Waiting for the Truth: The Politics Behind BPS’ Statistical Silence

Delays in poverty data release by BPS fuel doubts on transparency, risking public trust and policy credibility in Indonesia

***

Public trust in government is increasingly strained due to policy controversies, corruption scandals, ineffective policy communication, and most recently, the delayed release of poverty data by BPS about a week ago. Although BPS argues that the delay ensures data accuracy and analytical rigor, the current political atmosphere has fueled speculation that data manipulation may have occurred due to political pressure.

Three key factors highlight the significance of this issue. Firstly, delays and omissions by BPS are not unprecedented. In September 2023, BPS skipped the scheduled poverty report, creating a significant data gap until March 2024. Similarly, the release of trade balance data for April 2025 was abruptly postponed, accompanied by a sudden late-night notification for a morning announcement the following day. This irregularity raised concerns regarding transparency and accountability. Additionally, the discontinuation of the regular "Publikasi Indikator Ekonomi" in January 2025 further complicated access to consolidated economic data, provoking criticism from researchers and media about reduced transparency and navigational difficulty.

Secondly, discrepancies between BPS data and analyses from institutions such as the World Bank have sparked public debate, particularly on social media. Although these variations primarily stem from methodological differences, whether focusing on economic benchmarks like the Food Poverty Line, global poverty thresholds ($2.15, $3.65, $6.85/day), EDE, SPELL, Component approach, or a multidimensional deprivation perspective, the controversy remains significant. The World Bank attributes contrasting figures to declining purchasing power against the US dollar and adjusted international poverty thresholds, suggesting conventional poverty measures may underestimate actual poverty. Interpreting these numbers can also be misleading. For instance, although Indonesia's poverty rate slightly decreased from 9.22% in 2019 to 9.03% in 2024, the absolute number of poor individuals rose from 25.1 million to 25.22 million due to population growth. This nuanced reality underscores potential political manipulation where favorable outcomes are celebrated, while less favorable data may be selectively obscured or contextualized to manage public perception.

Thirdly, accurate and timely poverty data are crucial for researchers, scholars, policymakers, NGOs, and international organizations. These stakeholders rely heavily on current data to formulate effective policies, conduct academic research, evaluate programs, and advocate for vulnerable populations. Access to these statistics is a public right, and reports from BPS are indispensable, comparable in importance to those produced by global institutions like the World Bank, OECD, and UN SDG frameworks. Because such comprehensive reports are difficult to replicate independently, timely and transparent publication by BPS is essential. Data disruptions thus have significant repercussions, undermining analytical rigor, policy validity, and international credibility.

Repeated disruptions in critical statistical releases indicate a systemic issue, gradually eroding public trust. Public scepticism is exacerbated during election periods, as conflicting statistics from various agencies regarding candidate popularity or institutional trustworthiness (e.g., perceptions of the police) frequently emerge. Given the widespread accessibility of information through social media, traditional methods of perception manipulation by authorities become increasingly ineffective.

Beyond its use in advancing political agendas, the manipulation or selective presentation of poverty data also undermines academic and policy work. For scholars, journalists, policymakers, and NGOs, unreliable data introduces operational friction, complicating analyses and policy recommendations. Hence, BPS must assert stronger independence and commitment to analytical rigor and transparency.

In Indonesian politics, poverty frequently serves as a politicized issue, exploited through methods like money politics, social aid programs (bansos) susceptible to corruption, and populist strategies aimed at maintaining power. Poverty, however, is more than just statistical manipulation, it represents real human struggles, structural inequalities, and societal conditions affecting daily life. Marginalized groups, including the elderly, women, children, and persons with disabilities, face compounded challenges due to persistent stigma, weak policies, and insufficient support mechanisms.

While BPS has promised to release the delayed data by July 25, its credibility remains at stake. Ultimately, public scrutiny and media oversight remain essential to ensure that statistics serve the public interest, not political expediency. This incident should serve as a critical lesson for statistical institutions, emphasizing the need for transparency and reliability, especially when data significantly impacts social and political life.