Indonesia is currently facing serious challenges regarding legislative governance. The explosion of rule production over the last two decades, rather than strengthening the state, has instead created a confusing phenomenon of hyper-regulation. Without an integrated master design, policies born often operate in silos, trapped in sectoral egos between agencies and regional governments.
Conditions on the ground reflect a contradictory reality; administratively, everything appears legal, but in practice, business actors and the public are trapped in a bureaucratic labyrinth. The lack of synchronization between sectoral regulations and technical ministry guidelines creates tangible legal uncertainty. This phenomenon proves that the state is often weakened by a backlog of rules lacking clear direction and purpose.
As a strategic instrument, regulations should function to maintain order and ensure constitutional goals are achieved, rather than merely acting as an administrative response to momentary issues. The quality of legal products is fundamentally not measured by quantity, but by the consistency of norms, clarity of orientation, and integration among regulations. Regrettably, the current harmonization process lags far behind the speed of rule production itself.
This condition demands a paradigm shift through the implementation of a comprehensive national regulatory policy. The state needs to consciously define boundaries—when a norm must be established and when simplification needs to be conducted. With an integrated constitutional design, Indonesia can avoid normative fatigue that has long hindered civil service innovation and sparked hesitation in the business world.
This strategic step is not merely an ordinary bureaucratic reform, but a fundamental effort to restore the essence of the rule of law. With a focused regulatory policy, Indonesia is expected to deliver inclusive legal certainty and reduce the potential for conflicting norms that often disadvantage the broader public.
