One of the detainees arrested during the May Day 2026 protests in Bandung, RR alias Mpe, who was previously accused of being the “leader of an anarchist group,” has now been charged by the police under terrorism laws. He has also reportedly been placed in isolation and denied access to legal counsel of his own choosing, raising serious concerns over the violation of a suspect’s right to provide testimony freely and without coercion, intimidation, or pressure.
In this case, the police appear to be employing the same narrative pattern used during last August’s unrest: identifying a supposed “mastermind,” “leader,” or individual believed to have planned and orchestrated the riots. Law enforcement authorities maintain that prosecuting those considered to be the driving force behind unrest can prevent similar incidents from recurring in the future. In practice, however, such an approach has often functioned as an authoritarian mechanism for criminalizing groups deemed disruptive to political stability, while simultaneously diverting public attention away from structural grievances and redirecting it toward specific individuals.
Through this method, social anger is framed not as a response to real social suffering, but rather as the product of manipulation by a handful of supposedly “deceitful” actors. This narrative also serves to justify state repression without the need to materially prove criminal wrongdoing; once a “leader” has been identified, an entire movement can be dismissed as illegitimate or “inauthentic.” Such patterns closely parallel authoritarian political practices.
Recent developments further illustrate this tendency. The Jakarta Metropolitan Police recently formed an anti-robbery task force to address rising street crime, accompanied by public calls in several regions for robbers to be shot on sight. Shortly thereafter, the Indonesian military (TNI) announced plans to deploy personnel to assist in combating street crime, a move widely interpreted as an attempt to legitimize the expansion of the military’s role into civilian law enforcement.
These two narratives have since been amplified on social media by both the police and the military, each seemingly seizing the moment to reassert themselves as central actors in national security through displays of readiness and force. The situation has also provided an opportunity for both institutions to recover public legitimacy amid ongoing criticism surrounding their involvement in corn plantation projects, the Free Nutritious Meals (MBG) program, and the security management of National Strategic Projects.
The connection between these two phenomena exposes how the state constructs and manages narratives of “security threats.” In the case of RR alias Mpe, the threat is personified through the figure of the “mastermind,” “leader,” or “terrorist” accused of mobilizing political unrest. In the case of street crime, the threat is produced through discourse surrounding a supposed “crime emergency” that demands swift and harsh measures. Although the objects differ, both operate according to the same logic: manufacturing fear in public space so that the expansion of state authority appears both natural and necessary.
In other words, the figures of the “riot mastermind” and the “street criminal” function politically as instruments for rebuilding the image of security institutions, legitimizing repressive measures, and expanding their role within civilian life in the name of public security.
At a time when such patterns continue to recur and directly contribute to criminalization and the erosion of civil liberties, the political position that cannot be avoided is one of siding with those who become victims of these practices.
Solidarity and unconditional support for all anarchist detainees
Ps: we are now collecting fund for Mpe lawyers. If you can help contact us to the email below:
Contact: palanghitam [ no scums ] riseup [ fuck cops ] net
PALANG HITAM INTERNATIONAL
palanghitamanarkis.noblogs.org
—
Salah satu tahanan May Day 2026 Bandung, RR alias Mpe, yang sebelumnya dituduh sebagai “ketua Anarko”, kini dijerat polisi dengan pasal terorisme. Ia juga diisolasi dan tidak diberi hak untuk didampingi penasihat hukum pilihannya sendiri sehingga berpotensi melucuti hak tersangka untuk memberikan keterangan secara bebas tanpa paksaan, intimidasi, maupun tekanan.
Dalam kasus ini, polisi memakai pola narasi yang sama seperti saat menangani kerusuhan Agustus tahun lalu: mencari “dalang”, “ketua”, atau pihak yang dianggap merencanakan dan menggerakkan kerusuhan. Penegak hukum meyakini bahwa menindak pihak yang dianggap sebagai penggerak dapat mencegah kerusuhan serupa terjadi di kemudian hari. Namun dalam praktiknya, pendekatan semacam ini kerap menjadi metode kekuasaan otoriter untuk mengkriminalisasi pihak yang dianggap mengganggu stabilitas politik, sekaligus mengalihkan perhatian publik dari persoalan struktural ke individu tertentu.
Melalui cara ini, kemarahan sosial dipersempit seolah bukan lahir dari penderitaan nyata, melainkan hasil hasutan segelintir orang “licik”. Narasi tersebut juga sekaligus membenarkan tindakan represif negara tanpa perlu membuktikan kejahatan secara materiil; cukup menunjuk seorang “ketua”, maka seluruh perlawanan dapat dicap sebagai gerakan yang “tidak murni”. Pola narasi semacam ini paralel dengan praktik otoritarianisme.
Hal itu dapat dilihat dalam perkembangan baru-baru ini ketika Polda Metro Jaya membentuk Tim Pemburu Begal untuk menangani maraknya kejahatan jalanan, disertai wacana instruksi di beberapa tempat lain agar pelaku begal ditembak di tempat. Tidak lama kemudian, TNI menyatakan juga akan menurunkan personelnya untuk memberantas begal yang dapat dibaca sebagai upaya melegitimasi agenda perluasan peran TNI ke ranah penegakan hukum sipil.
Dua narasi ini kemudian diamplifikasi di media sosial oleh Polisi dan TNI yang seolah menemukan momentum untuk kembali tampil sebagai aktor utama keamanan dengan menaikkan narasi “siap bertindak”. Keduanya tampak memanfaatkan situasi tersebut untuk keluar dari serangan legitimasi yang selama ini membayangi mereka, termasuk karena keterlibatan dalam proyek tanam jagung, program MBG, hingga pengamanan Proyek Strategis Nasional.
Keterhubungan dua fenomena tersebut menelanjangi bagaimana negara memproduksi dan mengelola narasi “ancaman keamanan”. Dalam kasus RR alias Mpe, ancaman dibentuk lewat figur “dalang”, “ketua”, atau “teroris” yang dianggap menggerakkan kerusuhan politik. Sementara dalam kasus begal, ancaman diproduksi melalui wacana “darurat kriminalitas” yang membutuhkan tindakan cepat dan keras. Meski objeknya berbeda, keduanya bekerja dengan logika yang sama: menciptakan rasa takut di ruang publik agar perluasan kewenangan aparat terlihat wajar dan diperlukan. Dengan kata lain, figur “dalang kerusuhan” dan “begal” adalah instrumen politik untuk membangun kembali citra aparat, membenarkan tindakan represif, dan memperluas peran mereka di ruang sipil atas nama keamanan.
Dalam situasi ketika pola semacam ini terus berulang dan berdampak langsung pada kriminalisasi serta perampasan hak-hak sipil, sikap politik yang tidak bisa dihindari adalah keberpihakan pada mereka yang menjadi korban dari praktik tersebut.
Solidaritas dan dukungan tanpa syarat kepada semua tahanan anarkis!