Youth Generation Participation in Public Policy Making

Dinda Az Zahra Damayanti

Contributor

23 Apr 2026 · 06:32 23 April 2026 06:32 WIB 4 minutes reading time: 4 minutes 21 read

Closed public policies risk triggering rejection, judicial review of a law, and a legitimacy crisis. The young generation must be meaningfully involved.

Ilustrasi generasi muda, gedung lembaga negara, dan simbol hukum dalam pembentukan kebijakan publik (Source: AI ChatGPT, Redaksi Literasi Hukum Indonesia)

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

Legal Literacy - Throughout 2024, Constitutional Court completed 158 petition judicial reviews of a law. This surge is not merely a legal statistic, but a strong signal that the public is increasingly questioning the policy-making process in Indonesia. At the same time, the younger generation is often excluded from decision-making spaces, even though they are the group that will bear the brunt of the policy impacts for the longest time. This topic was chosen because the participation of the younger generation is not only a social demand in the life of a democratic state, but also has an academic and juridical basis as part of the principle of the rule of law.

This situation creates a democratic paradox: public participation is glorified as a principle, but its practice often feels artificial. Protests, criticism in the public sphere, and judicial review of a law to the Constitutional Court become the last channels of correction when formal participation spaces do not work. The question is, why is the involvement of the younger generation still not a core part of public policy making?

The issue of public participation is not an abstract one. In the process of forming the Job Creation Law, a judicial review of a law stated that there was a formal defect due to the non-fulfillment of the principles of openness and meaningful public participation. The decision affirmed that national strategic policies can lose legitimacy when the process is closed, even if the substance is claimed to be in the public interest. [1]

A similar pattern re-emerged in the formation of the Criminal Procedure Code Law ratified on January 2, 2026. Various news reports and public discourses highlighted the minimal involvement of the public, including the younger generation, in the drafting process. In fact, the Criminal Procedure Code regulates the rights of citizens in the criminal justice process—an area very close to the experiences and future of the younger generation as legal subjects. [2]

The main problem with public policy making in Indonesia does not lie in the absence of participation, but in the quality of that participation itself. The younger generation is often presented as a symbol of legitimacy, not as an actor whose opinions are genuinely considered. This kind of participation not only weakens democracy, but also produces policies that are prone to being questioned and difficult for the public to accept.

Referensi

Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia. (2020). Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 tentang Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2020 tentang Cipta Kerja. ↩︎
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Acara Pidana (KUHAP). (2026). ↩︎
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 14 Tahun 2008 tentang Keterbukaan Informasi Publik. ↩︎
Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia. (2024). MK putus 158 perkara pengujian undang-undang sepanjang 2024. ↩︎
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 11 Tahun 2020 tentang Cipta Kerja.