President Prabowo's government established a new institution called the Daya Anagata Nusantara Investment Management Agency (Danantara Indonesia). Its mission is lofty: to improve the prosperity of all Indonesians. However, according to CELIOS Executive Director Bhima Yudhistira, as a sovereign wealth fund (SWF), Danantara has become a place for state-owned enterprises to "wash the dirty dishes."
***
Conceptually, there's no doubting the mission to be realized with the establishment of Danantara: to manage state assets professionally, transparently, and sustainably in accordance with the principles of good governance to promote public welfare, as mandated by Article 33 Paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution and the Asta Cita mission.
Note and underline: the ultimate goal is to improve the prosperity of the Indonesian people. This aligns with President Prabowo Subianto's speech at the Plenary Session of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) during the Inauguration of the President and Vice President-elect for the 2024–2029 period. He loudly proclaimed, "All our wealth must be used to the greatest extent possible for the benefit and prosperity of our people (the Indonesian people)," he said.
The question is, is the path to public prosperity, as proclaimed in this mission, already visible—at least signs of a path toward the prosperity of the people, not the prosperity of a select few?
It's indeed too early to judge, as Danantara has only just emerged. But remember, despite its infancy, it has already become a giant. The assets it currently manages exceed USD 1 trillion, or approximately IDR 16,300 trillion to IDR 16,800 trillion. Such substantial funds must be managed properly.
Therefore, Bhima Yudhistira said, this institution must be closely monitored to ensure its goal of improving the prosperity of the Indonesian people. So far, he has observed that Danantara's project list is still not strategic and does not support President Prabowo's main programs, namely food security and energy security.
"The problem is, the projects Danantara is currently working on are fraught with vested interests and are working on things that are unpopular within state-owned enterprises. So, the projects on Danantara's list, as we observe, are closely linked to conglomerates. This is the most obvious conflict of interest. Second, they are economically unprofitable. For example, coal gasification, which was abandoned by Chinese and American investors, has ended up on Danantara's list. So, Danantara has become a place to wash dirty dishes for state-owned enterprises. They should be looking for more profitable projects that absorb more labor," said Bhima Yudhistira during a visit to the VOI office in Tanah Abang, Jakarta, on September 29, 2025.
In your opinion, what is the ideal role of a SWF like Danantara in accelerating public prosperity?
Danantara is a collection of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and their dividends, which it aims to cultivate into a large investment fund. This is nothing new, as other countries already have sovereign wealth funds or endowments. Norway, China, Alaska (USA), and Middle Eastern countries also have similar institutions. With Danantara, Indonesia could have a super holding company.
In fact, this was the dream of the late Tanri Abeng: no need for separate SOEs, all united under one large holding company.
Whether Danantara will improve the welfare of the people remains to be seen. Will Danantara invest in projects that absorb labor and add economic value, or will it instead invest in projects that are unprofitable within SOEs and then be taken over by Danantara?
What is more relevant than the concept of prosperity?
When making investment decisions, does Danantara take into account the aspirations of the Indonesian people whose funds it manages? Are workers' rights taken into account? These issues should be included in the revised SOE Law. We can learn from a similar institution in Norway, which is considered excellent. There, the SWF involves labor unions, and worker representatives even sit on the SWF board. They also hold referendums to determine which sectors and where to invest.
Danantara doesn't yet have such a system. Not to mention taxpayers, whose money also goes to Danantara, but so far hasn't been involved.
In Asia, which SWFs in other countries can serve as examples?
A closer look is Khazanah in Malaysia. Initially, it operated in the oil and gas sector through Petronas and others. Its profits were used to finance Malaysian government projects.
However, there are also failed examples, such as 1MDB, a Malaysian SWF that was implicated in a major corruption case. So, all of this can be a lesson—some good and some bad. Hopefully, Danantara can learn from this good example.
Temasek in Singapore is also similar to Danantara and can serve as a positive reference.
The funds and assets raised by Danantara are enormous. If the public is concerned about its management, is that reasonable?
It's understandable, because these funds belong to the public. For example, the recent reaction to the withdrawal of deposits from Himbara (State-Owned Banks Association) banks. Because Himbara banks were incorporated into Danantara, while Danantara lacks a robust oversight system, public concern was understandable.
Indeed, deposits under IDR 2 billion are guaranteed by the LPS, but what about deposits above that? It all depends on the profitability of the Himbara banks and Danantara.
On a smaller scale, concerns also arise from workers and vendors. Frequent questions arise: will Danantara be more assertive regarding outsourcing and workers' rights, especially in the merger and acquisition process of state-owned enterprises (BUMN). From the taxpayer's perspective, there are also hopes: will profits from BUMN provide relief to the public—for example, more affordable electricity, and whether electricity can be sourced from renewable energy sources?
Regarding risk management (risk management, segregation of duties, internal control), what minimum must Danantara have in place to minimize the threat of mismanagement?
There are still many gaps that need improvement. One such issue is the function of the Supreme Audit Agency (BPK). Currently, they only function as additional auditors, and even then, they must have the approval of the Indonesian House of Representatives (DPR RI) in the revised State-Owned Enterprises Law. Previously, SOEs were automatically subject to audits by the Supreme Audit Agency (BPK). The same applies to the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK)—Danantara is granted certain immunity, weakening oversight.
Furthermore, in terms of public oversight, the public is not informed of the rationale behind Danantara's investment decisions, for example in the coal gasification project. Public input should be one of the recommendations before investing.
In Norway, their SWF even severed ties with companies that fund weapons for Israel, because they felt they owned the SWF. Funds were diverted to better investments for democracy and human rights enforcement. They knew what was happening in Gaza and refused to invest with those involved.
If we want the public to be involved, what is the best route?
Through the revision of the State-Owned Enterprises Law, currently being drafted by the Indonesian House of Representatives (DPR RI). The first revision in early 2025 was unsatisfactory, and further revisions will be required. The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), the Supreme Audit Agency (BPK), and law enforcement officials need to be involved to serve as a first line of defense.
Furthermore, the separation of assets must be clear—SOE assets transferred to Danantara, as well as government assets such as GBK and others, if they are to be managed by Danantara, must be regulated to avoid conflicts with the 2003 State Finance Law.
The selection of Danantara's directors and advisors must also be transparent. The public is wondering why Thaksin Shinawatra is on Danantara's board—even though he is currently imprisoned in Thailand. Ray Dalio's name is also considered problematic. He is a major player in the investment world, so if he were an advisor, he could request detailed reports. This could provide insights for his own business. He would know which SOE stocks are good before other market players.
Regarding the issue of only the House of Representatives (DPR) and Danantara being able to conduct oversight, while the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and the Supreme Audit Agency (BPK) cannot, only if requested—this creates opportunities for corruption, collusion, and nepotism (KKN). What do you think?
We conducted a public survey, and the results showed that more than 80% of respondents were concerned that Danantara would become a breeding ground for corruption by certain individuals. This means that the public sees opportunities for corruption and governance issues at Danantara. This includes issues of holding dual positions in state-owned enterprises (BUMN) and the procurement of goods and services.
Then there is also the potential for conflicts of interest, such as in the sale of Patriot Bonds. The primary targets are conglomerates: if you don't want your business disrupted, you should "serve the country" by purchasing Patriot Bonds. The money is used for a waste-to-energy project. The conflict of interest is clear, as some of the management also owns a waste processing company. Therefore, Danantara's governance must be improved immediately.
What are CELIOS's or similar institutions' suggestions for amending the BUMN Bill?
We have prepared several proposals. One of them concerns the separation of the Ministry of BUMN and Danantara. We reject the creation of a State-Owned Enterprises Supervisory Agency (BP BUMN), because if a super holding company like Danantara already exists, why even have one? It would simply waste funds amidst ongoing efficiency efforts. Furthermore, there would be potential overlapping authority.
The establishment of Danantara should actually expedite the investment process. Having a BP BUMN would make subsidy distribution even more complicated. This could be handled directly between the Minister of Finance and Danantara.
What other input do you have?
Public participation must be expanded. Academics who have traditionally supported the government should not be invited to the House of Representatives (DPR). Open the door as wide as possible. The revision of the State-Owned Enterprises Law in early 2025 was incredibly fast—it only took three days. Don't be allergic to critical academics, because that will actually increase the trust of depositors, investors, and the public. So, for the second revision, don't rush it. With more time, public participation will also be broader.
What is the formulation of sanctions for dishonesty?
In the first revision of the State-Owned Enterprises Law, they were granted a form of immunity—that Danantara's actions could not be categorized as state losses. So, in addition to not being supervised by the Supreme Audit Agency (BPK) and the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), it's also not considered a state loss. This shouldn't happen.
We don't want a case where a CEO doesn't receive a single penny, but is deemed to have caused state financial losses due to the policies they take. This must be clarified in the second revision of the State-Owned Enterprises Bill.
What else must be disclosed to the public?
Those who sit on Danantara must not have any conflicts of interest and must not hold dual positions. They also must not own shares in private companies or state-owned enterprises, which could lead to insider trading. Because they know in advance what projects will be undertaken, their subsidiaries could be directed to enter those positions.
The Ministry of Investment must also be clean—its ministers cannot hold dual positions, for example, being CEO of Danantara. They must choose one. This separation of roles is crucial.
This conflict of interest is rather vague. How can it be explained more effectively?
It must be included in the revised articles of the State-Owned Enterprises Bill. Everything must be regulated clearly and in detail. Every director and advisor to Danantara must not have any business interests, shares, or beneficial ownership.
They usually use shell companies, but the money still flows to them. They're actually the controllers, but their names aren't listed on the company.
What if they pass information to someone else?
That falls under the category of bribery or gratuity. For example, if they leak that Danantara will be working on a specific project next month for a certain amount, and then receive money for that information—that falls under the category of gratuity.
You mentioned earlier that 1MDB was a bad example. What can be learned to prevent a repeat of this at Danantara?
The concept behind 1MDB was to manage funds for development. However, oversight was minimal. In fact, the exact direction of the funds was only discovered two to three years later. Even now, the main perpetrators have not been apprehended.
The main weaknesses lie in oversight and the lack of public participation. This should not happen at Danantara. Moreover, Danantara is larger than 1MDB, so its oversight system must be multi-layered.
Which countries have good oversight of SWFs and can serve as examples?
Norway is excellent, as are Alaska and Qatar (Qatar Investment Fund). They are very transparent and have good administration. I know that the Norwegian SWF even invested in a solar panel project in Indonesia.
They publish reports every three months. Therefore, they quickly identify any investment going to an Israeli arms company—and immediately withdraw it. They have environmental, social, and governance (ESG) principles. Every funded project must not violate these three principles.
They also have a recall mechanism, where directors can be dismissed upon public request. The public can petition to replace directors deemed problematic.
Are there any international mechanisms (due diligence on partners, correspondent banks, or cross-border transaction compliance) that must be implemented from the outset to prevent money laundering or illicit transfers?
Yes. INA SWF, the forerunner of Danantara, used to primarily manage the New Capital City project. INA is a member of a coalition of international endowment funds. International endowments are subject to the Santiago Principles, which include prohibiting money laundering, terrorism financing, or activities that cause environmental damage.
If Danantara wants to join endowment institutions in developed countries (for example, those under the OECD), they must also adhere to strict anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism financing principles.
You said earlier that if Danantara already exists, why would there be a state-owned enterprise (SOE)? Is this regulated in the draft revised SOE Bill?
Unfortunately, not yet. The other day, we hoped that the Ministry of SOEs nomenclature would be removed. So everything is clear: SOEs are under BPI Danantara.
However, to abolish the Ministry of SOEs, a revision of the 2003 State Finance Law and the 2025 SOE Law is required. Otherwise, the bureaucracy will only become longer. Furthermore, leadership positions must be truly professional—not political appointments. This must not happen.
With this constellation, can Danantara still be improved?
Academics and civil society have created a monitoring platform for Danantara at https://danantaramonitor.org/. It lists projects Danantara will implement. There's also a complaint box for the public to report suspected corruption at Danantara.
This is a bit of a pointed dig: we, the people, can create a transparent platform without taxes, so why can't Danantara? It's an interesting question.
Equally important, Danantara needs to be directed toward projects that support President Prabowo's government's mission: energy security and food security. At the UN General Assembly, President Prabowo loudly declared that Indonesia would transition to using new and renewable energy within 10 years. However, Danantara's projects seem disconnected from the president's mission. I don't know what went wrong, but they should have built large-scale solar power plants and large-scale hydroelectric power plants.
So, where do you think the missing link is?
From the start, its creation was hasty and misread the trend. The current global trend is energy transition, and Danantara is unwilling to enter it. This is confusing investors. Furthermore, Danantara must avoid cannibalizing existing state-owned enterprises. Currently, there appears to be competition between Danantara and state-owned enterprises—this needs to be regulated.
We also observe that projects on Danantara's list are closely linked to conglomerates. This is the most obvious conflict of interest. Second, these projects are economically unviable. For example, coal gasification, which was abandoned by Chinese and American investors, has instead been added to Danantara's list. So, Danantara seems to be a place to "wash the dirty dishes" of state-owned enterprises. This institution should be looking for more profitable projects that absorb a large workforce.
Returning to the initial question, will Danantara's presence improve people's welfare, or is the opposite already readily apparent?
The answer is: not yet. It will take a long journey to achieve that. But the important thing is that the initial steps must be correct. So, if you want to move forward, don't go against current trends and societal needs. What do the people need? Jobs, decent housing, public transportation, clean water, and environmentally friendly energy. All of this should have been addressed with the presence of Danantara. Funding isn't actually an issue. In fact, Mr. Purbaya recently injected IDR 200 trillion through the Himbara banks.
The IDR 200 trillion injection is interesting. Before the injection, Himbara banks already had excess funds. They're actually confused about how to get additional funds. How do you see it?
In general, the banking sector in Indonesia isn't short of liquidity, as there are around IDR 2,400 trillion in idle funds. Specifically, at Himbara banks, there are around IDR 500 trillion (as of June 2025). That's why they were confused when the IDR 200 trillion was added. If they misallocate funds, they could be sued for causing bad debts. But if the funds aren't disbursed, the interest becomes prohibitive. This is what's giving Himbara bank directors a headache.
Given this situation, what should Himbara bank directors do?
They must coordinate with Danantara. What's currently needed are projects in the food security and energy security sectors. Danantara is currently consolidating state-owned enterprises and hasn't yet appeared to be entering new projects.
If there's a leak or misuse of funds at Danantara, who will bear the burden?
Whatever happens to Danantara, it will ultimately require assistance from the state budget. In the future, regardless of who the finance minister is, if any Danantara project fails, the state budget will be the one to cover it—meaning the people will also bear the burden.
Second, state-owned enterprises could be affected. Healthy state-owned enterprises are forced to become sick. Therefore, we oppose the merger of Pelita Air with Garuda, because Pelita Air is a good airline, on time, and highly profitable.
What else do you think is crucial about Danantara?
One is Patriot Bonds, which are selling well because they target the private sector (conglomerates). However, their credit rating must be considered. Furthermore, the funded projects should not be solely for specific interests or even corrupted. This requires transparency. Therefore, our call to the public to withdraw funds from banks is not a wise move. If you disagree with the law, you can file a judicial review with the Constitutional Court (MK).
Most importantly, is Danantara willing to accept public input? Are there any indications that this is happening?
So far, there hasn't been any. The determination of Danantara projects is still carried out behind closed doors. Supervisory institutions such as the Supreme Audit Agency (BPK) and the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) must also be reactivated. The voice of civil society must also be heard.
In your opinion, what are the five priority points that need to be considered for the revision of the State-Owned Enterprises Bill?
First, oversight. Second, channels for public participation. Third, avoiding conflicts of interest. Fourth, clear criteria for project selection. And fifth, active involvement of SOE employees—if necessary, they should be part of the Danantara management.
The Excitement of Bhima Yudhistira Solo Climbing a Mountain in Japan
Climbing mountains in groups is commonplace, but solo hiking is rarely done due to various considerations. But that's what Bhima Yudhistira, Executive Director of CELIOS (Center of Economic and Law Studies), does. What's the thrill of climbing a mountain alone?
Beyond his busy schedule as a lecturer and economics analyst, Bhima Yudhistira enjoys playing mini-soccer and mountain climbing. "My hobbies are playing mini-soccer and reading books. Every month I have to read two books, either fiction or non-fiction. I occasionally go mountain climbing," said the man whose full name is Bhima Yudhistira Adhinegara.
His schedule: he has to play mini-soccer once a week. Depending on his position, sometimes in Jakarta and sometimes in Yogyakarta. "But I play more in Yogyakarta. There are lecturers, environmental activists, students, journalists—they all join in," said Bhima, who plays as a goalkeeper.
He chose mini-soccer because it's less energy-intensive than futsal or soccer, which have larger fields. It turns out there are tips for keeping his goal from being easily breached. "Before playing, I contacted the striker and said, 'Don't be too harsh, okay?'" he said with a laugh. "It turned out to be a successful use of power relations, because the person I contacted was my student," he continued jokingly.
When it comes to goalkeeping, he was inspired by the legendary German goalkeeper, Oliver Kahn. "He was brave and had the ideal posture for a goalkeeper," Bhima explained.
Indonesian Football and Mathematics
Bhima Yudhistira hopes Indonesian football can progress. He said one key is to reduce political interference. Allow football to develop as a sport, not as a political vehicle. (Photo: Bambang Eros VOI, DI: Raga Granada VOI)
When it comes to football, he can't forget Ratu Tisha, who currently serves as Deputy Chairperson of the Indonesian Football Association (PSSI) for the 2023–2027 period. "We were both in the same LPDP scholarship training program. At the time (2013), she said that Indonesian football must change, combining science, mathematics, and sports. So, it's like the movie Moneyball starring Brad Pitt—everything is calculated using calculus and algorithms. Hopefully, Indonesian football can progress in the future, not just relying on naturalization," said the alumnus of the Faculty of Economics and Business, Gadjah Mada University.
According to Bhima Yudhistira, Indonesian football has been heavily influenced by political decisions. "Going forward, football must return to its basics as a sport. There shouldn't be too much political interference. Don't let the desire to promote a certain name lead to our football being unprofessional," he explained.
He is optimistic that Indonesian football will improve in the future. "Please reduce the use of football for personal gain. I hope Ratu Tisha can become the Chair of the PSSI and make changes by using technology to boost our football achievements," he said.
Eating Ramen on a Mountaintop
This was a unique experience for Bhima while solo hiking a mountain in Japan. "Sorry, I can't name the mountain. Actually, I finished climbing in one day. The mountain was clean and the environment was safe, even though I climbed alone," he said, briefly revealing that the mountain he climbed is a black bear habitat.
Although the mountain is known as a black bear habitat and there are restrictions on climbing alone, Bhima succeeded and returned home safely. "It was truly a magical experience for me. Being able to climb alone and return home safely," explained the man who completed his Master's at the University of Bradford, England.
Upon reaching the summit, the first thing he did was read a book and eat ramen. "Now, here's the second clue: there's a ramen cafeteria at the top of the mountain. Anyone who's been there will know the name of the mountain," said Bhima, who has climbed Mount Merapi, Sindoro, and several mountains in West Nusa Tenggara.
It turns out he's not the only one who enjoys climbing mountains alone. His beloved wife does the same. "If I happen to be unable to climb, I ask her to bring me photos of the mountains my wife has climbed," said Bhima Yudhistira, who has already added Mount Rinjani and Mount Sumbing to his list of upcoming climbs.
"Danantara's investment needs to be directed toward projects that support President Prabowo's government's mission, namely energy and food security. At the UN General Assembly, President Prabowo loudly stated that Indonesia would be using new and renewable energy within 10 years. Now, Danantara's project is disconnected from the president's mission. I don't know where the error lies. They should be building large-scale solar power plants and large-scale hydroelectric power plants."
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)
Most Popular Tags
#Prabowo Subianto #donald trump #2026 World Cup #bgn #konflik timur tengahPopular
