PRESIDENT of Indonesia, Prabowo Subianto, has visited disaster areas several times, including Aceh. The public should appreciate the head of state's good intentions to directly observe the recovery of disaster areas after being hit by floods and landslides in late 2025.
Unfortunately, each visit by the President has been followed by controversial statements that have eroded victims' trust in the central government, including his visit during Eid al-Fitr 1447 Hijri. The statement that Aceh was almost recovered and that there were no longer any refugees under tents drew criticism from various groups and survivors.
The reality is that the post-disaster rehabilitation and reconstruction process in Aceh has been slow. Central officials come and go—bringing good news—but conditions on the ground have not changed much.
It's understandable why, when the people need accelerated recovery, the government has responded by forming a task force that overlaps with the role of the local government. At least one task force exists, led by Home Affairs Minister Tito Karnavian, and a task force formed by the Indonesian House of Representatives.
The central government task force focuses on field implementation, infrastructure rehabilitation, and reconstruction in Aceh, North Sumatra, and West Sumatra. Meanwhile, the House of Representatives (DPR-RI) Task Force focuses on budget oversight and accelerating recovery.
The division of labor and authority is clear. Within these task forces, a technical unit for the Aceh Government stands.
Learning from the rehabilitation and reconstruction of Aceh, such as the 2004 tsunami, the central government established only one institution with full authority. This is understandable, given the destruction of many offices and disruption to local government. The establishment of the Aceh Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Agency was a strategic decision.
The task force in Aceh at that time seemed to be the opposite. Field practice showed a recurring pattern: numerous task forces, but minimal acceleration, even disrupting the focus of recovery.
Conceptually, the formation of the task force was justified. Post-disaster situations present complex issues: housing, infrastructure, health, education, and even economic recovery. The government needed a more flexible, agile, and focused work unit. The task force was expected to be a driver of acceleration capable of navigating bureaucratic complexity.
However, the opposite occurred in Aceh. The large number of task forces often led to overlapping authority. A single program can be handled by multiple teams with differing approaches. Coordination, which should be streamlined, instead becomes a new burden. Meeting after meeting is held, but implementation on the ground is hampered. Energy is spent on coordination, not execution.
The existence of multiple task forces also raises accountability issues. When rehabilitation and reconstruction progress is slow, the public struggles to determine who is responsible. Each task force has its own role, but there is no single, truly strong command to control the direction and pace of the program.
As a result, policies become fragmented, while disaster-affected communities continue to wait for certainty.
Budget inefficiencies cannot be ignored. Each task force requires operational costs, human resources, and administrative support. In an emergency, this kind of waste can be reduced by simplifying the work structure. Instead of increasing the number of teams, the government needs to strengthen a unified command with full and clear authority under the Aceh Government.
Accelerating Aceh's rehabilitation and reconstruction requires simplification, integration, and firm leadership. A clear roadmap, a single control center, and a transparent evaluation system will be far more effective than numerous teams operating independently.
The success of rehabilitation and reconstruction is not measured by the number of task forces formed, but by how quickly and accurately the state intervenes to restore the lives of the people. Aceh does not need a crowded structure, but rather precise action.[]
