Suprisno Baderan
IAIN Sultan Amai Gorontalo

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Kontestasi Politik PBNU dan PKB Pasca Muktamar NU Ke-34 Di Lampung: Otoritas Kelembagaan, Klaim Representasi dan Pemilu 2024 Adnan Adnan; Suprisno Baderan; Ahmad Khoirul Fata; Sunandar Macpal
Farabi Vol 22 No 2 (2025): Farabi
Publisher : LPPM IAIN Sultan Amai Gorontalo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.30603/jf.v22i2.8313

Abstract

This article examines the reconfiguration of relations between the Executive Board of Nahdlatul Ulama (PBNU) and the National Awakening Party (PKB) following the 34th NU Congress in Lampung. It focuses on changing institutional boundaries, competing claims to represent the Nahdliyin constituency, and their implications for the 2024 election. The study applies a qualitative case-study design and document analysis to official statements, organizational documents, scholarly literature, research reports, and verified media coverage published between December 2021 and September 2024. The data are thematically analyzed through the categories of khittah and organizational autonomy, religious authority, representative claims, elite conflict, and electoral and social consequences. The findings show that the congress served as a critical juncture that transformed long-standing tensions into an open dispute over who has the authority to define the NU-PKB relationship. PBNU invoked khittah and organizational discipline to reaffirm institutional autonomy, while PKB relied on its founding genealogy, kyai networks, and its claim to be the political channel of NU followers. The 2024 election demonstrated that Nahdliyin representation is neither singular nor automatic, but continuously negotiated and contested. The conflict is therefore not merely personal; it is a struggle over organizational boundaries, sources of legitimacy, and the future relationship between a religious mass organization and a political party.
The Hybrid Decentralization Paradox in Mining Governance: Authority, Responsibility, and Accountability Misalignment in Pohuwato, Indonesia Jurisman Kadji; Suprisno Baderan; Shelda Adriana Taimaris Rogi
Publisia: Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Publik Vol. 11 No. 1: April 2026
Publisher : Universitas Merdeka Malang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.26905/pjiap.v11i1.17420

Abstract

The evolving relationship between decentralization and recentralization poses fresh challenges for natural resource governance, especially as the power to extract strategic resources is increasingly centralized at a higher level of governance, while the social, economic, and ecological consequences remain at the local level. This study examines how the configuration of the mining authority within the framework of recentralization generates a hybrid governance pattern through the relationship between authority, responsibility and accountability. This study used a qualitative case study method to study the governance of mining in Gunung Pani, Pohuwato Regency, Indonesia. Data were collected through in-depth interviews, document analysis, field observation, and data to support public perception. The results of the study reveal four main mechanisms in the Hybrid Decentralization Paradox. The first is mismatched authorities, where the strategic authority of mining is at a higher level of government, while local governments are still confronted with community demands. Second, uneven benefits tell us that mining creates economic opportunities but that benefits are not shared equally. Third, participation asymmetry shows that formal participation spaces haven’t always had a substantive influence on strategic decisions. Fourth, accountability displacement implies that local governments are under accountability pressures even when they have limited control authority. This research contributes to the development of the Hybrid Decentralization Paradox concept, which refers to the condition when the strategic authority is transferred to a higher level, while responsibility and accountability remain situated at the local level. This idea extends the study of decentralization, recentralization and natural resource governance by explaining how the mismatch between authority, responsibility and accountability shapes governance dynamics in extractive areas.