A wave of public discontent is sweeping through Indonesia as accusations of nepotism and cronyism under President Prabowo Subianto’s administration intensify. From high-profile ministerial appointments to strategic roles in state-owned enterprises, critics argue that personal connections and political loyalties are overshadowing merit and competence, raising serious questions about governance, accountability, and the future of Indonesia’s democracy.
The latest controversy centres on Forestry Minister Raja Juli Antoni, who also serves as secretary general of the Indonesian Solidarity Party (PSI). Raja recently appointed himself, PSI deputy chair Andy Budiman, Andy’s wife Suci Mayang Sari, and at least ten other party members to key positions in the Forestry and Other Land Use (FOLU) Net Sink 2030 program—a critical environmental initiative aimed at achieving carbon neutrality. The move has sparked widespread outrage, with social media users and opposition lawmakers decrying what they see as blatant cronyism and a potential misuse of donor funds. Some have even urged international donors, including Norway and the UK, to reconsider their financial support for the program.
Raja has downplayed concerns about fund misuse but has yet to address the appointments directly. Meanwhile, Andy Budiman did not respond to queries from local media outlets such as The Jakarta Post. The public backlash reflects a deeper unease about the direction of Prabowo’s administration, which has faced similar allegations since the President took office in October 2024. 
A Pattern of Favoritism
The FOLU program appointments are not an isolated incident. Earlier this month, Defense Minister Sjafrie Sjamsoeddin’s younger brother, Maroef Sjamsoeddin, was named executive director of MIND ID, a state-owned mining holding company overseeing major firms like PT Antam and PT Timah. Maroef, a retired two-star Air Force officer, previously served as president director of Freeport Indonesia from 2015 to 2016. While the State-Owned Enterprises Ministry insists he is qualified for the role, critics argue that his familial connection to a senior cabinet minister raises concerns about conflicts of interest.
Beyond these specific cases, Prabowo’s broader appointments have drawn scrutiny. Key ministerial posts have gone to close confidants, including Deputy Finance Minister Thomas Djiwandono, Prabowo’s nephew, and Foreign Minister Sugiono, often described as the President’s “ideological son” due to their personal rapport. Even special presidential envoys have not escaped criticism, with actor-turned-businessman Raffi Ahmad—part of Prabowo and Vice President Gibran Rakabuming Raka’s campaign team—facing questions about his qualifications for such a role.
Vice President Gibran himself, the eldest son of former President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo, embodies what many see as a troubling trend of political dynasties. His candidacy for vice president was controversially cleared by the Constitutional Court in 2023, at a time when the court was led by his uncle, Anwar Usman. Political analyst Yoes Kenawas argues that Gibran’s successful nomination marked a turning point. “Since then, ethics has become less and less important for state administrators,” Yoes told local media. “Politicians now seem to think that all is fair as long as it doesn’t violate the law, even if it breaches ethical standards or creates potential conflicts of interest.”
Historical Context and Growing Boldness
Nepotism and cronyism are not new to Indonesian politics. Political analyst Abdil Mughis Mudhoffir of the University of Melbourne points to past examples, such as the dynasty of former Banten governor Ratu Atut Chosiyah, where family members were systematically positioned in public office. “What we’re seeing under Prabowo isn’t unprecedented,” Abdil noted in a recent interview. “But the openness of these actions is striking. There’s a disregard for public criticism that wasn’t as evident before.”
Yoes Kenawas echoes this sentiment, describing the current wave of appointments as “more blatant” than in previous administrations. He highlights the case of Sjafrie and Maroef Sjamsoeddin as a clear example of potential conflict of interest, arguing that such arrangements undermine public trust in government institutions. “These attempts at nepotism and cronyism are now more exposed, with little effort to mitigate public backlash,” he added.
The growing boldness of such practices may be linked to a broader erosion of ethical norms in Indonesian politics, particularly following high-profile cases like Gibran’s vice-presidential candidacy. Critics warn that if left unchecked, this trend could have far-reaching consequences for the country’s democratic framework.
Implications for Governance and Democracy
The proliferation of nepotism and cronyism poses significant risks to Indonesia’s governance structures, according to analysts. Abdil Mughis Mudhoffir warns that the absence of a merit-based system in public appointments undermines the government’s ability to function effectively. “Public officials are not selected based on competence but on favoritism and personal relationships,” he said. “This results in a lack of skilled professionals who can properly implement government programs.”
The impact of such practices is already visible in some of Prabowo’s flagship initiatives. The free nutritious meals program for schoolchildren and pregnant women, for instance, has faced criticism for its costly implementation and questions over the nutritional value of the meals provided. Similarly, the newly established sovereign wealth fund, Danantara, has raised concerns about mismanagement, especially given Indonesia’s long history of corruption scandals within state-owned enterprises.
Beyond inefficiency, analysts caution that favoritism in appointments could exacerbate corruption at both central and local government levels. “This kind of governance destroys democracy,” Abdil argued. “It creates an environment where accountability is diminished, and corruption can flourish unchecked.” If speculative reports of fund misuse in programs like FOLU Net Sink 2030 are confirmed, they could further damage public trust and strain Indonesia’s relationships with international partners.
Public Discontent and Historical Echoes
Public frustration with perceived nepotism is not a new phenomenon in Indonesia. In 1998, during the waning days of President Suharto’s regime, students at the University of Indonesia in Jakarta held protests with placards reading “Nepotism Sucks,” decrying the systemic favoritism that defined Suharto’s rule. That era of discontent ultimately contributed to Suharto’s downfall, and today’s allegations under Prabowo’s administration evoke similar sentiments among Indonesians wary of history repeating itself.
Social media has amplified these concerns, with hashtags and campaigns calling for transparency gaining traction. Lawmakers from opposition parties have also joined the chorus, urging greater scrutiny of appointments and funding allocations. The question remains whether this public outcry will translate into meaningful reforms or if it will be dismissed as mere noise by those in power.
A Test for Prabowo’s Leadership
As allegations of nepotism and cronyism continue to mount, President Prabowo Subianto faces a critical test of his leadership. Balancing personal loyalties with the demands of effective governance will be no easy task, particularly in a country with a complex history of political patronage. While some of his supporters argue that his administration’s focus on loyalty ensures stability, critics contend that this approach risks alienating the public and undermining democratic principles.
For now, the long-term impact of these controversies remains uncertain. If unaddressed, they could hinder Prabowo’s ambitious policy agenda and tarnish his legacy. Analysts suggest that introducing stricter guidelines for public appointments and enhancing transparency could help mitigate criticism, though there is little indication of such reforms on the horizon.
Indonesia stands at a crossroads. The echoes of past struggles against nepotism resonate in today’s protests and online campaigns, reminding both leaders and citizens of the fragility of trust in governance. Whether Prabowo’s administration can navigate these challenges without sacrificing accountability remains to be seen, but the stakes for Indonesia’s democracy could not be higher.
