Scopus

46

Citation

Dimension

282

Citation

Journal of Social Knowledge Education (JSKE)

an Open Access Journal

Political Negotiations in the Formulation of Indonesian Citizenship Regulations: A Historical Analysis Leading to Law No. 12 of 2006

Hilal Ramdhani
Siliwangi University ROR
Indonesia
hilalramdhani@unsil.ac.id
Share

  • Purpose of the study: This study examines the political negotiations involved in the formulation of Indonesian citizenship regulations and analyzes how deliberative processes shaped the construction and transformation of citizenship from the Old Order to the Reform Era.

    Methodology: This study employed a qualitative approach using a historical-empirical method to examine political negotiations surrounding Indonesian citizenship regulations across historical periods. Data were collected through interviews and document analysis. The data were analyzed through data condensation, focusing on political arguments, actors, aspirations, and negotiations underlying changes in citizenship regulation.

    Main Findings: The findings demonstrate that the formulation of Indonesian citizenship regulations involved deliberative processes characterized by the exchange of ideas, articulation of political aspirations, and negotiation among political actors. The meaning and regulation of citizenship changed significantly from the Old Order to the Reform Era, particularly through greater recognition of Indonesia's social diversity while maintaining principles of nationalism and national unity.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: This study offers a deliberative perspective on citizenship formation by demonstrating that citizenship regulations are not merely legal grants but products of political negotiation and historical processes. In the Indonesian context, citizenship is shaped through the interaction of competing political aspirations, national identity, diversity, nationalism, and the principle of unity.

  • How to cite

    [1]
    H. Ramdhani, “Political Negotiations in the Formulation of Indonesian Citizenship Regulations: A Historical Analysis Leading to Law No. 12 of 2006”, Jo. Soc. Know. Ed, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 611–616, Sep. 2026, doi: 10.37251/jske.v7i5.3752.

    More Citation Formats

  • 31
    Abstract views
    20
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. I. D. Mustikarini and Y. Harmawati, “Project-based learning models to analyze citizenship law in legal science subject,” Substantive Justice International Journal of Law, vol. 7, no. 2, 2024, doi: 10.56087/substantivejustice.v7i2.291.
    2. I. Bloemraad, A. Korteweg, and G. Yurdakul, “Citizenship and immigration: Multiculturalism, assimilation, and challenges to the nation-state,” 2008. doi: 10.1146/annurev.soc.34.040507.134608.
    3. M. Gianni, “For a political conception of multicultural citizenship,” Ethnicities, vol. 23, no. 4, 2023, doi: 10.1177/14687968221149741.
    4. J. W. Kuyper, B. O. Linnér, and H. Schroeder, “Non-state actors in hybrid global climate governance: justice, legitimacy, and effectiveness in a post-Paris era,” 2018. doi: 10.1002/wcc.497.
    5. Fathur Rahman Suryadi and Sasmi Nelwati, “Mengupas sistem demokrasi indonesia, keunikan dan perbandingan global,” Dewantara : Jurnal Pendidikan Sosial Humaniora, vol. 3, no. 3, 2024, doi: 10.30640/dewantara.v3i3.2823.
    6. B. Anderson, “Blurred boundaries: fantasy citizenship, the worker citizen and mobility controls,” J. Ethn. Migr. Stud., vol. 50, no. 11, 2024, doi: 10.1080/1369183X.2023.2298545.
    7. M. E. Biresselioglu et al., “Empowering energy citizenship: Exploring dimensions and drivers in citizen engagement during the energy transition,” 2024. doi: 10.1016/j.egyr.2024.01.040.
    8. W. Berenschot and G. van Klinken, “Informality and citizenship: the everyday state in Indonesia,” Citizensh. Stud., vol. 22, no. 2, 2018, doi: 10.1080/13621025.2018.1445494.
    9. A. Rosser and G. Qiao-Franco, “Political settlements and expatriate dual citizenship in Australia and Indonesia,” Asian Journal of Comparative Politics, vol. 9, no. 4, 2024, doi: 10.1177/20578911231188769.
    10. Patricia Diane Mouboua, Fadeke Adeola Atobatele, and Olateju Temitope Akintayo, “Language as a tool for intercultural understanding: Multilingual approaches in global citizenship education,” Magna Scientia Advanced Research and Reviews, vol. 11, no. 1, 2024, doi: 10.30574/msarr.2024.11.1.0071.
    11. A. Osler and H. Starkey, “Learning for cosmopolitan citizenship: Theoretical debates and young people’s experiences,” 2003. doi: 10.1080/0013191032000118901.
    12. M. Choi and J. S. Yang, “Exploring the complexities of negotiation: Strategies for successful intra- and inter-team negotiation in organizations,” JASSS, vol. 27, no. 3, 2024, doi: 10.18564/jasss.5398.
    13. S. Ramadhani, W. Kustiawan, J. H. Nasution, and M. I. Azhari, “Strategi lobi dan negosiasi dalam proses komunikasi politik,” An Nadwah, vol. 28, no. 1, 2022, doi: 10.37064/nadwah.v28i1.12255.
    14. A. Gutmann and D. Thompson, “Why deliberstive democracy?,” Issues Sci. Technol., 2004.
    15. F. Blanco Brotons, “Justice and deliberative democracy: tensions within the framework of justice,” Topicos (Mexico), no. 72, 2025, doi: 10.21555/top.v720.2841.
    16. R. F. Mendonça and H. Asenbaum, “Decolonizing deliberative democracy,” European Journal of Social Theory, vol. 29, no. 1, 2026, doi: 10.1177/13684310241297906.
    17. L. Hakim, L. M. Kolopaking, S. Sjaf, and R. A. Kinseng, “Assessing village democracy and welfare in rural Indonesia: an index-based correlation analysis,” Front. Polit. Sci., vol. 7, 2025, doi: 10.3389/fpos.2025.1622507.
    18. A. Chalik, “The half-hearted compromise within indonesian politics: the dynamics of political coalition among islamic political parties (1999-2019),” Journal of Indonesian Islam, vol. 15, no. 2, 2021, doi: 10.15642/JIIS.2021.15.2.487-514.
    19. R. Prajoko, A. Pradhanawati, F. Fitriyah, and N. H. Sardini, “Hegemony of political parties and regional political oligarchy,” Khazanah Sosial, vol. 6, no. 1, 2024, doi: 10.15575/ks.v6i1.34121.
    20. L. Tsiakiri, S. L. Yeo, and J. Savulescu, “Eliciting normative judgments for ethically and politically legitimate policy-making,” Monash Bioeth. Rev., 2026, doi: 10.1007/s40592-026-00291-4.
    21. O. Escobar and A. Bua, “Democratic innovation for change: A participatory corrective to deliberative hegemony,” Politics, vol. 46, no. 1, 2026, doi: 10.1177/02633957251349635.
    22. D. F. Thompson, “Deliberative democratic theory and empirical political science,” Annual Review of Political Science, vol. 11, 2008, doi: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.081306.070555.
    23. M. Hammond, “Deliberative democracy without deliberation,” Journal of Deliberative Democracy, vol. 21, no. 1, 2025, doi: 10.16997/jdd.1460.
    24. A. Mikhaylovskaya, “Enhancing deliberation with digital democratic innovations,” Philos. Technol., vol. 37, no. 1, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s13347-023-00692-x.
    25. F. Feulner, “The Indonesian house of representatives and its role during democratic regression,” Theory and Practice of Legislation, vol. 12, no. 2, 2024, doi: 10.1080/20508840.2024.2351763.
    26. S. Gherghina, “Political parties and forms of citizens’ involvement in decision-making: a special section,” Political Studies Review, vol. 23, no. 3, 2025, doi: 10.1177/14789299241307218.
    27. Mi’rojul Huda, Mubarok Muharam, Mochamad Arif Affandi, Agus Satmoko Adi, Silkania Swarizona, and Eko Satriya Hermawan, “Indonesia’s struggle for democratic resilience: issues and institutional reforms,” International Journal of Law and Society, vol. 2, no. 2, 2025, doi: 10.62951/ijls.v2i2.379.
    28. C. Zilla, “Defining democratic inclusion from the perspective of democracy and citizenship theory,” Democratization, vol. 29, no. 8, 2022, doi: 10.1080/13510347.2022.2090929.
    29. D. Nilsson and I. Svensson, “Pushing the doors open: Nonviolent action and inclusion in peace negotiations,” J. Peace Res., vol. 60, no. 1, 2023, doi: 10.1177/00223433221141468.
    30. I. Rissanen, “Negotiations on inclusive citizenship in a post-secular school: perspectives of ‘cultural broker’ muslim parents and teachers in Finland and Sweden,” Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, vol. 64, no. 1, 2020, doi: 10.1080/00313831.2018.1514323.
    31. S. Lorenzini and N. von Jacobi, “Whose forest? A two-level collective action perspective on struggles to reach polycentric governance,” For. Policy Econ., vol. 158, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2023.103093.
    32. A. Noor, “Socio-Legal Research: Integration of normative and empirical juridical research in legal research,” Jurnal Ilmiah Dunia Hukum, vol. 7, no. 2, 2023, doi: 10.56444/jidh.v7i2.3154.
    33. J. W. Creswell and M. Inoue, “A process for conducting mixed methods data analysis,” J. Gen. Fam. Med., vol. 26, no. 1, 2025, doi: 10.1002/jgf2.736.
    34. E. A. Mezmir, “Qualitative data analysis: an overview of data reduction, data display and interpretation,” Research on Humanities and Social Sciences, 2020, doi: 10.7176/rhss/10-21-02.
    35. H. S. Nordholt, “Identity politics, citizenship and the soft state in Indonesia: an essay,” Journal of Indonesian Social Sciences and Humanities, vol. 1, no. 1, 2018, doi: 10.14203/jissh.v1i1.1.
    36. G. van Klinken, “Politics of citizenship in Indonesia,” Nord. J. Hum. Rights, vol. 36, no. 2, 2018, doi: 10.1080/18918131.2018.1510643.
    37. I. P. Wijaya, “Ras, kuasa, dan kekerasan kolonial di hindia belanda,” Jurnal Sejarah Indonesia, vol. 8, no. 2, 2026, doi: 10.62924/jsi.v8i2.35756.
    38. J. Imai, “‘Industrial citizenship’ and social inequality in Japan: the dynamics of contract and status in shaping inequalities,” Frontiers in Sociology, vol. 10, 2025, doi: 10.3389/fsoc.2025.1647338.
    39. G. R. de Groot and O. Vonk, “Acquisition of nationality by birth on a particular territory or establishment of parentage: global trends regarding ius sanguinis and ius soli,” Netherlands International Law Review, vol. 65, no. 3, 2018, doi: 10.1007/s40802-018-0118-5.
    40. A. Honneth and N. Fraser, “Redistribution or recognition? a political-philosophical exchange,” North, vol. 74, no. 6, 2003.
    41. A. S. Mubah and S. Anabarja, “Globalization, national identity and citizenship: dilemma of chinese indonesians in indonesian nation-building,” Tamkang Journal of International Affairs, vol. 23, no. 3, 2020, doi: 10.6185/TJIA.V.202001_23(3).0002.
    42. E. Isin and B. Turner, Handbook of Citizenship Studies. 2012. doi: 10.4135/9781848608276.
    43. J. Mansbridge, “Deliberative and non-deliberative negotiations,” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2011, doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1380433.
    44. C. Setio Wardoyo and A. Eliasta Meliala, “Loyalty dilemma: challenges and opportunities of dual citizenship policy for the indonesian diaspora,” Asian Journal of Engineering, Social and Health, vol. 3, no. 11, 2024, doi: 10.46799/ajesh.v3i11.459.
    45. M. N. Fitria and I. H. Wiranata, “Kasus trisakti 1998: pelanggaran ham dalam dinamika reformasi Indonesia,” Prosiding Konseling Kearifan Nusantara (KKN), vol. 4, 2025.
    46. S. R. Gustin and M. Yarni, “Analisis terhadap hilangnya kewarganegaraan indonesia berdasarkan undang-undang nomor 12 tahun 2006 tentang kewarganegaraan Indonesia,” Limbago: Journal of Constitutional Law, vol. 4, no. 1, 2024, doi: 10.22437/limbago.v4i1.21776.
    47. Marwan Marwan, “Tinjauan yuridis status kewarganegaraan ganda menurut undang-undang nomor 12 tahun 2006 tentang kewarganegaraan republik Indonesia,” Public Service and Governance Journal, vol. 6, no. 1, 2024, doi: 10.56444/psgj.v6i1.1973.