Ikhsan Yosarie, a researcher on human rights and the security sector\nat SETARA Institute for Democracy and Peace, has assessed that the Draft\nPresidential Regulation (Perpres) on military involvement in\ncounter-terrorism has the potential to violate the principles of\ncivilian supremacy and the criminal justice system. He argues the draft\nis problematic on constitutional, democratic, and human rights\ngrounds.<\/p>\n
Article 2, paragraph (2) of the draft Perpres reintroduces a\nmilitaristic approach to handling terrorism. It outlines TNI functions\nencompassing deterrence, enforcement, and recovery.<\/p>\n
\u201cArticle 3 even elaborates that the deterrence function is to be\ncarried out by the TNI through four activities and\/or operations, namely\nintelligence, territorial, information, and others,\u201d said Ikhsan in\nJakarta on Thursday, 12 February 2026.<\/p>\n
Threat to Civil Liberties<\/p>\n
Ikhsan, who is also a lecturer in Government Studies at Indo Global\nMandiri University, noted that the Civil Society Coalition has\nconsistently highlighted the phrase \u201cother operations\u201d in the draft.\nThis phrase is extremely elastic and open to multiple interpretations,\ncreating potential for abuse for political power interests and\nthreatening civil liberties and democracy.<\/p>\n
The Civil Society Coalition has also reiterated that the term\n\u201cdeterrence\u201d (penangkalan) is not recognised in Law No.\u00a05 of 2018 on the\nEradication of Criminal Acts of Terrorism, which only recognises the\nterm \u201cprevention\u201d (pencegahan).<\/p>\n
Law No.\u00a05 of 2018, in Article 1 paragraph 1, explicitly categorises\nterrorism as a criminal offence. Its handling falls within the criminal\njustice framework, with the National Police as the primary law\nenforcement actor and judicial mechanisms as the means of\naccountability. This categorisation means the handling mechanism is\nsubject to the general court system.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf the TNI is not subject to the general courts, how will\naccountability work if violence and human rights violations occur in the\nfield caused by TNI personnel?\u201d he asked.<\/p>\n
Ikhsan explained that TNI involvement is possible under certain\nconditions \u2014 for example, with TNI participation classified as auxiliary\nsupport, deployed only when the escalation of terrorist acts exceeds the\ncapacity of law enforcement authorities.<\/p>\n
The draft regulation, Ikhsan said, also needs to clarify the nature\nof TNI involvement in terrorism escalation scenarios. The provisions in\nthe draft Perpres only address the object of the threat without touching\non escalation criteria.<\/p>\n
\u201cGranting the TNI independent deterrence and enforcement functions\nhas the potential to create overlapping authority with law enforcement,\ngiven that terrorism falls under the category of criminal offences,\u201d he\nsaid.<\/p>\n
Ikhsan argued that reviving a draft Perpres previously criticised by\nvarious parties without substantive improvements would merely repeat old\npolicies. This step also reflects the state\u2019s failure to learn from\npublic criticism and weakens the principle of civilian control over the\nsecurity sector.<\/p>\n
This situation, he continued, could serve as material for analysing\nwhy TNI reform has stalled despite more than 20 years of progress. One\nreason is that civil society criticism of the expansion of the TNI\u2019s\nrole is not treated as input for policy evaluation but is instead\nreduced to a procedural formality.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis pattern reinforces the tendency towards elite-driven\npolicymaking in the security sector, where the preferences of state\nactors dominate over the aspirations of citizens,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Constitutional Violation<\/p>\n
Senior researcher at Imparsial, Al Araf, assessed that the draft\nPerpres is unconstitutional because it expands the TNI\u2019s role in\ndomestic deterrence and enforcement, contravenes the principle of due\nprocess of law, and risks the abuse of authority.<\/p>\n
The Civil Society Coalition, including Al Araf, has urged the\nPresident to revoke and review the draft.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe basis of this draft Perpres is Article 43 of the Terrorism\nCriminal Act Law, which mandates military involvement in\ncounter-terrorism to be regulated through a Presidential Regulation,\u201d he\nsaid on Monday, 16 February 2026.<\/p>\n
The Brawijaya University Faculty of Law lecturer questioned the\nmilitary\u2019s presence in a law on criminal acts of terrorism. The\ninstitutions that should be regulated, according to Al Araf, are those\nwith law enforcement authority. \u201cLogically, it should regulate people\nwith law enforcement authority \u2014 police, prosecutors, courts. Why is\nthere an article about a Perpres on TNI involvement in terrorism within\nthat law? So normatively, it is already wrong,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Al Araf stated that law enforcement must comply with the principle of\ndue process of law, from arrest through investigation to trial. He\nhighlighted the potential for violations if the military is involved in\ncounter-terrorism and questioned the mechanism for pre-trial\ncomplaints.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe question is, does the military understand what due process of\nlaw means? That is a long lesson. One of the principles is that you can\nonly make an arrest if you have two sufficient pieces of evidence. If\nyou cannot, you cannot arrest. And there are other principles in the due\nprocess of law that must be respected,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
He therefore assessed that these provisions create legal chaos. TNI\ninvolvement through a Perpres is also deemed to contravene the rule of\nlaw.<\/p>\n
Elastic and Multi-Interpretive Definition of Terrorism<\/p>\n
Al Araf noted that another highly dangerous problem is the elastic\nand multi-interpretive definition of terrorism. He recalled that the\nPresident had once labelled demonstrations in August 2025 as treason or\nterrorism.<\/p>\n
According to him, with a loose definition and room for unclear \u201cother\noperations,\u201d anyone could be accused of being a terrorist. In this\ncontext, pro-democracy groups, critics of government policy, and civil\nsociety are at risk of being silenced through the stigmatisation of\nterrorism.<\/p>\n
\u201cMoreover, the definition and labelling of terrorism in Indonesia is\nelastic. Abroad, the definitions of such groups are clear. So this could\nbe misused against groups that differ from the government. This Perpres\nhas an extremely broad definition extending to threats to safety, plus\nideology. What kind of threat is ideology? The benchmarks are unclear,\u201d\nhe said.<\/p>\n
The former director of Centra Initiative emphasised that military\ninvolvement in combating terrorism should only occur as a last resort\nwhen terrorism threatens sovereignty, and must be based on a political\ndecision of the state, not merely a presidential order.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf the TNI makes mistakes in handling terrorists, there is no clear\njudicial mechanism because soldiers are not subject to the general\ncourts,\u201d he said.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/military-involvement-in-draft-counter-terrorism-regulation-risks-abuse-of-power-and-threatens-civil-liberties-1771647630", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }