As Joko Widodo, widely known as Jokowi, prepares to step down as Indonesia’s president, the country remains one of Asia’s most important democracies. However, the promise that initially accompanied Jokowi’s rise to power in 2014 has been clouded by concerns of democratic backsliding. This shift has led many to question how a leader once celebrated for his populist approach and connection to ordinary Indonesians has overseen a period where democratic institutions have eroded, and Indonesia’s once-lauded democratic resilience has weakened.
When Jokowi was first elected in 2014, he represented a break from Indonesia’s traditional political elite. Unlike his predecessors, who were seen as deeply connected to the entrenched power structures of Jakarta, Jokowi came from outside the capital. His ascent from being a small-town mayor to the governor of Jakarta and, eventually, the president was heralded as a triumph for democracy.
His appeal was grounded in his reputation as a man of the people, a leader who understood the struggles of ordinary Indonesians. Jokowi’s populist approach was not confrontational but rather collaborative. His blusukan style, where he would visit markets and public spaces to speak directly with citizens, symbolized his commitment to listening to the people. For many, this approach was a refreshing contrast to the often aloof and elite-driven politics that had defined Indonesia since the fall of Suharto’s authoritarian regime in 1998.
Jokowi’s victory was also celebrated by Indonesia’s Reformasi movement, which had played a crucial role in ousting Suharto and pushing the country toward democracy. Reformasi supporters saw in Jokowi a leader who could continue the democratization process and strengthen Indonesia’s young and fragile institutions. In the early years of his presidency, there was hope that Jokowi would build a more responsive government and tackle the country’s persistent corruption.
However, as Jokowi’s presidency progressed, it became clear that his governance would not fulfill the democratic aspirations many had hoped for. Over the past decade, Indonesia has witnessed a significant erosion of its democratic institutions. A central feature of this backsliding has been the weakening of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), once a cornerstone of Indonesia’s fight against corruption.
The KPK, established in 2003, was hailed as one of the most effective anti-corruption bodies in Southeast Asia. Its bold actions in pursuing corrupt officials and powerful elites made it a symbol of hope for cleaner governance. But under Jokowi’s administration, the KPK’s power was dramatically reduced. Legal amendments in 2019 curtailed the agency’s independence, making it more vulnerable to political interference. Many critics viewed these changes as a calculated move to shield the political elite from scrutiny, marking a serious blow to the integrity of the anti-corruption fight in Indonesia.
In addition to undermining the KPK, Jokowi’s administration has been accused of curtailing the role of civil society and stifling dissent. One of the most troubling trends has been the increasing use of the Electronic Information and Transactions Law (UU ITE) to silence critics. The law, originally intended to regulate online interactions, has been repurposed to prosecute individuals for defamation and other charges related to free speech. This has resulted in a chilling effect on civil society, with activists, journalists, and ordinary citizens facing legal action for expressing dissenting opinions or criticizing the government.
Moreover, Indonesia’s security forces, particularly the military and police, have reasserted themselves in politics. After the end of Suharto’s rule, there was a concerted effort to depoliticize these forces, which had played a central role in maintaining his authoritarian regime. Under Jokowi, however, the military and police have regained influence, often being deployed to quell protests and suppress dissent. The government’s use of violent means to respond to demonstrations, coupled with increasing surveillance of civil society groups, has further narrowed the space for political activism.
Jokowi’s approach to governance has been characterized by a deep focus on the needs of ordinary Indonesians, particularly in terms of improving living standards. His administration has prioritized infrastructure development, healthcare, and social welfare programs, which have been popular among the public. Jokowi has consistently monitored public opinion, using polls to gauge the concerns of citizens and respond accordingly.
However, this populist approach has come at a cost. Jokowi’s vision of democracy appears to be one that is primarily concerned with delivering material improvements to citizens rather than protecting the institutional frameworks that ensure democratic governance. His focus on satisfying the immediate needs of the people has been coupled with a disregard for institutions that place checks on executive power.
For instance, his administration’s interference with the KPK, as well as his manipulation of legal institutions for political purposes, has been viewed by many as a move to consolidate power. One of the most controversial examples was the Constitutional Court’s decision in 2023 to lower the age requirement for presidential and vice-presidential candidates. The ruling allowed Jokowi’s son, Gibran Rakabuming Raka, to run for the vice presidency, fueling accusations that Jokowi was attempting to establish a political dynasty.
This manipulation of democratic institutions has led to a broader critique of Jokowi’s governance. While he has remained popular with the public, thanks in part to his economic policies, his disregard for democratic norms has raised concerns about the long-term health of Indonesia’s democracy.
As Jokowi leaves office, he passes the baton to a figure with an even more controversial history: Prabowo Subianto. A former general and defense minister under Jokowi, Prabowo has a long and troubling record of alleged human rights abuses, dating back to his role in the final years of the Suharto regime.
Prabowo was once a key figure in Suharto’s inner circle, even marrying the dictator’s daughter. During his military career, he was implicated in several human rights violations, including the abduction and torture of pro-democracy activists in the late 1990s. Although he has never been convicted of any crimes, his past continues to cast a shadow over his political career.
Despite his controversial history, Prabowo has managed to reinvent himself as a populist leader. In the past, he positioned himself as a fierce nationalist, accusing his political opponents of betraying Indonesia’s sovereignty and promising to restore the country’s greatness through strong, centralized leadership. In his most recent political incarnation, however, Prabowo has sought to soften his image, presenting himself as a jovial, grandfatherly figure and aligning closely with Jokowi.
This transformation has been politically advantageous for Prabowo, as he has been able to capitalize on Jokowi’s popularity. Despite their previous rivalry, Jokowi appointed Prabowo as defense minister in 2019, a move that surprised many but helped Prabowo gain legitimacy among Jokowi’s supporters. As Jokowi’s preferred candidate in the 2024 presidential election, Prabowo has benefited from the machinery of the state, with reports of pressure being placed on community leaders to mobilize votes in his favor.
Prabowo’s rise to the presidency raises important questions about the future of democracy in Indonesia. Given his authoritarian background and the weakening of democratic institutions under Jokowi, there are legitimate concerns that Prabowo could further erode the country’s democratic framework.
Prabowo inherits a political system where key institutions designed to check executive power have been hobbled. The KPK is a shadow of its former self, civil society faces increasing restrictions, and the military is once again playing a political role. In this environment, Prabowo may find it easy to continue the process of democratic erosion that began under Jokowi.
However, Indonesia’s democracy is not without hope. The country’s vibrant civil society, independent media, and active political opposition provide important counterbalances to the power of the executive. While these forces have been weakened, they remain resilient, and they may yet play a role in resisting further authoritarian encroachments.
As Prabowo takes office, Indonesia’s democratic future hangs in the balance. Whether the country continues down the path of democratic backsliding or experiences a resurgence of democratic values will depend on the actions of both the new administration and the broader political landscape. What is clear, however, is that the promise of Indonesia’s democratic transition is far from fulfilled, and the country’s journey toward consolidating its democracy remains uncertain.
