REGIONAL AUTONOMY IS BEING REDUCED RIGHT AND LEFT, SYSTEMIC SCENARIO FOR THE 2029 REGIONAL ELECTION RETURNS TO THE DPRD
By: H. Adlan Daie
Political and Socio-Religious Analyst
Regional autonomy is being reduced “right and left.” From the “right,” regional authority has been significantly curtailed, including due to the enactment of the “Job Creation” Law. A number of licensing authorities, previously vested in regional governments, have now been transferred to the “central government.”
From the “left,” regional transfer funds (TKD) have been cut, with an average of 75% of regional fiscal capacity dependent on TKD. Regions can only make promises, but their fiscal space is being curtailed. Regions are clamoring to “clash” with the “central” government, but what can they do?
Are the “right and left” cuts mentioned above a systemic scenario to return regional elections to non-direct elections, namely to elections by the Regional People’s Representative Council (DPRD), as President Prabowo Subianto frequently suggests in various public forums?
“Trust me, future regional elections will almost certainly, I say, almost certainly return to being elected by the DPRD,” said Bahlil Lahadalia at an official Golkar Party event in Sulawesi, posted on TikTok (“Hot Topic”, 2/11/2025).
Bahlil’s statement above is clearly not “OMON OMON.” He is not only a minister but also the chairman of the Golkar Party, a supporter of President Prabowo. The regional election scenario he believes in is surely the result of political discussions within a “limited group,” a very limited group within the President’s inner circle.
Even the cuts to regional autonomy don’t stop there. Currently, as Prof. Djohermansyah, Professor of the National Institute of Public Works (IPDN) and former Director General of Regional Autonomy, is currently formulating a revision to the Civil Servant Law, which will transfer all echelons I and II in the regions to the central government, no longer under the jurisdiction of regional heads.
Furthermore, when regional government funds were cut, there was a surge in budget allocations for ministries and institutions (K/L) to strengthen their roles in regional development.
This is clearly a deliberate takeover of regional policy space—if not a distrust of the central government toward the regions.
It is ironic that regional heads are directly elected at such high political and social costs, yet they lack authority and have limited fiscal space, making it difficult to execute campaign promises. They can only pile up “false promises” to the people, while what they promised is not within their authority.
On the other hand, it must be acknowledged that direct regional elections, with all their potential for social conflict, do not always produce elected leaders with adequate competence and authority as “regulators.” Often, those elected are leaders who lack the ability to regulate but have a surplus as “entertainers.”
The difference between the two is simple but fundamental. “Regulatory” leaders possess the competence to “clean up” with performance standards based on rationality, fairness, efficiency, and measurability.
Meanwhile, “entertaining” leaders are merely skilled at honing their skills in entertaining lies, taking selfies on social media, “scheming” and being unclear about the measures of technocratic work they intend to achieve, and are often involved in corruption through various methods.
This is the problem related to regional elections, where the revised bill, which coincides with the general election bill, will be implemented in 2026. Meaningful public participation is crucial to produce a design for regional election regulations that are accountable and transparent, and capable of serving as a selection instrument for political leaders with high competence and integrity.
In the author’s perspective, “directly elected” regional elections are the ideal choice within the principle of government decentralization to strengthen the legitimacy of regional autonomy, but they must employ a recruitment pattern that produces credible “regulatory” leaders with sufficient authority and fiscal capacity within the region.
The bitter alternative: if the reduction of authority and TKD continues under central control, then elections by the Regional People’s Representative Council (DPRD) are the rational option. In other words, what’s the point of direct regional elections, with their high political and social costs, but with such little authority and funding to implement campaign promises?
This means that when the central government retains control over almost all authority and fiscal instruments, regional autonomy remains a mere name, an administrative procedure devoid of substantive meaning. Decentralization is an illusion, and direct regional elections are simply a “wasteful” option. **
Indramayu, November 7, 2025
—–
