Nepotism, a persistent undercurrent in Indonesian politics, has resurfaced as a pressing concern following recent appointments under President Prabowo Subianto’s administration. The practice, deeply entrenched despite reforms dating back to 1998, threatens to undermine Indonesia’s aspirations for meritocracy and progress as it pursues ambitious goals like net zero emissions in forestry by 2030 and a “wealthy and just nation” by 2045, as envisioned by Prabowo himself. Among the most contentious moves is Forestry Minister Raja Juli Antoni’s decision to appoint fellow Indonesia Solidarity Party (PSI) members to key roles in the Operation Management Office (OMO) for Indonesia’s Forestry and Other Land Use (FOLU) Net Sink 2030 initiative—a decision critics argue prioritises political loyalty over expertise.
The appointments, made without apparent transparency, have sparked debate about whether Indonesia can achieve its environmental targets when key positions are filled by individuals with little to no track record in forestry or land use management. While Minister Antoni has defended the move by stating that foreign donors cover the office’s operational costs—including staff salaries ranging from Rp 8 million (US$487.80) to Rp 50 million monthly—the lack of a merit-based selection process has drawn sharp criticism. This controversy is emblematic of a broader pattern in Indonesian governance, where familial ties and political affiliations often overshadow qualifications, casting a shadow over the nation’s democratic ideals.
A Legacy of Nepotism in Politics
Nepotism is not a new phenomenon in Indonesia. The practice has long been woven into the fabric of the country’s political system, with family dynasties and close confidants frequently securing influential positions. The 1998 reforms, enacted in the wake of the Asian financial crisis and the fall of Suharto’s New Order regime, aimed to dismantle corruption, collusion, and nepotism through measures like Law No. 28/1999 on clean governance. Yet, over two decades later, these practices persist, often normalised in the eyes of a public desensitised to their implications. 
A stark example lies in the rise of the PSI, once seen as a progressive force appealing to millennials and younger voters. The party’s image took a hit when Kaesang Pangarep, the youngest son of former president Joko “Jokowi” Widodo, was elected chairman in 2023, just days after joining. Despite failing to secure seats in the House of Representatives, PSI gained proximity to power by supporting Prabowo Subianto and his running mate, Gibran Rakabuming Raka—Kaesang’s elder brother—in the 2024 presidential election. Gibran’s candidacy itself stirred controversy, as it was enabled by a Constitutional Court ruling on age limits for candidates, presided over by his uncle, Anwar Usman. Though an ethics council later found Anwar guilty of a gross violation of the code of ethics, the ruling stood, reinforcing perceptions of entrenched nepotism.
Under Prabowo’s cabinet, similar concerns have arisen. The appointment of his nephew, Thomas Djiwandono, as deputy finance minister has fuelled speculation about familial influence in key economic roles. Rumours of Finance Minister Sri Mulyani Indrawati’s potential resignation have only intensified scrutiny, with some suggesting Thomas could ascend to the top post if she steps down—a move that, if confirmed, would further cement perceptions of dynastic politics within the administration.
Forestry Appointments: A Misstep for Climate Goals?
At the heart of the current controversy are the appointments within the Forestry Ministry’s OMO for FOLU Net Sink 2030, a critical initiative aimed at achieving net zero emissions in the forestry sector by the end of the decade. The selection of PSI members for these roles, reportedly without a transparent recruitment process, has raised questions about their qualifications. Critics argue that placing individuals without relevant expertise in such positions could jeopardise Indonesia’s environmental commitments, particularly at a time when global pressure to combat climate change is mounting.
Minister Antoni’s assertion that the appointments do not burden the state budget, due to funding from foreign donors, does little to quell concerns. The issue, analysts note, is not merely financial but systemic: when political allegiance trumps competence, the risk of mismanagement grows. This is particularly alarming given the scale of Indonesia’s forestry challenges, including deforestation and land use conflicts, which require specialised knowledge and experience to address effectively.
The timing of these appointments also stands in stark contrast to the government’s decision to delay the start dates for 1.2 million new civil servants and contract employees to October 2025 and March 2026, respectively. This disparity has fuelled public frustration, with many questioning why political appointees appear to face fewer hurdles than ordinary citizens seeking government roles.
The Normalisation of Dynastic Politics
Beyond specific appointments, the broader landscape of Indonesian politics reveals a troubling trend: the normalisation of dynastic power. Political families often dominate regional and national elections, with candidates qualifying for legislative or gubernatorial races based on their connections rather than their credentials. This phenomenon spans both ruling coalitions and opposition parties, suggesting a systemic issue that transcends ideological divides.
Such practices stand in sharp contrast to the meritocratic systems that underpin many developed nations, where positions are ideally awarded based on ability and achievement. In Indonesia, the persistence of nepotism risks sidelining the “cream of the crop,” as President Prabowo has called for, who could drive the nation towards its 2045 vision of prosperity and equity. Instead, the entrenchment of political dynasties may perpetuate inequality and hinder democratic progress, particularly when public apathy allows these practices to go unchallenged.
The normalisation of nepotism also reflects a broader challenge to Indonesia’s democratic maturity. While the country has made significant strides since the authoritarian era of Suharto, the lingering influence of familial and patronage networks suggests that true democratic accountability remains elusive. For ordinary Indonesians, the perception that power is inherited rather than earned can erode trust in institutions, further complicating efforts to build a just and transparent society.
A Threat to National Aspirations
Nepotism, alongside corruption and collusion, poses a direct threat to Indonesia’s long-term goals. President Prabowo has repeatedly emphasised his commitment to transforming Indonesia into a “wealthy and just nation” by 2045, with policies aimed at economic growth, social equity, and environmental sustainability. Yet, the persistence of nepotistic practices undermines these ambitions by prioritising loyalty over competence, potentially leading to inefficiencies and mismanagement in critical sectors like forestry and finance.
The historical context adds urgency to this issue. The multidimensional crises of 1997-1998, which brought Indonesia to the brink of collapse, were exacerbated by systemic corruption and nepotism under Suharto’s regime. The reforms that followed were intended to prevent a repeat of such a “dark episode,” as described by contemporary observers. However, the continued prevalence of these practices suggests that Indonesia remains vulnerable to similar risks, particularly if public and institutional checks fail to hold leaders accountable.
Towards a Merit-Based Future?
Addressing nepotism in Indonesian politics will require more than legislative measures; it demands a cultural shift. Public awareness and engagement are crucial to challenging the normalisation of dynastic power, as is the enforcement of transparent recruitment processes for government roles. Civil society, media, and independent oversight bodies must play a proactive role in scrutinising appointments and ensuring that merit, rather than connections, dictates access to power.
President Prabowo’s administration has an opportunity to set a precedent by prioritising competence in future appointments and distancing itself from perceptions of familial bias. While speculation about roles like the finance minister position remains unconfirmed, any decision to elevate individuals based on family ties rather than qualifications could further erode public trust. Conversely, a commitment to transparency and meritocracy could bolster confidence in the government’s ability to deliver on its promises.
For now, the controversy surrounding the Forestry Ministry appointments serves as a reminder of the challenges Indonesia faces in balancing political loyalties with national priorities. As the country strives to meet its environmental and developmental targets, the question remains whether it can overcome the shadow of nepotism to build a governance system rooted in fairness and capability. Without addressing this systemic issue, Indonesia risks repeating the mistakes of its past, at the expense of a future that could belong to its most deserving citizens.
