February 28, 2025
JAKARTA – Amid the wave of public protests called Indonesia Gelap (Dark Indonesia), driven by civil society and student movements to mark the 100th day of President Prabowo Subianto‘s administration, the National Police made a misstep: They reportedly banned and intimidated punk band Sukatani for performing its song “Bayar Bayar Bayar” (Pay pay pay).
Released in 2023, the song openly criticizes abuse of power within the police force, particularly institutionalized bribery. Its sharp, uncompromising lyrics, combined with Sukatani’s bold punk style, seemingly provoked a repressive response from authorities.
Two members of the National Police’s cybercrimes unit, along with four officers from its counterpart at the Central Java Police, reportedly confronted both members of Sukatani. As a result, the band was compelled to publish an apology video and withdraw the song from circulation.
How should we interpret this incident?
First and foremost, the reported ban and intimidation of Sukatani constitute a constitutional violation. Since the 1945 Constitution was drafted as the foundational law of the Republic of Indonesia, its framers recognized that one of the nation’s fundamental pillars its citizens’ freedom.
Article 28 of the 1945 Constitution explicitly guarantees the right to freedom of association, assembly and expression. These civil liberties are reinforced further by two key legal instruments related to human rights.
The first is Law No. 39/1999 on Human Rights, which explicitly guarantees freedom of expression in Article 23. This provision affirms that every individual has the right to express, disseminate and develop opinions, whether verbally or in writing, including through mass media.
The second is Indonesia’s ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) through Law No. 12/2005, which underscores the country’s legal commitment to respecting, protecting and fulfilling the rights enshrined in the covenant. This ratification further reinforces the guarantee of unrestricted freedom of opinion and expression.
As a result, Indonesia formally recognizes the civil and political rights of its citizens, establishing these principles as legal benchmarks for policymaking, including law enforcement actions, while also providing civil society with a strong foundation to monitor government policies.
A closer examination of police action in Sukatani’s case reveals three key aspects that warrant attention.
First is the police’s violation of civil liberties, particularly freedom of opinion and expression, underscoring the institution’s significant authority within the state administrative system to maintain security and political stability.
Notably, the police force operates independently of any ministry and is directly accountable to the president, as stipulated in Article 8(1) of Law No. 2/2002 on the National Police. Consequently, a president’s vision, political agenda and policies exert a direct influence on police action, creating institutional pressures that are difficult for the police leadership to resist.
Second, the National Police’s actions and policies are heavily shaped by the leadership style of a sitting president, who often prioritizes political and security stability to advance the government’s agenda.
As a result, any element perceived as a threat to national stability or the government’s public image is likely to be controlled or suppressed. Unfortunately, this approach frequently comes at the expense of civil liberties, despite its clear contradiction to democratic principles.
Third, the police’s impulsive response to Sukatani’s performance of a song that contains social criticism of the police institution reveals a deep concern about its image and authority. Such criticism is perceived as damaging to the institution’s dignity and offensive to its internal solidarity (esprit de corps). Furthermore, songs containing social critiques are often framed as threats to national stability, prompting repressive measures from authorities.
From a constitutional perspective, these actions run counter to the basic structure doctrine, which aims to uphold the fundamental framework of the Constitution, including rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms.
The police’s reactive and repressive response is a direct violation of constitutional principles. If left unchecked, such actions risk eroding the system of constitutional government and weakening protection of human rights and civil liberties.
Finally, punk music emerged as a form of resistance against oppressive systems, social injustice and the hegemony of capitalism.
In this context, Sukatani’s existence and songs embody a spirit of defiance, serving as a political critique of deeply entrenched corruption within the police institution, a problem that remains unresolved.
This phenomenon aligns with the punk tradition worldwide. For instance, English punk rock band Sex Pistols fiercely criticized the British monarchy and conservative government in its song “God Save the Queen” (1977). Similarly, The Clash denounced capitalism, social injustice and police repression in tracks like “Clampdown” (1979) and “White Riot” (1977).
Against this backdrop, National Police chief Gen. Listyo Sigit Prabowo’s offer to appoint Sukatani as “ambassadors” for police reform and ethical conduct stands as one of the greatest public farces. Punk, at its core, symbolizes resistance to injustice and embodies an anti-mainstream movement that inherently exists outside the corridors of power.
Music as a medium for social critique is nothing new in Indonesia’s sociopolitical landscape.
During the New Order era, legendary musicians like Iwan Fals and Franky Sahilatua became symbols of resistance, giving voice to the struggles of ordinary people in highlighting social inequality, corruption and the suffering of farmers and laborers. Similarly, Slank openly criticized widespread corruption and the decay of the political system during the early years of Reformasi.
Music thus serves as a powerful tool of resistance, amplifying political and social awareness while fueling collective movements. It is no surprise that “Bayar Bayar Bayar” resonated powerfully among protesters last week to become an anthem of defiance for the Indonesia Gelap rallies, in a clear testament to the enduring role of music as a force for social change.
To conclude, the constitutional violations in this incident stem from the police’s vast authority in maintaining political security and stability, as well as the institution’s deep-rooted esprit de corps that remains resistant to social criticism from civil society.
This incident serves as yet another critical moment for the National Police to undertake meaningful reforms, ensuring its transformation into a democratic institution that aligns with the values of civil society and upholds the fundamental freedoms of opinion, assembly and expression.