Special Autonomy in a New Chapter: Symptoms of Autocratic Legalism of the Government of the Republic of Indonesia in IKN

Legal Literacy - This article discusses the changes in the Indonesian government system after the New Order era and the massive reform agenda carried out to eliminate the characteristics of centralization in leadership. However, currently, the presence of oligarchy in taking roles and consensus for the country is becoming rampant and worrying. This article also discusses the Special Autonomy in the National Capital City (IKN) and concerns about its constitutionality, considering the IKN Authority institution which is equivalent to a ministry that has never existed in the constitutional practice in the Republic of Indonesia.

By: Ch Idzan Falaqi Harmer, Postgraduate Student (Master of Law) Faculty of Law, Gadjah Mada University.

After ending the era of government New Order which had been in power for 32 years, the very strong centralization in the narrative of the New Order era leadership faded thanks to a massive reform agenda throughout Indonesia. Criticism from several regions that wanted to separate from the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia, such as: Aceh, Riau, Papua were considered serious problems that had emasculated the regions in the principle of recognizing 'original rights' in a government that tended to be autocratic at that time, so it was not in line with the initial ideals of the founding of this republic.

A new chapter, the neo-colonialism shown by the practice of government implementation today is a portrait of the rampant presence of oligarchy in taking roles and consensus for this country. As the ultimate goal, is to increase the power of capital and politics for their group—which in reality should have been rejected and buried as deeply as possible in order to achieve social justice for all Indonesian people. Ironically, this practice seems to be supported by the power held by a group of people in the government. In fact, this is considered more dangerous than the practice of authoritarianism in the New Order era.

Special Autonomy in IKN: An Analytical Review of Laws and Regulations

Through the General Session of the People's Consultative Assembly on August 18, 2000, there was an agreement to make the second amendment to the 1945 Constitution, namely on the content of Articles 18, 18A, and 18B concerning the status of special and privileged regions. At least, after the amendment to these articles, there are several regions that are special and privileged, such as: Aceh, Yogyakarta, Papua, and Jakarta—then, a nomenclature new in IKN, namely Nusantara and further explained through Article 1 number 2 of Law Number 3 of 2022: “The State Capital is named Nusantara and hereinafter referred to as the Nusantara State Capital is a special regional government unit equivalent to a province whose territory becomes the seat of the State Capital as stipulated and regulated by this Law”.

A 'specialty' and different from the usual granting of 'special' and 'privileged' status to the regions mentioned previously is re-emphasized in Article 5 Paragraph (3) which states that: “Except for other regional government units, only national-level general elections are held in the Nusantara State Capital.” Indeed, its formation is intended in the course of a mandate for the continuity of the new capital for the Republic of Indonesia. But it should be noted that its implementation should not contradict the principles that have been built and implemented in Indonesia.

Clearly, as mentioned in the 'considering' point, one of the foundations for the formation of this Law is Article 18 paragraph (1) and Article 18 (2) of the 1945 Constitution as the constitutional basis for the formation of this Law. It is necessary to review whether the formation of this Law is in line with the meaning of the basic law that is the foundation in the context of the implementation of special autonomy in Indonesia.

That, the existence of the 1945 Constitution in the 'considering' point does not fully answer the constitutionality of IKN—in principle. Regarding the constitutional basis used in the Law, it has provided a separate shift towards the placement of the 'Nusantara Capital City Authority' as an institution equivalent to a ministry (Article 4 Paragraph (1) point b), which has never existed in the constitutional practice of this republic. Thus, the placement of this 'equivalent' thing is a new practice that has violated the constitution as the highest legal norm.

In principle, regional governments, as the basis in the 'considering' section through Article 18 Paragraph (1) and Paragraph (2), even if recognized as regions with the granting of 'special' or 'privileged' status, have never had a form or practice that makes them equivalent to a ministry. This means that the new legal event in state administration practice in this Law has far violated a number of provisions that were not carried out in previous state administration practices and are never mentioned in the constitution.

A reality that has just emerged through this Law is the existence of a new mandate in the course and implementation of government in Indonesia. The existence of a 'special' mandate is a new history in the course of 'asymmetrical decentralization' or 'special autonomy' in Indonesia. The law becomes the basis for the administration of government in the new capital region of the State of Indonesia. Of course, it becomes a shared task to oversee and criticize this new customary practice.

The Government's Autocratic Legalism Practice Occurs in IKN

With the issuance of Law Number 3 of 2022 concerning the State Capital, it at least provides a sign regarding the future challenges of the Indonesian government in the hands of the oligarchy. The legalization of this practice seems to have an impact bad for the future of democratization in Indonesia.It is seen that the authority of the president in determining the continuation of the implementation of the region with a new nomenclature regarding the Nusantara Capital City Authority which provides a new form in the framework of democracy in Indonesia. This is anticipated as a gateway to the occurrence of oligarchy practices in terms of management and natural resources in Indonesia. This is due to the lack of access for the general public in the determination of management of IKN.

These concerns have actually arisen from various criticisms against the irregularities practiced by the government in the administration of state power. Allegedly, this places the position of people's sovereignty in a very serious predicament. The scent of state control in the hands of the oligarchy is increasingly evident in the determination and management of IKN. Even though criticism is part of democracy, and is always echoed in the context of IKN.

The increasingly visible indication of government in practices controlled by the oligarchy is seen in the implementation of development projects for IKN that are very pro-investment and disregard the interests of the general public and local communities. This is evident in the content of Article 17 which states that: "The Nusantara Capital City Authority has the right to be prioritized in the purchase of Land in the Nusantara Capital City." This, of course, becomes a strong legal basis for actors and investors who will later use IKN as an excuse to control the natural resources in the Nusantara Capital City.

An analysis of this matter reveals that since the beginning of the formation of the Law itself, there has been very minimal public and community participation in discussing the legal product. This is certainly contrary to Law Number 12 of 2011 which requires the involvement and participation of the public in the making of the Law. Unfortunately, this has spread into a culture and practice that commonly occurs among lawmakers. This was acknowledged and stated by Yohana Tiko, Spokesperson for the East Kalimantan branch of the Indonesian Forum for Environment (Walhi) as she stated: "procedural defects in the preparation of the Strategic Environmental Assessment (KLHK) recurred in the making of the IKN Bill. Where previously it was carried out in a closed, limited manner, and did not involve communities directly affected by the relocation of the Capital City."

It is also reflected in the mandate regarding the Election of the Head of the Nusantara Capital City Authority, that the election is appointed, appointed, and dismissed directly by the President and the DPR. Then, they have the right to stipulate regulations to organize the Special Regional Government (Part Two of Article 5 concerning Position and Special Characteristics). Also stated in Article 10 Paragraph (1) that the Head and Deputy Head of the IKN Authority can be re-appointed and re-appointed in the same term of office. This means that in that article point, the same Head and Deputy Head of the IKN Authority can be re-elected and there is no specified period limit.

The assumption that a new chapter in the maintenance of 'oligarchy' within the framework of a democratic state will clearly continue to thrive and develop. Indeed, with regard to the mechanism for the appointment and dismissal of the head and deputy head of the IKN Authority, it is carried out directly by the President and the DPR for the sake of accelerating development. However, this certainly needs to be criticized, when the implementation of IKN has normalized, there is no reason and narrative of 'accelerated development' to eliminate a direct election in IKN.

As is the case with sovereignty over leadership and the implementation of democratic principles, there must be direct elections from the people, and the regulations issued must also absorb and pay attention to the aspirations of the people, not just limited to certain groups. Moreover, it is also very important to pay attention to the democratic nodes at the local level which are fundamental in maintaining the mandate of regional autonomy or decentralization in Indonesian government.