Online Petition on Surakarta Palace Dispute Draws Responses from Two Factions

The leadership polemic of the Keraton Kasunanan Surakarta Hadiningrat has returned to public attention following the emergence of an online petition on change.org titled ‘Ungkap Kebenaran untuk Akhiri Polemik Keraton Surakarta’ (Reveal the Truth to End the Surakarta Palace Polemic). The petition, created on behalf of the Aliansi Budaya Indonesia, has gone viral in recent days. It requests the government to facilitate an objective and transparent resolution of the dispute based on law, custom, history, and accountable evidence. The petition is addressed to the President, the Minister of Culture, the Minister of Home Affairs, the Governor of Central Java, the Mayor of Surakarta, the Indonesian House of Representatives, the Regional Representative Council, and the National Commission on Human Rights. The initiators also propose the formation of an independent team to examine historical documents, genealogy, and various pieces of evidence related to the palace leadership polemic. The petition even opens the possibility of using scientific methods, including DNA testing, if deemed relevant and agreed upon by all parties. The petition’s emergence has drawn different responses from the two factions that have been in dispute over the leadership of the Surakarta Palace. Pangageng Paran Parakarsa Sri Susuhunan Paku Buwono XIV, KGPH Puruboyo, KPAAd Nur Wijaya Adiningrat, stated that the succession mechanism within the Surakarta Palace is monarchical and cannot be equated with a democratic system. ‘This is a monarchy, not a democracy. In any monarchy in the world, when the king dies, the crown prince automatically ascends the throne,’ said Nur Wijaya when met by journalists at the Surakarta Palace on Saturday, 25 July 2026. According to him, the palace as a customary institution has succession procedures regulated by monarchical tradition. Therefore, the change of throne is not carried out through an election or deliberation mechanism like a democratic political system. He said opinions from various parties can still be conveyed within the palace environment, but the highest decision remains in the hands of the king. ‘One may express opinions, but the decision remains with the king,’ he stated. Meanwhile, the Lembaga Dewan Adat (LDA), which supports KGPH Hangabehi as SISKS Paku Buwono XIV, stated that it appreciates the public’s concern for the future of the Surakarta Palace. Pengageng Sasana Wilapa from the Hangabehi faction and Chairperson of the LDA, GKR Koes Moertiyah Wandansari or Gusti Moeng, said the increasing public attention shows the palace still holds an important position as a centre of Javanese culture. ‘The Keraton Surakarta Hadiningrat is a historical mandate, a cultural mandate, and a national mandate that has been passed down across generations. Therefore, safeguarding the palace is not only the responsibility of the palace’s extended family but also a shared responsibility of the government and all Indonesian people,’ said Gusti Moeng in a written statement received by Tempo on Friday, 24 July 2026. Gusti Moeng assessed that the resolution of the polemic should not be directed at determining a winning or losing party. More importantly, according to them, is to provide legal certainty, customary certainty, historical certainty, and institutional certainty through an objective, transparent, fair, and accountable process. In her statement, Gusti Moeng mentioned that the LDA is part of the institutional structure of the Keraton Surakarta Hadiningrat and has a legal basis. They refer to the Decree of the Minister of Culture Number 8 of 2026, which regulates that the implementation of protection, development, and utilisation of the Surakarta Hadiningrat Palace Cultural Heritage Area is carried out through coordination with Pengageng Sasana Wilapa, the Chairperson of the Lembaga Dewan Adat, and the palace’s extended family. Responding to the DNA testing proposal listed in the petition, the LDA stated that a scientific approach can be considered as long as it is carried out professionally, independently, objectively, and with the consent of the parties while respecting human rights and privacy rights. However, according to the LDA, the results of a DNA test cannot be used as the sole basis for resolving the palace leadership polemic. The results must be combined with historical facts, genealogy, customary rules, valid documents, and applicable legal provisions. The LDA stated it is ready to participate if the government deems it necessary to facilitate dialogue or a resolution mechanism involving various stakeholders. The institution also invites the palace’s extended family, the government, cultural observers, academics, traditional leaders, mass media, and the public to make the increasing public attention a momentum to strengthen reconciliation and the preservation of the Surakarta Palace.