MPR Study Body Discusses Strengthening People's Sovereignty with Academics

The MPR Study Body held a Focus Group Discussion (FGD) themed ‘People’s Sovereignty in the Perspective of Pancasila Democracy’. The FGD was led by the Chair of the MPR Study Body, Yasonna H. Laoly. In his introduction, Yasonna stated that the FGD is part of the MPR Study Body’s efforts to gather academic views and public aspirations regarding the implementation of the constitution and the future of Indonesian democracy. “The results of various studies and aspiration-gathering forums are expected to serve as initial material to build momentum for the MPR to hold a Constitutional Conference in the future,” Yasonna said in a written statement on Tuesday (14/07/2026). The FGD, which took place at the Aryaduta Hotel in Bandung on Monday (13/7), discussed the challenges of implementing people’s sovereignty amidst a procedural democracy that has not been fully accompanied by meaningful public participation, accountability of power, and the realisation of social justice. The Constitutional Conference is envisioned as a national forum bringing together state institutions, universities, civil society organisations, strategic groups, the younger generation, regional communities, and various elements of society to evaluate the implementation of the constitution and formulate directions for strengthening Indonesia’s state administration. Present as speakers were Prof. Dr. Caroline Paskarina, S.IP, M.Si (Professor of Contemporary Political Science, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Padjadjaran), Ari Ganjar Herdiansah, Ph.D (Head of the Postgraduate Political Science Programme, Universitas Padjadjaran), and Bilal Dewansyah, S.H., M.H (Department of Constitutional Law and Centre for State Policy Studies, Faculty of Law, Universitas Padjadjaran). In her presentation, speaker Caroline Paskarina revealed that while elections and regional elections have relatively strong constitutional and procedural foundations, people’s sovereignty has not been fully realised substantively due to the dominance of party elites in candidate selection, high political costs, money politics, candidates’ dependence on financiers, and the weak relationship between representatives and their constituents after elections. She explained that the problem with Indonesian democracy is not the lack of democratic institutions and procedures, but rather the gap between these procedures and the people’s ability to genuinely influence, oversee, and correct the exercise of state power. According to Caroline, the people should not only be present as voters on polling day. People’s sovereignty must operate before, during, and after elections. The relationship between the people and their representatives needs to shift from a personal and transactional one to a programmatic relationship based on service, public policy, and accountability. Caroline also highlighted the weakness of public participation in policy and law-making. Public involvement is often treated as an administrative formality, rather than a process that genuinely influences the substance of decisions. “Therefore, the policy process must apply the principle of meaningful participation, namely the right of the public to be heard, the right for their opinions to be considered, and the right to receive an explanation regarding the acceptance or rejection of their input,” she said. Meanwhile, speaker Ari Ganjar Herdiansah highlighted the increasing mobilisation of students and the younger generation in recent years. According to him, demonstrations and digital movements should be read as indicators that formal channels for conveying aspirations are not working optimally. “The main problem with public movements is not a lack of participation, but the weak process of converting aspirations into institutional responses and policy corrections. People’s sovereignty must work through a clear chain, from citizens’ voices, to public agenda setting, deliberation, institutional response, and policy correction,” Ari explained. He cautioned that the restlessness of the younger generation can stem from everyday issues, such as difficulty finding jobs, rising education costs, economic pressures, and declining trust in institutions. This restlessness should not be underestimated or dismissed as movements controlled by certain parties. Bilal Dewansyah highlighted the strong dominance of political parties and factions within the representative system. “Legislative members are formally elected by the people, but in practice they are often more dependent on party and faction decisions than on the aspirations of their constituents,” he said. According to Bilal, this condition can weaken the accountability of representatives while opening up the risk of policy capture by interest groups. The influence of oligarchy, high political costs, and the dependence on election financing are issues that need to be part of a serious evaluation of Indonesia’s democratic system. Bilal also stressed the importance of safeguarding academic freedom and space for public criticism. “Criticism of state policy must be placed as part of democratic control, not as a threat to be met with intimidation or excessive use of legal instruments,” he asserted. He continued that universities can serve as a moral force and an informal check on power through research, legal studies, public education, and data-based criticism. Digital spaces must also be maintained as places for the exchange of ideas and the channelling of aspirations, even though the quality of deliberation is not always ideal.