programmes, arguing that such a move would “further erode the regional autonomy”.
Officials have insisted that the cuts will lead to more efficient spending. But YLBHI argued that the decision was likely to weaken key state institutions responsible for safeguarding human rights and enforcing the law.
A number of institutions are set to be impacted by the budget cuts, including the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM), which has seen its budget reduced by 46 percent from Rp 112 billion to Rp 52 billion.
The Judicial Commission also saw its budget slashed by 54 percent from Rp 184 billion, with observers raising concerns that the cut could impact its ability to monitor nationwide legal proceedings.
“Massive budget cuts are a disaster for the legal and human rights situation in Indonesia,” said Isnur of YLBHI.
“The consequences will disrupt services in ensuring justice is upheld.”
Cabinet reform The budget cuts will be ineffective unless the government addresses the underlying issue of having a large and complex cabinet with its 130 members, said economist and public policy expert Achmad Nur Hidayat of think tank the Narasi Institute.
“A cabinet that is too fat will result in budget waste in the form of operational costs, allowances and increasingly complicated bureaucracy,” he wrote in a statement.
Achmad asserted that budget efficiency should extend beyond budget cuts for ministries and state institutions, adding that President Prabowo “must be brave enough to reassess the effectiveness of existing ministries and institutions”.
On Monday, Prabowo expressed his frustration over resistance to the budget cuts from within his own administration. He called those opposing his plan “naughty, stubborn and thieves”, accusing them of using nongovernmental organisations and the media to attack his plan.
Presidential Communications Office head Hasan Nasbi was not immediately available for comment.
He had previously defended the Inpres, saying it eliminated “wasteful” expenses while protecting essential services.
“The President has made it clear that public services, subsidies, civil servants’ salaries and social assistance disbursements won’t be affected by the budget efficiency measures,” Hasan said. - The Jakarta Post/ANN
