Military Involvement in Counter-Terrorism Efforts Conflicts with International Legal Principles
Jakarta — M. Isnur, Chairman of the Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI), has assessed that the proposed presidential regulation (Ranperpres) on military involvement in counter-terrorism efforts is technically inconsistent with principles of international law. Furthermore, existing Indonesian legislation already contains extensive provisions addressing terrorism across various statutes.
This assessment was presented during a public discussion at the Faculty of Law, Trisakti University on Tuesday, 26 February 2026. During the discussion, strong opposition emerged to the proposed presidential regulation on military involvement in counter-terrorism operations.
Isnur contends that if the government intends to regulate military involvement, it should be done harmoniously and consistently within existing legal frameworks. “Rather than through regulations that risk creating disharmony,” Isnur stated in a press release on Friday, 27 February 2026.
Isnur also reminded participants that in Indonesian history, military involvement in social and political matters has demonstrably hindered democratic development. Past military involvement in socio-political affairs has caused distortions in the legal system and government administration. Consequently, the military should not intervene in law enforcement mechanisms, given that the military’s character and operational systems differ fundamentally from civilian legal mechanisms.
According to Isnur, the post-reform period has witnessed a clear paradigm shift, with the TNI focused on national defence and external threats, whilst domestic security and law enforcement remain the mandate of the police.
The proposed regulation on military involvement in counter-terrorism operations appears to further entrench military influence in civilian domains, threatening the spirit of reform and democracy pursued since 1998.
Isnur also highlighted the increasingly blurred boundary between military and civilian functions in current governance. He cited several cases of military involvement in matters that should remain within the civilian domain, including the handling of small-scale commerce and involvement in civilian development projects such as the food estate in Papua. This phenomenon indicates a trend of remilitarisation across various sectors.
Erwin Natosmal, Deputy Secretary General of the Indonesian Advocates Association (IKADIN), stressed that within a civil society context, legal disputes are resolved through legal mechanisms, not through force. According to him, the civil paradigm positions law as an instrument for just conflict resolution, rather than through armed force logic.
Therefore, Erwin contends, the policy direction of the proposed regulation, which opens space for military involvement, is contrary to the spirit of problem-solving in a democratic society. “Indonesia’s current capacity remains adequate to mitigate armed conflict issues, terrorism, and other crimes through existing law enforcement mechanisms,” he stated.
Law enforcement officials, Erwin continued, remain capable of handling terrorist offences within the criminal justice system framework. Consequently, military involvement through the proposed regulation lacks clear urgency.
Erwin emphasised that there is no compelling rationale for bringing the TNI into counter-terrorism operations. The law enforcement paradigm currently employed has functioned adequately and possesses sufficient legal foundation. The proposed regulation on military involvement fails to address fundamental issues in Indonesia’s counter-terrorism approach, instead risking creating new problems in security and legal governance.