Breaking the Constitutional Poverty Trap: Socio-Economic Rights and Inequality in Indonesia’s Constitutional Framework
Keywords:
Socio-Economic Rights, Constitutional Poverty Trap, Indonesia, Inequality, Sustainable ConstitutionalismAbstract
This study examines the paradox of socio-economic rights within Indonesia’s constitutional framework, demonstrating how their formal recognition has failed to alleviate entrenched inequality, resulting in what can be termed a “constitutional poverty trap.” The primary objective is to analyze the disjunction between constitutional text and social reality, interrogating why constitutional guarantees of education, health, work, and social security have not produced substantive equality. To address this, the research employs a normative legal method, drawing on statute, conceptual, comparative, and case approaches. This methodology allows a critical assessment of the 1945 Constitution’s provisions on socio-economic rights, the Constitutional Court’s jurisprudence, and comparative insights from jurisdictions such as South Africa, India, and Latin America, where doctrines of progressive realization and judicial activism have been developed. The results indicate that while Indonesia’s Constitution embodies robust socio-economic commitments, weak enforcement mechanisms, limited judicial intervention, institutional inefficiency, and oligarchic dominance have prevented these rights from being realized in practice. Moreover, decentralization has generated uneven regional capacities, producing geographic inequality in access to education, healthcare, and social protection. The findings suggest that breaking the constitutional poverty trap requires a multidimensional strategy: strengthening constitutional jurisprudence with doctrines of enforceability, enhancing institutional capacity and accountability, reforming political finance to reduce elite capture, and aligning constitutional guarantees with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals to ensure inclusivity and intergenerational equity. Ultimately, the study contributes to the broader discourse on constitutionalism by arguing that socio-economic rights must be reframed not as symbolic provisions but as binding obligations integral to sustainable development and democratic consolidation.
References
Agustina, R., Dartanto, T., Sitompul, R., Susiloretni, K. A., Achadi, E. L., Taher, A., ... and Thabrany, H. (2019). Universal health coverage in Indonesia: Concept, progress, and challenges. The Lancet, 393(10166), 75–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31647-7
Aspinall, E., and Berenschot, W. (2019). Democracy for sale: Elections, clientelism, and the state in Indonesia. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501732990
Aspinall, E., and Sukmajati, M. (2016). Electoral dynamics in Indonesia: Money politics, patronage and clientelism at the grassroots. Singapore: NUS Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1fxm7kw
Booth, A. (2016). Economic change in modern Indonesia: Colonial and post-colonial comparisons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316341527
Buehler, M. (2010). Decentralisation and local democracy in Indonesia: The marginalisation of the public sphere. In E. Aspinall and M. Mietzner (Eds.), Problems of democratisation in Indonesia (pp. 267–285). Singapore: ISEAS. https://doi.org/10.1355/9789814279896-018
Butt, S., and Lindsey, T. (2012). The Constitution of Indonesia: A contextual analysis. Oxford: Hart Publishing. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472565805
Chang, M. C., Shaeffer, S., Al-Samarrai, S., Ragatz, A. B., de Ree, J., and Stevenson, R. (2014). Teacher reform in Indonesia: The role of politics and evidence in policy making. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-9829-6
Gargarella, R. (2013). Latin American constitutionalism, 1810–2010: The engine room of the Constitution. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199937967.001.0001
Gargarella, R., Domingo, P., and Roux, T. (2006). Courts and social transformation in new democracies: An institutional voice for the poor? London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203087244
Ginsburg, T., and Dixon, R. (2011). Comparative constitutional law. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9780857931214
Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hadiz, V. R., and Robison, R. (2013). The political economy of oligarchy and the reorganization of power in Indonesia. Indonesia, 96, 35–57. https://doi.org/10.5728/indonesia.96.0035
Liebenberg, S. (2010). Socio-economic rights: Adjudication under a transformative constitution. Claremont: Juta and Co.
Prasetyo, A. (2021). Social protection and inequality in Indonesia during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Southeast Asian Economies, 38(3), 297–315. https://doi.org/10.1355/ae38-3f
Sunstein, C. R. (2001). Designing democracy: What constitutions do. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0198293332.001.0001
Suryahadi, A., Hadiwidjaja, G., and Sumarto, S. (2012). Economic growth and poverty reduction in Indonesia before and after the Asian financial crisis. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 48(2), 209–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/00074918.2012.694155
Trubek, D. M., and Galanter, M. (1974). Scholars in self-estrangement: Some reflections on the crisis in law and development studies in the United States. Wisconsin Law Review, 1974(1), 1062–1102.
Tushnet, M. (2008). Weak courts, strong rights: Judicial review and social welfare rights in comparative constitutional law. Princeton: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400828154
UNDP. (2020). Indonesia’s SDGs roadmap 2020–2030. Jakarta: UNDP.
Winters, J. A. (2011). Oligarchy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511762151
World Bank. (2022). Indonesia economic prospects: Navigating uncertainty. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/37215
Yamin, A. E., and Gloppen, S. (2011). Litigating health rights: Can courts bring more justice to health? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
