The findings matter because COVID-19 demonstrated that a pandemic can quickly become more than a public health emergency. The disruption extended to economic activity, public mobility, essential services, food security, social stability, and national resilience. The authors therefore frame pandemics as non-military threats that can affect the functioning of the state and require coordinated action across government sectors.
COVID-19 Exposed a Reactive Legal System
Indonesia already had laws relevant to emergencies before COVID-19. Law No. 24 of 2007 governed disaster management, while Law No. 6 of 2018 regulated health quarantine. However, the authors found that these laws did not specifically provide a comprehensive governance framework for a pandemic affecting health, the economy, public administration, national defense, and social life at the same time.
As the pandemic developed, the government introduced additional legal instruments. Presidential Decree No. 11 of 2020 established COVID-19 as a public health emergency, while Presidential Decree No. 12 of 2020 designated the spread of COVID-19 as a national non-natural disaster. These measures were followed by regulations covering large-scale social restrictions, economic policies, healthcare services, vaccination, and other pandemic responses.
The result was an expanding legal framework that adapted to rapidly changing circumstances. But the study concludes that much of this development was reactive. Regulations, coordination mechanisms, and institutional structures were frequently created or adjusted after new problems emerged rather than being fully established in advance.
How the Research Was Conducted
Putri, Utama, and Triadi used normative legal research with a qualitative approach. They examined legislation, legal doctrines, policy documents, and relevant legal literature to assess how coherent and adequate Indonesia’s emergency legal framework was.
The researchers used statutory, conceptual, and doctrinal approaches to identify regulatory gaps, inconsistencies, and institutional weaknesses. They also examined the development of Indonesia’s emergency legal governance from the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic through the post-pandemic period. The findings section additionally draws on interviews with informants from the Ministry of Health, Ministry of Defense, and Ministry of State Secretariat.
Four Pillars of Legal Preparedness
The central proposal from the Indonesia Defense University researchers is to move emergency law from a response-oriented model toward a preparedness-oriented system.
The study identifies four interconnected dimensions:
- Regulatory preparedness: Laws and implementing regulations should be sufficiently clear, harmonized, and ready for immediate use.
- Institutional preparedness: Government institutions should have clearly defined responsibilities and authority before an emergency begins.
- Coordination preparedness: Permanent mechanisms should enable ministries, agencies, local governments, security institutions, and healthcare organizations to work together quickly.
- Operational preparedness: Standard procedures and practical mechanisms should already exist so policies can be implemented without lengthy preparation during a crisis.
This framework shifts the question from whether a government can legally respond to an emergency toward whether its entire legal system is ready to respond effectively.
Coordination Was Critical During COVID-19
The study highlights the COVID-19 Response Acceleration Task Force and its subsequent transformation into the Committee for COVID-19 Response and National Economic Recovery, or KPCPEN, as important examples of cross-government coordination.
These structures connected central and regional governments with ministries, agencies, the Indonesian National Armed Forces, the Indonesian National Police, disaster management authorities, and public health institutions. According to the study’s interview findings, the mechanism helped accelerate decision-making and improve synchronization between institutions.
However, their temporary nature also revealed a structural weakness. The coordination institutions were established in response to the pandemic rather than being permanent emergency mechanisms already available before the crisis. The researchers argue that future emergency governance should not depend primarily on institutions created after a crisis has begun.
An official from Indonesia’s Ministry of Health, quoted in the study, emphasized the lesson that emergency coordination, institutional responsibilities, health data management, logistics, and healthcare delivery should be prepared beforehand rather than developed from scratch during a crisis.
Implications for Future Policy
The findings have implications beyond pandemic management. Putri, Utama, and Triadi argue that Indonesia’s emergency legal reforms should strengthen the implementation of Law No. 17 of 2023 on Health and Government Regulation No. 28 of 2024.
The researchers note that several areas still require detailed implementing regulations, including national coordination for public health emergencies, institutional authority, emergency command structures, health-data governance, and standard operating procedures.
They recommend regulatory harmonization, permanent coordination mechanisms, clearer institutional responsibilities, standardized operating procedures, and regular simulations and evaluations. Such measures could help government institutions respond more rapidly while maintaining legal certainty, accountability, and constitutional rights.
The concept could also be applied to other non-military threats. The authors identify cyberattacks, biological hazards, climate change, energy crises, and environmental emergencies as areas where a preparedness-based emergency legal system could potentially be relevant.
The broader message from the Indonesia Defense University researchers is straightforward: having emergency laws is not enough. A resilient state also needs institutions that know their roles, coordination channels that already function, and operational rules that can be activated immediately.
Author Profiles
Agita Asmara Pratama Putri — Faculty of National Security, Indonesia Defense University. The article does not specify her academic degree or a more detailed field of expertise.
Anang Puji Utama — Faculty of National Security, Indonesia Defense University. The article does not specify his academic degree or a more detailed field of expertise.
Irwan Triadi — Faculty of National Security, Indonesia Defense University. The article does not specify his academic degree or a more detailed field of expertise.
0 Komentar