Analyst: Kapolri Tenure Limited to Three Years Would Reduce Presidential Prerogatives
Senior political analyst Boni Hargens has criticised the proposal to limit the tenure of the Chief of the Indonesian National Police (Kapolri) to a maximum of three years, saying the idea is irrelevant and could undermine Indonesia’s presidential democracy. Boni argues that proposing to cap the Kapolri’s tenure through legislation constitutes indirect parliamentary intervention in the executive domain and would diminish the president’s prerogative to appoint the head of the Bhayangkara Corps.
‘In my view, this proposal is not relevant and not significant within Indonesia’s presidentialism framework. The idea of setting the Kapolri’s tenure directly would reduce the presidential prerogative authority that is already regulated in the Police Act,’ Boni said in a written statement on Thursday (21 May 2026).
Boni outlined, legally, that the position of Polri is clearly governed by Law Number 2 of 2002 on the Indonesian Police. Article 8(1) and (2) state that the Polri is directly under the President and the Kapolri is directly responsible to the head of state. Meanwhile, Article 11(1) provides that the process of appointing and dismissing the Kapolri is conducted by the President with the approval of the DPR.
‘This is not merely an administrative formality; it is the structural foundation that determines the whole dynamics of the institutional relationship between Polri and the executive branch,’ Boni explained.
He added that the Kapolri is a position born from the President’s trust in a specific individual, making the relationship personal, professional, and political at the same time. If tenure were normatively restricted, the president would lose the flexibility to retain a figure deemed capable of executing the government’s law-and-order vision.
Furthermore, Boni argues that in a presidential system, tenure limits should apply only to electoral positions elected directly by the people to prevent power monopolies, such as the President or regional leaders. ‘The principle is to prevent monopoly of power arising from a mandate of the people. In this context, the tenure of members of the DPR should be limited to two terms,’ Boni quipped.
Conversely, he said, institutional structural posts like the Kapolri and the Panglima TNI follow different HR management logic, where their limits are retirement age and internal career progression, not political mandate rotation. He warned that mixing these two matters would undermine established governance and trigger new legal uncertainty.
As an alternative solution, Boni urged the DPR to focus on strengthening supervisory functions rather than cutting the executive prerogative that is constitutionally counterproductive. ‘If the aim is to strengthen Polri accountability, a more appropriate mechanism is to reinforce external oversight, increase transparency of the track record in Kapolri selection, and establish a measurable performance evaluation mechanism,’ Boni concluded. (H-2)
Revisions to the relevant article on Kapolri tenure are long overdue to provide legal certainty and professionalism.
DIREKTUR Eksekutif Amnesty International Indonesia, Usman Hamid, commented on the Kapolri tenure issues currently being challenged at the Constitutional Court (MK).
The Constitutional Court (MK) rejected the lawsuit challenging the limitation of the Kapolri’s tenure under Law Number 2 of 2002.
A Kapolri tenure that is not bounded by a time limit could foster a personality cult and erode Polri’s professionalism.