"The real gist of that entire situation was government please listen to people who are hurting so more free speech so more freedom of press more avenues for the people and the DPR and the government to interact and I think the big aha moment in this entire movement is finally lots of people are waking up that politics affect their everyday lives it affects every single person who's a resident or a citizen and are living in Indonesia and who love Indonesia" - Gita Sjahrir, Head of Investment at BNI Ventures


"The cost of this was extremely clear. It's the cost of what happens when empathy is not expressed in politics and when you make rules and regulations. The cost of what happened starting in the end of August until now is more than 6,000 people have been arrested. I lost count of how many thousands of people are injured. Ten people were killed. And so the cost is extremely clear. I'm hoping there's something that came out of it." - Gita Sjahrir, Head of Investment at BNI Ventures


"One person said, 'Anyone who criticize what DPR members make are idiots.' And there were others who said, 'Well, I'm okay getting this housing benefit. I think it's completely fair because my house is very far from my office in Jakarta.' That was considered tone-deaf for very obvious reasons. A really big piece that's missing here is empathy. There seems to be this lack of empathy and understanding that people are hurting. People don't have time to wait for government officials to finally do the right thing and have great results because people are literally hurting in every way—economically, health-wise, everything." - Gita Sjahrir, Head of Investment at BNI Ventures

Gita Sjahrir and Jeremy Au analyze Indonesia’s nationwide protests to uncover how economic frustration, political tone-deafness, and social media reshaped the country’s trust in government. They discuss how widening income gaps and stalled reforms triggered anger across generations, how empathy and governance broke down, and how technology became both a rallying force and a regulatory battleground. Their conversation highlights the urgent need for reform, the rise of citizen activism, and the lessons Southeast Asia can draw from Indonesia’s call for accountability and change.

02:00 Economic anger ignited mass protests: Gita recounts how outrage over parliamentary pay and weak economic growth led to demonstrations in 33 cities across Indonesia.

03:35 Lawmakers’ high pay exposed inequality: Parliament members earning over $200,000 a year contrasted sharply with citizens living on a $5,000 GDP per capita.

06:46 Empathy collapsed in leadership: Gita explains how tone-deaf remarks and government inaction during hardship revealed a lack of care for ordinary people.

11:20 Citizens demanded reform through “17+8 Tuntutan”: Protesters called for salary freezes, free speech protections, and limits on military involvement in civilian life.

15:00 Political shifts followed public pressure: A new finance minister emerged, promising transparency and empathy amid policy reshuffles.

18:48 Structural reforms proved elusive: Bureaucratic red tape, poor SME support, and a lack of deregulation trapped Indonesia in slow growth.

21:29 TikTok ban worsened SME struggles: A freeze on TikTok Live and Shop disrupted small businesses that relied on digital sales for survival.

Jeremy Au (01:15)

Hey, good see you. We're in person. we're in person. Hi five we're live We were not AI generators, so that head cap got five fingers. So, no, it's good to see you person again. And, I think a lot has happened over the past month.

Gita Sjahrir (01:16)

That's an understatement.

Jeremy Au (01:34)

and there was this very large protest and I think what's interesting is that we were actually discussing in the last episode right before the protest happened, how there's a huge trust gap between I think the middle class and the government and we said that there were conditions that were just not right and obviously that has kind of like erupted in street protests. So but I think maybe from your perspective could you recap what happened?

Gita Sjahrir (01:43)

So I was in the ground, I was in Indonesia when it all happened. And it started out with a series of smaller scale protests. So there was a protest by the labor movement. There was another protest regarding conditions in the economy and trust issues with the government in general due to expansion of TNI or the military involvement in civilian projects or in state sponsored projects. And so there's

a lot of pushback. And then there were this onslaught of dissatisfaction that was expressed very publicly by multiple layers of society about the DPR, which is our parliament, about the DPR's increased allowance, especially what was famous as this housing allowance, which will give them about 3,200, 3,500 US dollars a month net for housing.

you know, for rent or whatever, just FYI, GDP per capita of the country is 5,000. So this is way above and beyond a typical average salary of a person. ⁓ That's just housing. It's not the actual salary. So all in, I think all of the salary would have amounted to 20,000 US dollars and it's net. So because they're part of the government, they're not taxed.

Jeremy Au (03:09)

Seven times

Gita Sjahrir (03:24)

on top of that, right? So people are just, oh, this is $20,000 a month. Yeah, no, no,

Jeremy Au (03:32)

$240,000 USD per year salary.

Gita Sjahrir (03:35)

This is salary plus plus so like the way it works is you get a base salary and then you get Allowances for things so some of the allowances that people thought were crazy were rice allowance. You get I don't know a couple hundred dollars or up to a thousand of yeah rice allowance And I don't know what you're doing with that much rice per month

Jeremy Au (03:59)

I'm doing the math and I'm like, wait, I mean, the GDP per capita is $5,000.

Gita Sjahrir (04:04)

Yes, correct. That's $5,000 not a month, $5,000 a year.

Jeremy Au (04:09)

So the average GDP per capita of Indonesian is $5,000 per year. And the salary is.

Gita Sjahrir (04:18)

of parliament members were close to about 200,000 dollars a year.

Jeremy Au (04:23)

that would be the equivalent of I guess in Singapore, America, the average GDP per capita is about 70,000. So 50 X would be about getting paid 3.5 million per year. But is it considered like a full-time job? Can you work with other jobs?

Gita Sjahrir (04:37)

yeah, about that. It is technically a full-time job, but people do other things too because of how porous our legal system is, which is something I've talked about multiple times, how there are so many gray areas in our legal system. So for example, a vice minister can be a commissioner of a state-owned enterprise. Yeah, like a double-hatting, which is...

Jeremy Au (04:56)

I like a double-head thing.

Gita Sjahrir (04:59)

I think where it gets people very riled up is, again, when you're in a country where the GDP per capita is still very low and then there are not enough economic reforms that allow people to trade freely and also just get jobs much more easily. Again, one in four youths in Indonesia are not in employment, training, or school. So it's a very high number, right? And when the statistic board said

Oh, that's not true. Our employment rate is actually very high. The question becomes, how do you define employment? Because in Indonesia, there's also an extremely high rate of informal employment, right? So your gig drivers, your daily laborers. And if you count that as employment, sure, then I guess it's high. It's a very high rate. Then your unemployment rate may be at 5%. But they don't have the same level of job security, right?

They don't have the same level of job security, benefits, all of that. So their lives are still extremely, extremely tough. So you combine the situation of the parliament making such a such a large data of salary and benefits versus the average person. And then several members of the parliament said some things in relation to that that was just very negative. So one person said,

anyone who criticized what DPR members make are idiots. Or there are people who said, well, I'm OK getting this housing benefit. I think it's completely fair because my house is very far from my office in Jakarta. And that was considered tone deaf for very obvious reasons. Right. Right. OK, it's not hard to figure it.

Jeremy Au (06:40)

politics is about saying stuff about the leadership, know, so not saying stupid stuff.

Gita Sjahrir (06:46)

Well, a really big piece that's missing here is empathy. It's something I've seen since actually months ago even. There seems to be this lack of empathy of really understanding that people are hurting and people don't have time to watch government officials to finally do the right thing and finally have great results because people are very objectively like.

literally hurting in every way economically, health-wise, everything. And so when there was a series of protests, the problem was there wasn't a lot of response to that protest. So it was government officials saying, things are fine. You just have to give us time. And they again seemed tone deaf until one night, and I was in Jakarta when this happened.

a very public video of a Gojek driver that was sending food to, just being a Gojek driver, sending food delivery was hit by the police with a tank, basically. And it's very, very visual and it's all caught on camera. And that was when the next day everything erupted again for good reason. Right. And I think it was then that finally,

government officials realized that this is not a game, that people are extremely angry. And so what happened next was a wave of, you know, a wave of restrictions. A lot of military and the police were coming into the streets too, to manage and regulate. And it really just became this massive undress in 33 cities. And then there were burnings of some buildings.

and public facilities which were considered not necessarily the action of the demonstrators because a typical demonstrator wouldn't burn things that demonstrators use like train stations and buses, right? Because they're public facilities that are helpful. So with all this unrest, with all this very, very legitimate and valid anger, finally the government started speaking up also because

there were mass lootings of government officials houses. BPR houses were raided, actually raided by lots and lots of people. Unfortunately, there were also other houses that were raided, including the Ministry of Finance at the time and lots of others. So basically the message was change something, change it fast.

In a way, some stuff happened because they had to happen immediately. If not, we would just go straight into even more unrest. And the really big one was there were this document called Tuntutan, which means what the people requested. The headline for that is called 17 plus 8 because that's the amount.

that people were asking for. But when I say people, it's not also representative of all people because how do you also create something that's representative of 285 million people? But that is the most wildly circulated one. For the most part, they were pretty, yeah, pretty pointed. So for example, it asked DPR members to have a freeze on

salary hikes and to have much more, basically a much lower rate of salary and benefits. It then asked for more inclusion of public participation in the creation of undang-undang or the law. Also asked for, you know, limitation of TNI, the military in public spaces, in projects, civilian projects, etc.

asked, it basically asked for many, many things, but the real gist of that entire situation was government, please listen to people who are hurting. So more free speech, so more freedom of press, more, you know, more avenues for the people and the DPR and the government to interact. And really it's that, and I think the big

aha moment in this entire movement is finally, lots of people are waking up that politics affect their everyday lives. I mean, it's really that, right? And I think that's usually, sorry to say, usually when people who come from, honestly, people like me, right? Like more elite backgrounds, educated, speak English, all of that. We sometimes feel that we're separate or apart.

from all these, but we're not. It affects every single person who's a resident or a citizen and are living in Indonesia and who love Indonesia. And another interesting aspect of this is the increased movement of the diaspora. So Indonesians who live abroad, who study abroad, or they're citizens of the United States, European Union countries, all of those, they've actually

gone down to their embassies and their public parks and spaces and spoke for a better Indonesia. So now, as we look forward, there's this concept called Reset Indonesia. It's a hashtag. There are also different variations of this. They're not the only one. But what we see is this decentralized movement simply because people are exhausted with where the policies are taking them.

Jeremy Au (11:49)

you for me, it's like something that I read in the news, right? And I think obviously you see some of the videos. I watched that video of the poor Go-Jak driver getting hit by car. You know, I think it's something that, you look at this and you're just like...

This is the stuff that happens, right? At some level, it's yes, it's chaos, it's randomness. But on the other side, you said, mechanistically, if there's lot of frustrated people who feel like they're unheard, they're going to protest. There's going to be good faith actors who try their best. And then there's going to be bad faith actors. protest in America, in any country in the world.

And then obviously how you respond to it is going to be the make or break component. And really you call it good politics, or you call it good crisis management. But how you handle it is going to be the part that's important.

not an easy topic at all. I think it makes me wonder, this one big question is like, what are the lessons or things to take away from this? I think a protest is a scream from the unheard, right? Yeah. Is this something that happens? often, it's like tip of the iceberg, right? It's like there's a big thing underneath the water. But what are the key takeaways from this entire crisis?

Gita Sjahrir (13:04)

The cost of this was extremely clear and I mean not the cost of what the demonstrators bring because again, they're valid. It's the cost of what happens when empathy is not expressed in politics and when you make rules and regulations. And the cost of what happened starting in end of August until now is more than 6,000 people have been arrested. I lost count of how many thousands of people are injured.

10 people were killed and so the cost is extremely clear, right? Until today, almost a thousand people, if not more, actually we've lost track because so many have been arrested due to supposedly due to anarchy actions or whatnot, right? Unfortunately, there's also

group of children who are currently detained, which I don't know what the logic is, but here we are. Right. So I'm hoping there's something that came out of it. There were lots of changes. I probably can't even blurt out all of them because there's been a lot in a way. Right. So for example, a lot of political parties have made public statements saying that they will be on the side of the people, which for lots of people, they would go.

Well, yeah, of course. And then I went, well, if you've seen the way the politics have been played, the mass and just people in general don't feel that these political parties represent them. They feel that the political parties are all playing a game, a political maneuver. And somehow the people's wishes may not always be front and center. Right. You can see this in other countries. Indonesia is not different, to be honest. So.

political parties have expressed that they will be on the side of people. And then, you know, the finance minister was reshuffled. So now it's a new guy. And currently he's pulling quite well. He started out quite rough in the beginning, just like, I guess, lots of people, lots of ministers who start out, they usually start out with people not trusting them. But this current minister seems like he has...

good ideas, he expresses them. And I think people like the way he expressed things, because they're very honest. He is very unfiltered. Yeah. He is very unfiltered. And people like that, because I think what people are looking for is empathy, and just something genuine. People are just trying to grasp at, you genuine? Right. So we have a new finance minister. And then

you know, supposedly there will be more oversight for the free lunch program that is deeply now, deeply political and controversial in Indonesia for many reasons. And so, yeah, there are some changes here and there, but again, the question is how fast can those changes come and how much costs will they incur?

And when I mean costs, I mean not just money, but actually the most important part, which is the well-being and the social justice of the people.

Jeremy Au (15:58)

I one thing obviously is really the economic piece of And I think the biggest driver is from the analysis. I think they feel like obviously one is economic growth is not as fast as it should be. think that's one way of thinking. But two is if you like it's getting worse, right? And so I think that's...

Gita Sjahrir (16:16)

They're not wrong. ⁓

Jeremy Au (16:19)

So I think what I find tricky is like something the reports have conflicting points of view, is what people feel like the economy is getting worse, but it feels like the official numbers, it feels like it's growing slowly. So I don't know what's the lived reality.

Gita Sjahrir (16:30)

Right. So I think what makes it very, very hard again is the government is already starting at a trust deficit in the country. That includes official numbers because a lot of people now, including not just, know, Gita doing a podcast, but also, consulting companies, research bodies, independent organizations, they are questioning official government numbers because like, as I said before, no, our

employment is very low. And then the question is, how do you define employment? If it includes informal employment, yeah, it's very low. But if you just find formal employment with health care involved and all of that, maybe the number is actually high. There are still waves of layoffs, especially with what just happened with the Ministry of Energy and the big issues with

imported gasoline and fuel into the country and there's just a lot of these other issues in all the different sectors, in all the different sectors, whether you're in energy or whether you're in SMEs, there's just so many of these problems. So for example, today, I just found out several hours ago that TikTok was banned And I can only imagine what

the tens of millions at least in lost revenue by SMEs who sell through TikTok shop and TikTok live. I can only imagine. So I think it's all of those very real economic issues. And I'm not even talking trickle down economics. I'm just talking very real economic problems that makes it hard for an average person to either A, get a job that pays them well, a living wage and

humane conditions or two, if they were to start a business, an SME, how do they maintain consistent revenue where they can employ people, grow, thrive, get access to credit financing and all of that so that they continue to build better lives for their families? I really worry about those. And right now, I'm not quite sure what strong economic policies or deregulation that is happening that would help any of those two.

Jeremy Au (18:48)

And I think there's a part that's tough, which is structural reform. is the hardest part of unlocking the economic growth. think there's easy wins, is lowering interest rates. Right, of course. There's easy wins, there's a stimulus and everything. I think that's the tricky part. And I think the middle income trap, economy trap is very real Of course, but it feels like there's so many quick wins that Indonesia could still do. Whereas you say Indonesia is the middle income economy. Yeah, yeah, yeah. There's still quite a lot of easy wins.

Gita Sjahrir (19:16)

So for example, one of the quicker wins, wouldn't say very quick, but maybe one of the quicker wins was the one that was mentioned by several economists in the past about deregulation and just making it easy for businesses to set up shop in Indonesia. mean, it's just very straightforward.

Jeremy Au (19:33)

make it less forms less it's correct painful more streamlined you could do it in nine months you know hopefully you've put everybody in the room

Gita Sjahrir (19:39)

Yeah, so that's fairly easy. Right?

Yeah. But again, I think what the protests are hopefully starting to bring up into the light is that.

politics affect everyday people and affects everyone. So when we're talking about the economy, it's not this concept that only people who study economics understand or people study economics can give a commentary on. It's basic questions on if I were an SME in Indonesia, how easy it is for me, for example, to incorporate into an LLC so that the finances is not in my personal bank account name.

in BCA or BNI or Mandiri, right? these are just basic questions that I think often gets ignored because the other things are flashier. It is flashier to give, for example, we call it bansos, which is social support, which is also needed. Don't get me wrong. But it is flashier to just give an extremely large aid package.

rather than ensuring that economic cycles happen in every layer of society. So not just the conglomerates with their very large, large cap listed companies, but also people at the grassroots level. How easy it is for them to set up a small business. How easy it is for them to get access to financing again. How easy it is for them to trade. What if they want to trade

to international buyers. Yeah, right? Because when we think international buyers, we often think, you must be a large startup backed by a VC. No, I'm talking about carpenters in Java who can sell their furniture abroad and probably make a better margin if they want to. But again, these are the questions that are often just not answered.

Jeremy Au (21:29)

Yeah. And I think you also mentioned about TikTok, you know, currently going to a regular show. Effectively a soft band in the term. So I think what's interesting was that

Gita Sjahrir (21:34)

regulatory.

Jeremy Au (21:41)

the factual part of it is that it sounds like chronologically what I've read from the news is that TikTok was being used, especially TikTok Live was being used during the protests, there's a coordination, donations, diaspora, news gathering, community organizing. I understand that the government has requested for data from TikTok about who was live streaming the IP addresses, who donated and gave money.

Gita Sjahrir (22:03)

whatever it is they requested.

Jeremy Au (22:05)

And then they felt that TikTok didn't give that data. then so now they've done, they're relooking at the license of TikTok being able to operate in Asia.

Gita Sjahrir (22:15)

I have no access to what the government asked TikTok. I don't work there. So I have no... I'm not privy to it at all. But it seems that from all the reports, the government asked for data on the TikTok engagement between August 25 to...

August 30, which is happens to be in the same time as the civil unrest. Do with that information what you want. Right. And because the government now deems that TikTok hasn't quite responded fully. And also, there was another potential cause, which is they said, we want to protect our SMEs. I'm not quite sure. And then supposedly, there's rumors of

no, this is because they wanted to see if anyone was doing online gambling and online gambling is a very big problem. It's a huge social problem in Indonesia in general. So again, no one knows, but do with the information what you will. And now supposedly there's been a freeze on at least parts and features of TikTok. But my biggest concern is the TikTok live and the TikTok shop features because

So many SMEs just use that for like what up to 90 % of their income. Like it's just such a huge part of their sales method, such a huge part of their go-to-market strategy. So I really hope that whatever step is being taken right now that we also think of, I don't even know the millions of SME that are suffering. Yeah.

Jeremy Au (23:52)

think it's an interesting dynamic because during the protest, think that TikTok actually shut down his livestream component. And after that, he went back up. And because the people were asking for it, mean, the word people is very large, but there's a very big outcry for it to be restored. And of course now I'm sure that from my perspective, it's quite interesting because I was like, if you're TikTok's public policy team, it's really not an easy...

Gita Sjahrir (24:17)

No, no, no, no, I don't envy the public policy and government relations team right now at all. It's a tough place to walk because Indonesia also has several laws that over time probably can be used to either leverage or...

benefit certain groups much more than the rest. So a very famous one is about this law that you cannot, in a way, portray other people in a very negative light. Like, so it's a type of, I don't even know how to explain it. But yeah, like a defamation, but it's very slippery. It's a very slippery argument. So for example, you can actually get defamation

Gita Sjahrir (25:02)

under this law if you create, let's say, a very negative review of a skincare clinic. But what does that even mean, right? I mean, I don't know, because what if it's real? What if the treatment really did bring about something very negative? So that definition of this particular law, for example, is very odd.

Another odd one is it's an outdated 1961 law on fundraising. So supposedly, if you want to fundraise for anything at all, like medical needs of people, legal help, all of that, you would need a permit from someone or from something. supposedly that is to protect consumers or to protect

people who donate, but at the same time, since this is from 1961, so think of the context, 1961 was before there was a working clear democracy in the country, right? So why was there such strong laws on fundraising? So like, if you fundraise, for example, what if you fundraise for, your family members who had a terrible accident?

then do you need a permit? How do you get that permit? How does this work? Like what, you know, what areas does this cover? And I think it's that there's a lot of legal uncertainties or gray areas is more like it. And that can be weaponized over time or leverage. And I think that is the part where, yeah, that is the part where structural reforms are needed, more transparency, more public participation is needed throughout and should be the lesson of this entire civil unrest.

Jeremy Au (26:37)

Yeah, I think it is really interesting because I think TikTok reminds me very much of actually like, you know, Facebook, right? And Facebook very much was a big player in, for example, the Arab. think it's interesting because every new communication medium seems to generate its own form of community of organizing and that form of shows up in political unrest.

And I think it's been interesting to see because I tech out like, you know, in a broader context is they're fighting like a multi front regulatory, in America, I think they recently agreed to sell the ticket to US to a consortium of American folks. So that's one thing. Obviously, we know that India's holding back as well as Nepal.

Gita Sjahrir (27:16)

Yeah.

Jeremy Au (27:18)

And then obviously we have other countries like Afghanistan, Somalia, Tik Tok as well. I it's interesting to see that. I think people, I just think that it's going to be interesting because I'm just kind of curious how it all shakes out to be, honestly. Like it's not an easy regulatory question.

Gita Sjahrir (27:36)

And again, all of these platforms, we must remember are managed by corporations. So they're managed by corporations, they look for profit, profit comes in the form of our attention, our focus on it. And I think this is what makes participatory democracy challenging in today's time, right? It's not as simple as, every voice matters, we listen because

voices can be distorted through platforms. Obviously, right? And also a lot of countries, we have to understand that, you know, the constitution laws and amendments of so many countries are alive today. They're not set in stone. They're not necessarily, some 10 commandment type things that are unshakable. Like so many of these laws and constitution.

our life today and the people still have power in shaping where it goes. But I think this is the part that makes everything very complicated because with social media platform or individualism and just people not connecting as people. Yeah, we forget people we forget each other. That it makes democracy.

actually quite shaky and not as firm as people think of it as an ideal and a value. One of the big things that happened to me personally during the entire thing was there was this small thing where a bunch of friends said, hey, we can treat Gojek and Grab drivers and their friends and their families to food on the app. Maybe we can just.

buy them food and it was just very simple. And then we found out that, you know, so many people that did this in the country, but so did Singaporeans. So did Malaysians. So did Filipinos. They downloaded the Grab or Gojek app and bought people food. And just, it's so amazing to see, you know, ASEAN.

At least the youths, right? Doing these very small act of kindness. And it's just a small act of kindness and connection. So the grab driver I bought food for, he took a picture of him giving food to his friends. And they took like a picture, all five of them going like this. And it was just, you know, like, nice to see like it's a connection, and then I asked how they're doing. I hope they like the food and it's just, you see these interactions happening. So

I'm not one to say that social media is 100 % good, 100 % bad, because many things are not 100 % good or bad. Humans are also not always 100 % good or bad, right? We're just shades of gray trying to do good, sometimes doing bad, right? It's just hopefully in that net at the end you're just doing way more good so that you're leaving this world a bit better. And I think it was that very small act of, know, very small act of connection.

I wouldn't even call it kindness, it's just connection, right? You seeing someone and trying to give something to others. That was pretty powerful for me. And just seeing everybody else in Southeast Asia doing that, that was quite cool.

Jeremy Au (30:36)

Well. You know, on that hopeful note, I hope that things continue to grow. I think it feels like I think the tree takeaways I got from this conversation one is like, you and I have been discussing this podcast for a long time about the things that need to change. And it like a lot of it boiled over really in terms of economic growth, in terms of feeling disconnection or trust deficit. hopefully that can be seen factually. think that's one. Two is I think quite clearly this protests have

resulted in this law and order crackdown. And so I think the country is a process. What is the right steps moving forward as well. The third thing is that think technology and communication platforms are such a huge part of this entire story. And I think that's the final chapter. This hasn't been written yet.

Gita Sjahrir (31:23)

Yep, you're right. I like that. It hasn't been written yet.

Jeremy Au (31:26)

Yeah, we'll find out. We'll find out. Stay tuned. tuned. OK, on that note, let's wrap up and see you next time.

Gita Sjahrir (31:32)

Take care. Bye.