The discourse regarding the revival of the State Policy Guidelines\n(PPHN) is assessed to have the potential to erode democracy and the\nspirit of decentralisation if the concept reverts Indonesia\u2019s\ndevelopment pattern to an overly centralised system, similar to the New\nOrder era.<\/p>\n
Political communications observer from Esa Unggul University, M\nJamiluddin Ritonga, stated that the PPHN needs to be designed carefully\nso as not to conflict with the presidential system, democracy, and\nregional autonomy that have developed since the Reformation.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf the PPHN is to be implemented, it should not contradict the\nprinciples of decentralisation and a bottom-up development approach,\u201d\nJamiluddin told Media Indonesia on Wednesday (2\/9).<\/p>\n
According to Jamiluddin, Indonesia has abandoned the Broad Guidelines\nof State Policy (GBHN) since the Reformation because the concept was\ndeemed unsuitable for the presidential system and the principles of a\ndemocratic rule of law. Currently, the direction of national development\nrefers to the National Development Planning System (SPPN), which\nincludes the Long-Term Development Plan (RPJP) and the Medium-Term\nDevelopment Plan (RPJM).<\/p>\n
\u201cThe RPJP and RPJM translate the vision and mission of the elected\npresident, who has received a mandate from the people through elections,\nrather than a mandate from the MPR,\u201d he explained.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, Jamil\/uddin noted that the debate over the PPHN arises\nbecause some parties desire continuity in development across different\nadministrations. However, the concept also raises concerns regarding the\nmechanism of checks and balances between state institutions and the\nflexibility of democracy.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe existence of a state guideline document is not a necessity in a\ndemocratic system. Many democratic nations do not have a single document\nsuch as the PPHN or GBHN, yet they are still able to maintain\ndevelopment continuity through the constitution, laws, sectoral\npolicies, and long-term development targets,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
According to Jamiluddin, countries such as the United States rely on\nthe political vision and platforms of the governing administration.\nOther nations use long-term planning models based on legislation or\nsectoral strategies to maintain development continuity.<\/p>\n
On that basis, he assessed that the existence of the PPHN is not\nautomatically a guarantee that development will improve. The more\nimportant factor is ensuring that the planning mechanism is consistent\nwith Indonesia\u2019s political and constitutional system\npost-Reformation.<\/p>\n
Jamiluddin also warned that highly centralised state guideline\nconcepts are more commonly found in government systems that implement\ncentralised development planning. He cited China, with its Five-Year\nPlans, and several other countries that implement centralised national\nstrategic planning.<\/p>\n
\u201cCountries that use a PPHN-style approach generally adhere to a\ncentralised system. This was relevant to Indonesia when the New Order\nregime was in power, implementing a closed political system and\ncentralised development planning,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
In his view, Indonesia\u2019s current condition is vastly different from\nthe New Order era. Since the Reformation, Indonesia has implemented a\nmore open political system while strengthening regional autonomy. This\nshift has moved the development pattern from a top-down approach to a\nbottom-up approach. Consequently, Jamiluddin fears that the PPHN could\nserve as an entry point for the re-strengthening of central government\nauthority.<\/p>\n
This concern is increasingly relevant amidst the recent withdrawal of\nseveral regional authorities to the central government, including in the\nmining, spatial planning, forestry, and certain maritime management\nsectors.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf the PPHN cannot accommodate this, then it could erode the\ndemocracy that has been fought for and protected all this time,\u201d he\nasserted.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, Jamiluddin requested that the MPR ensure the PPHN\nconcept does not reduce regional authority or the space for public\nparticipation in determining the direction of development.<\/p>\n
\u201cTherefore, the MPR must be able to convince all citizens that the\nPPHN will not return Indonesia to a centralised state. The PPHN must\nalso not damage the democracy built since the 1998 Reformation,\u201d he\nconcluded.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/observer-pphn-discourse-must-not-return-indonesia-to-a-centralised-system-1788339304", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }