Tandingan's Action Supports MBG Program to Emerge in Various Regions: Voice of the People's Hearts or Mass Legitimacy?

JAKARTA - In the last few days, a number of community groups have rallied to support the Free Nutritious Meal (MBG) program. However, the public wonders whether the mass action in support of MBG is purely the voice of the people, or the opposite?

The demonstration action has been taking place since June 10, 2026, which was initiated by a coalition of civil society to students. One of their demands is to urge the government to stop the MBG program because it is considered to have raised a number of issues and even eroded the state budget.

Interestingly, in the midst of the heavy demands for the termination of MBG, there was an action that supported that the flagship program of President Prabowo Subianto was still carried out. The action was held in a number of major cities, including Jakarta, Batam, Yogyakarta, Medan, to Jember.

However, this action has sparked questions for a number of circles. MBG is said to have become a political issue, instead of as a policy to fulfill nutrition.

Demands that the MBG program be evaluated, or even stopped, continue to emerge. The absorption of such a large budget that interferes with other budgets is one of the reasons why the program should not continue.

In the midst of these demands, there was a demonstration with a narrative that was different from the previous demonstration. The action to support MBG, which was carried out in Batam and Jember, was carried out by the MBG Kitchen Workers Volunteer Alliance, the owner of SPPG, teachers, to elementary and junior high school students. Meanwhile, the participants in the action in Jakarta claimed to have received transportation money of Rp. 100,000.

However, Jakarta Community Alliance Coordinator Edi Marzuki ensured that the involvement of all participants in the MBG support action was purely voluntary and without payment. He decided that those who participated in this action felt the benefits of MBG.

So far it cannot be proven whether this money is paid as a reward for the demonstration. Agus Sarwono, representative of MBG Watch, said that if the provision of goods and money is indeed directly related to the action, then the MBG support demonstration is not an expression of the aspirations of the people, but an engineering to shape public opinion.

"This kind of practice is dangerous because it turns the democratic space into a propaganda tool. The mass action is used to give the impression that the MBG program is defended by the people, even though what is at stake is the accountability of the use of state funds," said Agus.

Meanwhile, political observer Dedi Kurnia Syah said that the demonstration was actually a public right. However, in the past few years, Dedi has seen that there has been an attempt to damage the reputation of the demonstration in a way that is not fair.

"The action was carried out with minimal arguments and several times it was proven that these actions were only engineered," said Dedi when contacted by VOI.

In principle, he continued, the evaluation of MBG must still be pursued, given the evidence that the program was actually used as a venue for massive corruption. This condition indicates that MBG is not only a financial burden, but also a burden for the management of policies that could have an impact on other conditions.

"As long as MBG continues to be carried out with the current procedures, then during that time the public's insistence on evaluation will continue to strengthen," he said.

Lecturer of the Doctoral Program in Communication Studies, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences (FISIP), Universitas Brawijaya, Prof. Maulina Pia Wulandari, S.Sos., M.Kom., PhD, also commented on the waves of pro and con against the MBG program that emerged in a number of cities, including Malang.

Pia said that this action showed that the program had moved beyond its initial function as a nutrition fulfillment policy. MBG, he said, is now a political-communicative issue that is debated in the public space.

"The phenomenon of action against action shows that MBG has moved from merely a public policy program to a political-communicative issue. This program is no longer judged only from its normative objective, namely nutritional fulfillment, but also from the aspects of legitimacy, transparency, governance, and public trust," said Pia.

In a democratic system, student actions criticizing government policies are a form of social control. Likewise with the expected support for policies, which is the right of citizens.

But when support actions appear after the rejection action, it is often considered by the public as an effort to build a counter-narrative.

Criticism of the public, according to Pia, should be seen as an early signal that needs to be responded to with explanation and dialogue, not just balanced with mobilization of support.

"Demonstrations should not be seen as a threat. In the perspective of political communication, criticism is an early warning signal that there is a part of the public that needs explanation, data, and a space for dialogue. If criticism is only answered with mobilization of support, public communication can shift from deliberation to mass legitimacy," he said.

The existence of actions and counteractions is basically a natural thing in democracy because this reflects the diversity of public views. However, this condition can turn into a trigger for polarization if the debate is not focused on the substance of the policy.

"In political communication, polarization occurs when the public is encouraged to choose a camp, not to understand the problem. Therefore, what is important is not the existence or absence of countermeasures, but how the narrative, symbols, actors, and messages are built in it," said Pia.