Recalibrating the Ministry of Human Rights: Between Expectations and Reality

A room with a still-damaged ceiling serves as a temporary office. In the corners, building tools are still stored. The sounds of renovation echo here and there. Several employees in neat uniforms manage administrative files, while others prepare for dissemination events. This room, currently being refurbished, holds the story of a new beginning. According to local staff, the Regional Office of the Ministry of Human Rights in East Java recently received a ‘blessing’. After coordinating with the East Java Provincial Government, the regional office was loaned a previously unused official residence belonging to the Deputy Governor. The building is now being renovated to serve as a proper workspace. This converted official residence is a symbol of a transition phase. It is a snapshot of one of the twenty Regional Offices of the Ministry of Human Rights established following the ministry’s formation at the end of 2024. With approximately 1,300 employees spread from the central office to the regions, the Ministry of Human Rights appears ‘small’ when compared to other bureaucratic giants. This number of human resources is also far from ideal for carrying out a mandate that is inherently cross-sectoral and touches all aspects of governance. Yet, amidst these limitations, the Ministry of Human Rights is trying to build its institutional foundation and strengthen regulations to advance human rights civilization in Indonesia. Public expectations for this ministry are already very high. On the other hand, building an effective new institution requires time, resources, and a complex process of institutional strengthening. Herein lies the dual challenge: the new ministry must be agile externally while simultaneously getting its internal affairs in order. The domestic affairs currently being organized are actually a microcosm of a much larger concept. In the human rights regime, the state is always positioned as the primary actor bearing human rights obligations (duty bearer). The question then arises: who exactly is the ‘state’ in the context of fulfilling these obligations? International law views the state not as an abstract, floating concept, but as a legal entity represented by the government. Thus, when discussing the state’s obligations in the field of human rights, we are actually highlighting how government institutions work as the tangible representation of the state apparatus. In Indonesia’s constitutional system, the Constitution stipulates that the President holds governmental power. Naturally, the President does not work alone in running the government but is assisted by state ministers who manage specific affairs. It is within this context that the establishment of the Ministry of Human Rights finds strong theoretical and constitutional justification. Through Presidential Regulation Number 156 of 2024, this new ministry is tasked with organizing governmental affairs in the field of human rights. This step is also in line with the mandate of Article 28I paragraph (4) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, which affirms that the protection, advancement, enforcement, and fulfilment of human rights are the responsibility of the state, especially the government. It must be underscored that the phrase ‘especially the government’ indicates that the government bears the primary responsibility. Many people then ask: what exactly is the difference between the Ministry of Human Rights and the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM)? This is where the beauty of our constitutional system lies. Although both operate in the field of human rights, these two institutions have different characters, functions, and bases of legitimacy. The Ministry of Human Rights sits within the executive branch as a government human rights focal point, while Komnas HAM stands independently outside the government structure as a state auxiliary body. This is not a question of which institution is more important, but rather a relationship of complementary institutions. Lately, many journalists have been asking the Minister of Human Rights for responses regarding various alleged human rights violations that have drawn public attention.