Seats without Sway: Women in Indonesia’s Parliament

For more than two decades, women activists have pushed to increase women’s representation in Indonesia’s parliament, but the results of their efforts remain uneven. In a country where women comprise nearly 50 per cent of the population, they currently hold only 22 per cent of seats in the House of Representatives (DPR), the highest figure since the 2004 legislative elections, when a 30 per cent quota for women came into effect. The requirement was later strengthened under Law No. 7/2017 on Elections, which requires party lists to include at least 30 per cent women candidates in each electoral district. However, the 2024 final candidate list found that only the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS), a national Islamist party, met the 30 per cent threshold across all DPR electoral districts, while many other parties still fell short of this target.

On paper, the quota and the gradual increase in the representation of women appear progressive. However, in practice, the increase has not made a significant change in the influence that women hold in parliament. Entrenched patriarchal norms continue to shape party and parliamentary culture, resulting in what some researchers call the “domestication” of women. This refers to the practice of assigning women to parliamentary commissions and committees (Alat Kelengkapan Dewan, AKD) handling issues that mirror women’s care-giving roles in the household — e.g., social welfare, education, health, and religion — rather than more strategic issues such as defence, law enforcement, intelligence, and energy.  This division of labour locks women’s influence at the margins of the policy agenda, while the most consequential decisions continue to be taken in spaces dominated by men. In other words, the issue is not how many women enter parliament, but how much authority they actually have. Women’s struggle does not end once they have secured a seat in parliament; it begins at that point.

Women’s representation in leadership positions in most AKDs is also limited. In the current 2024–2029 DPR term, six of the 13 parliamentary commissions have no women in leadership roles. Even more egregious and ironic, Commission VIII, which should be a strategic space for women’s issues and child protection, does not have any women among its leaders. Overall, women hold only 18 of the 104 leadership seats across all 20 AKDs. This gap shows that although women now occupy more than one-fifth of DPR seats, they still hold fewer than one-fifth of leadership positions. Their access to real authority in parliament remains limited. This means key policies are often produced with little or no meaningful gender perspective.

The controversy surrounding women’s representation in politics shows that affirmative action policies alone are not enough to change a political culture that remains deeply patriarchal.

In response to this situation, the Constitutional Court issued Decision Number 169/PUU-XXII/2024 on 30 October 2025. The ruling, prompted by petitions from women’s organisations and election reform advocates, requires that at least 30 per cent of leadership positions across all AKDs must be held by women. Women members of parliament (MPs), the court said, should be assigned roles according to their expertise rather than kept mainly in areas long treated as women’s issues. This principle aims to challenge gender stereotypes and ensure fairness in the distribution of political responsibilities.

The Constitutional Court’s ruling has been warmly received by the parliamentary elite, including the speaker of the DPR, who is a woman. In publicly expressing her full support, Speaker Puan Maharani said she would soon discuss its technical implementation at commission level with representatives of each parliamentary faction. At a meeting between the DPR leadership and faction leaders on 12 November 2025, responsibility for implementing the ruling was delegated to each faction. However, apart from statements of support, no concrete internal rules or clear mechanisms have yet been set out to change the current leadership composition of the AKDs. Realistically, it might be difficult to meet the quota for women’s leadership of AKDs in the current parliamentary term, given that most parties do not have sufficient women MPs.

The controversy surrounding women’s representation in politics shows that affirmative action policies alone are not enough to change a political culture that remains deeply patriarchal. Women are still often seen as less capable of leading and therefore not treated as a priority in political agendas. In many parties, the nomination process, allocation of positions on candidate lists, and the distribution of leadership positions are more often than not controlled by a small, male-dominated circle. In such a culture, women politicians are often positioned as electoral complements rather than as key political actors fully entitled to hold leadership positions. As a result, affirmative policies easily become a form of formal compliance, rather than a tool for changing the way parties distribute power.  

Whether the 30 per cent requirement for women’s leadership in AKDs can be met in future will depend not only on rules set in the DPR, but on whether parties are willing to change how they prepare and support women for leadership roles. For many parties, this means moving beyond relying on relatives of powerful politicians or last-minute nominees to fill quotas for women, and instead creating clearer pathways, mentoring and backing for promising women candidates to develop the experience and authority needed to lead.

Ultimately, the issue at stake is the broader commitment to inclusive leadership. As long as patriarchy remains embedded at various stages of the political process, and women are not recognised as equal political actors, the increase in women’s seats in parliament risks remaining symbolic — reflected in numbers rather than in genuine shifts in power and decision-making.

2025/10