The growing number of proposals for establishing new special regions or administrative authorities in Indonesia has drawn public attention and sparked discussion among legislators.
According to an expert, such proposals warrant deeper evaluation as they may not necessarily improve governance or enhance public welfare. On the contrary, they may be motivated by the political ambitions of the elite.
Dr. Abdul Gaffar Karim, a political and governance expert from the Faculty of Social and Political Sciences at UGM (Fisipol UGM), emphasized that any government policy, including the establishment of new regions, must ultimately improve public welfare. He said proposals that do not support this goal should be set aside.
“Whatever action is being proposed, the main question is whether it contributes to accelerating public welfare. If not, it should not be pursued,” Dr. Gaffar said on Saturday (May 3) at the UGM Campus.
He stated that effective governance is one of the key factors in achieving public welfare. He asserted that the creation of new special regions or administrative authorities would only be meaningful if they genuinely improved government effectiveness.
“If it’s merely to facilitate elite circulation and power arrangements, I see no benefit in it,” he said firmly.
He also warned of the risks when new administrative regions are created solely as political vehicles for elites. Citing past experiences with regional expansion, Dr. Gaffar pointed out that it often led to bloated administrative costs and increased opportunities for corruption.
“What ends up happening is that the people remain impoverished while the political elites prosper. Social inequality will only widen,” he added.
Dr. Gaffar also addressed arguments suggesting that former royal territories deserve special regional status. In his view, such reasoning is weak. He said the current relevance and urgency must also be considered beyond historical context.
He cited the Yogyakarta Special Region (DIY) as the only case with a fully intact royal governance structure, complete with a reigning monarch, palace, defined territory, political system, and royal guards.
“In other regions, only the history remains. The governmental structures are no longer complete. So, that argument is very weak,” Dr. Gaffar explained.
He noted that Indonesia’s existing special regions, such as DIY for its role in independence, Aceh due to its conflict history, and Jakarta as the national capital, were established for distinct historical and political reasons.
These regions were granted specific privileges, such as land affairs flexibility in DIY, local political parties in Aceh, and a unique governance model for Jakarta’s municipalities and regencies.
Dr. Gaffar explained that Indonesia generally applies a uniform regional governance system despite the country’s vast sociocultural diversity.
He argued that the state should instead adopt an asymmetric regional autonomy model, allowing each region the flexibility to manage governance based on its own characteristics.
He urged the government to move away from a piecemeal and patchwork approach to regional development.
“If regional autonomy is not uniform, then every region becomes special. There would no longer be a need for separate discussions about special regions,” Dr. Gaffar said.
Instead, the expert encouraged the government to design a comprehensive, overarching plan for Indonesia’s regional governance system.
“If we truly want a more effective design for regional governance, we must consider the entire country. Create a system that is not uniform and not symmetrical,” Dr. Gaffar concluded.
Author: Bolivia Rahmawati
Editor: Gusti Grehenson
Illustration: Antara