The Desire for Power and the Chaos at the Aceh DPRA Plenary Session |
The atmosphere of the Aceh People's Representative Council plenary session on Monday, April 6, 2026, further clarified the roots of the ongoing political turmoil. The meeting became tense as several members of the Aceh DPR interrupted and even diverted to issues outside the main agenda, namely the discussion of the submission of the Aceh Governor's 2025 Accountability Report (LKPJ).
As if seeking to legitimize his political character, the Speaker of the Aceh DPR, Zulfadli, emphasized that the council's recess activities and main ideas (pokir) are protected by law. He repeatedly stated this, as if trying to influence public opinion that the council's pokir are legitimate and beyond criticism.
Unwittingly, this stance seemed to be a response to the Aceh DPR Speaker's long-standing stance. The Aceh DPR leadership's stubborn stance against high-ranking executives, which has been widely reported in various media outlets, is closely related to the pokir allocation, which the executive is unlikely to fulfill due to allegations of potential legal violations.
The Aceh DPR Speaker's stubborn stance in responding to interruptions from a member of the National Awakening Party (PKB) faction, Rijaluddin. Zulfadli repeatedly reminded him that the meeting must focus on the original agenda. However, Rijaluddin made a request that raised significant questions.
Along with other members of the Aceh DPR, Rijaluddin wanted to meet with the Governor of Aceh, Muzakir Manaf. This wasn't unusual, actually. It became interesting because Rijaluddin stated they wanted to meet with Mualem—Muzakir Manaf's nickname—without the Aceh DPR leadership. Several DPRA members immediately agreed with Rijaluddin's proposal.
This interesting incident proved that there were indeed problems at the Aceh DPR leadership level. Zufadli's statement, alluding to the idea of "pokir" (thinking) amidst different agendas, and his attempts to prevent members from speaking out, raised significant questions.
Several civil society groups had previously linked the Aceh DPR Speaker's pokir issue to the intense scrutiny of executive officials in Aceh. Although the true motive behind this scrutiny remains unknown, discussions on social media about it have become increasingly prominent.
To resolve this issue, Mualem should have responded to the DPRA members' requests for a meeting. The public has a right to know what the DPRA members want to convey to Mualem and why they don't want the leadership to participate.
One thing that DPRA members, including those at the leadership level, must always remember is that they represent the people. Therefore, plenary sessions are not merely an arena for championing program interests. When regulations are viewed as obstacles, rather than guidelines, not only the quality of policies but also public trust is threatened.
Ultimately, what is needed is not an emotional defense of "pokir" (thinking), but a commitment to ensuring that every rupiah of the budget truly supports the interests of the people and complies with applicable laws. If this is ignored, the anger in the courtroom will only reflect a larger problem: a leadership crisis in understanding the boundaries between authority and regulations.[]
