In a democratic country, the people’s voice is at the highest level, and the people have the right to oversee the birth of various government policies and the implementation of their programs. Ideally, advocacy for the aspirations of the people towards the formulation of a policy is conveyed through the House of Representatives (DPR) as representatives of various constituent groups from multiple segments and layers of society.

It has been over a year since President Jokowi started his second presidential term. The COVID-19 pandemic, which is a challenge for all countries, has led to changes in program priorities and work plans prepared by this administration. However, amid this health crisis, some policies have been passed despite the pros and cons since their formulation. There is a massive tug of interest, exacerbated by policymakers’ failure to socialize and build understanding with the public.

The moment aspirations are Neglected.

One example of a controversial policy is the Job Creation Law, which was intended to address problems in the business world, primarily related to overlapping regulations in terms of licensing. The hope is that this law can increase investment, leading to employment.

Unfortunately, according to many parties, the Job Creation Law is problematic regarding process, method, and substance. This law is viewed as violating non-retrogression principles (not allowing people to advance or conditions to get better), thus bringing setbacks in fulfilling community rights. The nuances also lead to the centralization of power, which is vulnerable to potential corruption. From the start, the revision process ignored democratic space. It was carried out in a hurry so that it did not accommodate the interests of beneficiaries, was considered unfair, and even several aspects were deemed unreasonable. Many parties, therefore, have used the Job Creation Law as an example of bad practice by the government and the DPR. The government’s ignorance resulted in dissatisfaction and rejection by the people that this law should accommodate. 

The channels for the public to express their disapproval were systemically closed then. Opposition parties in the parliamentary environment were dormant in supporting the people’s voice because their numbers were not balanced with those of parties that sided with the government, which amounted to 60 percent. 

This deadlock gave birth to logical consequences and created a natural phenomenon commonly found in various issues and parts of the world. Public anxiety manifested through demonstrations in front of the Parliament building, which started when the Job Creation Law was still being discussed in Parliament. ‘Only’ because the COVID-19 pandemic hit Indonesia, and implementing Large-Scale Social Restrictions (PSBB) ultimately stopped the demonstration activities.

Alternative Channels and Their Consequences

Social media platforms and digital sites have finally become an alternative to voice people’s consciences. What is the nature of political communication through social media and digital sites? Is the government sensitive and open to criticism and suggestions its people submit through these channels? Let’s examine how the ruler’s control mechanism over the voice of the people.

Undeniably, several hacking cases of social media accounts and online sites have been carried out on those considered critical of the government. Of course, this violates the people’s right to freedom of speech. One of the social media accounts hacked and closely monitored by the government is a social media account belonging to the management of the University of Indonesia Student Executive Board (BEM -UI), following open criticism from this institution to President Jokowi, who was dubbed the “King of Lip Service” in June 2021.

Not just that, in the context of other problems, in August 2020, when the pandemic cases began to rise in the country, there was also a hack on the Twitter account of University of Indonesia (UI) epidemiologist Pandu Riono at @drpriono because of his critical attitude towards the government’s handling of COVID-19, and this continued to hack the Tempo.co account, which contained articles critical of the issue.

The government’s repressive actions to silence public criticism also enter the cultural arts sector, which appears very visible because it occurs outside the online network. One of them was what happened in the city of Yogyakarta, where a wall had a mural made by Yogyakarta’s artists with a satirical tone, which was removed by the Yogyakarta City Satpol PP in a short time.

If the public feedback mechanism is halted, various communication channels to criticize policies are closed, and the people’s voice is silenced with repressive actions, these actions might detonate a time bomb in the future and form a society that does not trust its leaders.

Pressure Groups as a Source of Hope

One of the driving forces of socio-political life, and a balancing force for the authorities, are civil society organizations that are also representatives of the people outside the official structure of the trias politica. This collection of individuals manifests in many forms, such as non-governmental organizations (NGOs), professional associations, non-profit foundations, research and research institutions, mentoring institutions, and others, to help carry the voices and thoughts of the people. These agents of reform move and fight on various issues, often found in environmental and climate change, indigenous peoples, women and children, labor and workforce, health, education, vulnerable groups, and so on – considered important as the joints of life.

The endless interplay between the government and the people in building various social constructs and alignment with people’s rights is fascinating to observe from the perspective of policy communication and advocacy. Civil society tries to resolve public issues and guard against the government’s steps, which often launch programs contrary to the people’s aspirations. For example, the Food Estate program or the expansion of large land areas for rice production threatens the environment, ecosystems, and social environment. Warnings against the government’s ill-considered decisions have long been shouted by NGOs such as Pantau Gambut, ECONUSA Foundation, Madani Berkelanjutan Foundation, Indigenous Peoples Alliance of the Archipelago, and so on – but have not succeeded in moving the government’s attitude and what is realized is still a long struggle to go.

Civil society organizations work from the bottom up, for example, conducting research and data collection, intervening directly with community groups, providing strengthening, mentoring, and capacity building for communities to be able to defend their rights, developing innovations so that communities can better channel their aspirations, and offering options for solutions to other problems faced. Of course, the ‘struggle’ is also present in the digital realm to reach and influence a more comprehensive public circle despite dealing with the risk of hacking by state operators.

The Importance of Political Will and Transparency in Policy Communication

Through President Jokowi, the government has often emphasized that it cannot work alone in solving various development problems, so collaboration and civil society involvement are needed. However, the reality of this collaboration needs to be clarified.

The government must first have the political will to resolve various public issues. This commitment must be shown not only by the President but also by public officials at the smallest level.

The pattern of public communication cannot run in one direction; it relies on normative narratives while silencing critical public members. Democratic public communication needs to reflect the political will and transparent processes, shown in concrete actions and collaboration in making decisions for the fate of the people, one of which is responding well to any policy-related issues submitted by the people.

The government should provide a broader chamber to manage people’s expectations. Existing channels and mechanisms can be better optimized, and collaborative gestures need to be shown in a more friendly manner. Only then will the government become more sensitive to the shortcomings and mistakes that can occur when ignoring the people’s whispers. The people will be better trained to take responsibility for what is voiced and be more involved in the pace of development.

A democratic and transparent government is reflected in the extent to which it is open to the public, gracefully accepts criticism, and is innovative in offering solutions. If all channels are shackled, destructive social movements at the local level will undoubtedly accumulate and risk being counterproductive to the development agenda itself.

National development in various sectors can be completed faster and better when the government and the people work hand in hand, answering problems and fulfilling what the people need.

Author: Riska Fiati