H. DEDI WAHIDI’S PERSPECTIVE ON THE IMPACT OF TKD FUND CUTS ON REGIONAL EDUCATION
By: Adlan Daie
Political and Socio-Religious Analyst
In his remarks at the “Education Workshop” in Cirebon City (Sunday, October 19, 2025), H. Dedi Wahidi, a member of Commission X of the PKB Faction of the Indonesian House of Representatives (DPR RI), offered an interesting perspective on the state’s constitutional obligation to allocate 20% of the education budget, as mandated by Article 31, paragraph 4 of the 1945 Constitution (Amendment), which states:
“The state prioritizes the education budget at least twenty percent of the state revenue and expenditure budget and the regional revenue and expenditure budget to meet the needs of implementing national education.”
The explicit mention of a minimum 20% education budget in the national and regional budgets (APBN) in the constitution is not common in other countries. It is merely a nice touch in our constitution, and even bittersweet due to the central government’s policy of cutting regional transfer funds (TKD).
The perspective offered by H. Dedi Wahidi is a formulation that states that the total regional transfer funds (TKD), consisting of the General Allocation Fund (DAU), Special Allocation Fund (DAK), and Revenue Sharing Fund (DBH), plus Regional Original Revenue (PAD), minus expenditures on salaries, allowances, and operational efficiency.
From this perspective, the remaining 20% is budgeted for education and 80% is allocated proportionally to other sectors based on priority scale.
The above interpretation is not only within the constitutional framework but also more “honest” in interpreting the mandate of Article 31, paragraph 4 of the 1945 Constitution. It represents a budgetary policy choice that affirmatively supports the Constitution’s phrase that “the state prioritizes the education budget.” The 20% figure represents the central point of priority for the education budget mandated by the Constitution.
In other words, this is a perspective or “interpretation” of the 1945 Constitution’s mandate regarding the education budget, as a “tested” and “praised” path in the history of nations, that only education, as a systemic path, can foster vertical mobility in the quality of the nation and society.
H. Dedi Wahidi’s constitutional solution perspective was born from “Asbabun Nuzul,” a reason he “coincidentally” accompanied by the author, received a heartbreaking “confession” from H. Ronianto, S.pd., M.M., Head of the Cirebon Regency Education Office, about the impact of cuts to the Regional Leadership and Community Development (TKD) funds on the state of education in Cirebon Regency.
H. Ronianto portrayed the irony of the education budget: after deductions for salaries and allowances for civil servants (ASN) and PPPK (Employee Education Program), as well as operational costs within the education office, only 7 billion rupiah remained for the implementation of education with “mandatory” authority at the elementary and junior high levels.
This is a portrait of the irony of the education budget. In essence, it’s a collective irony experienced by nearly all regions, especially regencies/cities in Indonesia, due to the policy of cutting TKD funds. The figure of 20% of the education budget is merely a beautiful statement in the constitution, but its interpretation in policy is bitter and bitter.
If H. Dedi Wahidi’s interpretation above is not infused with state regulatory policy, or if the state does not construct alternative solutions for the education budget in regions affected by the TKD funding cuts, our education roadmap will almost certainly become increasingly “blurred” as a path for the nation’s future.
The Indonesian Education Monitoring Network (JPPI), a civil society movement, has noted five “bad” things that will threaten education due to TKD funding cuts:
Decreased education quality, increased school dropout rates (ATS), difficult access to education in the regions, mass dismissals of honorary teachers, and educational inequality.
This is the context of sociologist Seymon Martin Lept’s statement that the potential for a nation to be more prosperous and to linearly impact all aspects of its people’s quality of life depends on the average level of education.
This means that the nation’s future prosperity depends heavily on the state’s commitment to education, a “test” of the state’s adherence to the constitutional mandate that education should be allocated at least 20 percent of the national and regional budgets (APBN) and must be consistently maintained.
The nation was built on the intellectual work of the “Founding Parents,” the founding fathers of the nation, who, in addition to protecting the nation’s life, explicitly aimed to educate the nation.
This is the mandate of the preamble to the 1945 Constitution, which must be upheld in our commitment to national and state life. **
Indramayu, October 20, 2025
Wassalam
—–
