Open access Vol. 6 No. 1 (2026) · pp. 1-16

Evaluation of Policies on Mass Organizations in Indonesia from the Perspective of Freedom of Association and Public Order

Authors

  • Al-Adly Darniyus Politeknik Negeri Medan
Abstract

The issue of restricting the operational space of mass organizations (ormas) has recently become a significant concern in Indonesia’s democratic discourse. The tension between the need to maintain public order and the obligation to uphold freedom of association has become increasingly evident, particularly amid the rise of coercive administrative policies. This article aims to comprehensively evaluate policies governing mass organizations in Indonesia by examining three purposively selected evaluative dimensions: policy effectiveness, responsiveness to civil society, and their impact on the social order. The study employs a qualitative-descriptive approach through a literature review, analyzing legal documents, institutional reports, and relevant academic literature. The document review focuses on policy dynamics, particularly following the enactment of Law No. 16 of 2017. The analytical method applied is thematic and evaluative document analysis. The findings indicate that policies on mass organizations in Indonesia remain partial and are predominantly characterized by an administrative-repressive approach. In terms of effectiveness, the policies emphasize formal legality rather than the substantive strengthening of organizational capacity. Their responsiveness is also limited due to the lack of public participation in both policy formulation and evaluation processes. From the perspective of social impact, these policies have the potential to constrain civic space and exacerbate social polarization. This study recommends the reformulation of mass organization policies based on the principles of due process, meaningful participation, and the strengthening of constitutional rights protection. Furthermore, insights from international practices—such as the model of militant democracy in Germany and the challenges observed in India—are presented to enrich the discourse on developing more democratic and accountable policy frameworks in Indonesia.

Keywords
  • Mass Organizations (Ormas)
  • Policy Evaluation
  • Effectiveness
  • Responsiveness
  • Freedom of Association
Author Biography
  • Al-Adly Darniyus, Politeknik Negeri Medan

    Al-Adly Darniyus is a lecturer in Business Management at the Department of Business Administration, Politeknik Negeri Medan. His academic field is public administration, with research interests in public policy, public management, and governance. Several of his scholarly works discuss topics such as e-procurement policy, land use policy, and collaborative governance.

References
  1. Abdelghani, K., Abdeslam, B., & Mohamed, O. (2024). Assessing Public Policies?: A Comprehensive Review of Evaluation Methods. International Journal of Applied Management and Economics, 02(11). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14035228
  2. Aluko, T. O., & Ntsalaze, L. (2022). Effectiveness Measurement Framework for a Grant Programme. The Case of Cooperative Grant Scheme (CIS). Development Southern Africa, 39(3), 388–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/0376835X.2021.1883417
  3. Baihaqi, M. (2020). RelasiI Elit Lokal dalam Konflik Keagamaan di Lombok Barat. Sosilogi Agama, 14(2), 235–254. https://doi.org/http//doi.org/10.14421/jsa.2020.142-06
  4. Béland, D., & Howlett, M. (2016). The Role and Impact of the Multiple-Streams Approach in Comparative Policy Analysis. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 18(3), 221–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/13876988.2016.1174410
  5. Berliana, E. M., Priyanti, E., & Kurniansyah, D. (2022). Upaya Mewujudkan Perdamaian pada Konflik antar Organisasi Kemasyarakatan di Kabupaten Karawang. Nusantara: Jurnal Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial, 9(8), 3112–3117.
  6. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
  7. Brandmann, F. (2022). Radical-Right Parties in Militant Democracies: How the Alternative for Germany’s Strategic Frontstage Moderation Undermines Militant Measures. European Constitutional Law Review, 18(3), 412–439. https://doi.org/10.1017/S157401962200030X
  8. Dunn, W. N. (2018). Public Policy Analysis: An Integrated Approach (6th ed.). Routledge.
  9. Elfudllatsani, B., Isharyanto, , & Riwanto, A. (2019). Kajian Mengenai Kebebasan Berkumpul dan Berserikat Pasal 28E Ayat (3) Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 Melalui Organisasi Kemasyarakatan Kaitannya dengan Teori Kedaulatan Rakyat dan Hak Asasi Manusia. Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan Ekonomi, 7(1), 52. https://doi.org/10.20961/hpe.v7i1.29190
  10. Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing Public Policy: Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 266 pp.
  11. Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of Participation in Complex Governance. Public Administration Review, 66, 66–75. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4096571.
  12. Gora, A., & de Wilde, P. (2022). The Essence of Democratic Backsliding in the European Union: Deliberation and Rule of Law. Journal of European Public Policy, 29(3), 342–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2020.1855465
  13. Herdiansah, A. G., & Randi. (2016). Peran Organisasi Masyarakat (Ormas) dan Lembaga Swadaya Masyarakat (LSM) dalam Menopang Pembangunan di Indonesia. Sosioglobal: Jurnal Pemikiran dan Penelitian Sosiologi, 1(1), 46–67. https://doi.org/10.36701/nukhbah.v3i1.27
  14. Human Rights Watch. (2022). World Report. In Human Rights Watch. www.hrw.org.
  15. Human Rights Watch. (2023). India Stop Abusing Counterterrorism Regulations. https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/11/03/india-stop-abusing-counterterrorism-regulations
  16. INFID. (2022). Laporan Tahunan Interrnational NGO Forum on Indonesia Development. www.infid.org
  17. Junputh. (2024). Repeal UAPA, Reform PMLA, Stop Targeting HRD’s and non-FCRA Organisations: PUCL. https://english.junputh.com/voices/repeal-uapa-reform-pmla-stop-targeting-hrds-and-non-fcra-organisations-pucl/
  18. Komnas HAM. (2020). Pembubaran Ormas Harus Sesuai Konstitusi. www.komnasham.go.id/index.php/n/1636
  19. Kurniawan, M. B. (2018). Konstitusionalitas Perppu Nomor 2 Tahun 2017 tentang Ormas Ditinjau dari UUD 1945. Jurnal Konstitusi, 15(3), 455. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1531
  20. Maasum, M. (2017). Penerapan Sanksi terhadap Ormas yang Bertentangan dengan Nilai-Nilai Pancasila Ditinjau dari Undang-Undang Nomor 17 Tahun 2013 tentang Organisasi Kemasyarakatan. Lex Crimen, 6(5), 5–12. http://nasional.warta10.com/toto-ormas-bukan-
  21. Meier, A. A. (2025). ‘A Name was Banned. Nothing More!’: Identity, Democracy and Banning White Supremacists in Germany. European Journal of International Relations, 31(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/13540661241277026
  22. Olabisi, N., & Wei, Y. (2024). Designing Effective Policy to Achieve Sustainable Development Impact of FDI: The Case of Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of International Business Policy, 8(1), 33–52. https://doi.org/10.1057/s42214-024-00203-5
  23. Pertiwi, S. F., Herawati, N. R., & Erowati, D. (2023). Pengawasan kepada Organisasi Kemasyarakatan oleh Badan Kesatuan Bangsa dan Politik Kota Semarang Tahun 2022 (Sesuai Permendagri Nomor 56 Tahun 2017). Journal of Politic and Government Studies, 12(4).
  24. Poli, M. T., Rende, D. C., & Pelleng, E. S. (2023). Dinamika Kekuasaan Lokal dan Peran Masyarakat Sipil dalam Konteks Desentralisasi Pasca-Orde Baru (Studi pada YLBHI-LBH Manado). Journal Lyceum, 10(1). https://unpi.ac.id/ejournal/index.php/lyceum/issue/view/93
  25. Pradhan, N. S., Su, Y., Fu, Y., Zhang, L., & Yang, Y. (2017). Analyzing the Effectiveness of Policy Implementation at the Local Level: A Case Study of Management of the 2009–2010 Drought in Yunnan Province, China. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 8(1), 64–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-017-0118-9
  26. Rahman, A., Wasistiono, S., Riyani, O., & Tahir, I. (2023). Peran Organisasi Masyarakat (Ormas) dan Lembaga Swadaya Masyarat (LSM) dalam Pembangunan Berkelanjutan di Indonesia. Ekonomis: Journal of Economics and Business, 7(2), 1461. https://doi.org/10.33087/ekonomis.v7i2.1492
  27. Rosyadi, R. (2022). Analisis Terhadap Penghapusan Proses Peradilan dalam Pembubaran Organisasi Kemasyarakatan (Studi Peraturan Pengganti Undang-Undang No. 2 Tahun 2017). Officium Notarium, 2(1).
  28. Salim, C. (2018). Problematika Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang (Perppu) No. 02 Tahun 2017 Tentang Organisasi Kemasyarakatan. Istinbath?: Jurnal Hukum, 15(2), 309. https://doi.org/10.32332/istinbath.v15i2.1251
  29. Saragih, D. E., Nulhaqim, S. A., & Fedryansyah, M. (2022). Analisis Segitiga SPK Pada Kekerasan Langsung antar Organisasi Kemasyarakatan (Ormas) Forum Betawi Rempug (FBR) dan Pemuda Pancasila (PP). Jurnal Kolaborasi Resolusi Konflik, 4(2), 134. https://doi.org/10.24198/jkrk.v4i2.40000
  30. Sari, A., Nasarudin, T. M., Perdana, A. P., & .-, E. (2022). Analisis Yuridis Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2017 Tentang Organisasi Kemasyarakatan. Jurnal Hukum Malahayati, 3(1), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.33024/jhm.v3i1.6361
  31. Setiawan, K. M. P., & Tomsa, D. (2023). Defending a Vulnerable yet Resilient Democracy: Civil Society Activism in Jokowi’s Indonesia. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 42(3), 350–371. https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034231209058
  32. Sheluchin, A., Johnston, R. M., & Linden, C. D. (2020). Public Responses to Policy Reversals:The Case of Mask Usage in Canada during COVID-19. Canadian Public Policy, 46, S119–S126. https://doi.org/10.3138/CPP.2020-089
  33. Sholihah, I. (2016). Menyoal Organisasi Kemasyarakatan (Ormas) Anti-Pancasila. RechtsVinding?: Media Pembinaan Hukum NAsional, 5(2). https://rechtsvinding.bphn.go.id.
  34. Smidt, H., Johansson, J., & Richter, T. (2024). Civil Society Under Attack: The Consequences for Horizontal Accountability Institutions. Studies in Comparative International Development, 60(1), 81–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-023-09423-x
  35. Staro?ová, K., & Gajduschek, G. (2019). Guy Peters – Institutional Theory in Political Science: The New Institutionalism. Perspectives from Central and Eastern Europe. NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 12(2), 281–285. https://doi.org/10.2478/nispa-2019-0024
  36. Suteki, S., & Jalil, A. (2021). Dissolution of Islamic Community Organizations (Ormas) in the Context of a State of Law and a Democratic State. Walisongo Law Review (Walrev), 3(2), 223–242. https://doi.org/10.21580/walrev.2021.3.2.10848
  37. The Wire Staff. (2024). India’s Misuse of Counter-Terrorism Laws Targets Civil Society, Says Amnesty International. https://thewire.in/rights/indias-misuse-of-counter-terrorism-laws-targets-civil-society-says-amnesty-international
  38. Wardani, A. K., & Riwanto, A. (2020). Analisis Pembubaran Organisasi Kemasyarakatan Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia dalam Perspektif Negara Hukum yang Bebas Berserikat. Jurnal Hukum Dan Pembangunan Ekonomi, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.33756/jelta.v13i01.5417
  39. Warong, K. M., Waha, C. J. J., & Tangkere, C. (2020). Kajian Hukum Hak Asasi Manusia terhadap Kebebasan Berpendapat oleh Organisasi Kemasyarakatan di Media Sosial. Lex Administratum, 8(5), 73–92. http://hpj.journals.pnu.ac.ir/article_6498.html
  40. Wibowo, C., & Harefa, H. (2015). Urgensi Pengawasan Organisasi Kemasyarakatan oleh Pemerintah. Jurnal Bina Praja, 07(01), 01–19. https://doi.org/10.21787/jbp.07.2015.01-19
Downloads
PDF
Record
License

Copyright (c) 2026 Al-Adly Darniyus

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Evaluation of Policies on Mass Organizations in Indonesia from the Perspective of Freedom of Association and Public Order. (2026). Bestuurskunde: Journal of Governmental Studies, 6(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.53013/bestuurskunde.6.1.1-16

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.

Indexed by