Expert: Placement of Active Police Officers in Civil Positions Must Be Limitatively Regulated in Law

Jakarta (ANTARA) - Maradona, a criminal law lecturer at Airlangga University, Surabaya, stated that the placement of active police officers in civil positions closely related to policing functions must be regulated limitatively within the revision of the Law on the National Police of the Republic of Indonesia (Polri).

During a public hearing regarding the Polri Bill with Commission III of the Indonesian House of Representatives (DPR RI) in Jakarta on Tuesday, Maradona argued that provisions regarding which civil positions may be occupied by Polri members must be detailed.

“If the position is closely related to policing functions, it must be included in a limited list of positions. It should not be broadly open. Therefore, this law should regulate, for example, which specific positions within which fields can be occupied by Polri members,” he said.

According to him, there are at least three policing functions: the maintenance of public order, law enforcement, and public service. Because policing functions are broad, they may be required in other sectors.

Consequently, Maradona stated that the assignment of active police to positions outside the Polri institution that relate to policing functions is an inevitability that needs clear regulation, as mandated by the Constitutional Court (MK) ruling.

However, regarding the assignment of active police to purely civil positions that have no connection to policing functions, Maradona argued that the provision requiring the involved Polri members to resign or retire must be maintained.

He emphasised that the regulation of Polri members outside the institution must be viewed through the lens of political neutrality, the merit system in bureaucracy, and the prevention of the expansion of apparatus power into the civilian sphere.

“The question is not whether they are allowed to hold civil positions, but most importantly: which position, for what function, for how long, what is the legal basis, who supervises, and how do we prevent conflicts of interest?” he said.

According to the expert, the Constitutional Court has emphasised that positions requiring Polri members to resign or retire are those that have no connection to policing.

“This means that if a position still has a direct link to the functions, duties, and authority of the police, the space for the assignment of active Polri members is not constitutionally closed,” he added.

In ruling number 223/PUU-XXIII/2025, the Court emphasised that the issue is not whether Polri members are permitted to be placed outside the institution, but rather that the Polri Law has not clearly regulated which positions related to policing can be held by active officers.

He noted that the Constitutional Court does not absolutely prohibit the assignment of Polri members outside the structure, but emphasises that such assignments must not be left in a grey or vague area. Therefore, the revision of the Polri Law currently being discussed in Parliament must follow up on these two Constitutional Court rulings.

“The Polri Bill must clearly answer which positions can be filled, what the functional reasons are, what the selection mechanism is, to whom the accountability lies, and how the evaluation is conducted,” he concluded.