Palace to Study Constitutional Court Ruling on Separating Free Nutritious Meals Budget from Education Funds

Minister of State Secretary Prasetyo Hadi responded to the Constitutional Court’s ruling that the Free Nutritious Meal (MBG) programme budget must be given its own post or separated from the education fund starting in 2028. Prasetyo said his side would study the ruling.

“Thank you, we have also received information that the Constitutional Court has made a decision. But indeed, firstly, because we are currently out of town, we have not yet officially received a copy of the decision,” said Prasetyo aboard the Nusantara Explorer train in Central Java on Thursday (30/7/2026).

“And of course, whatever the Constitutional Court’s decision is, we certainly respect it and will study it,” he continued.

Prasetyo also touched on the issue that the budget does not only involve the government, but also the House of Representatives (DPR). He opened the possibility of discussing the matter further with the DPR.

“Because in any case, when it concerns budget matters, we certainly do not stand alone. The budget is drawn up together with our colleagues in the DPR. So please give us time,” he said.

Previously, the Constitutional Court granted a lawsuit filed by a number of citizens demanding that the education budget not be used for the MBG programme. The Court asked the government to create a separate budget for MBG in 2028.

“Granting the petitioners’ request in part,” said Chief Justice Suhartoyo when delivering the ruling at a session on Thursday (30/7).

The Court also declared that Article 22 paragraph (3) of Law Number 17 of 2025 on the 2026 State Revenue and Expenditure Budget contradicts the 1945 Constitution. The Court’s ruling reads:

“Declares that the Elucidation of Article 22 paragraph (3) of Law Number 17 of 2025 on the 2026 State Revenue and Expenditure Budget (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Year 2025 Number 179, Supplement to the State Gazette Number 7144) does not contradict the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia of 1945 and has conditionally binding legal force insofar as it is interpreted as ‘applying only to the State Revenue and Expenditure Budget for Fiscal Year 2026, so that for subsequent fiscal years the budget for the nutritious meal programme that is not a core component of education shall be separated from or shall not form part of the operational budget for the provision of education, and such separation shall apply no later than in the State Revenue and Expenditure Budget for Fiscal Year 2028 or no more than 2 (two) years since this ruling is pronounced’.”

In its considerations, the Court stated that the purpose of the MBG programme is to reduce stunting rates and other health problems. Therefore, the Court viewed that MBG should have its own budget allocation.

“The stated purpose of MBG as a real solution to stunting and other health problems resulting from the state’s uneven fulfilment is a broad purpose, so according to the Court it must be given its own separate budget allocation in the state budget, rather than being placed as an extension of the operational definition of the provision of education,” the Constitutional Court judge said.