Legal Literacy - Discussing the opposition in a democratic country will never end. Because its presence is very important, like a safety valve that prevents power from running uncontrollably. However, what happens if the safety valve slowly disappears from the main political stage? This question becomes relevant when hearing a firm statement from the top leadership of the country.
“Our nation is a great nation, therefore it needs a large coalition.” That was roughly the sentence spoken by the highest leader of the country when speaking at the BNI Investor Daily Summit in Senayan, October 2024. (Anggrainy, 2024). [1]
The statement seemed to give a subtle code that the opposition was not important. In fact, in a healthy democracy, the opposition is the lifeblood of checks and balances. The purpose is clear: so that power is not used carelessly or as if this country belongs to a private individual.
The narrative about a "large coalition" as a condition for development stability does sound convincing. However, behind that argument lies a great risk: the dying of the supervisory power to the point where our democracy experiences a real threat. The question is: where did the opposition actually go? Are they lost, or deliberately eliminated?
The author tries to think positively that the opposition is not completely lost, let alone eliminated, but has only experienced a shift in place from the main stage of parliament to a smaller and more dispersed public space.
The Disappearance of Voices in Parliament
Political observer from the National Development University (UPN) Veteran Jakarta, Ardli Johan Kusuma, said that the coalition supporting the government in the House of Representatives (House of Representatives) has reached an extraordinary percentage (Reza, 2025). [2] If we refer to BPS data regarding the 2024 Election results, the coalition supporting the elected President now dominates the majority of legislative seats. Let's sort them from the most, such as: Gerindra (102 seats), Golkar (86 seats), Nasdem (69 seats), PKB (68 seats), PAN (48 seats), Democrats (44 seats) (Statistics Indonesia, 2025). [3]
Post-election, major parties that were previously outside the circle of power chose to join the coalition, such as PKB for example. This decision is based on accommodative and transactional politics. In a presidential system like in our country, joining the coalition guarantees access to power (such as easy access to positions and political security), which is often considered more tempting than being in opposition.
Ironically, this reality occurs even though the main task of political parties as stated in their Articles of Association is to lead society towards prosperity. (Jurdi, 2020: 139). [4] However, instead of focusing on that ideal consensus, parties in parliament today are more driven to act solely for their own interests.
This shift in motivation is what structurally paralyzes the oversight function in the DPR (House of Representatives). With a massive majority, almost no government regulations or policies can be firmly rejected by the DPR. The mechanism of voting or interpellation loses its meaning when one bloc controls three-quarters of the seats. This is strong enough data to show that structurally, the function of parliament as a check and balance is paralyzed.
This is very different from the United States, which tends to be equal in terms of opposition because there are only two political parties, namely the Republican Party with a conservative ideological basis and the Democratic Party with a liberal ideological basis. If the Democratic Party loses, then the Republican Party will become the opposition, and vice versa. (Mochtar, 2022: 145).[5]
Searching for the Opposition Outside the Parliament Building
Even though critical voices in parliament are almost extinct, the opposition is not completely dead. It has only moved its contract outside the parliament building. The author sees that there are two last fortresses that still remain:
- The Moral Strength of Civil Society and Campus Intellectuals Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), academics, and student movements are now transforming into a line of "street parliament". When the legislative function in the DPR runs in the same direction as the executive's will, they are the ones who take on the role of supervision through judicial review to the Constitutional Court or the Supreme Court. Ironically, intelligent national dialectics are now more alive on campuses and online discussions than in DPR commission meeting rooms, which are often just ceremonial stages for passing agreements. Campuses are no longer just ivory towers, but the last bastion against unethical policies.
- Independent Media as the De Facto Opposition Amidst a uniform political landscape, investigative media and the independent press have emerged as the most tangible opposition force. Through in-depth and incisive coverage, they are able to uncover the irregularities of power, from corruption scandals to policies that favor oligarchs and marginalize the people, which would be impossible for members of the DPR (People's Representative Council) who are already comfortable in the "embrace" of the coalition to touch. The media is no longer just a messenger, but a supervisory instrument that ensures that deviations are not simply buried by the government's single narrative.
However, this opposition outside parliament certainly has weaknesses. They have moral authority, but no structural authority. They are vulnerable to intimidation, criminalization through the ITE Law (Law on Electronic Information and Transactions), funding difficulties, and restrictions on access to information.
One of the grim portraits of this intimidation is clearly recorded in our press history, as experienced by the Tempo Office. They once experienced a terrifying physical terror, namely being sent a package containing a pig's head as a form of psychological threat (Muzakki, 2025). [6] This kind of primitive act is not just a personal attack, but a dark message to silence critical reasoning and create a deterrent effect (chilling effect) for anyone who dares to expose the corruption of power. This proves that when legal instruments begin to become blunt in silencing the media, methods of intimidation beyond the bounds of humanity begin to be played.
Opposition Moving Out
So, where exactly has the opposition in Indonesia gone? The answer is tragic but simple: the opposition no longer resides in the magnificent Senayan building, but has "moved" to the streets, gadget spaces, and news desks. The structural power that should be a counterweight has now been paralyzed by the political lust for accommodation that gave birth to a grand coalition.
When almost all party colors melt into one line of power, the check and balances function is not just weakened, but in a state of suspended animation. The parliament, which should be the "guardian" of the people's interests, has now turned into a "stamp" for every executive ambition. Without a strong opposition in parliament, any public policy, no matter how severe its impact on the people, will proceed smoothly without meaningful debate. This is a danger signal for democracy, because power without supervision is a red carpet to authoritarianism and structured corrupt practices.
This "moving" phenomenon is the last line of defense for democracy. When the doors in the Parliament building are closed to criticism, the public voice will find its own way through non-formal channels. The mass media now bears the heavy burden as the de facto opposition, while social media becomes the judge's hammer for policies deemed odd. The people are forced to take over the supervisory function left by their representatives who are busy "embracing" power.
Ultimately, when political parties prefer to maintain harmony within the government, it is natural for the public to become more critical. This is not merely a complaint, but rather a way for the people to fill the oversight role left vacant by the parliament. When the seats in Senayan are perceived as being too comfortable, then discussions in newsrooms and peaceful demonstrations on the streets become the last hope to ensure that our democracy does not proceed in only one direction. It is here that we hope these public spaces will remain free, because it is there that the nation's conscience is maintained.
If this final stage is also seized through silencing regulations, then we no longer live in a democratic country. We are merely watching a long monologue performance, where the government is busy praising itself every day, while the people are forced to be silent spectators.
Comments (0)
Write a comment