Expert: Challenge to Kapolri's tenure is justified for legal certainty

Jakarta (ANTARA) — Ahmad Sofian, Secretary-General of the Indonesian Association of Legal and Criminology Instructors (Asperhupiki), said that a challenge to the tenure of the Chief of the Indonesian National Police (Kapolri) under the Police Law (UU Polri) could be justified in the interests of legal certainty.

Sofian explained that the post requires a time limit and proposed restricting it to a maximum of five years in office to allow the Polri to undertake regeneration in accordance with the provisions.

‘In my view, a challenge to the Kapolri’s tenure to the Constitutional Court is justified so that the tenure would have a limit, giving legal certainty. The Kapolri is an office; there should be a time limit, for example a maximum of five years so that there can be regeneration within Polri,’ he said, when contacted by ANTARA in Jakarta on Thursday.

The limitation, he added, should be enshrined in law so that the tenure is not determined by retirement age. This would help avoid absolutist power in the office and set a bad precedent for the rotation mechanism within the Polri.

‘The importance of limiting the Kapolri’s tenure in law is that the post ends not depending on retirement age, as this would foster absolute power and set a bad precedent and would not reflect a measured turnover of leadership at Polri,’ he said.

In addition, Sofian stressed that the Kapolri post itself is highly political and vulnerable to conflicts of political interest if not carefully regulated within tenure limits.

‘The Kapolri post is political, as it is determined by the ruling regime. Political interests are very strong for this post, because the President needs strong backing to secure his position,’ he stated.

‘However, once there is discord with the Kapolri, it is also difficult for the President to replace him if the law does not regulate it. Historically, the Kapolri post ends when retirement occurs,’ Sofian continued.

In a press release from the Constitutional Court (MK) on Monday (2/3), the test of the law against Kapolri tenure is set out in petition No. 77/PUU-XXIV/2026 and tests Article 11 paragraph (2) which reads ‘The proposal for appointment and dismissal of the Kapolri is submitted by the President to the House of Representatives together with its reason’ in the preliminary examination.

The petition was filed by Tri Prasetio Putra Mumpuni. The petitioner says that the aforementioned article only regulates the appointment and dismissal of the Kapolri without setting a tenure period. In Tri’s view, the Kapolri’s position could become a post dependent on political relations with the President.

Moreover, Tri believes that the absence of a time-based tenure limit for the Kapolri constitutes an imbalance that creates systemic differences in the structure of public offices and contradicts the principle of equality before the law.

Therefore, Tri submitted a number of petitions asking the MK to declare the aforementioned article unconstitutional conditionally on the understanding that it does not clearly set a tenure limit for the Kapolri; the MK would deem it constitutional as long as it is interpreted to limit the Kapolri’s tenure to a defined, measurable period based on a fixed term, and only extendable in a limited way with the DPR’s approval.

Tri also asked the MK to order the lawmakers (DPR and the President) to amend and adjust the provision on Kapolri tenure to a maximum of one year from the date of the decision, with a firm, accountable, transparent cap and with the legislative oversight mechanism as part of checks and balances.

Furthermore, the petition states that if the lawmakers do not act within that period, the Kapolri tenure shall be a maximum of five years and may be extended only once with DPR approval.