Rejecting the TNI Bill, 29,554 Citizens Have Signed an Online Petition

JAKARTA, KOMPAS – Opposition to the proposed approval of the revision of the TNI Law into legislation at the Parliament Building in Jakarta this afternoon continues to grow. This is evident not only from demonstrations by students and civil society groups at the Parliament Building and in several cities but also from activity in the online sphere. This is reflected in the 29,554 citizens who have already signed an online petition rejecting the Draft Law or RUU TNI.

Dozens of citizens have signed an online petition rejecting the TNI Bill since the petition was launched on March 16 or four days ago, on the change.org page. The number of petition signatories is still likely to increase because the petition has not been closed. The petition was initiated by Imparsial, a civil society organization that has focused on human rights issues, including reforms in the security sector.

In the online petition, Imparsial also mentioned 174 figures and 186 institutions that supported the petition. Among the figures listed as supporters are human rights activists Nursyahbani Katjasungkana and Usman Hamid, academics Bivitri Susanti and Feri Amsari, as well as artists such as writer Ayu Utami and artist Butet Kartaredjasa. As for the supporting institutions, most are civil society groups, in addition to student organizations.

Imparsial as the petition launcher also explained the reason for launching the petition entitled "Reject the Return of Dual Function through the Revision of the TNI Law".

According to Imparsial, the government submitted the List of Problem Inventory (DIM) for the TNI Bill to the DPR on March 11, 2025. The DIM is said to be problematic. There are articles that would restore militarism (TNI's Dual Function) in Indonesia.

"We believe the agenda to revise the TNI Law lacks the urgency for transforming TNI into a professional force. Instead, it will weaken military professionalism. As a state defense instrument, TNI is trained, educated, and prepared for war, not for non-defense functions such as occupying civilian positions," the petition stated.

In the context of security sector reform, the government and the House of Representatives should promote the agenda of military judicial reform through the revision of Law No. 31/1997 on Military Courts. The revision of this law is more important than the Military Bill, as this agenda is a constitutional obligation of the state to uphold the principle of equality before the law for all citizens, without exception. Military judicial reform is mandated by MPR Decree No. VII of 2000 and Law No. 34/2004 on the Armed Forces.

Imparsial, together with the Civil Society Coalition for Security Reform, also assessed that the Draft Law on the Armed Forces would reinstate the dual function of the military, whereby active military personnel occupy civilian positions. The expansion of active military placements is inconsistent with the principles of military professionalism and poses risks such as the exclusion of civilians from civilian positions, strengthening military dominance in the civilian sphere, and triggering dual policies and loyalties. Additionally, it involves seizing civilian positions and marginalizing civil servants and women in accessing strategic roles.

Instead of revising the Military Law (UU TNI), Imparsial demands that various violations of the Military Law over the years be evaluated and rectified. "We urge active military personnel occupying civilian positions outside those stipulated in Article 47, Paragraph 2 of the Military Law to immediately resign (take early retirement). For years, many active military personnel have held civilian positions without resigning first," the petition stated.

Moreover, all collaborations involving the military, based on various memorandums of understanding that allow the military to enter civilian domains under the pretext of military operations other than war, need to be reviewed as they are not in line with the Military Law. The involvement of the military in operations other than war can only be carried out based on a political decision by the state, not through memorandums of understanding as stipulated in Article 7, Paragraph 3 of the Military Law.

Even more dangerous, the TNI Bill also intends to revise the clause on military involvement in military operations other than war without the need for DPR approval. The clause in the TNI Bill, military operations other than war are sufficiently regulated in Government Regulations. In fact, such operations are included in the state's political policy, namely the President with consideration from the DPR as regulated by Article 7 paragraph 3 of the TNI Law.

"The TNI Bill wants to eliminate the role of parliament as a representative of the people. This will create a conflict of authority or overlap with other institutions in dealing with domestic problems. Implicitly, the change in the article is a form of takeover of the authority of the people's representatives by the TNI in military operations other than war and eliminates civilian control," said Imparsial again.

The TNI Bill is also considered to only legitimize the mobilization and expansion of the involvement of TNI soldiers in domestic issues such as Free Nutritious Meals (MBG), distribution of LPG gas, food security, guarding oil palm plantations, implementing National Strategic Projects (PSN) as well as regulating and guarding forest areas and even managing the Hajj pilgrimage.

"We reject the TNI Bill and the DIM of the TNI Bill submitted by the Government to the DPR because they contain problematic articles and have the potential to restore the dual function of the TNI and militarism in Indonesia," wrote Imparsial.

We actually urge the Government and the DPR to modernize defense equipment, ensure that the TNI is adaptive to external threats, improve the welfare of TNI soldiers and pay attention to gender balance in the TNI organization which includes increasing the representation of women in various strategic positions, eliminating structural barriers in military careers, and guaranteeing a safe and discrimination-free work environment in order to realize the professionalism of our TNI as a national defense tool," Imparsial wrote again.

For your information, the discussion of the TNI Bill by Commission I of the DPR and government representatives has been going fast since about two weeks ago. Commission I of the DPR and government representatives then took a level I decision on the TNI Bill on Tuesday (18/3/2025). Furthermore, today, the TNI Bill is scheduled to be discussed at the DPR Plenary Meeting to request approval for ratification into law. If approved, then all that remains is for President Prabowo Subianto to ratify it.

Regarding the plan to ratify the TNI Bill, the Indonesian Center for Law and Policy Studies (PSHK) provided three notes. First, PSHK assessed that the TNI Bill was not valid as a priority bill in the 2025 National Legislation Program (Prolegnas).

Researcher at the Center for Indonesian Law and Policy Studies (PSHK) Fajri Nursyamsi said that the TNI Bill was passed as a priority bill in the 2025 Prolegnas in a Plenary Meeting on February 18, 2025, which had not included it on the agenda from the start. Changes to the agenda or meeting agenda were not made through the mechanism in accordance with Article 290 paragraph (2) of DPR Regulation Number 1 of 2020 concerning DPR Rules of Procedure (Tatib DPR), namely that changes to the meeting agenda must be submitted in writing two days before the meeting is held.

Then the TNI Bill was said to have been decided to be included in the 2025 Prolegnas without any consideration from the DPR Legislation Body (as regulated in Article 66 letter f of the DPR Tatib). This consideration is important because it needs to be proven whether the revision of the current TNI Law is more urgent than the agenda of other priority bills such as the mandate to establish the Military Justice Law, the Asset Confiscation Bill, or the Customary Law Community Bill; so that changes must be made to the 2025 Prolegnas. Consideration is needed to be the basis for decision making in order to achieve the principle of accountability.

The 2025 revised Prolegnas that included the TNI Bill also did not go through socialization by the DPR Legislative Body in accordance with its duties in Article 66 letter l of the DPR Tatib. This is detrimental to the public, especially since the discussion was carried out so quickly in one session.

The second note from PSHK, the discussion of the TNI Bill is considered to have bypassed the drafting stage in the process of forming the law as mandated in Chapter V of Law Number 12 of 2011 concerning the Formation of Legislation.

The process of forming the TNI Bill skipped the drafting stage because the Presidential Letter appointing government representatives in the discussion of the Bill had already existed since February 13, 2025, before the TNI Bill was included in the 2025 Prolegnas (planning stage) on February 18, 2025. The Presidential Letter then became the beginning of the discussion stage between the DPR and the Government, which began with a Working Meeting on March 11, 2025.

This condition allows if the TNI Bill is a carry over Bill, namely continuing the discussion in the 2019-2024 DPR Period. However, the TNI Bill is not a carry over Bill according to what is stated in the DPR Decree Number 64/DPR RI/I/2024-2025 concerning the 2025 Priority Bill Prolegnas and the 2025-2029 Priority Bill Prolegnas.

Third, PSHK assessed that the TNI Bill was not transparent in its discussion, which resulted in the blocking of public participation space. The draft of the TNI Bill was never officially disseminated by the DPR. As a result, the public was unable to participate meaningfully.

This was exacerbated by the DPR's communication which had cornered critical people by stating that the draft used was not the same as the draft being discussed. This further shows that the DPR has never carried out its duties to disseminate the draft of the TNI Bill in accordance with Article 96 paragraph (4) of Law 13/2022 and Article 7 letter b of the DPR's Tatib.

In addition, the discussion of the TNI Bill was held in a hotel with a high level of security, so that the public's space to find out about the discussion was increasingly closed.