When Power Controls Information

In modern politics, information is not merely a collection of data; it is a resource that can determine bargaining power, influence decisions and shape policy. The right information at the right time can determine the direction of investment, open up business opportunities and even affect bargaining positions in decision-making. When access to information is concentrated among certain groups, the issue touches on something more fundamental: economic justice and who truly benefits from state power.

In business, information can determine whether an enterprise succeeds. An entrepreneur who knows about plans to build a toll road in a particular area, for example, can prepare early by buying land, building a warehouse or opening a distribution centre. Other businesses without that information may only learn of the opportunity after land prices have risen. This illustrates how information can create an economic advantage, particularly when access to it is unequal.

The growth of the digital economy has further strengthened information’s position as a strategic resource. Data is not merely administrative material; it is also a basis for decision-making, product development and market control. MacFeely et al. (2022) explain the importance of international data governance, since cross-border data flows are linked to economic opportunities, security and sovereignty. Strategic information must therefore be managed transparently and responsibly.

Oligarchy and unequal economic opportunity

The issue of information leads to a discussion of oligarchy: the concentration of economic and political power in a limited group able to influence policy and the distribution of resources. In Indonesia, the relationship between business interests and political power is an important subject in political-economy studies. Damanik et al. (2025) examine business-political ties and conflicts of interest in Indonesia’s policymaking process.

In government procurement, for example, companies should ideally compete on the basis of quality, price and capability. But if proximity to policymakers matters more than competence, small and medium-sized enterprises may lose out. Similar conditions can arise in mining, plantations and investment if permits are not issued transparently.

This phenomenon is connected to rent-seeking: the pursuit of profit through influence over policy or privileged access to resources, rather than by increasing productivity. Tambunan (2023) discusses how oligarchic interests can influence Indonesia’s legislative process. The issue is not a person’s wealth in itself, but the possibility of using economic power to secure preferential treatment and restrict competition.

Between profit and trust

From the perspective of Islamic entrepreneurship, economic activity is not solely about making a profit; it must also be grounded in honesty, fairness, responsibility and the public good. Javaid (2021) emphasises an entrepreneurial orientation that is not centred only on profit, but also on service and the common interest.

The principle of amanah, or trust, teaches that authority and resources must be used in accordance with the responsibilities attached to them. An entrepreneur managing investors’ funds must not use them for personal purposes without consent. Similarly, officials with access to state information must exercise their authority in accordance with the law and the public interest. Ahmed and Aassouli (2022) discuss the relevance of Islamic ethics in building trust and responsible relationships in entrepreneurial activity.

The principle of justice (’adalah) also demands equal economic opportunity. MSMEs should be able to compete for government contracts on the basis of quality and capability, rather than personal connections. Meanwhile, the principle of maslahah, or public benefit, reminds us that investment success cannot be measured solely by corporate profits, but also by job creation, local employment and benefits to communities. Economic gains must therefore go hand in hand with social responsibility.

Geopolitics and economic sovereignty

These issues also have an international dimension. Indonesia’s strategic position, natural resources and large domestic market give it interests and ties with various global economic powers. International influence does not always operate through military force; it can also take the form of investment, trade, technology, financing and security co-operation.

For instance, foreign investment in mineral-processing industries can increase value added and create jobs. However, the government must ensure technology transfer, involvement of local suppliers and environmental protection. Likewise, the use of digital technology from international companies must be accompanied by safeguards for strategic national data.

Economic sovereignty does not mean shutting the country off from foreign investment; it means being able to set the direction of development in line with national interests. International co-operation should strengthen the economy, not diminish the independence of state policy.

Returning power to the public interest

These issues demonstrate the importance of building transparent and accountable governance. The use of technology and strategic information must have a legal basis, independent oversight mechanisms and clear accountability. At the same time, the government should widen economic opportunities through transparent procurement, access to finance for MSMEs, simpler licensing and fair competition.

Businesses should also foster a culture based on innovation, quality, professionalism and trust, rather than relying on proximity to power. A relationship between government and business remains necessary, but it must be conducted openly and deliver benefits to society.

Ultimately, oligarchy, control of information and geopolitical influence must be considered in terms of how power and resources are managed. Power is a trust; economic activity must be founded on justice; and development must serve the public good. A country’s success is measured not only by how much wealth it generates, but by how fairly that wealth is managed, how widely its benefits are shared and how faithfully public trust is upheld in the exercise of power.