Pancasila in the Paradox of Nation-Building
By Ferdian Andi
The debate surrounding the foundational ideology of the state and the relationship between religion and the nation is no longer a fiercely contested issue. That dynamic has been overcome during crucial moments such as the sessions of the Investigating Committee for Preparatory Work for Indonesian Independence (BPUPK) (1945), the Constituent Assembly (1955-1959), and even the early constitutional amendments at the dawn of Reformasi (1999). Pancasila firmly stands as the philosophische grondslag (philosophical basis) for nation-building.
The most pressing challenge currently lies in the implementation of Pancasila's values in national, state, and societal life. At least two areas exist to ensure Pancasila remains relevant:
- Operationalizing Pancasila as a guiding instrument and standard in state governance across all branches of state power.
- Ensuring every citizen adopts Pancasila as a guide in both private and public spheres.
Pancasila is practically compatible with all generations, including Generation Z and Generation Alpha. The noble attributes inherent in Pancasila ideally should not stop at mere slogans or material for state socialization and campaigns. Ensuring Pancasila's relevance in various situations and conditions is a challenge that must be addressed by all stakeholders. In practice, Pancasila drives and directs the nation's journey in accordance with the aspirations of the founding fathers.
Ethical Standard
For eight decades of Indonesia's independence, Pancasila has ideally been positioned as an ethical standard in state administration. Every step and movement of the state is imbued with the spirit of Pancasila's principles. The manifestation of the idiom "source of all sources of law" attached to Pancasila, in essence, conditions every norm enshrined in public regulations to possess the spirit of Pancasila. This is what is called the philosophical foundation, serving as one of the markers of the good or bad of laws and regulations. The purpose is clear: to ensure that every norm binding and regulating the public does not deviate from the philosophy of nation-building.
Unfortunately, this situation is paradoxical when juxtaposed with several facts on the ground, such as the data on judicial review and formal review petitions at the Constitutional Court (MK) regarding the constitutionality of laws. Not a few norms within laws have been annulled by the MK for contradicting the constitution. Throughout 2024, based on recapitulation data of judicial review cases submitted to the MK, 158 cases were filed, and 18 cases were granted. Meanwhile, up to May 2025, 77 cases were submitted, and 14 petitions were granted.
Another crucial issue is corruption occurring within state administrators. The crackdown on corruption cases by law enforcement agencies such as the Attorney General's Office and the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) recently confirms a state governance far removed from the spirit of Pancasila. Corrupt practices by state administrators in various branches of power, to an extreme extent, violate Pancasila's values. Although it should also be noted that Indonesia's ranking according to Transparency International's (TI) Corruption Perception Index (CPI) increased to 37/100, a three-point rise compared to the previous year's 34/100. However, in reality, corruption remains a stumbling block in realizing good and clean governance. According to records from the Financial Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (PPATK), the flow of funds from alleged corruption cases in 2024 reached up to Rp 984 trillion.
This situation reveals an extreme paradoxical side. On one hand, Pancasila is placed in a supreme position as the basic norm in nation-building. Yet, in practice, state administration and state management often turn their backs on, or even confront, Pancasila. At this point, Pancasila appears irrelevant and inoperative for state administrators who violate the law. However, in this context, Pancasila can be qualified as a presupposition, which, according to Hans Kelsen (1967), is "the last and highest," its position transcending the individual, not created by an authority whose competence requires other norms. In Amiroeddin Sjarief's notes (1997), Pancasila is referred to as a grundnorm or upsrungnorm (original and fundamental) that serves as the source of a society's worldview, consciousness, and legal ideals.
Relevant and Grounded
The national, state, and societal challenges occurring today can ideally and effectively be addressed with Pancasila as the state ideology, manifested in concrete forms of legal policy and administrative action, both in guiding the formal process of formation and in normalizing policy (material) by government officials. Pancasila's values are concretized through the actions of state administrators who are oriented towards orderly procedures outlined in state policy choices geared towards citizen welfare. This step is a tangible part of making Pancasila always relevant in addressing current societal problems.
Crucially, state administrators must exemplify leadership rooted in Pancasila's values. The exemplary conduct of leaders demonstrating Pancasila-aligned attitudes is the most effective campaign to serve as a model for others. Pancasila-aligned behavior is none other than adhering to the constitution, abstaining from corruption, serving citizens wholeheartedly, and other actions oriented towards the common good.
This article was published on Kompas.com on Monday, June 9, 2025. The author is a researcher at the Center for Public Policy and Law Studies (Puskapkum) and a lecturer at the Faculty of Sharia and Law, UIN Jakarta.