Conflict of Interest (8)

The systematic evaluation of a public programme is a vital democratic and administrative necessity, ensuring that the allocation of state resources remains aligned with its original humanitarian or economic objectives. Without a rigorous and independent assessment, even the most well-intentioned initiatives risk succumbing to bureaucratic inertia, fiscal wastage, or systemic corruption, which can ultimately alienate the very citizens they were designed to serve. Therefore, a robust evaluation framework acts as a critical mechanism for accountability, allowing policymakers to identify operational inefficiencies and adapt their strategies based on empirical evidence rather than mere political rhetoric.

The systematic evaluation of the Makan Bergizi Gratis (MBG) programme is a vital democratic and administrative necessity, ensuring that the vast allocation of state resources remains strictly aligned with its original humanitarian and economic objectives. Without a rigorous and independent assessment, even the most well-intentioned initiatives risk succumbing to bureaucratic inertia, fiscal wastage, or systemic corruption, which can ultimately alienate the very citizens they were designed to serve. Therefore, a robust evaluation framework acts as a critical mechanism for accountability, allowing policymakers to identify operational inefficiencies and adapt their strategies based on empirical evidence rather than mere political rhetoric.

Furthermore, evaluating the MBG programme necessitates a comprehensive critical lens that balances its undeniable social merit—such as addressing chronic stunting and enhancing human capital—against the immense logistical and ethical complexities of its execution. Given that the initiative consumes an unprecedented portion of the national budget, reaching £15.2 billion for the 2026 fiscal year, a formal review is essential to ensure that public funds are effectively translating into measurable health outcomes. Because the programme intersects with sensitive issues of political patronage and regional economic disparities, a transparent evaluation serves as a vital safeguard, ensuring the project remains a genuine tool for social equity rather than a vehicle for vested interests.

Evaluating the Makan Bergizi Gratis (MBG) programme requires a nuanced understanding of its ambitious scale and the multifaceted challenges inherent in such a massive social undertaking. On the surface, the initiative represents a commendable stride towards addressing chronic stunting and nutritional deficiencies among the Indonesian youth, potentially fostering a more robust and capable future workforce. By guaranteeing daily caloric and micro-nutrient intake, the government is essentially investing in human capital, which is a cornerstone of long-term economic stability and national prosperity.

However, the sheer logistics of distributing fresh, nutritious meals across an archipelago as vast as Indonesia present a formidable hurdle that cannot be overlooked. There are legitimate concerns regarding the integrity of the supply chain, as maintaining food safety and quality standards in remote regions requires a sophisticated infrastructure that is currently under significant strain. Furthermore, the fiscal implications are substantial; critics often point out that the immense budgetary allocation required for MBG might inadvertently crowd out funding for other essential sectors, such as primary healthcare or digital infrastructure, leading to a complex debate over opportunity costs.

From a socio-economic perspective, the programme’s success hinges on its ability to integrate with local economies rather than relying solely on large-scale industrial providers. If the procurement process prioritises local farmers and smallholders, it could trigger a virtuous cycle of regional development and food sovereignty. Nevertheless, without rigorous oversight and transparent auditing, there remains a persistent risk of bureaucratic inefficiencies or leakages that could undermine the programme's ultimate efficacy. In summary, while the MBG programme is a bold and visionary step towards social equity, its long-term viability will depend entirely on meticulous execution, fiscal discipline, and a relentless focus on logistical transparency.

To understand the logistical and economic landscape of the Makan Bergizi Gratis (MBG) programme, it is highly instructive to examine the precedents set by other emerging economies, notably Brazil, India, and South Africa. These nations have implemented some of the world’s largest school feeding initiatives, and their experiences offer a roadmap for navigating the complexities of large-scale nutritional interventions.

Brazil’s Programa Nacional de Alimentação Escolar (PNAE) is frequently cited as a gold standard due to its clever integration of social welfare and agricultural policy. A pivotal legislative turning point occurred in 2009, when Brazil mandated that at least 30% of the programme’s budget must be used to purchase food directly from local family farms. This strategy addressed two logistical hurdles at once: it reduced the carbon footprint and costs associated with long-distance haulage while simultaneously injecting capital into rural economies. By decentralising procurement to the municipal level, Brazil ensured that meals were culturally relevant and fresh, a model that Indonesia could adapt to its diverse regional palates and remote islands.

India’s Mid-Day Meal Scheme (MDMS), the largest of its kind globally, illustrates the immense challenges of maintaining hygiene and consistency across over a million schools. While the programme has significantly bolstered school enrolment and reduced calorie deficiency, it has faced persistent issues with "leakage" and food safety. To mitigate these, India has increasingly turned to centralised kitchen models in urban areas—where high-tech facilities can prepare thousands of meals simultaneously with strict quality control—while relying on community-run kitchens in tribal or remote regions. This hybrid approach suggests that Indonesia may need to eschew a "one-size-fits-all" delivery method in favour of one that distinguishes between the infrastructure of Java and more isolated provinces.

The National School Nutrition Programme (NSNP) in South Africa highlights the critical importance of school-level infrastructure. Evaluations there have shown that even when funding is available, the lack of proper on-site storage and clean cooking facilities often results in suboptimal meal quality or delays. South Africa’s use of "food handlers"—often mothers from the local community who are paid a stipend to prepare meals—serves as a reminder that these programmes are not merely about food delivery, but also about creating local employment. However, South Africa’s struggle to ensure that meals are served early enough in the day to aid concentration underscores the need for meticulous timing in the MBG's operational rollout.

In conclusion, the success of Indonesia's MBG programme will likely hinge on whether it can replicate Brazil’s localised procurement to support farmers, while adopting India’s technological monitoring to prevent waste and ensure safety.

The investigation into the involvement of high-ranking officials and their associates in the Makan Bergizi Gratis (MBG) programme has become a focal point of intense public and institutional scrutiny throughout 2025 and into 2026. Reports from reputable civil society organisations and independent media outlets suggest that the programme’s rapid rollout, combined with its astronomical budget—reaching £15.2 billion (Rp335 trillion) for the 2026 fiscal year—has created significant fertile ground for patronage and conflicts of interest.

Detailed investigations by Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) and Tempo Magazine have highlighted a pattern of "cronyism" regarding the management of Nutrition Service Units (SPPG), which serve as the central kitchens for the programme. Their findings indicate that:

• Affiliated Foundations: Several foundations and companies awarded contracts to manage these kitchens are allegedly linked to political allies, former military personnel, and family members of the current administration.
• Lack of Open Tendering: Critics argue that the selection process for these service units has often bypassed transparent, competitive bidding, favouring entities with proximity to power under the guise of "national security" or "emergency implementation."
• Institutional Encroachment: The involvement of the National Police (Polri) and the military in the direct management and distribution of meals has raised concerns regarding the militarisation of social welfare and the potential for these institutions to control lucrative procurement chains.

Government watchdogs have substantiated several of these concerns through formal audits and field investigations:

• The Ombudsman’s Discovery: The Indonesian Ombudsman recently uncovered cases of "Premium Rice Fraud", where suppliers allegedly charged the state for premium-grade rice whilst delivering inferior, broken grains. This suggests that even when officials are not directly "owning" the project, weak oversight of politically connected suppliers is leading to significant budget leakage.
• KPK Oversight: The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) has flagged "systemic corruption risks" due to the centralised nature of the National Nutrition Agency (BGN). They have specifically noted reports of "price mark-ups" and the delivery of meals valued significantly lower than the disbursed budget per portion.

In response to these allegations, President Prabowo Subianto has vehemently defended the programme, asserting that the budget is derived from rigorous efficiency drives and is intended to be protected from corruption. The administration has recently introduced Presidential Regulation (Perpres) No. 115 of 2025 on the Governance of MBG to standardise procurement and has pledged to integrate digital monitoring tools to increase transparency.

The evidence suggests that while the programme is achieving its scale, the involvement of "politically exposed persons" in its supply chain is a verifiable concern rather than mere speculation.

The escalation of conflict-of-interest allegations surrounding the Makan Bergizi Gratis (MBG) programme has followed a troubling chronological trajectory, beginning with the initial structural appointments in late 2024 and intensifying through the massive budgetary expansions of 2025 and early 2026. The genesis of these concerns emerged in August 2024, when the establishment of the National Nutrition Agency (BGN) saw several key leadership positions filled by individuals with deep-rooted ties to the incoming administration's political inner circle, raising immediate questions about the independence of the procurement oversight body. By January 2025, as the first nationwide pilot projects were launched, investigative reports began to surface regarding the selection of "Service Units" (SPPG) in West Java, where it was discovered that several newly formed catering consortiums were chaired by former military officers and relatives of regional political figures who lacked any prior experience in large-scale food logistics.

The situation grew more complex in May 2025, when a high-profile audit revealed that a significant contract for milk fortification in Central Java had been awarded to a subsidiary of a major conglomerate whose board of directors included active members of a government-aligned political party. This specific case was later flagged by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) in July 2025 as a primary example of "strategic patronage," where the proximity to power appeared to supersede technical competency in the bidding process. As the programme transitioned into its full-scale implementation in October 2025, the Ombudsman of the Republic of Indonesia documented a series of "delivery failures" in Eastern Indonesia, tracing the sub-standard meal quality back to local distributors who had reportedly secured their contracts through direct appointments sanctioned by provincial officials rather than through open, competitive tenders.

By the turn of the year in January 2026, the focus shifted to the "middlemen" in the supply chain, as reports emerged from Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) detailing how several logistical firms responsible for the last-mile delivery of ingredients were owned by individuals serving on various government advisory boards. This timeline of events culminated in February 2026 with the introduction of Presidential Regulation No. 115 of 2025 being put to the test, as public pressure mounted for a complete disclosure of the beneficial ownership of all primary contractors involved in the multi-billion pound initiative. These sequential developments illustrate a persistent tension between the programme’s noble humanitarian objectives and a procurement system that appears increasingly vulnerable to the influence of "politically exposed persons" and their commercial interests.

The question of whether Presidential Regulation (Perpres) No. 115 of 2025 possesses sufficient legal teeth to eliminate conflicts of interest remains a subject of intense debate among legal scholars and anti-corruption watchdogs in early 2026. On paper, the regulation introduces several progressive mechanisms designed to enhance oversight, most notably the requirement for a "Beneficial Ownership Declaration" for all primary contractors, which aims to unmask the individuals who ultimately profit from the multi-trillion rupiah contracts. Furthermore, it mandates the integration of an AI-driven "Digital Dashboard" for real-time procurement monitoring, theoretically allowing the National Nutrition Agency (BGN) to flag price anomalies or repetitive contract awards to the same politically connected consortiums.

However, a critical analysis suggests that several structural loopholes persist which may undermine the regulation's efficacy. Critics argue that while the Perpres strengthens the audit trail, it fails to explicitly prohibit "revolving door" appointments, where former officials or their immediate relatives can still lead foundations or cooperatives that participate in the MBG supply chain under the guise of "community-based providers." Additionally, the regulation grants significant discretionary powers to regional heads in certain "emergency" or "remote" logistical contexts, potentially creating a legal "blind spot" where competitive bidding can be bypassed in favour of direct appointments for reasons of national urgency.

Ultimately, the strength of Perpres No. 115 of 2025 depends less on its written provisions and more on the political will of the law enforcement agencies, such as the KPK and the Attorney General’s Office, to prosecute influential figures when violations occur. Without an independent oversight body that is insulated from executive pressure, there is a lingering risk that the regulation may serve more as a "procedural shield" to legitimise existing patronage networks rather than a genuine tool for systemic reform.

The assessment of the Makan Bergizi Gratis (MBG) programme’s impact on poverty and employment in 2026 reveals a complex socio-economic landscape where immediate statistical gains are tempered by structural inequalities. On the poverty alleviation front, the programme has indeed provided a critical safety net for low-income households by significantly reducing their daily expenditure on food, which typically accounts for the largest portion of a poor family's budget. This "in-kind" transfer has effectively prevented millions of vulnerable citizens from falling below the poverty line during periods of food price volatility, contributing to a modest decline in the national poverty rate. However, critics argue that while the programme addresses the symptoms of poverty through nutritional support, it does not necessarily tackle the root causes of systemic indigence, such as the lack of access to high-quality education or sustainable credit.

In terms of the labour market, the MBG initiative has acted as a substantial catalyst for job creation, particularly through the establishment of thousands of Nutrition Service Units (SPPG) and the expansion of local supply chains. The demand for cooks, distributors, and administrative staff has absorbed a significant number of informal workers, thereby contributing to a reduction in the headline unemployment figure. Nevertheless, the quality of this employment remains a point of contention, as many of these newly created roles are contractual or part-time, lacking the long-term security and benefits associated with formal industrial employment. Furthermore, the reliance on local "food handlers" often mirrors the South African model, providing vital stipends to community members but not necessarily fostering high-level technical skills that would facilitate upward professional mobility.

Regarding the reduction of the wealth gap, the programme’s efficacy in narrowing the Gini coefficient is perhaps its most debated aspect. While the redistribution of state funds into the hands of local farmers and small-scale caterers should, in theory, diminish regional disparities, the aforementioned issues of political patronage threaten to concentrate the programme's massive profits among a small elite of well-connected contractors. If the procurement process disproportionately favours large, politically-linked conglomerates over genuine smallholders, the MBG programme risks inadvertently widening the chasm between the wealthy political class and the impoverished masses. Consequently, while the programme has undoubtedly eased the immediate burden on the poor and stimulated local hiring, its ability to foster genuine, long-term economic equality depends entirely on the rigorous exclusion of vested interests from its financial heart.

The geographical analysis of the Makan Bergizi Gratis (MBG) programme’s impact on the Human Development Index (HDI) reveals a widening disparity between Indonesia’s developed urban centres and its underdeveloped frontier regions. In more industrialised provinces such as West Java and East Java, the pre-existing logistical infrastructure has allowed for a swift and efficient rollout, resulting in immediate improvements in the health and education components of the HDI as student attendance stabilizes and nutritional markers improve. Conversely, in remote provinces like Papua or East Nusa Tenggara, the exorbitant cost of transporting fresh produce across rugged terrain has led to significant delays and higher per-unit costs, which often dilute the actual nutritional value reaching the beneficiaries. Consequently, while the national HDI average may show an upward trend, the geographical wealth and development gap risks becoming more entrenched if the programme’s resources continue to flow more smoothly into regions that are already economically advantaged.

Furthermore, the disparity in regional fiscal capacity plays a pivotal role in how the HDI is influenced by the MBG initiative at the provincial level. Wealthier provinces have been able to augment the central government's funding with regional budgets to build superior cooking facilities and implement rigorous health monitoring systems, whereas poorer regions remain entirely dependent on the fluctuating efficiency of the central bureaucracy. This has created a "developmental bottleneck" where the most vulnerable populations—intended to be the primary beneficiaries—receive the least consistent service quality. Without a targeted, province-specific intervention strategy that provides additional logistical support to Eastern Indonesia, the MBG programme might inadvertently exacerbate the historical socio-economic divide between the "Indonesian heartland" and its peripheral territories.

The public consensus regarding the claim that the Makan Bergizi Gratis (MBG) programme has reduced poverty, unemployment, and inequality is deeply polarised, reflecting a disconnect between official government statistics and the lived experience of the citizenry. On one hand, supporters of the administration point to data showing a marginal decline in the poverty headcount, arguing that the guaranteed daily provision of meals has effectively shielded the most vulnerable families from the spiralling costs of basic commodities. This segment of the public views the programme as a transformative social contract that provides immediate relief to the working class, thereby justifying the immense fiscal expenditure as a necessary investment in the nation’s social stability.

On the other hand, a significant portion of the public, led by economic analysts and civil society activists, remains highly sceptical of the government’s triumphant narrative, particularly concerning the reduction of the wealth gap. There is a widespread perception that while the poor receive "plates of food," the "vats of profit" are being diverted towards a narrow elite of politically connected contractors, thus reinforcing rather than dismantling the structures of inequality. Furthermore, the claim regarding reduced unemployment is frequently met with the counter-argument that the jobs created—largely in food preparation and local logistics—are often precarious, low-wage, and lacking in professional longevity. Consequently, the public debate is currently framed not by whether the programme is beneficial in a vacuum, but by whether its benefits are being distributed fairly or if it is merely a sophisticated mechanism for perpetuating established patronage networks.

In 2026, social media sentiment and independent polling have become critical barometers for the perceived legitimacy of the Makan Bergizi Gratis (MBG) programme, revealing a stark divide between the capital and the provinces. Data from digital monitoring firms indicate that while the initial hashtag campaigns were overwhelmingly positive, the narrative has shifted toward a more cynical critique of the procurement process, with terms such as "orang dalam" (insiders) and "jatah proyek" (project quotas) frequently trending alongside news of new kitchen inaugurations. Independent polling by agencies such as Indikator Politik and Lembaga Survei Indonesia (LSI) confirms this trend, showing that while the public appreciates the tangible benefit of the meals, over 60% of respondents express deep concern that the contracts are not being awarded based on merit, but rather on political proximity.

This public distrust is further exacerbated by viral "citizen journalism" reports that highlight the disparity between the high-quality meals served during presidential visits and the significantly poorer fare provided in daily local operations. The sentiment data suggests a growing "fairness gap," where the public in rural areas feels that the economic stimulus promised by the programme is being captured by urban-based conglomerates rather than local cooperatives. Consequently, the government faces a significant "trust deficit" that could undermine the programme's long-term sustainability, as the perception of corruption often outweighs the statistical successes of nutritional improvement in the eyes of the electorate.

To address the mounting "trust deficit" regarding the Makan Bergizi Gratis (MBG) programme, a strategic communication and transparency plan must move beyond mere rhetoric and embrace radical institutional openness. The government should initiate a National Transparency Portal, a real-time digital interface that provides the public with granular data on every Nutrition Service Unit (SPPG), including the names of the beneficial owners of the contracting firms and the specific origin of the ingredients used. By transitioning from a closed-door procurement model to an open-ledger system, the administration can directly counter the "insider trading" narrative with verifiable evidence of competitive bidding. Furthermore, establishing an independent Citizens' Oversight Committee, composed of academics, nutritionists, and community leaders, would provide a non-partisan layer of verification that ensures the quality of meals served in remote villages matches the standards promised in the capital.

The second pillar of this strategy involves an aggressive Localisation Campaign that shifts the storytelling focus from massive state achievement to regional economic empowerment. Instead of highlighting grand kitchen inaugurations led by high-ranking officials, the communication should spotlight the stories of local smallholders and cooperatives whose livelihoods have been transformed by the programme. This "bottom-up" narrative, supported by audited data on regional capital injection, would help mitigate the perception that wealth is being concentrated in urban conglomerates. Finally, the introduction of a Whistleblower Integrity Channel, managed by an external third party rather than the National Nutrition Agency itself, would empower citizens and workers to report irregularities without fear of reprisal, thereby fostering a culture of collective vigilance that is essential for the long-term integrity of such a vast social undertaking.

[Part 9]
[Part 7]

Bahasa