Personalization of Power: The Trap Behind the "People-Friendly"…

Personalization of Power: The Trap Behind the "People-Friendly" Communication of Public Officials

Dykasakti Azhar Nytotama

Contributor

02 Jul 2025 · 14:38 02 July 2025 14:38 WIB 5 minutes reading time: 5 minutes 89 read

Why is the "I built" claim by public officials dangerous for the state system? Understand the risk of blurring institutional responsibility from the perspective of Administrative Law

Personalization of Power: The Trap Behind the "People-Friendly" Communication of Public Officials

Opinion Note

This opinion article was written by a contributor/columnist. The views expressed are entirely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors.

CONTRIBUTOR PROGRAM

You can become a columnist at Legal Literacy.

Submit your legal opinion/analysis writing. If it is published, you have the opportunity to obtain a payout/honorarium in accordance with the provisions.

Submit Article Read Guidelines

Table of Contents

Introduction
Authority Attaches to the Position, Not the Individual
Populist Communication Traps: Effective, But Obscure Facts
Political Branding vs. Administrative Ethics: Where is the Limit?
The Biggest Risk: When State Institutions Are Submerged by Personal Figures
Conclusion: Returning the State to the System, Not Figures

Legal Literacy - Why is the "I built" claim by public officials dangerous to the state system? Understand the risk of blurring institutional responsibility from the perspective of Administrative Law.

Introduction

The phenomenon of personal communication by public officials in the digital space is increasingly widespread. Their social media timelines are now commonly filled with narratives that highlight the role of individuals, such as "I have built," "We personally have completed this," or "Thank you to those who have cared for the people."

At first glance, these sentences sound familiar and down-to-earth. However, when examined from the perspective of administrative law and public communication ethics, this approach contains a fundamental flaw. We live in a legal system that places power not on individuals, but on positions (office). When an official claims a state program as the result of his personal work, he is obscuring the main principle in good governance.

Authority Attaches to the Position, Not the Individual

In State Administrative Law (HAN), there is a fundamental principle that all government actions must be based on legitimate authority (rechtmatige bevoegdheid) that is inherent in the position. This principle is manifested in the concept of attributive authority, namely the authority granted directly by laws and regulations to a position.

Thus, when a regent inaugurates a new road or a minister launches a social program, what is actually acting is the state institution through the official as its legal representation. What works is the position of regent or the position of minister, not individual "A" or "B" personally. The narrative "I personally built this" is not in line with the principle of formal legality in every administrative action.

The risk is very clear: accountability becomes blurred. If in the future there is a dispute or legal violation related to the project, who is institutionally responsible? The personalization of power blurs the line between personal and public responsibility.