FERRY IRWANDI DITEROR: "UU TNI HANYA UNTUK PARA JENDERAL..... TIDAK SEMUA ORANG BISA DIKENDALIKAN"

Are you afraid of everyone? First of all, this is the first podcast I've accepted, Bro. Because you invited me, Akbar. This is the first podcast everyone is looking for. Everyone is looking for it. Yes. Roughly speaking, we could say this TNI Law is a law for the generals. This means it was drafted , it truly exists, it’s not a hoax, and it comes from the government. Meaning, uh, there is an intention there.

Yes. Many people have asked, who is this law actually meant to serve? Yes, that’s logical. Yes, logical. And more specifically, is this to extend the tenure of the TNI Commander and Chiefs of Staff to be longer? But is it true that you received threats? There are many things I fear, but death is not one of them. It’s only a narrative, it hasn’t

reached the point of action. Ah, I can't say that. Expression and criticism are the wealth of democracy. Without those, democracy truly disappears. Look, I just want Mr. Prabowo to know. For Mr. Prabowo to see this. Just as we, uh, predicted. That the TNI Law was actually ratified. At the time we are filming today, we received news that the President has finally officially signed the TNI Law that we have been debating for some

time recently. And the articles within it are just like our debates, including here in this forum. So then, we are discussing this; the interesting thing is that, as you have also read in the public space, some activists are under, um, pressure. I have brought here someone who has experienced pressure, especially due to their stance on social media. Present here is a social media activist, Irwan Wandang. Well, actually not an activist.

A social media user. A social media user. Because my level of compromise on things is actually very high, except for very high this, but yeah. Okay, because this has, what do you call it, entered the ideological realm. Yes, ideological principles. There’s no such thing as armed people living in the same ecosystem and society as

unarmed people. If you want to enter, leave your weapon, leave your rank, leave your uniform and your troops behind. Yes, that’s non-negotiable. An extreme opening, and I agree. And so that we get the crucial points, just like our debates many times before this , I invited my friend Alarf. Raf, thank you. Thank you, Bro. I’ll go to Raf first, okay?

Yes, Bro. Because of Feri, due to his stance, he received, uh, what do you call it, terror. But let's go to Raf first, let's try to show, uh, there are three crucial articles, right. Yes, that’s right. Raf, right? Let's repeat our debate here on article 7. Article 47 and Article 53. Right. Uh, try showing the draft we received today that has been recorded in the state gazette. How many

paragraphs are there in Article 7? There are four paragraphs. Paragraph 6. There are four paragraphs in paragraph 2; the other war tasks have increased. Yes. In fact, please discuss those other war tasks. Then also Article 47, what has changed and what is crucial here. Yes. Uh, and this Article 53, yes. Okay

, let's start with Article 7, Rif. Uh, what is it called? Please keep the discussion concise because we've discussed this repeatedly. Right. Correct. But the main question is, what is crucial for civil society regarding this article? Discussed repeatedly and still interesting. Okay. Yes, brother. First, uh, regarding

Article 7, there are additions related to military operations other than war, namely points 15 and 16, to counter cyber threats and protect citizens and national interests abroad. Uh-huh. Now, the most fundamental thing in Article 7 is that in Article 7 of the TNI Law Number 34, uh-huh. Operations for war and operations other than war must be based on a state

political decision. That was in the old TNI Law, in the new TNI Law, which is this state copy, for war operations, it still requires a state political decision. Meanwhile, for operations other than war, it's removed; it doesn't need to go through a state political decision. It's explained in the elucidation of Article 7 that it's enough to inform the government to overcome armed rebellion. Paragraph 2, uh, Article 7.

B. Uh, in the elucidation. Yes. Yes. Yes. Number one, and the government informs the DPR regarding the initial plan to overcome armed rebellions. So it's just informative, and it's also stated as " the government." Who is this " government," exactly? Is it the president? Is it the Minister of

Defense who provides the information? In the old TNI Law, the President is clear, rigid there. The President is the one who makes the decision with the consideration of the DPR. Now, the problem here is, uh, the military is trained, educated, and prepared for war, to kill. Therefore, they are the instrument of national defense, sir. Uh-huh.

So that is their primary duty. Now, if for their primary duty under this TNI Law, war operations must go through a state political decision, then for tasks that are other than war, logically, it must still go through a state political decision. Yes. But that is deleted; it's enough to just inform the DPR. What is the impact? In this case, the first impact, brother, is that this is not in line with the constitution. In our

constitution, it is stated that the president is the commander-in-chief over the army, navy, and air force. So, the deployment of military force must be by the president's decision. Uh-huh. Right? Now, in that context, for war operations and operations other than war, it must go through a presidential decision with the consideration of the DPR. That is the constitutional logic. Okay. But it is not like that here.

Operations other than war do not need a political decision from the president, state politics. Let me interrupt for a moment. There are two questions. Yes. The first is why the DPR was so willing to have its constitutional authority taken away. Yes. To the point of giving approval like this. I am also curious about that.

Yes. Yes. That is why I am asking. Unfortunately, in this forum of mine, members of the DPR are rarely present here. Whether they are willing or just daring , I become doubtful which one is accurate. I The second is why must it be distinguished? Split into two. Yes. For war, it must be state politics . For anything other than war, it is enough just to inform.

Okay. That is according to...Why? In my opinion, the first factor is that this will give—when the government discussed it with the DPR, there seemed to be a desire from the government that operations other than war should not be carried out too rigidly and strictly. Whereas in my view, this should actually be strict. Why? Because operations other than war will face their own society. He

Right. When facing their own society to overcome terrorism, rebellion, local government tasks, and so on—those 16 tasks, brother. Those 15 tasks, they should really be calculated by the President and the DPR when the military faces the public, whether the interest is urgent, an emergency, or not. Right. So then we look at the number. Yes. Over there, above.

Now, in that number, when it is in the context of assisting the local government, the military can handle strikes. That means labor or student strikes. Let's read it in full. Yes. Number. What is meant by assisting government duties in the regions, in quotes, is assisting the implementation of government functions in situations and conditions that

require resources, comma, equipment, comma, and the military's capabilities to resolve problems being faced, comma. Among others, assisting in overcoming the aftermath of natural disasters, comma, rehabilitating infrastructure, comma, as well as overcoming problems caused by strikes and communal conflicts. And this becomes dangerous. Very. Yes.

Precisely because it will face the public, our logic is, it must be a presidential decision first with the consideration of the DPR. Right, brother? Correct. But this was actually removed. It is enough to inform the DPR. It means the military will face the public directly without accountability, without a clear decision by the president. This military law is dangerous for the life

of democracy and civil liberties. I ask again, why was the DPR willing? Now, I will ask the DPR leadership back . Why did the DPR leadership ratify this? Yes. I will involve Feri in this part before—what is the testimony on what Feri is facing? Starting from the notes on this article first so we can be systematic. Yes. What are your notes, F?

Actually, regarding the issue of the state political decision, I’ve been reading it; has this been changed or not? That’s the latest draft we updated. However it hasn't been reviewed for war decisions because defining what a " state political decision" actually is, is difficult to explain. A presidential decision is already difficult and clear . Especially for points like in Article 9

. Just informing the House of Representatives (DPR) and we see it as addressing problems resulting from strikes. If what is considered a problem resulting from a strike is the actor who caused the strike to happen, can that be defined as a problem resulting from a strike? Well, give an example. For instance, I work in a labor union in the Cikarang area. Yes.

I am the one who initiates the strike. Then, based on that, the military sees me as the problem of this strike. Yes. Then you are faced with this law. And I am "dealt with." Not faced, dealt with. Dealt with, we can't just interpret it like that, as "addressing problems resulting from a strike." Yes. Yes. It means the strike produces a problem, and it's considered, "Oh, this

is it," which could be a justification for action. That's why, from the beginning, the most correct version of this TNI Law shouldn't be like this. Even if it must be updated, it shouldn't be for things like this. The boundary between civilians and the military should be clear, not mixed like this. Okay, let's move to Article 47. May I go back to the previous point? Oh, go ahead, please.

What is the next point, Bang? From a human rights perspective, the accountability becomes complicated. There is what is called command responsibility. I think Bang Akbar, having been on Commission 3, understands that perfectly. What is the function of that state political decision, Bang? It clarifies who is responsible for the operation, from the top down to the executors. By removing this, the civil authority is

running away from its responsibility, Bang. H. If, for example, it involves armed operations in Papua, and there are excesses of gross human rights violations, they will evade responsibility. From this matter. So, removing this article is essentially the civil authority—in this case, the president—running from its responsibility, shifting the burden

onto the executors. Now, these are events that have happened before, like in the 1998 kidnapping case, where the ones burdened were the perpetrators in the field. The commanders responsible were chased everywhere, but it's been difficult until now in the investigation case. What are you trying to say with this point? I want to say that by removing the state political decision in non-war

operations, the civil authority—in this case, the president—is running away from its responsibility. Regarding command responsibility, the burden of the excesses, if issues arise like gross violations in the field, falls on the field executors. It falls on the operators. It becomes unfair in the dynamics of the operation. to put it in simple terms, the subordinates will bear the consequences

yes, that’s roughly how it is, Sir the President cannot be touched like that that's roughly how it goes with the removal of this article. So, from that perspective, it becomes problematic. Okay, any additional per- enough, right. Okay, let's move to article 47. Now, please, Rafi. For me, what's interesting is that one of the triggers for why I'm being very

vocal is actually article 47 which circulated earlier in early 2024 or 2023. Yeah. which was claimed by the government as a hoax, a fake document, a document with unclear origins. And first, when we hear things like this, hear information like this on social media, of course, we cross-check. Whoa, how could how could how could it read like this where where active military personnel can,

well, simply put, it's like this, civil-wise it's like this. Active military can hold civil positions upon the instruction and authority of the president. Now it's gone. But in the early draft, the military could do business, politics, including holding positions, things like that were there. And when the government denied that it was ever a draft of the TNI bill, we kept digging and that, for me personally, was one of the boiling

points, Brother. the point of anger, you know. This means it was created and it truly exists, it's not a hoax, and the basis is from the government. Meaning, uh there was an intention toward that. Yes. Feri's thought is that the state once planned something. the state once planned this thinking maliciously, but no the state really did plan this and they denied that it was a fake bill, that it

was fake, and it wasn't fake, and if this were a court of law, I could prove clearly that it is not fake. it is not fake. Because the digital traces, even though they've been deleted, maybe because of incompetence by the people inside, they still remain, Brother, and I still keep them until now, I have a copy. and if opened now, it's still there but if it were a court of law, that's why that's why it was planned by someone

and discussed by someone that they wanted the active military to have authority like this and that someone could just be named the state. Yes. So but it will be called a hoax, Brother. It will be called that. That's why if anyone sues me in court for spreading hoaxes, I will say your incompetence makes you the problem because you didn't delete it cleanly. Okay.

Now, but what is feared or what Feri has been pointing out from the beginning is that the old draft is now gone, right. It's gone. The problem is we'll discuss that at the end later. that an active colonel yes, proposing proposing the exact same thing the exact thing conveyed by okay, we'll discuss that later, let's

go back to the article first, right, Raf, how is it? Yes, this is related to civil positions , there is an addition of several secretariats, right, first, the Republic of Indonesia's Attorney General's Office that even though below there is from 9 to 14 Yes, um, the Junior Attorney General for Military Criminal Affairs will have an explanation for that.

Uh-huh. Eh, second point to note is the Presidential Secretariat, that’s new, isn't it? Because usually in the old law, it wasn't included; now it is, so the head of the presidential secretariat could be an active TNI officer, and right now it is an active two-star general, right ? Oh. So, this is legalizing something that was wrong yesterday; that’s basically the justification. The next one is,

what is it, BNPB, the disaster management agency. This also raises the question: can the military handle disasters? Yes, they can. But must an active military officer serve as the head of BNPB? It shouldn't be that way because that is a civilian realm that should be handled by civilians. Like in the United States , there is FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency. FEMA is under the U.S. Department of Homeland Security,

Bang. But the head of it is a civilian. But can FEMA deploy the military for disaster response? They can, and they can be involved to handle certain things. Now, in the old law, this disaster management wasn't included, right? Now it is, and surely this disaster management body is BNPB, even though it doesn't specify it—terrorism management, maritime security, the

maritime security agency, the Attorney General's Office—those are the additions. Uh-huh. But all that really shows is that there is still room for the military to enter civilian positions, with the addition of the number from what was it? 9 to... 14. Bang Akbar surely understands that when Law 34 of 2004 was made, that number was actually a compromise.

Hmm. Why is that? Because at that time, it was enough to just be in the Ministry of Defense. No need for the others, that was the debate. But because there was still the TNI-POLRI faction, the overlapping areas like the State Intelligence Agency and others were also included, so it was enough to just have those. So if we read the what-do-you-call-it, the ratio legis or the records of the debate, it

was already very much a compromise. Now , it’s being expanded again. The discussion today should not be about expanding but narrowing it down, I suppose. Is this still appropriate? The argument most often used to counter the challenges from you, our friends in civil society, is Yeah. What is wrong with the TNI being everywhere?

After all, the police are everywhere too, is that basically it? Yes. Yes. Same with business. What is wrong with the TNI doing business? It turns out that TNI doing business is understood as, "it's okay to improve the economy, right?" Yes. Meanwhile, in some realities we see, that business is on a very large scale. It is personal in nature. Uh-huh.

We will find that in various places, especially in mines and all sorts of things. So, in this part, what can Feri note is , are we just toying with the wording of a law that actually has extraordinary effects? For example, like what Bang Akbar said earlier, they have a logical fallacy. One mistake does not justify another mistake. That means two mistakes, right ? For instance, if the police are doing

business, "Oh, the police are doing it too," that doesn't mean both are right, it doesn't make one of them correct. Right? Second, what's wrong with the TNI doing business? Well, back again, you cannot be equipped with something that we are not equipped with. You are equipped with weapons. That is what matters most . Weapons are tools that can take another person's life in an instant. Hm. No matter what, someone who is

legally allowed to hold a weapon will never be able to live together and compete fairly with someone who does not hold a weapon. That is why there are civilians, and there is the military. He. Of course, of course, we don't need to talk at length about other matters. If these are well-educated human beings, they know these two things are very different. He

let's say a boxing match or a UFC fight , for instance. Would we enjoy a fight between a person using bare hands, then suddenly the other uses a samurai sword , and then the one with the sword whines? We need to be in the fight too, but we must use a samurai sword. H this is shameful for our military, this is shameful. If you really want to compete, if you really want to do business,

leave it, leave it all behind. If, according to the records, according to the justification before the law, what do they call it, Bang? Academic paper. Well, the academic paper feels the human resources are high quality, they are superior, and so on. Okay, fine, we agree. If you really are better, surely you don't need all these ranks, troops, and weapons, right? That, that, that is the logic first, we need to fix the

framework of thinking because people sometimes refute it; instead of reducing the attacks, they actually double them if the argument is built, built by the contradicting party in that way. So it's actually not about the personnel, but about the fact that there is a clear borderline between the military and civilians. Now, if we have to be even more open, we can say Even with the TNI not doing business, we can see in every region that if there is a

large house, people say, "Oh, that's a general's house," in a state where the TNI is forbidden from doing business. Meanwhile, on the other hand, we see for ourselves that the mid-level soldiers live chasing after the poverty line, Bang. Yeah. The non-commissioned officers, the enlisted, the bullet fodder, they are chasing after it. Truly chasing after the poverty line. I experienced that. Yeah.

Is there a soldier among you here? Me. I'm a soldier, Bang. Hard, right? Can't even afford college. Wait, Bro. What rank was your father? I'm a soldier, Bang. The last one was Sergeant Major. Sergeant Major. Same with him. That means bullet fodder, Bang. Living in a difficult state, Bang. Okay . Eh, okay. And this point, the question you raised

, is important: both the TNI and the police don't need to hold civilian positions because their areas are different. Democracy requires us to differentiate institutional functions, right? The task of intelligence is early detection, the police is law enforcement, and the military is defending sovereignty. We must divide them like that. Civilian bureaucratic institutions have the task of serving. Because it is impossible for one

institution to accumulate authority unto itself. Being a defense tool while also being a civilian bureaucracy. That is not possible in a democratic system; in an authoritarian system, it was possible and did happen during the New Order. Therefore, they are indeed not permitted to enter civilian positions because their duty is national defense. Second, once the military requests a civilian position, at the same time, they must also be subject to the

civilian system. In this case, the general judicial system. When they seek civilian positions, they must be subject to it. But the problem is that, until now, they are still subject to military courts. That is one of the things we have discussed here. And my question is, let's open Article 65. Yes. This one? Yes.

So, this is in the current draft, right ? Sir. Huh? It's still here. It is still in effect. Still in effect. So it wasn't discussed ? Still—wasn't it discussed? Yes, it is still in effect. Well, here it is. So, my question to everyone present here regarding what Araf mentioned earlier is, okay, let's say the officers—and these are usually high-ranking officers—

are placed there. But what if a situation occurs that isn't as imagined or planned, what then ? They commit an act of criminal offense. Let's say a corruption case. The Basarnas case is an example we have now. If that happens, will they be subject to or rather, will they be tried or brought to which court?

General court or military court? If it remains a military court, that sounds unfair, doesn't it? Requesting a civilian post but being tried in a military court. What is your response? Yes, this is homework, brother, homework that Article 65 of the TNI Law must be enforced. But the problem is, in the TNI Law, there is a transitional article, Article 74 or 76, you can check, where the implementation of this

article only applies if Law 31/1997 on military courts is revised. Mm-hmm. So if the TNI Law is to be revised for the sake of transformation and reform in the military, the result should be that the transitional article is deleted. So that Article 65 automatically, mutatis mutandis, applies, brother. This article is beautiful, but it's locked by that transitional clause, brother. Now, that

is what should be revised, but it hasn't happened. That is why civil society considers that the revision of the TNI Law does not push toward transformation and professional military reform, but rather the opposite, setting it back by opening spaces for military personnel to enter civil service. Let's move to the third article or point that has made this debate so extensive. Article 53 is quite

interesting—no, not just quite interesting, it's as interesting as the others. Perhaps this is important because we were just discussing the quality of life between high-ranking officers and our poor parents. Well, how about we hear from Feri first? If, for example, it is also a bit confusing and contradictory when extending this age, considering it as extending the career and the career ladder of the TNI itself. Because those

who previously, for example, retired at what age? What was the last one for high-ranking officers, 50? One-star. There’s a sequence for it. If NCOs, 55, for war. 58. That's for a Colonel. Yes. One-star 60, two-star. Two-star 61, three-star 62. It could even be longer if deemed necessary by the state, you know.

Based on basic math, it just means. How long will they be needed by the state? From 58 to 62, how long do those in the middle of the pyramid have to wait? Yes, if there is a backlog here in the middle of the pyramid. The top part is being extended, the tenure. Surely Feri has heard that even now, based on the old law, not even this yet .

There are around 400 non-job officers. Non-job. Piling up there. Yeah. Yeah, it’s not funny, a two-star general with no job, what are they doing? There are even three-star generals with no job. And to solve that problem, it should be accelerated, right? Yes. So, there is actually a fundamental question regarding this article.

Yes. Who is this revision actually for? More precisely, which part of the TNI? In more detail, the low-ranking ones or the high-ranking ones? Bang Akbar's father who is poor, or my father who is poor—it has no effect on them. In fact, they are increasingly pressured by this law. Even mid-ranking officers are disadvantaged by this law. Because the career path in the military

is difficult, isn't it? Especially when certain levels are already politicized. How could they possibly advance? In the end, what happens? In the end, it opens up space for other side jobs. At the same time, there is a young officer named Lieutenant from, from. Major. Tedi Indra Wijaya became a Lieutenant Colonel, which turned out to be challenged by other parties. Because this clashes with this law, right?

Yeah. While others are queuing for a long time. The other one gets the fast track. How many batches did he skip to get that promotion, Bang? According to Mas Samat Ginting and Nadi Wijayanto, he should have waited until 2032 to become a Lieutenant Colonel. Because his peers are still Majors. Still Majors. Yeah. Just got it. Let's connect this with our issues, Raf

. Yes. Yes, Bang. What is the explanation regarding this? First, it's like this, Bang. When Law 34 on the TNI was created, the extension of retirement age was done... but they didn't predict that the extension would lead to that buildup. Yeah. So the buildup happening today is because the retirement extension was included when the TNI Law was drafted.

leading to that buildup. Now, it's already piled up and then increased again by this extension. I can't imagine how to resolve this problem, as people are already confused about the current solution. With this extension, the TNI will definitely face an internal organizational crisis regarding that buildup, especially at the middle officer level. As for the high-ranking officers you

mentioned, they are surely happy because their tenure lasts longer and they keep their positions. So for the generals, they must be happy about this . Meaning, the question many people asked : who exactly is this law serving? That becomes logical. Yes, logical. And more specifically, is this to extend the tenure of the TNI Commander and Chiefs of Staff? Because the TNI Commander is actually retiring

soon in August. With the TNI Law, it means they are entering a space that perhaps, uh, could go up to 2029, right? Yes. extended, especially with the position, uh, what do you call it, according to a presidential decree, according to the needs determined by presidential decree. I imagine the officers, especially the middle-ranking ones, are extremely frustrated seeing this law.

Especially for these middle officers, their wait will be even longer, Bang. Particularly at the colonel level. The question is, when will they get a star on their shoulder? It will take a long time, when will these colonels advance? But there could be a way out. a way calm down, there are 14 ministries or agencies, or maybe it will be distributed to other generals; they can't get it anyway.

When we were civil servants, Bang, when there was a buildup, Oh, right, right. already out. It's easier for us to transfer to other agencies or at least move between units . They can't possibly move to other agencies. Meaning that bottleneck is truly the worst bottleneck among all forms of organizations and institutions. The military has nowhere to go. Even 14

wouldn't work, since those 14 positions are all military anyway. Yes. So actually, one of the things that ultimately worsens the TNI as an institution, not as individuals or specific people. What’s worst is this Article 53, where if a performance audit or a consultant comes in, it will create major new problems and could potentially lead to things we don't want. For example, like what? In the past, the spirit of

bureaucratic reform in 2006 initially introduced performance allowances and regional performance allowances. In 2006, it first started at the Directorate General of Taxes so that tax officials would no longer be corrupt. The solution was to increase salaries, create remuneration, and fix the system . Yes. Did it have an impact? Yeah, we can

just answer that ourselves, I mean whether it has an impact or not, we can debate that. But there is a solution right there. Now, if the current situation is like this, while the TNI has other powers. We, everyone watching , even the TNI personnel themselves, everyone watching this podcast, we cannot pretend to be blind or pretend not to see the reality of how our TNI is in society. Right? I dare to say this, and imagine that what we have

been complaining about regarding the TNI in sectors where the TNI shouldn't be is increasing. If an institution wants to be right, the institution should be fixed first, and this is not an action that fixes the institution. I actually have thoughts going everywhere regarding this. Because I somewhat understand the TNI organization as we are children of military personnel, right? Right.

Yeah. We certainly hope that the loyalty of the subordinates to the leadership is truly 100%. Yes. Let's hope nothing happens. If things are like this, in the middle of the war, the loyalty will be a question mark. Don't ask me. Right? Remember, brother. At least, at the very least, it has happened, but in other countries.

It has happened in Indonesia, brother. In the Old Order era, there was a program called RERA, military reorganization and rationalization in '48. Uh, this reorganization program also impacted the dynamics of rebellions in several regions due to dissatisfaction with the program. Meaning, we once experienced the problem that when military organization and organizational structuring are not

carried out well, not building " democratic civilian control" but building "subjective civilian control" —in simple terms, the politicization of the military by civil authorities— then the impact on the inter-organization tends to experience turmoil, like that. That's the theory, conceptually. What is happening now is the application of subjective civilian control, not democratic civilian control. This is what needs to be

anticipated, roughly speaking. Let the Arabs talk about that here. But if we learn from history abroad, it has happened, right? Yes. Colonel Muammar Gaddafi and Colonel Honasan, right? Gregorio Honasan. Yes. Uh-huh. Um. This conversation is uncomfortable. But it's not finished yet, brother, it has to be hatched. Actually, I also want to ask brother Akbar, who is

really full of political experience, has dealt with many people, and so on, and has followed the dynamics from the reform transition until now. This isn't normal, is it, brother? When there is global geopolitical volatility, especially when we talk about the economy, supply and demand, supply chains, the Trump effect, and all sorts of things. It is very, very unnatural for a country to be doing something outside of that without looking at this

extraordinary external danger. It doesn't, it doesn't mean foreign threats will. Sometimes I’m confused by people saying this is because foreign parties don't like Indonesia, man. They have their own, even crazier things to deal with. Who would even bother with us, honestly. But we’re just like this, you know. Even though in this situation, we are actually in a position to improve ourselves. Our industries need to be built, like

that. We need to build our industry, our formal sector must be strong, the informal needs to be shifted, and so on . Why can’t we just, politically speaking—again, not talking about good or bad, just the political compass . A new term should have policies with clear metrics and a high potential to be liked by the public, a high probability. And it seems like It seems like you don't need to be a genius to understand

that this isn't one of them. Fair. Why, brother? I’m the one asking, why are you turning the question back on me? But you understand better. Yes. But in my opinion, well, I’m older than Feri. I think this question should always come up from the public sphere. Yeah. From civil society.

Yeah. Feri wants to say, "Brother Akbar, why is this nation actually moving backward ?" Yeah, the discussion is something like that, right? Yeah. The discussion is instead about so, yes. So actually, we need one or two more episodes. For that, I’ll make the answer simple because I’m a former member of the DPR. I am a political animal; I was a founder and

official of a political party. I always go back to that big office in Senayan called the DPR RI. Yeah. That should be the main filter for how the country moves forward. Why do members of the DPR need to be smart? Why do DPR members need to understand the hearts of their people? By looking into the eyes of one Indonesian citizen , they should be able to tell if this person is hurting or happy. That is

what they should represent in those parliamentary chambers. Yeah. Turns out, they don’t. I find it difficult to answer your question, Feri . But I like that question of yours. So , in my opinion, why did I create forums like this? Because I think there really need to be many parties involved to provide—well, to educate the public about their rights. Feri Irwandi , here you are, besides being a victim

of bullying that we will discuss later at the end of this talk, you want to say this: "Am I really in a country that protects my dignity?" That’s what you want to ask, right? Araf. Yes. That’s my question too, you know . Our discussion now has entered the fourth-generation warfare, Brother. Which requires two keys in this asymmetrical generation warfare. Professional soldiers and

well-provided-for troops. Something like, yeah I actually want this discussion about defense, the TNI bill in that area, to focus on building modernizing defense equipment and soldier welfare to face It's not moving backward, but we are moving backward, Bang, that's what Feri was actually getting at. Yes, and this is something that, in my opinion, is exhausting on one hand but also has to be faced because it's

becoming a threat to us too. We like it or not, we have to face it, Fair. Yes. That's why if I may add, Bang, it's just really confusing, you know. All the reasoning they are trying to use is just very, very confusing. Roughly speaking, we can say this TNI Law is a law for the generals. I can say that. This is a law for generals and even for the DPR, right. Yes, that's right. I'm the one taking the

risk there. Right. Right. And for the DPR members, it also has no benefit. Yes. What? Their benefits aren't there either. Except for micro benefits, the small ones. This is really us seeing that our generals just want things comfortable, that's what this law is. We aren't against the TNI Law being designed or updated like Bang Araf said earlier, especially for the soldiers '

welfare as times move on, so there must be some adjustments. But not like this, that's what I mean. Yes. Not like this. And it's also confusing if the DPR defends, for example, the DPR tries to defend the 12 %VAT issue yesterday or some other policies, it could make sense they have interests. Sorry Bang, why I'm concerned about welfare is because you and I are both children of soldiers who lived in

poverty. I wanted to go to college, Bang, I passed the state university entrance but couldn't go because I didn't have the 500,000 rupiah registration fee. In the end, my brother had to sell his camera so I could pay the registration fee to Brawijaya, then I could go to college. There are many friends of mine who are like me. They have dreams of going to college, these children of soldiers. I lived in Halim. We couldn't

do it, Bang. Now, the question is, where is the state's responsibility when the military has dedicated themselves, giving their lives for sovereignty. Providing welfare for them should be something that we really need to discuss. Besides modernizing defense equipment, the state always says there's no money for that. I say there is always money, there is always a way. As long as the requirement is that the state budget allocation is truly for

the defense sector and not toyed with. Something like that, Bang. This Araf is making me sad. It brings me back to my past, right. But I can confirm it because my high school was semi-military, Bang. The one training us was a Sergeant Major. Yes. Basically, middle-ranking soldiers. Then when I was a civil servant, there was an orientation, we met with military personnel too. After the

orientation, he asked for cigarettes, literally asked for cigarettes, this friend, a soldier from a special unit, for the whole duration he kept asking for cigarettes. Asking for cigarettes is, uh, tough, Boss. Money is tight. From there I knew. Even for the money that is actually legal for them, they don't even get it. Well, that's it. I want to refine it. We should be discussing the TNI Bill,

like how we can improve soldiers' welfare, right? Not discussing retirement matters. Regarding the lack of positions, that’s not the case. For retirement, for NCOs and enlisted, I agree; but for officers, it's unnecessary—let me refine Feri's grievance. A colonel named MHD Halqis, a lecturer at the Defense University, filed for a judicial review. Uh-huh.

Regarding this law. Uh-huh. Challenging four points. The points Feri mentioned are from the bill draft. Which is said to be a hoax. Which is said to be a hoax. Yes. Try to explain it first, Raf. Yes. So, there’s this colonel from the Defense University who filed a judicial review petition to the Constitutional Court while the TNI Law

was being discussed in the House. So, when the TNI Bill was being discussed at the House, the petition came in with four points: challenging the concept of a professional military so that soldiers could be elected. Being able to be elected means being able to engage in politics. Yes. Hmm. Soldiers could engage in business and occupy civilian positions more freely. Not limited as it was before. Now, if

these four points are approved by the Constitutional Court, it would strengthen the function and return the military to the political, economic, and business spheres. Is that petition still ongoing? It’s still in process, brother. I see . And of course, regarding that, civil society will respond to this petition. Perhaps they could file as a related party in the upcoming debates at the Constitutional Court. It will enter the

next stage, sir. We are waiting for, uh , who is involved, friends? The civil society coalition for security sector reform is involved, including YLBHI, KontraS, Imparsial, PBHI, HRWG, LBH Jakarta, Amnesty International, Centra Initiative, ELSAM , and many other organizations joined here. Uh, we can still breathe a little sigh of relief because I let Araf mention those names so the public also

thinks, "Oh, it turns out we aren't staying silent on all this; there are those taking action." So let's wait, okay. Why did I use the phrase "I want to refine Feri's grievance" just now? Because there is a lecturer who filed that, a lecturer from the Defense University. If I’m not mistaken, he’s a professor too. A tenured professor. A tenured professor, meaning if he's a

professor, then he's a professor, right ? Correct. The university, brother, the university — Defense University, under the Ministry of Defense. Okay. Are you asking me or do you want to ask ? Okay, so the situation is like that; I invited Feri because I wanted to get

certainty, to get the detailed story concerning the terror you experienced after responding to this law. Hmm. That really should have been at the beginning. Yes. But then, I want the viewers to learn from Feri that when he takes a stance, he then accepts the risks. So he isn't just taking a stance; there were arguments he discussed in the earlier parts.

But it's true that you received those threats, you received those threats, and it didn't bother me at all, and they also realize the more I'm terrorized, the more I... What were the threats like, Fer? Uh, what I can tell you is just the usual things that happen in the sphere. It’s okay to repeat them, it’s fine . Yes. WhatsApp, DMs, uh, attempts to break into everything—Instagram,

Twitter, and all sorts of things. Yeah, just things like that. And there are some things I cannot talk about because if I do, the essence of what I’m fighting for disappears. The point is, uh, like this, I see it, of course, and I don't mind when it happens because it's part of the causality for myself. Of course, that's a problematic thing. But I don’t want to lament it. The point is, my way of fighting back is that the more you terrorize me, the

more—well, there are many things I fear, but death is not one of them. The more you are bothered, the more you will feel terrorized yourself. Did it ever escalate to physical threats? Oh, it reached physical threats, yes, even threats to take my life, it reached that point. But, in the end, it never... Was it just a narrative, not reaching actual action? Ah, I can't say that.

Look, Sir. Uh, I don't want to pressure you to reveal the details. But why did I invite Feri and also discuss this at the same time? Because I think it’s a barbaric culture that shouldn’t exist. Let alone doing it, even thinking about it shouldn’t be a thing anymore. Now, I have a thought like this, brother. If we make a big deal out of things like this, they will forever feel that this is a big deal. For me,

for someone with a platform like mine. It’s a different story for other members of society. What does that mean ? It means you can't control everyone. Oh, yes. An, an important stance. But why did I bring this up, even though it’s been talked about in various places, I think we must be on a unified path that we must protect this country for the next 1,000 years by Yes. collectively rejecting barbaric

behaviors like what you have experienced. It could be experienced by other people , too. In terms of, uh, what do you call it, digital. My forum has been hacked twice, you know, Ref. It’s cool, that’s why, brother, the forum. Twice, until our algorithm dropped to almost zero, right? I know they wanted to target it so that no one would watch my forum anymore.

But even more people are watching. Uh. That’s why, I don’t understand why they do that. Let’s just hope they don’t try it again. I’m going back to the case faced by F. Raf, could you give us a note on how this shouldn't happen again, and what should we as civil society do? Yes, I agree with that, Bang. Events like this must not happen. What Feri experienced is also experienced by many

friends advocating for the TNI Law, partly like Andri from Kontras. Andri was hit too. Yes, he was hit; even Kontras faced several threats, and in some actions too, they faced quite harsh pressure in several places, like Jakarta, Semarang, Jogja, or Surabaya, and so on. This is a democracy; expression and criticism are the wealth of democracy. Without

that, democracy is truly lost. So for those who understand democracy, a fundamental principle is accepting criticism and civil expression as essential for democratic progress. But if it's seen as a threat, met with intimidation or terror, then something is wrong, something is not right in our democracy . In other words, the government certainly deserves to be held responsible for that issue. So what

happened to Tempo, for example, with the terror of a pig's head a pig's head and a rat's head the rat one, that also shows: wow, are the old patterns like in the New Order era coming back today? This is what causes concern. But then again, Bang, we must not be afraid, we must not stop , and we must face these things. Why? Because we want space for freedom. We want this republic and country to stay

on track as a constitutional state based on law that respects differences. Okay. Okay. Lastly. Are you afraid of everything? Okay, let me add a few things, Bang. Actually, this is the first podcast I've accepted , Bang. Because Bang Akbar invited me; this is the first podcast everyone is looking for. Everyone is looking for that. Yes. Everyone is looking for me, and I felt like, wait, I'm working

right now. I said, wait, I'm working right now. I feel like no, I have to focus on one thing because it's bigger than anything. It's bigger than anything. And I've met so many parties, you know. And likewise, I always say this is an ideological mission. Now, what I'm most worried about now is we never know. We never know what the social media space is like. The real, the truth, we never know. We never know who has an interest, who has an agenda.

Why was this created? Just like the question, is the political elite that tactless to see how dangerous it is to pass this bill at a moment like this? We never know who wants something to happen or something not to happen, and so on. Ultimately, all we can do is connect the dots. Connecting the dots. I’ve had a mission from the start, ever since I heard—following up on what I said earlier—that the government denied that the draft

regarding business and politics was a hoax. That the military could engage in business and politics, and could hold positions based on instructions and so on. And it turns out, it's actually there. That’s where I realized, oh, I have to go full fight here, because once this happens, there's no turning back. Now, in that fight, I’ve really tried to calculate and crunch the numbers on how public opinion can shift this way, to see the urgency of this

TNI Bill. And finally, yesterday, in the analytics data, when checking the TNI Bill, my name actually came up as number one. Below it was Sumidas Ahmad, then Utut Ardianto, then whoever else. So, it means the point is already correct here . Now, when people see all that and all forms of terror, and I get scared, then everything falls apart. Hm. What does that mean? It means we are

civilians. Whatever dynamics happen later, fine. But it’s still civilian versus civilian. But God forbid, if we have to clash with the military, then this is what will happen. Once military power is established, how long does it take to fall? That could take decades, man. It’s a different fight, a different form, a different situation. Are people like you, Bang Akbar, in danger? No. Are people like me in danger? No. Whatever I’ve done,

whatever I’ve built in the past, when that happens and the country is in chaos, I can just leave. Hm. Yeah. But 200 million people. Yeah. Hm. We just don't know, you know? When power changes and it turns for the worse, we don't know. Yeah. And when we’re back to a situation where we never know when we’ll die,

when we’ll go missing, when we’ll be shot, when we’ll be called to an office and only our names remain. Coming back with parts of our bodies missing. Yes, that’s exactly what I mean. So it’s like people don’t see the urgency. If we think about the worst case, this is really bad. This is really bad. Coming back to all political dynamics, as long as it's civilian versus civilian. Yes, since the reform era,

that’s what’s been happening. But if the level is no longer a fair fight, then okay it's not gonna be good. So I think once we’ve discussed this and the law is passed, it’s time for the public to realize that the potential danger becomes even greater. And I sometimes hope the president understands that. Look, I just want Mr. Prabowo to know, for Mr. Prabowo to see this, you know.

Don't you want to be like Mr. SBY, a military man? But in the end, he felt calm when he was in office, "I don't know how people think, what kind of legacy do you want to leave behind when you die?" Hm. When stepping down from power. Yes, stepping down from power is seen as— imagine, sir. Mr. Prabowo—uh, Mr. SBY —we know that when he was in office, there were many weaknesses or whatever. But what remains now is a fragrant name

. H A truly fragrant name, you know. Yes. Now, if I were president, I would certainly be envious of a president like this. Why, given they have the same background? Why—does President Prabowo not want to be the same? To be seen in the same light; that’s from me. But I salute these students, brother.

They have enough morality and massive movements, right, in addressing this issue. And in my opinion, uh I still hope and continue to hope that the student movement will continue to live for this nation. Emm, Mas Araf, thank you. Hm. In the ideological realm, I no longer care about the number of viewers for episodes like this. I don't care anymore. If it turns out there are only five viewers, but those

five can join us all toward an understanding of what kind of democracy we are aiming for, it is more meaningful. If it is watched by 10 million viewers but we then just stay silent watching a legislative process take place in a way—and especially for a goal—that is inappropriate, that is a risk for us. So, allow me to thank all my friends, Mas Araf, who is always in civil society along with other friends.

Feri, with all his content—viewers, this is one of the good content creators. He already has millions of subscribers too. Feri, you know, my dear, I will always support you for things that are logical for our society, right? Like we talked about earlier, I even wrote this. In mine. Hm. Guard carefully the power that you currently hold. Because there will

always be reasons from within yourself to justify all your behaviors in power. And "this is for the sake of the people " is the phrase that appears most often for that. However, God also has a way of judging the honesty of your heart and your behavior. History records that not a few rulers ended up disgraced due to the failure to measure the quality of their honesty. Nice. Uh, we are taking that position here, Mas Araf.

See you at the Constitutional Court, sir. Viewers, a heavy discussion; the fight is never over. Yes, the fight is not over. Yes, that's how it is. The two people I invited here are as you often see in the public sphere, always in the, what should I say, substantial realm. Uh, Araf at the Constitutional Court, then uh, Feri with his content that is always uh sharp, right?

Yeah. It's fine if I promote them here. One of the podcasts I watch is Feri's. Yes. Sometimes I actually get scared myself just watching it. But that's how it is, we shouldn't feel threatened by progressive ideas. For that, I invite you all once again to get involved in our program, Rakyat Bersikap. Like in previous episodes, we are taking the theme of Jokowi's fake diploma, a question mark, what is the stance on

Jokowi, because this is a growing voice in society. We need to record it, we need to talk about it so that our civic life can progress. Please share your stance by visiting www.rakabbersikap.id . id/stance for Jokowi. Let's keep the logic of the state through conversation . Thank you for watching this conversation. Yeah.