In just two weeks, we have witnessed the profound problems of Indonesia's social protection system. From the child suicide in Ngada, East Nusa Tenggara, to the loss of access to healthcare subsidies by 11 million National Health Insurance Beneficiaries (PBI-JKN). These two cases demonstrate that, whether healthy or ill, millions of people are at risk of being unprotected by the current social protection system.
"Administrative errors" were cited as the primary cause of these cases. In the Ngada case, issues with mistargeting and administrative processes were cited, resulting in the child not receiving social assistance (Bansos).
Similarly, the case of PBI-JKN non-activation, which was caused by the calibration or re-updating of the National Integrated Socioeconomic Data (DTSEN), is a common one. These various excuses are merely the tip of the iceberg and do not reflect the true nature of the problem.
In the case of a child suicide in Ngada, East Nusa Tenggara, a recent report stated that the child's family did not receive social assistance due to administrative reasons that led to beneficiary mistargeting. This is a classic problem in the social protection system, resulting in millions of poor and vulnerable families—who should receive assistance—not receiving it at all due to data collection errors (exclusion error). Conversely, millions of well-off families receive assistance instead (inclusion error).
The government's option in this case is to improve the targeting system and regional administration. However, even if the government is able to design better targeting scenarios and designs, this does not guarantee that similar cases will not recur. Targeting errors are an intrinsic weakness or trade-off of the social assistance program's data collection mechanism.
In this case, means-tested. As the history of social assistance programs in Indonesia shows, it's impossible for any program to be free from errors in data collection and beneficiary determination.
A World Bank study on the Family Hope Program (PKH) revealed that millions of well-off families are registered as receiving PKH assistance. Conversely, millions of Beneficiary Families (KPM) categorized as poor and vulnerable to poverty never receive social assistance.
At one point, the PKH program's mistargeting rate reached 77,7%. If translated into 10 million PKH recipient families registered in 2025, that means nearly 8 million of them are not actually poor.
This means that, year after year, the government wastes trillions of rupiah in funding to support those who are well-off and economically stable. Meanwhile, the government leaves millions of poor and vulnerable families without protection. Last year alone, the Ministry of Social Affairs (Kemensos) removed 1,9 million people from the social assistance recipient list because they were deemed no longer eligible.
Rather than maintaining a means-tested scheme with its risks, the government should transition to a Universal Basic Income (UBI) design that incorporates empowerment principles. Practically, UBI requires the state to provide a cash payment to individuals equal to their income, but with additional social services. For example, psychosocial support for the elderly and people with disabilities, or active labor market policies (ALMPs) for the productive age group.
This approach aligns with the government's agenda to eradicate poverty and extreme poverty through empowerment principles. This program will ensure a transition to a stage of life where recipients are no longer dependent on social assistance. It will also alleviate various administrative issues that have proven to be a significant burden on the population.
Similar policies already exist. For example, the Integrated Elderly Services (LLT) program initiated by the Ministry of National Development Planning (PPN/Bappenas) does not yet include a UBI component. Furthermore, Government Regulation (PP) Number 39 of 2012 concerning Social Welfare also requires the implementation of the Continuous Direct Assistance (BLB) program for the elderly and people with severe disabilities, who are required to receive cash assistance and non-cash services.
Unfortunately, there are currently no technical regulations enabling its implementation. Nevertheless, this regulation sets a good precedent for future development. It could even be extended to other productive age groups, starting with poor households, those at risk of poverty, and other groups.
Returning to the tragic death of the child in Ngada, another issue also concerns fiscal sustainability. The investigative report stated that the deceased's family had to pay additional school fees, which had increased from Rp 500 to Rp 1,2 million in the past year. This situation left the child's parents unable to afford other school supplies.
The school stated that the fee increase was intended to cover operational costs, including paying honorary teachers who could no longer be covered by the School Operational Assistance (BOS) fund. This was related to the reallocation of the state budget to support the flagship Free Nutritious Meals (MBG) program, which was also drawn from the education sector. As a result, funds normally used for school operations and paying honorary teachers disappeared, forcing the school to pass the shortfall onto students' families.
A similar issue was also encountered in the case of PBI-JKN non-activation. Based on Presidential Regulation (Perpres) No. 118 of 2025 concerning the Detailed State Budget, Rp24 trillion in MBG funding comes from reallocation of the health budget.
In addition, the government has also cut the Regional Transfer (TKD) allocation for Tobacco Excise Revenue Sharing Funds (DBH-CHT) by 74%, from IDR 192,3 trillion in 2025 to just IDR 45 trillion. This is despite the fact that, according to Minister of Finance Regulation (PMK) Number 72 of 2024, 50% of DBH-CHT funds must be allocated to social welfare programs, including social assistance, and another 40% to support the sustainability of the PBI-JKN program in the regions.
The government argues that the DTSEN update has removed 18,3 million people—7,3 million by June 2025 and another 11 million this month—from the PBI-JKN program. However, the government has offered the option of reactivation as a temporary solution. However, one rarely discussed issue is that, in addition to decile factors, the number of PBI-JKN participants is highly dependent on the state budget, or the extent to which the central and regional governments are able to subsidize the health insurance program.
In other words, if the budget is available, there will be participation. If not, some will have to be reduced. To address this, the government could actually do two things: intensify DBH-CHT by increasing taxes on tobacco products, such as cigarette excise. Or, expand the "sin tax" through excise on Packaged Sweetened Beverages (MBDK) and a carbon tax.
Therefore, as long as the government doesn't address the main obstacles, namely resilience, availability, and fiscal allocation, these cases will continue to occur. No single program should be prioritized so much that it creates a trade-off in the form of a lack of rights felt by the community in other aspects of life.
Our Constitution, specifically Articles 28H and 34, states that every citizen, regardless of socioeconomic class, has the right to equitable and universally accessible social protection. These cases should serve as a wake-up call for this nation to reform its social protection system from the root causes from which it grows.
Read more : Katadata.co.id