MBG, Dirty Hands, and the Critical Reasoning of Universities
The nation is once again faced with an irony that is difficult for common sense to accept. While the state allocates a massive budget to build the quality of future generations through the Free Nutritious Meal (MBG) Programme, the public has been shocked by legal processes involving several officials within the programme’s management circle.
This event is not merely a matter of individual issues or alleged budget misappropriation, but touches something far more fundamental: the people’s trust in public mandates. Despite the various fiscal constraints faced by the state, MBG serves as one of the most ambitious policies in the history of Indonesia’s social development. The programme is built on an undeniable idea: the quality of future human resources cannot be separated from the nutritional quality of children today.
Conceptually, MBG is a long-term investment. Various international studies show that adequate nutrition in children contributes to cognitive development, economic productivity, public health, and the nation’s future competitiveness. Therefore, when the state allocates a large budget to this programme, the public understands that this policy is intended as a foundation for human development towards Indonesia Emas 2045.
However, good policy does not automatically result in good governance. This is where the real problem begins. The various legal developments involving officials in the MBG management circle present more than just legal issues; they touch upon the public’s trust in the state. From a public perspective, the legitimacy of a policy is determined not only by its good intentions but also by the integrity of its implementation. When a programme built in the name of the people is marred by alleged malpractice, it is not just the budget system that suffers, but the moral contract between the state and society.
Corruption in social programmes has a different ethical dimension compared to corruption in other sectors. When road construction funds are misappropriated, the community loses infrastructure quality. When education funds are misappropriated, the community loses learning opportunities. However, when funds intended for meeting the basic needs of the community are misused, what is lost is not just state money, but the citizens’ right to receive the protection and welfare promised by the state.
In the context of MBG, this issue becomes increasingly sensitive as it occurs amidst various unresolved development challenges. One sector feeling the impact of budget constraints is higher education. In recent years, the state’s fiscal space to support the strengthening of universities has faced various pressures. Many state universities (PTN) are required to increase financial independence, leading to a race to increase new student enrolments as a strategy to maintain operational sustainability and institutional development.
At the same time, private universities (PTS) face significant pressure. A decrease in prospective students, demographic changes, rising educational operational costs, and increasing competition with state universities mean many PTS must struggle to maintain their institutions. Yet, facts show that more than 95 per cent of universities in Indonesia are private. For decades, PTS have been strategic partners of the state in expanding access to higher education, especially for those unable to enter state universities.
Millions of graduates who now contribute to national development emerged from the academic spaces built and managed by PTS. In other words, the sustainability of PTS is not merely an issue of educational institutions, but part of the great effort to educate the nation as mandated by the constitution.
On the other hand, many students face economic difficulties in continuing their studies. The rising cost of living, limited educational assistance, and family economic conditions cause some students to delay or even stop their education. Many universities are also still struggling with the need to improve laboratory quality, research, scientific publications, lecturer development, and digital transformation, all of which require significant budgetary support.
Therefore, every rupiah allocated by the state through the State Budget (APBN) should be treated as a public mandate that must be accounted for both morally and administratively. In this context, alleged irregularities in the management of MBG cannot be viewed as an isolated case. This issue reveals an old paradox of Indonesian development: the state is often capable of designing large and visionary programmes, but has not yet fully succeeded in building an equally strong system of integrity.
We speak of the demographic bonus, Indonesia Emas 2045, the development of superior human resources, and the increase of national competitiveness. However, all these ambitions will be difficult to achieve if public governance continues to be shadowed by corrupt behaviour that erodes public trust. Corruption is not just an economic crime; the most dangerous aspect of corruption is not the loss of state funds, but the loss of opportunities that should be enjoyed by the next generation. Every misappropriated public budget means reduced space for education, health, research, and human development.