287,887,000 people
Source: Tyranny Tracker
HRF classifies Indonesia as ruled by a hybrid authoritarian regime.
Between 1966 and 1998, Indonesia was under a dictatorship led by General Suharto. His resignation led to a democratic transition known as the “Reformasi” era, which restored direct presidential elections, enhanced human rights protections, and decentralized government powers. However, twenty-five years later, Indonesia is reverting towards authoritarianism. President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo (2014-2024) repeatedly used public funds to tilt the electoral playing field, enacted stringent laws to curb criticism, and interfered with oversight bodies. In 2024, Prabowo Subianto, Suharto’s former son-in-law, won the presidency in a landslide, running on the same ticket as Jokowi’s eldest son, Gibran Rakabuming Raka. Their victory is controversial due to Prabowo’s past involvement in human rights abuses during Suharto’s regime in East Timor and West Papua, as well as indications that President Jokowi abused state resources to shore up support for them. Meanwhile, West Papua remains a conflict-ridden region, with the separatist Free Papua Movement waging a decades-long armed resistance against Indonesia’s central government in pursuit of independence.
National elections are largely free and fair. Candidates and political parties are free to organize their campaigns, and mainstream media outlets offer balanced coverage. However, election periods are marked by increasing online disinformation and smear campaigns targeting both the incumbent and opposition sides. Jokowi’s government has also faced accusations of misusing public funds to boost his own and Prabowo-Gibran’s campaigns as well as of influencing electoral oversight by appointing loyal members to key supervisory positions.
Civil society leaders and members of the general public are seriously and unfairly hindered in their ability to openly criticize or challenge the regime. State-backed repression has increased since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, with cases of police brutality, unlawful killings, and enforced disappearances on the rise, while stringent laws have targeted minority groups. The regime has also increased its presence in the online space by means of censorship, surveillance systems, and internet shutdowns.
Institutions are somewhat independent but frequently constrained by the regime. Courts have enabled the regime’s attempts to tilt the electoral process in favor of the incumbent as well as to retaliate against critics in high-stakes cases, including dissenting judges. Officials implicated in grand corruption cases have largely escaped accountability. Top courts and other oversight bodies have suffered from a series of attacks by the regime, leading to a substantial erosion of their independence and operational effectiveness. A weakened parliamentary opposition has further reduced institutional constraints on the executive, while the regime has simultaneously expanded the role of the military within civilian government.
Hit enter to search or ESC to close
