Golkar Proposes 5% Parliamentary Threshold: So Parties Aren't Caught Off Guard

Golkar Party Secretary-General Muhammad Sarmuji has argued that the proposed parliamentary threshold need not be raised as high as 7%, instead recommending it be set at around 5%.

“We are proposing a moderate parliamentary threshold combined with a factional threshold. This way, the chances for parties to enter parliament remain fairly high, but they would be grouped into sufficiently large factions,” Sarmuji said on Tuesday (24/2/2026).

Sarmuji stated that any increase in the parliamentary threshold should not deviate significantly from the previous rule of 4%. He argued the threshold need not reach 7%, as proposed by NasDem Chairman Surya Paloh.

“If there is a slight increase combined with a factional threshold, that would actually be quite ideal. There’s no need for it to go as high as 7 per cent,” he said.

Sarmuji went on to propose a parliamentary threshold of 5%, arguing that this figure would not shock political parties.

“Yes, around that level (5%). So that parties aren’t caught off guard,” he said.

Surya Paloh had previously stated that NasDem would remain consistent in pushing for the parliamentary threshold to be raised to 7%. Paloh argued that a 7% threshold would be far more effective.

“I think NasDem should just remain consistent on that position. Unless there are very significant changes. In any case, NasDem genuinely believes that, honestly, if we could shift from a multiparty system to a selected party system, that would be far more effective — both for maintaining governmental stability and for implementing the benefits of the democratic freedoms we possess,” Paloh said at NasDem Tower in Menteng, Central Jakarta, on Saturday (21/2).

Paloh then raised the issue of the large number of political parties, questioning the purpose of democracy if it does not deliver tangible benefits.

“So this should give us pause for reflection. We have been overly enthusiastic about the sheer number of political parties in the name of democracy itself. But on the other hand, what is the point of democracy if it does not bring practical benefits and consistency in pursuing our independence ideals? Capability, effectiveness, reasoning, intellectuality, and morality must move ever closer towards our shared objectives,” he said.