MBG and KDMP: Strengthening Policy, Correcting Course

In the realm of statecraft, understanding governance requires differentiating between the mechanics of administration and the foundational principles of nationhood, argues Dr. Al Ghozali Hide Wulakada, a lecturer at Universitas Slamet Riyadi. He posits that while governments operate through authority, programs, and policies, a nation is built upon aspirations, its constitution, laws, the welfare of its people, and the continuity of collective life. Consequently, major government policies, particularly those involving substantial state resources, demand a deeper level of inquiry than a simple agreement or disagreement.

The crucial questions, according to Wulakada, should revolve around the policy's purpose, its congruence with constitutional ideals, the fairness of its execution, the distribution of its benefits and risks, and ultimately, its effectiveness in guiding the populace toward a better life. From a legal perspective, this evaluation must extend beyond formal legality. While adherence to legal frameworks and authority is essential, a law-based state also necessitates considerations of justice, rights protection, public interest, and legitimacy. A policy might possess a legal basis, yet its implementation could still be challenged on grounds of fairness and utility.

Wulakada draws a distinction between actions that are unlawful and those that substantially risk diminishing public rights or opportunities, labeling the former a matter of legality and the latter a question of legitimacy. Therefore, the law should not only ask "May the government do this?" but also "Is this method just, and do its benefits reach the people?" It is within this framework that the 'Program Makan Bergizi Gratis' (MBG), or Free Nutritious Food Program, should be examined. Providing nutritious food to Indonesian children is undeniably a noble objective, aligning with the state's responsibility to foster a healthy, intelligent, and capable populace, and fulfilling constitutional aims like educating the nation and advancing general welfare.

Critiques of the MBG program, Wulakada suggests, should not target its fundamental purpose. Instead, the focus should be on how the program is structured to ensure that the significant state budget allocated not only provides food for children but also generates broader economic benefits for society. The MBG program, he contends, is more than just a food initiative. Given its substantial demand for rice, eggs, chicken, fish, vegetables, fruit, milk, spices, transportation, processing, and labor, it creates a vast market. The pertinent question then becomes: who benefits from this market? Does the economic value largely return to farmers, breeders, fishermen, MSMEs, and rural communities, or is a greater portion captured elsewhere?