On the first week of September, Indonesia witnessed yet another controversy triggered not by policy missteps, but by words. Minister of Religious Affairs Nasaruddin Umar was forced to issue a public apology after his statement—“if you want to make money, do not be a teacher, be a trader”—went viral. The clip, stripped of context, circulated widely and sparked outrage among educators who felt demeaned.

The recent meeting on 31 August 2025 between Vice President Gibran Rakabuming Raka and several online motorcycle taxi (ojol) drivers at the Vice Presidential Palace was intended as an empathetic gesture—just days after the tragic death of driver Affan Kurniawan during protests. Yet rather than healing wounds, the interaction stumbled into a communication crisis that exposed a deeper problem: the distortion between intent and image.

Delpedro Marhaen, the Executive Director of the non-profit civic organization Lokataru Foundation, was arrested on Monday (01/09) for allegedly inciting underaged students to riot. There are some irregularities in his sudden arrest, which led people to believe that this is a repression of free speech. Once again, Indonesia’s democracy has hit a new low.

The arrest of Delpedro Marhaen has now escalated beyond a procedural irregularity: the Executive Director of Lokataru Foundation has been officially named a suspect. This rapid shift from arbitrary detention to formal criminalization demonstrates how the state is determined not merely to silence but to delegitimize dissent.

Bandung has long been called the city of students, a hub of intellectual life and civic engagement. Yet the night of September 1, 2025, laid bare a jarring contradiction. On one side, the Governor of West Java was busy showcasing photo opportunities, treating demonstrators to food and drinks in a gesture of magnanimity. On the other, security forces under his watch turned university grounds into battlegrounds, firing tear gas into Unisba and Unpas, and assaulting not only students but also medical volunteers.

The night of September 1, 2025, may well be remembered as a turning point for Indonesia’s fragile democratic trajectory. At 10:45 p.m., Delpedro Marhaen, Executive Director of the Lokataru Foundation, was forcibly taken by men who identified themselves as police officers from the Jakarta Metropolitan Police (Polda Metro Jaya). They arrived in plain clothes, about ten in number, and used a white Suzuki Ertiga to whisk him away. Crucially, no arrest warrant was shown, no formal explanation was given.

Indonesia wrapped up the Independence month with its fragile democracy hanging by a thread. Civilians who wanted to voice their frustration at the government were met with state violence, which has become more apparent after Prabowo Subianto instructed TNI and POLRI to take action against the anarchy that caused destruction of public facilities. This turn of events makes people wonder whether it was all orchestrated to further the president’s consolidation of power.

The Swiss watchmaking brand gained popularity during the unrest in Jakarta and the looting of private residence of Ahmad Sahroni, treasurer of NasDem Party, who is lawmaker at House Commisssion I (overseeing military and foreign affairs). One kid joining the looting went viral in the social media for showing off Sahroni’s Richard Mille, which might worth billions of rupiah. 

In an era where social media influencers are often enlisted to reinforce official narratives, one prominent figure, Jerome Polin, took a bold stand. On 29 August 2025, he publicly revealed an offer to become a government-paid promoter for Rp 150 million in exchange for posting coordinated content. His refusal sparked nationwide debate—not just about personal integrity, but about the complex interplay between money, media, and democratic trust.

As nationwide demonstrations swept through major Indonesian cities in early September 2025, the government’s response was quick, albeit fragmented. From urging companies to let employees work from home (WFH), to abruptly shifting schools to online learning, the policy reactions ostensibly prioritized public safety. Yet, beneath these well-intentioned moves lies a concerning signal: a lack of coordinated crisis governance, fragmented institutional responses, and policy improvisation under pressure.