Saiful Mujani's Explanation on Why the President Needs to Be Removed
Professor of Political Science at Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta, Saiful Mujani, outlined the key arguments underpinning his view that the president needs to be removed. He presented this during a discussion series titled ‘Politics and Academic Freedom’ on Thursday, 23 April 2026.
“Why remove the president? There are several arguments I want to highlight here,” he stated in his presentation at UIN Jakarta on Thursday.
Saiful’s arguments stem from suspected violations of the Basic Law (UUD) and MPR Decrees (Tap MPR), which he deems to have systemic impacts on public policy. He emphasised that the normative basis for assessing the president’s actions refers to the oath of office.
“The president’s oath serves as the constitutional foundation for determining whether violations have occurred,” Saiful said.
He identified indications of neglect regarding Tap MPR No. XI/MPR/1998 on Clean and Corruption-Free State Administration (free from Corruption, Collusion, and Nepotism). In this context, Saiful cited the appointment of Thomas Djiwandono as Deputy Governor of Bank Indonesia. According to him, Thomas lacks a career background in the Ministry of Finance or fiscal fields.
Additionally, he raised concerns about the appointment of Hashim Djojohadikusumo as the president’s envoy for energy and climate, which he views as posing a conflict of interest. “These two cases are sufficient to say that Prabowo proposed, approved, pushed for, and appointed his family to public positions,” he said.
Criticism of Constitutional Direction and Democracy
Saiful also spotlighted Prabowo’s statements on “Indonesian-style democracy”. He assessed this concept as linked to the idea of reverting to the original 1945 Constitution before amendments.
He referenced Prabowo’s statements supporting a return to the original 1945 UUD, as also reflected in the political vision of the Gerindra Party.
“If we return to the original 1945 UUD, the highest state institution would be the MPR, and the president would be elected by the MPR, not directly by the people,” he said.
Saiful views this situation as potentially stunting democracy by opening avenues for executive dominance over legislative institutions.
Policies Deemed Contrary to the Constitution
In his presentation, Saiful criticised several government policies he considers contrary to the UUD. He exemplified this with Prabowo’s statements on the potential recognition of Israel as a sovereign state.
According to him, such a policy should be discussed with the DPR as it pertains to foreign relations, and it is deemed contrary to the principles in the Preamble of the 1945 UUD that reject colonialism.
Saiful also highlighted the involvement of active military personnel in civilian positions. He mentioned the appointment of several high-ranking TNI officers to non-military roles, including assigning active generals to special positions that he believes do not align with the TNI Law.
Furthermore, he criticised the formation of Territorial Infantry Development Battalions (Yonif TP) in various regions, which he sees as expanding the military’s role into civilian domains. “This violates the principle that the TNI may not enter civilian territories except under certain conditions,” he said.
Spotlight on Government Programmes
Saiful also examined several government programmes such as Free Nutritious Meals (MBG), Merah Putih Cooperatives, and the establishment of development battalions. He assessed these programmes as lacking strong legal foundations, being based merely on presidential instructions.
According to him, these programmes represent forms of the political practice known as “Gentong Babi”, namely using state budgets to build political support bases. “It’s just breeding voters,” he said.
He argued that the MBG programme’s target of reaching tens of millions of recipients is not entirely based on real needs, referencing nutrition experts’ views that the primary targets should be more limited to vulnerable groups such as pregnant women and toddlers.
Decline in Democracy and Economy Quality
In terms of democracy, Saiful cited findings from Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) showing a decline in Indonesia’s democracy quality. He noted that Indonesia’s democracy score has been in the low range in recent years.
He also linked this to tendencies of weakening regional autonomy, marked by reduced budget transfers from the central government to regions. According to Saiful, this condition could breed dissatisfaction in the regions and impact national stability.
In the economic sphere, he quoted results from a study by the Institute for Economic and Social Research at the Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Indonesia (LPEM UI), involving around 100 economists. “Almost all economists assess that the economic condition under the current administration has weakened,” Saiful said.
He mentioned indicators of weakening including declining foreign investment, rising national debt approaching Rp10,000 trillion, and a debt-to-GDP ratio of around 40 percent.
Statements Deemed Unpresidential
Saiful also spotlighted the president’s public statements, which he considers not to reflect state ethics. He exemplified this with statements labelling observers as parties unhappy with government successes, and accusations against demonstrators as perpetrators of rebellion or terror.
According to him, such statements can be categorised as “disgraceful acts” under Article 7A of the UUD. “A president must not make statements that demean groups of society or threaten freedom of opinion,” he said.
Saiful emphasised that all his views are presented in an academic context and freedom of expression within the campus environment. “This is part of academic freedom. I am presenting it as knowledge, not practice,” he said.
The founder of Saiful Mujani Research and Consulting (SMRC) has become a topic of discussion due to his statements regarding President Prabowo Subianto. During a halal bihalal event titled “Before Observers Are Silenced”, Saiful stated that