Pribadi Wicaksono (Kontributor), Jakarta – The birth of investment management agency (BPI) Daya Anagata Nusantara, or Danantara, during Prabowo's administration, has drawn sharp scrutiny. Various parties have raised concerns about the governance and accountability of the agency that manages over US$900 billion in assets.
Edi Sewandono, a public policy researcher and an alumnus of the Strategic and Global Studies Doctoral Program at the University of Indonesia (UI), for example, has deemed the basic structure of Danantara to be vulnerable to operational and legal paralysis.
The sovereign wealth goal to address fundamental issues within State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) such as business overlaps, according to Edi, is also at risk due to its fragile governance and supervision, resulting in directorial inefficiencies and politicization. The institution's structure, in fact, creates new vulnerabilities that could turn into serious problems.
Edi said, "Danantara operates as an institution without fundamental corporate governance structures, which should be the standard in professional investment asset management," during a forum organized by the Nagara Institute and Akbar Faizal Uncensored (AFU) in Yogyakarta on Tuesday, December 16, 2025.
According to him, the absence of a corporate body structure in Danantara, such as a Board of Directors, Board of Commissioners, Audit or Risk Committee, clearly opens doors for several weaknesses. One of which is the crucial and fundamental fiduciary tasks that raise fundamental questions about who is legally responsible in the event of investment losses.
Danantara also lacks a business judgment rule protection mechanism that is inherent in corporate structures, which allows for personal liability exposure for high-ranking officials.
Furthermore, Edi went on, the power inversion within Danantara paves for non-commercial political interventions. Despite Danantara holding 99 percent of the shares, SOE shareholders have override authority with presidential approval to appoint directors. This fundamentally compromises professional investment management independence.
Despite this, Edi argued that the governance vacuum that permeates the entire bureaucracy structure of Danantara could potentially increase the risk of operational paralysis and create legal vulnerabilities for individual administrators. This is because there is no clearly defined decision-making hierarchy for investment committee responsibility, risk oversight, and strategic direction.
Meanwhile, Akbar Faizal, Executive Director of the Nagara Institute, underscored the massive scale of Danantara, which now serves as a super holding company managing seven parent SOEs with a total of 844 subsidiaries. He believes that Danantara's accountability, governance, and supervision are crucial issues that must be openly answered to the public.
"Danantara was born as a political decision during the Prabowo Subianto government. The hope is that it becomes a solution to strengthen SOEs, rather than the opposite," said Akbar.
Earlier, at the end of March 2025, Danantara CEO Rosan Perkasa Roeslani said the agency's officials are professionals with commendable track records who have gone through a stringent selection process.
CIO of Danantara, Pandu Sjahrir, emphasized that the appointment of foreign figures in Danantara's leadership was done to anticipate the increasing macroeconomic and geopolitical risks. He also stated that all Danantara team members were selected based on expertise and professionalism, not political interests.
Source: https://en.tempo.co/read/2073964/the-fragile-structure-of-indonesias-sovereign-wealth-danantar