Hajj Quota is Not a Subject for Negotiation
The management of the Hajj pilgrimage is not merely a matter of travel administration. It involves the rights of citizens, public funds, the waiting lists of millions of prospective pilgrims, and the state’s obligation to ensure that the pilgrimage is organised fairly and accountably.
Every policy related to the Hajj quota should be born through transparent, documented, and accountable procedures.
The testimony provided by Muhadjir Effendy, acting as the Minister of Religious Affairs ad interim at the time, during the trial regarding alleged corruption in the Hajj quota on 1 September 2026, must be taken seriously. During the trial, Muhadjir revealed that consultations were held with President Joko Widodo regarding the plan to reallocate 10,000 additional Hajj quotas.
He also explained that these consultations and directives were conducted orally, without written documentation. Furthermore, the issuance of the request letter for the quota reallocation was said to have originated from a request by a Hajj and Umrah travel association.
From that testimony, it appears that administrative issues occurred during this reallocation of the Hajj quota. This polemic has drawn significant public attention regarding criminal aspects, especially since the current Minister of Religious Affairs has been named a suspect. However, from an administrative perspective, a thorough investigation is also necessary.
Administrative Trail
When a strategic decision concerning 10-thousand Hajj quotas relies solely on oral consultations and directives, the fundamental question arises: where is the administrative trail?
In a modern rule-of-law state, public decisions cannot merely be based on who provided the direction; they must be traceable in terms of authority, considerations, procedures, and accountability.
Oral directives may occur in governmental practice. However, if such directives then become the basis for administrative actions that have a wide impact on public services, there should be a mechanism for documentation and verification.
Without a clear administrative trail, it will be difficult to determine who is responsible if such policies lead to complications.
Transparency and Accountability
There are allegations of ignoring the principles of transparency and accountability. It was revealed in court that the quota reallocation letter was related to a request from an association. Muhadjir even explained that the request was submitted via a party representing the association.
The question is, why can the interests of a group or association serve as the gateway for the creation of strategic policies regarding the Hajj quota? Is there an official mechanism for the public, regular prospective Hajj pilgrims, the DPR (Parliament), or relevant institutions to know and provide input?
If access to the policy-making process is more open to certain groups than to the directly affected community, then there is undoubtedly a serious problem regarding fairness of access and transparency in decision-making.