JAKARTA - Public policy observer, Trubus Rahardiansyah, assessed that the polemics on the source of funding for the Free Nutritious Meal Program (MBG) which was accused of having taken or eroded the education budget must be thoroughly examined both in terms of policy design, the structure of the State Budget (APBN), and the legislative process that has taken place in the DPR.
According to him, placing the MBG Program in the education function is an approach that can be conceptually accountable. Because, the main beneficiaries of the program are schoolchildren, who are the main subjects in the national education system.
"If the target of the program is the learners, then logically the public policy is relevant if it is grouped in the education function. Healthy children and meeting their nutritional needs have better learning readiness. That is part of long-term investment in education," said Trubus, Sunday, March 1.
He said, the view that clearly separates the MBG program and the education sector is a too narrow way of thinking. In the approach to human resource development, nutritional intervention for students is considered as part of the education ecosystem itself.
He also emphasized that the 2026 State Budget was not a one-sided product of the government. The budget document is the result of a long discussion between the executive and legislative branches. The draft ABPN for the 2026 Fiscal Year was discussed in the relevant committees and in the DPR Budget Agency, before finally being passed in the DPR Plenary Meeting. The ratification was carried out by acclamation and was led by the DPR leadership from PDIP.
The budget was then stipulated in Law Number 17 of 2025 concerning the 2026 Fiscal Year State Budget, and detailed through Presidential Regulation Number 118 of 2025 concerning the 2026 Fiscal Year State Budget Details.
"Throughout the discussion process to the ratification, there is no official record in the form of a formal rejection or different opinion regarding the placement of the MBG Program in the education function. There is no voting mechanism that shows objections," said Trubus.
Therefore, the Chairman of the Indonesian Policy Analyst Association (AAKI) questioned the consistency of the parties who are now suing the funding source of the program. According to him, if there are indeed fundamental objections, the APBN discussion forum is the right place to convey this attitude.
"If there are objections, they should be submitted during the discussion before ratification. In our constitutional system, the State Budget is a law. This means that it is a collective political product that binds all parties," he said.
Trubus emphasized that criticism of public policies is an important part of democracy. Evaluation of the effectiveness of the MBG Program, including aspects of governance and supervision, is natural and even necessary. However, he reminded that the debate should not be trapped in the use of provocative terms and potentially misleading public understanding.
"Referring to policies that have been enacted through laws as acts of plundering the budget certainly has serious implications. It is as if it questions the legitimacy of the legislative process involving the DPR itself," said Trubus about the MBG budget controversy.
The English, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, and French versions are automatically generated by the AI. So there may still be inaccuracies in translating, please always see Indonesian as our main language. (system supported by DigitalSiber.id)
