Judging Deviations, Not Condemning the Correctional System
The findings by the Republic of Indonesia’s Ombudsman at the Class IIA Cibinong Correctional Institution in September 2026 have immediately sparked public outrage. Behind prison walls, structures resembling cluster houses or homestays were discovered, featuring facilities deemed unusual for a correctional environment. The Ombudsman is now investigating potential maladministration and preferential treatment of certain inmates.
If special facilities were indeed provided illegally—especially if linked to bribery, connections, or abuse of authority—the case must be thoroughly investigated. Who authorised it, who benefited, how such facilities came to exist, and who is responsible must be disclosed transparently. There is no excuse for protecting misconduct.
However, the issue becomes unjust when a single finding is transformed into a verdict against the entire Correctional system. The Cibinong case could lead to the conclusion that all prisons and all officers are the same, and that the Correctional system is nothing more than an institution riddled with deviations. Social media operates in a simplistic manner; a single image can be more powerful than a detailed official report. A video of a luxurious room is far more likely to trigger emotion than the daily realities of security and safety within prisons.
Deviations in one unit do not automatically prove that all units operate in the same manner. This phenomenon was discussed by Jonsson et al. (2009) in their research on the spread of loss of legitimacy. When one organisation or part of an organisation commits a deviation, its poor image can spread to other parties that are actually uninvolved. This is precisely what is happening with the issues at the Cibinong Prison. When one prison stumbles, the stigma is not only borne by the prison head or the involved officers. Officers in other regions, who may work according to the rules and face even harsher conditions, are also suspected. The public ultimately judges the institution based on its worst case, rather than a complete picture. This is certainly unfair to the Correctional system.
The Correctional system does indeed have significant work to do. The Ombudsman has previously urged improvements in governance, ranging from issues involving mobile phones, illegal levies, and drug trafficking to internal supervision.
Working in Silence
The Correctional system operates under far from simple conditions. Data from the Directorate General of Corrections in 2026 shows that the number of inmates in national prisons and detention centres far exceeds available capacity. In April 2026, capacity was approximately 146,000 people, while the inmate population exceeded 271,000. This means overcrowding reached approximately 85 per cent.
Imagine a house designed for one hundred people that must accommodate nearly two hundred. In such a situation, officers do more than just open and close cell doors. They must maintain security, control conflicts, prevent the entry of narcotics and contraband, fulfil the basic rights of inmates, provide healthcare, manage family visits, and manage rehabilitation programmes so that prisoners are prepared for reintegration into society. All of this work happens every day.
The problem is that normal, functioning work does not go viral. Officers who refuse bribes do not go viral. Officers who thwart drug smuggling are only reported on briefly. Community leaders who assist clients, prepare social research, and ensure the reintegration process follows the rules are almost unknown to the public. Rehabilitation programmes that enable former inmates to return to work rarely receive as much coverage as scandal news.
Prisons are no longer about retribution
The controversy regarding facilities within the prison also indicates a major misunderising regarding the purpose of imprisonment. A portion of society still views prisons as places of retribution. Inmates are expected to live as harshly as possible; the harsher the prison conditions, the more just the punishment is perceived to be.
However, the Indonesian legal paradigm has long moved away from that view. Law Number 22 of 2022 concerning Corrections emphasises that the Correctional system aims to improve the quality of the personality and independence of inmates so that they realise their mistakes, reform themselves, do not repeat criminal acts, and can be reaccepted by society.
This means that while inmates lose their freedom, they do not lose their human dignity. This principle also aligns with the United Nations’ Mandela Rules, which place rehabilitation and social reintegration as essential components of a modern prison system.
Therefore, the real issue is not whether inmates are allowed to live humanely. If the allegations of preferential treatment at the Cibonong Prison are proven, the impact is even more serious than mere damage to the institution’s image. Discriminatory treatment can destroy the sense of justice among inmates. When an individual feels that rules only apply to those without money or connections, the legitimacy of the officers will erode.
Research by Deambrogio (2025) on procedural justice within prisons shows that compliance is not formed solely by the threat of punishment. Inmates also assess whether authorities act fairly, consistently, and treat them with respect.
For these reasons, cases like this must be dealt with firmly. However, firmness against violations must go hand-in-hand with fairness in evaluating the institution. An institution trusted by the public is not one that never makes mistakes. A trusted institution is one that dares to admit its errors, opens the investigation process, punishes violations, and improves the system. The Correctional system is not an institution that is easy to love. It works in places that most of society does not wish to see. It handles people who are…