Demanding the Promise of Digital Public Participation: Evaluation and Reform of E-Participation in Indonesian Legislation

Legal Literacy-The Constitutional Court (MK) Decision Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020became a milestone in Indonesian legislative democracy. For the first time, the concept ofmeaningful public participation (meaningful participation)was affirmed as a constitutional obligation. The public is no longer merely involved as a formality, but must be given the right to be heard (right to be heard), the right to be considered (right to be considered), and the right to be explained (right to be explained). Following up on this decision, Law Number 13 of 2022 was born, which explicitly opens the door for online public participation, or what is globally known ase-participation. The hope is that information and communication technology (ICT) will become a bridge that brings the people closer to their representatives, creating a more transparent, inclusive, and responsive legislative process. However, after several years, the promise of digital participation still feels far from expectations. Various participation portals built by the government and the DPR appear deserted, and substantial dialogue between policymakers and the public in cyberspace is almost unheard of. So, why are these digital channels not yet effective? What are the fundamental problems that hinder the realization ofe-participationin Indonesia? This article, referring to an in-depth analysis by Mochamad Adli Wafi and Muhammad Machshush Bill Izzi, will evaluate the bleak portrait of the implementation ofe-participationcurrently, comparing it with successful practices in other countries, and formulating four pillars of reform to claim the promise of true digital participation.

The Grim Reality of E-Participation in Indonesia

Although Indonesia has a fairly good E-Government Development Index (EGDI) and E-Participation Index (EPI) ranking at the global level, the implementation of digital participation in the national legislative process still faces two fundamental and interconnected problems.

Regulatory Ambiguity: Three Platforms, Zero Legal Certainty

The first problem is chaos and ambiguity at the regulatory level. Currently, there are at least three main portalse-participationoperated by different institutions:SIMAS PUUby the DPR RI (the House of Representatives),e-partisipasi.peraturan.go.idby the Directorate General of Legislation (Ditjen PP) of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, andpartisipasikuby the National Legal Development Agency (BPHN) of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights. The existence of these three independent platforms creates several serious problems. First, there is an overlap of authority, especially between the Ditjen PP and BPHN, which are both under the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, which confuses the public as to which is the official government portal. Second, these platforms were established before a strong legal basis existed, and to date, there are no implementing regulations (Presidential Regulations, DPR Regulations, and DPD Regulations) mandated by Law 13/2022 to regulate technical public participation. As a result, all of these portals operate in a legal gray area, without clear guidelines on how input from the public should be managed, considered, and responded to.