Indonesia’s dilemma: Giving police too much power

Indonesia confronts a critical conundrum as it grapples with the extent of power a police chief should possess. An alleged case of unlawful surveillance by former police officials has reignited debates on the balance between independent investigations and unchecked authority. The issue of how much leeway should be granted to any one individual within the police force remains a contentious one.

The recent announcement by the National Police's Criminal Investigation Department (Bareskrim) of three senior officers being suspected of illegal surveillance adds weight to this debate. The targets of these investigations include high-profile individuals such as President Prabowo Subianto, politicians, journalists, civil society activists, and business leaders. Despite the investigation still being in its early stages, the concentration of authority raised by these allegations is alarming.

The timing of this investigation, coinciding with transitions in both the presidency and police leadership, serves as a cautionary tale. It underscores the difficulty of achieving genuine oversight when the political climate allows for new obstacles to emerge. While legal merit and political opportunity can align, it is crucial not to misconstrue the temporary opening presented by shifting political winds as a permanent solution to institutional power.

The National Police's broad mandate, encompassing routine tasks like issuing driver's licenses to complex criminal investigations and intelligence gathering, grants it a level of influence far beyond the resolution of individual crimes. This ubiquity of power, especially when internal oversight operates under the same command structure, poses significant challenges. Reform efforts must therefore question whether such extensive unchecked power is appropriate for a single entity.