Civil society coalition files constitutional challenge against Free Nutritious Meal programme in state budget law
Jakarta — A coalition of civil society organisations has filed a constitutional review petition against the State Budget Law, specifically challenging the Free Nutritious Meal programme (Makan Bergizi Gratis/MBG), with Indonesia’s Constitutional Court in Jakarta on Tuesday.
The petition was filed by several organisations, individuals and institutes including the Sayogyo Institute, YLKI, Jakarta Legal Aid Institute (LBH Jakarta), ASPPUK, CELIOS, Aliansi Ibu Indonesia, as well as individuals Busyro Muqoddas, Agus Sarwono, and a village chief.
“Six organisations and individuals have filed the constitutional review petition against the State Budget Law,” said Jaya Darmawan, moderator of the civil society coalition grouped within the MBG Watch Coalition, at the Constitutional Court building.
The petitioners brought various research-based documents for physical registration with the court and were officially registered under case number 98/PUU-XXIV/2026. The law under challenge is Law Number 17 of 2025 concerning the 2026 state budget.
Each petitioner hopes the Constitutional Court judges will accept their petition and hear the case promptly in order to reform the MBG programme.
According to Busyro, the MBG has become a tragedy whose governance has become increasingly uncontrolled, creating destructive impacts and causing widespread hardship to society whilst extending to state fiscal problems.
“We see this is troubling and concerning, but we do not stop at this trouble and concern. That is why we approach the Constitutional Court as a beacon of justice for the broader public. Our hope is that the court judges can feel the suffering and cries of public aspirations caused by this tragedy in MBG governance,” said Busyro.
Meanwhile, Media Wahyudi Askar, Director of Public Policy at the Center of Economics and Law Studies (CELIOS), cited potential losses from wasted MBG food at Rp1.2 trillion per week.
Furthermore, the organisation also views the MBG programme as a populist programme masquerading as policy that actually only benefits the rulers’ cronies.
“We see MBG as a populist programme masquerading as policy that in reality is only distributed to the cronies of those in power. This is what we do not want and refuse to remain silent about,” said Media.
Meanwhile, Agus Sarwono from Transparency International (TI) Indonesia suggested that MBG is fundamentally a campaign programme from the outset designed to garner political votes in 2029.
“From the beginning we said the MBG project failed from the planning aspect. Citizens were never involved, whilst regulations in Indonesia clearly stipulate that all government activities must have information disclosure processes, must have public participation space processes, and must have accountability,” said Agus.
Muhammad Isnur, Chairman of the Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI), stated that there are several articles in Law Number 17 of 2025 concerning the 2026 state budget that have been challenged in the constitutional review, namely Articles 8 paragraph (5); 9 paragraph (4); 11 paragraph (2); 13 paragraph (4); 14 paragraph (1); 20 paragraph (1) and 29 paragraph (1).
“We are challenging these articles. We are asking some to be interpreted constitutionally with conditions, asking for explanations, additional clauses, and some we are asking to be removed,” said Isnur.
After registering and submitting their petition documents, the parties received a case number letter and will now await the hearing date, which will be communicated online.