Legal Literacy -
Constitutional Court Decision (MK) Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 becomes a milestone in Indonesian legislative democracy. For the first time, the concept of
meaningful public participation (meaningful participation) is affirmed as a constitutional obligation. The public is no longer just 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 as
e-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, this promise of digital participation still feels far from expectations. Various participation portals built by the government and the DPR seem deserted, and substantial dialogue between policymakers and the public in cyberspace is almost unheard of.
So, why aren't these digital channels effective? What are the fundamental problems that hinder the realization of
e-participation meaningful in Indonesia? This article, referring to an in-depth analysis by Mochamad Adli Wafi and Muhammad Machshush Bill Izzi, will evaluate the bleak picture of the implementation of
e-participation currently, comparing it with successful practices in other countries, and formulating four pillars of reform to collect the promise of true digital participation.
The Bleak Picture of E-Participation in Indonesia
Although Indonesia has a fairly good E-Government Development Index (EGDI) and E-Participation Index (EPI) at the global level, the implementation of digital participation in the national legislative process still faces two fundamental and interrelated problems.
The first problem is the mess and ambiguity at the regulatory level. Currently, there are at least three main portals
e-participation operated by different institutions:
SIMAS PUU by the DPR RI,
e-partisipasi.peraturan.go.id by the Directorate General of Legislation (Ditjen PP) of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, and
partisipasiku by 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 Directorate General of Legislation and the BPHN, which are both under the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, which confuses the public about which is the official government portal. Second, these platforms were established before a strong legal basis existed, and until now there have been 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.
The second problem, which is a result of the absence of clear regulations, is the platform design that has not been able to encourage active participation. Referring to the OECD framework, the interaction model on these portals is still largely at the lowest level, namely
information (the government provides draft bills/academic texts) and
consultation (the public is given a comment column).
There is no established mechanism to create a symmetrical two-way dialogue, where public aspirations are not only accommodated, but also seriously responded to by policymakers. The absence of feedback (
feedback) makes the public feel that their participation will not have an impact. As a result, the level of public engagement is very low, as evidenced by the lack of comments and input on each bill uploaded. In the end,
e-participation what currently exists only fulfills
right to be heard in a limited way, but fails completely in fulfilling
right to be considered and
right to be explained.
Learning from Global Practices: Three Successful E-Participation Models
To redesign a better system, we can learn from countries that have successfully implemented it earlier
e-participation effectively.
Finland: The Power of Citizens' Initiative (Citizens' Initiative)
Finland implements a direct democracy model through a citizen initiative platform. This is a form of
CrowdLaw or
crowdsourced legislation, where every draft bill initiative from the public that successfully collects a minimum of 50,000 signatures (both written and electronic) must be considered and decided by parliament within six months. This model empowers citizens not only to provide input, but also to proactively set the legislative agenda.
United States: Transparency Through Open Government
During President Obama's era, the US launched the
Open Government initiative which also uses a
crowdsourcingmodel. The public and experts are invited to provide ideas and input through a dedicated website. Interestingly, active participants whose contributions are considered substantive will be displayed on a leaderboard (",
leaderboard"). This gamification and public recognition mechanism has proven effective in encouraging more qualified participation and building a sense of ownership.
European Union: Structured Openness Through "Have Your Say"
The European Union provides a central portal called "Have Your Say" as a single gateway for public participation. This platform has several advantages: openness of structured information based on topics and stages of the process, clear and sufficient participation deadlines (12 weeks), and most importantly, the obligation for the European Commission to publish
an in-depth feedback report on every input received from the public. This is a concrete manifestation of fulfilling
right to be explained.
Based on the evaluation of problems and lessons from global practices, a total reformulation of the ecosystem is needed
e-participation in Indonesia. This reform must be supported by four main pillars.
Strengthening Integrated Infrastructure and Regulations
The first step is to end ambiguity. There must be
joint regulations between the President and the DPR or at least regulations in each institution that clearly designate
a unified platform as the main gateway
e-participation national. This platform must be designated as part of the Priority Electronic-Based Government System (SPBE) to guarantee infrastructure support, data security, and interoperability according to the One Data Indonesia standard.
Adopting the Citizen Initiative Model and Crowdsourcing
To move from passive to active participation, Indonesia needs to adopt the model
citizen initiatives as in Finland. Clear rules of the game need to be formulated, for example, online petitions supported by a certain number of citizens (with verification of population data) must receive an official response or even be discussed in a Public Hearing (RDPU) in the DPR. This is a concrete implementation of
right to be considered at the legislative planning stage.
Regulating the Timing and Stages of Participation
Participation should not only be opened at the beginning as a formality. Implementing regulations must explicitly require the opening of digital participation channels in
every stage of the legislative process, starting from planning (preparation of Prolegnas), drafting (preparation of Academic Texts and Bills), discussion (Level I and II), to ratification. Each stage must have a clear and adequate participation deadline.
Building Two-Way Dialogue and Feedback
This is the most important pillar for building public trust. The platform
e-participation must be designed to facilitate two-way dialogue. Public input must be able to be responded to directly by members of the council or government representatives. At the end of each stage, there must be an obligation for lawmakers to publish a report explaining what input was received, which was accommodated, and which was not, along with the reasons, similar to the "Have Your Say" model in the European Union.
Constitutional Court Decision Number 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 has provided a strong constitutional mandate to realize meaningful public participation. Digital technology offers a golden opportunity to realize this mandate more broadly and inclusively. However, technology is only a tool. Without a strong political will to carry out fundamental reforms, the platform
e-participation will only become an empty digital showcase and merely fulfill formalities.
It is time for Indonesia to shift from a fragmented and one-way approach towards an integrated, interactive, and accountable digital participation ecosystem. By building clear regulations, adopting active participation models, and most importantly, institutionalizing feedback mechanisms, we can truly claim the promise of digital participation and transform it from a mere slogan into a pillar of substantive legislative democracy in the future.
Editorial Note: This article is an in-depth review and analysis based on a scientific journal article entitled "Integrating Electronic Participation in the Legislative Process to Optimize the Fulfillment of Meaningful Participation" by Mochamad Adli Wafi and Muhammad Machshush Bill Izzi, which was published in Jurnal Konstitusi, Volume 21, Nomor 4, Edisi Desember 2024.
Source
Mochamad Adli Wafi and Muhammad Machshush Bill Izzi. "Integrating Electronic Participation in the Legislative Process to Optimize the Fulfillment of Meaningful Participation."
Jurnal Konstitusi, Vol. 21, No. 4 (December 2024).
Comments
0Share your perspective politely, stay relevant, and focus on the article. Comments appear after moderation.
Join the discussion
Write a clear, polite response that stays on topic.
No comments yet. Be the first to discuss.
Comments will appear after moderation.