Regional Autonomy Not New Centralization: Clarifying Authority Between Governments

Indonesia's post-1998 decentralization reforms introduced a new governance paradigm, aiming to bring public services closer to citizens, accelerate development, and foster local democracy. However, the practical implementation of these reforms has revealed persistent issues regarding the division of authority between central and regional governments.

A key challenge is the blurring of boundaries between the central government, provincial governors, and district/city heads. While the 1945 Constitution and Law No. 23 of 2014 clearly delineate powers, political dynamics, leadership styles, and bureaucratic culture often transform cooperative relationships into perceived command structures.

“

Decentralization is not new centralization.

The constitution designates provinces, districts, and cities as autonomous regions responsible for their own governance. Crucially, it does not establish governors as hierarchical superiors to district or city heads in all governmental matters. Governors hold a dual role: as provincial heads and as representatives of the central government. In the latter capacity, they are tasked with guidance, oversight, and coordination of district/city governance, but this does not grant them the authority to usurp the core powers assigned to local administrations.

Experts like Jimly Asshiddiqie stress that decentralization in a unitary state is a tool for better public service, not a superficial delegation of power. He warns against the concentration of power and advocates for clear divisions of authority to uphold the spirit of reform. Similarly, Bagir Manan defines regional autonomy as the independence to manage local interests based on local initiative and public aspirations, distinguishing it from mere execution of higher-level instructions.

“

Autonomy contains independence.