Elisabeth Kramer – On Monday 25 August, protestors took to the streets outside the House of Representatives (DPR) building in Jakarta under the banner of 'dissolve the DPR' (bubarkan DPR). These demonstrations were sparked by anger following an announcement by Deputy House Speaker Adies Kadir that national lawmakers would receive a new monthly housing allowance of Rp50million (approximately AUD4,700). These protests have continued through the week.
Turning violent with protestor throwing Molotov Cocktails, police have responded with tear gas, water cannons and tactical vehicles. That an online taxi motorcycle driver in close proximity to the protests was brutally killed by being run over by a police tactical vehicle has only fuelled public discontent.
The rationale for the new allowance was that legislators in the current term [2024-2029] were not receiving government housing, unlike in previous years, and were therefore entitled to compensation. This was further justified by the fact that many legislators are not from Jakarta and have to pay for accommodation when they are in town. The previously existing DPR housing complex where they received free accommodation was decommissioned in 2024 due to quality complaints from residents.
The allowance announcement led to outrage for many reasons. First, the amount of Rp50 million was seen as outrageously high – much more than what 'ordinary Indonesians' earn – and a poor use of taxpayers' money. This was further exacerbated by a viral moment in which Kadir gave a nonsensical calculation for how the Rp50million amount had been determined, defended it as being insufficient to find suitable accommodation in the vicinity of the legislative complex. He claimed that around Rp78million would be required every month and so legislators would still be out-of-pocket.
While a charitable interpretation would be that Kadir misspoke, the fact that his calculations were wildly incorrect led to ridicule and undermined the rationale of the allowance. Responding to pressure, Deputy House Speaker Sufmi Dasco Ahmad clarified on 26 August 2025 that the allowance would only be applicable for one year, from October 2024-October 2025, and that it could only to be used for housing, dismissing claims that it was a salary increase. However, this explanation has done little to address the underlying concerns that prompted public anger in the first place.
So, what do these protests say about current attitudes towards politicians, their work and their lifestyles in Indonesia? Following on from the recent One Piece flag phenomenon, the critiques that have unfolded reflect much deeper issues regarding Indonesians' perceptions of politicians. Not only are they seen as out of touch with the concerns of everyday people but also the decisions they make about government spending are made without transparency and accountability.
The housing allowance: is it justified?
One reason the new Rp50 million (AUD4,700) monthly housing allowance was such a shock to Indonesians is that it stands in stark contrast to the minimum wage rate (Upah Minimum Regional, UMR) for Jakarta, which currently sits at Rp5,396,791 (approximately AUD500) per month. As the minimum wage is government-sanctioned, the fact that another government body came out so publicly with wildly different calculations for housing, let alone other costs associated with surviving in Jakarta, hit a raw nerve.
Online media forum Kok Bisa compared the buying power of politicians and ordinary citizens. It found that on a politician's wage it would take 2 years and 1 month to afford a house, whereas it would take 38 years and 7 months for someone on minimum wage to do the same. Furthermore, politicians do not personally pay tax on their earnings, as the state covers it for them.
There have also been calls for more transparency on how the DPR decided on the allowance amount in the first place. Defending the decision, House Speaker Puan Maharani said that the determination was thoroughly evaluated and took into account 'the conditions and prices in Jakarta.' A cursory scan of property websites in Indonesia such as rumah123 and lamudi.co.id, list a wide range of accommodation available for rent around the Senayan area which surrounds the legislative complex. Yes, the area is central and highly desirable, but fully-furnished 2-bedroom apartments can still be found for under Rp10 million per month. Considerably larger houses at the low-end of the price spectrum can be found for Rp20 million per month.
Of course, there are other neighbourhoods close by that offer comparable options at significantly lower prices. The previous accommodation for DPR members was in Kalibata, a neighbourhood around 10 kilometres away from the DPR offices. This does beg the question of how legislators landed on the allowance sum of Rp50million per month in the first place, and whether politicians' entitlements are too high.
Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) and the Indonesian Institute have framed the debate in terms of what politicians already earn, highlighting that their compensation is already generous and their accommodation should not be further subsidised with public funds. In the aftermath of the announcement, several politicians have made public their earnings. Puan Maharani and Dasco Ahmad have both stated that their take home pay is around Rp100 million per month (AUD9,381), including base wages, allowances and higher duty benefits.
But the Indonesian Forum for Budget Transparency (Forum Indonesia untuk Transparansi Anggaran (Fitra) has claimed it to be closer to Rp230million (AUD21,578). For reference, the Central Statistics Agency (Badan Pusat Statistik, BPS), put the average monthly salary for managers in Jakarta at Rp14,329,826 (AUD1,341) (August 2024).
Other discourses that have emerged include comparing Indonesian politicians salaries to other countries around the world, including other ASEAN countries and many European states like Sweden. In a more local example, DPR salaries have been contrasted with those of teachers (particularly non-formal teachers or guru honorer), who receive between Rp1-2million (AUD93,81-187,64) per month – although there are reports of them receiving much less, particularly in rural areas.
Politicians out of touch
With politicians' salaries way above average pay rates in Jakarta, politicians have been accused of being unworthy of such high salaries and out of touch with the concerns of everyday Indonesians.
Netizens have flocked to social media to complain, including by posting comedic videos about how much they survive on in Jakarta. Some link their complaints to recent viral videos of politicians dancing (berjoget) and singing during legislative sessions, while another netizen compiled images of politicians asleep during debates. The underlying message is clear – what are you actually doing to earn your keep?
The public response of some politicians has added further fuel to the fire. Accused of being out of touch, KBR.ID have called the situation an 'empathy test' for politicians, which several seem to have failed. Project Multatuli compiled a list of quotes which exemplified the haughty retorts of politicians.
In some choice examples, PDI-P member Deddy Sitorus was quoted as saying that comparing legislators to becak drivers or workers is a 'logical fallacy', while Nasdem member Ahmad Sitori stated that people calling for the dissolution of the DPR 'are the dumbest people in the world.' Nasdem member Nafa Urbach refuted criticism of the housing allowance, arguing that due to traffic her commute to the DPR from outer suburb Bintaro was "extreme" (luar biasa) so she needed the allowance to live closer to work. Kompas, in a sly lampooning of this argument, calculated that by taking public transportation and walking she could be at work within 35 minutes.
Online discourse criticising the decision has drawn much from ideas about the appropriate use of public funds and that, as taxpayers, Indonesians should have a say in how politicians are compensated. Much has been made about Indonesia's economic situation which led to drastic cross-sectoral funding cuts earlier in 2025, including to the education and health budgets, and regional fund transfers. In an economic context where the government has been forced to take drastic measures and promote 'efficiency' within the national budget, a high additional allowance for lawmakers seems like a poor use of already limited funds.
Attempts to silence criticism have further angered the public. Reminiscent of the political debate surrounding flying the One Piece flag on Indonesia's national day, the Deputy Minister for Communication and Digital, Angga Raka Prabowo, called on social media platforms TikTok and Meta to assist with deplatforming 'provocative content.' In their attempts to mediate online channels, places where citizens can post their political complaints and critique government policies, politicians have only intensified the perception they believe that they should be above criticism.
Questioning the position of politicians
The protests and commentary on the housing allowance, both online and offline, reflect a revived spotlight on debate about the role of politicians and public expectations of them.
While the announcement of the housing allowance provided an impetus for outrage, the issues subsequently discussed are reflective of a much deeper dissatisfaction with the way the government is run. These August 2025 protests are part of a more recent history of protests stemming from the Dark Indonesia (Indonesia Gelap) movement, which aimed to highlight a plethora political complaints.
One of the fundamental reasons that the housing allowance has triggered anger is related to public perceptions of politicians and their role as representatives of citizens' interests. Arguments that since politicians' salaries are funded by public money, they should be beholden to the public fuels these complaints.
Indonesians are used to politicians falling short of expectations, evidenced by the high number of politicians embroiled in the corruption scandals flooding national news. But the housing allowance was particularly jarring because people could directly compare it to what they earn themselves.
This has opened the floodgates for a more intense focus on politicians' salaries and, more importantly, whether they are worthy of them. Here, the argument is that if politicians do not understand what it is like to live as an ordinary person in Indonesia, how can they possibly represent ordinary people's interests?
These complaints are not new. They reflect a long-existing divide between political elites and everyone else within Indonesian society. But with increasing social media commentary and debate, Indonesians are better able to connect across grievances and mobilise, both online and offline. The call for accountability and increasingly vocal demands that politicians answer to the public are reflective of an rising sense of dissatisfaction with the status quo, which, if not resolved, might lead to an ever-rising number of protests in the future.