DPA, Facing Challenges Of Time Or Looking Back?

Chairman of the DPR RI Baleg, Supratman Andi Agtas when receiving mini-views from various factions regarding the revision of the Bill concerning Amendments to Law Number 19 of 2006 concerning the Presidential Advisory Council. (dpr.go.id)

The re-establishment of the Supreme Advisory Council (DPA) has become a sharp focus amidst Indonesia's current political turmoil. Some see this step as the need of the times, while others suspect there is a hidden agenda that threatens democracy. Do we really need these institutions back?

DPA was first formed by President Sukarno as the country's highest advisory body. However, in the New Order era, its function began to be criticized until it was finally disbanded by President Megawati Sukarnoputri in 2003. This dissolution was considered a step towards efficiency and strengthening democracy, along with the amendment to the 1945 Constitution which removed the existence of the DPA as a state institution.

Now, the discourse to revive the DPA to replace the Presidential Advisory Council (Wantimpres) has emerged again. The DPR Legislative Body (Baleg) argues that this change is necessary to respond to the challenges of the times and provide more comprehensive strategic input for the president. But is that really true?

Wantimpres is an institution that provides advice to the president, focusing on certain issues mandated by the president. Meanwhile, DPA, based on its history, has a broader and strategic role in providing advice on general state policy. However, these two institutions basically have similar functions, namely providing advice to the president.

The main differences lie in the nomenclature and history of these institutions. Wantimpres was formed to replace the DPA which was deemed no longer relevant and efficient. By reviving the DPA, a big question arises: are we moving backwards or are we truly adapting to the needs of the times?

Strong criticism came from those who considered that this step was an attempt to revive the practices of the New Order, where power was centralized. On the other hand, supporters of the formation of the DPA argue that each era has its own needs. Former Wantimpres, Mardiono, said that the DPA was expected to provide more comprehensive and strategic input for the president. The DPR Baleg also ensured that the DPA would not be like the New Order era, and would function in accordance with the principles of democracy and transparency.

However, concerns about the politicization of this institution remain. Accusations of political retribution have emerged, with the assumption that the formation of the DPA is a form of political compensation for certain figures.

Reviving abolished state institutions is not uncommon. However, in the Indonesian political context, this is not without precedent. For example, the MPR, which used to be the highest state institution, has changed its function and role after reform. This shows that changes in institutional structures can indeed occur, but must be based on real needs and clear urgency.

To answer this question, we need to look objectively at whether the existence of the DPA will provide real benefits for the government and the people. The current Wantimpres function covers many aspects that were previously the duties of the DPA. If there is a need to strengthen the role of advice to the president, what should be done is to strengthen Wantimpres, not revive an institution that has been abolished.

In addition, there are concerns that the formation of a DPA will increase the burden on the state budget without providing significant benefits. In a challenging economic situation, the creation of new institutions must be truly based on clear urgency and need, not just political nostalgia or an attempt to preserve power.

In this context, we must continue to be critical and monitor every step taken by the government and the DPR. Democracy belongs to all of us, and every decision taken must be truly in the interests of the nation, not momentary political interests. In this way, we can ensure that Indonesia continues to move forward, not backwards.