Purbaya Emphasises Danantara's Role in KSSK is Advisory, Not Decision-Making
Danantara’s input is considered necessary for regulators to obtain additional information regarding business conditions, especially in formulating policies.
KOMPAS/DIMAS WARADITYA NUGRAHA
By Dimas Waraditya Nugraha
28 Jul 2026 20:07 WIB · Ekonomi & Bisnis
JAKARTA, KOMPAS — The involvement of the Investment Management Agency Daya Anagata Nusantara or Danantara in the coordination meeting of the Financial System Stability Committee or KSSK is beginning to change the coordination pattern of the forum that safeguards national financial stability.
The government ensures that Danantara only plays a role in providing input and does not have the authority in decision-making. However, Danantara’s involvement in the financial stability oversight forum raises questions about the potential overlap of mandates between regulators and state investment institutions.
Danantara made its first appearance at the KSSK coordination meeting in Jakarta on Tuesday (28/7/2026), after President Prabowo Subianto directed that the investment management body be involved in the KSSK coordination. The government stated that Danantara’s presence is necessary to provide a business perspective so that the economic policies formulated by regulators are more in line with field conditions.
The Minister of Finance and also the Chair of the Financial System Stability Committee (KSSK), Purbaya Yudhi Sadewa, stated that Danantara was present as an invited party in the KSSK meeting and does not have voting rights. According to him, the decisions of the KSSK remain the authority of the four members of the forum, namely the Ministry of Finance, Bank Indonesia (BI), the Financial Services Authority (OJK), and the Deposit Insurance Corporation (LPS).
“Danantara’s position in this meeting is as an invitee. We are all regulators. If the meeting is only among regulators, sometimes we want to hear direct input from business actors who are indeed running large-scale businesses,” said Purbaya after the meeting.
According to Purbaya, input from Danantara is necessary for regulators to obtain additional information regarding the business environment, particularly in formulating policies that impact the economy.
“Until now, they have provided input, and it is very useful for us to see the real conditions in the business world. As regulators, we sometimes view issues from a regulatory perspective. Therefore, Danantara enriches us with additional information from the perspective of business actors,” he said.
He ensured that the involvement of Danantara does not alter the decision-making mechanism within the KSSK. The government also stated that the involvement of parties outside the KSSK members is permitted based on Law Number 4 of 2023 concerning the Development and Strengthening of the Financial Sector (P2SK).
“In the law, it is indeed permitted to be attended by other institutions or invited parties. Therefore, KSSK may invite parties outside of KSSK. However, in decision-making, Danantara will not have voting rights,” said Purbaya.
In the future, the government plans to involve Danantara in the regular coordination of KSSK. According to Purbaya, this step is a directive from the President to ensure that policies across various economic sectors can operate more harmoniously.
However, this routine involvement has drawn the attention of several economists because KSSK has a different mandate from Danantara. KSSK was established as a coordination forum among authorities to maintain the stability of the financial system, while Danantara has the mandate to manage strategic investments and optimize state assets.
Conflict of interest
The Executive Director of the Center of Economic and Law Studies (Celios), Bhima Yudhistira, stated that the involvement of Danantara is still acceptable as long as it is limited to providing information without participating in the decision-making process.
However, according to Bhima, issues will arise if Danantara begins to have influence in the decisions of the KSSK. This is because the forum has the mandate to maintain the stability of the financial system through coordination among authorities with public authority.
According to him, Danantara has a different character as it is an investment institution that also has interests in business development and asset optimization. This condition has the potential to create conflicts of interest if it becomes too involved in policy discussions.
“If Danantara is able to intervene in every KSSK meeting, there is concern that when Bank Indonesia raises interest rates to maintain the stability of the rupiah or issues other monetary policies, it will be perceived that Danantara does not support its priority programs,” said Bhima.
He assessed that this condition could place BI in a dilemma in carrying out its mandate to maintain monetary stability. Moreover, the involvement of Danantara occurred while BI still did not have a definitive governor following the resignation of Perry Warjiyo.
According to Bhima, the independence of the central bank is one of the factors that determines the credibility of monetary policy in the eyes of the market. If the market perceives interference from non-regulatory institutions in the financial stability forum, the perception of risk may increase.
“This situation could actually lead to a decline in investor confidence as they observe that the monetary sector is beginning to be intervened by institutions that are not actually regulators of the financial sector,” he stated.
In addition to the risks to the independence of BI, Bhima also highlighted the position of Danantara, which has its own financing instruments, such as the Patriot Bond and Merah Putih Bond. According to him, this condition needs to be taken into account when regulating the limits of Danantara’s involvement in KSSK.
Meanwhile, economist from Andalas University, Syafruddin Karimi, believes that the presence of Danantara in the KSSK can still be justified as long as it is placed