Power relations shape the way political authority is exercised within modern governance systems. In many political contexts, authority is not only defined by formal legal mandates, but also by access to multiple institutional positions that allow political actors to extend their influence. In Indonesia, the practice of dual office-holding (rangkap jabatan) has increasingly become a public concern, particularly when individuals simultaneously occupy strategic positions within government institutions, state-owned enterprises, or political organizations. This practice raises questions about ethical leadership, institutional integrity, and the proper limits of political power (Mietzner, 2013).

From an ethical and governance perspective, dual office-holding may generate conflicts of interest and weaken mechanisms of accountability. When political actors hold multiple roles at the same time, institutional boundaries become blurred and decision-making processes risk being influenced by overlapping interests. Public debates and policy discussions have shown that such practices can undermine transparency and reduce public trust in political institutions (Aspinall & Berenschot, 2019). These concerns suggest that rangkap jabatan is not merely an administrative or legal issue, but a deeper ethical problem related to how power is distributed and controlled.

Islamic political ethics offers a normative framework to critically assess these issues. Within Islamic political thought, political authority is understood as a moral responsibility rather than a personal privilege. Concepts such as amānah (trust), justice, and accountability occupy a central place in evaluating the legitimacy of political leadership. Power is expected to serve public welfare and to be exercised within clear ethical boundaries that prevent domination and abuse (Kamali, 2002).

Classical Islamic political thinkers paid significant attention to the ethical limits of authority. Al-Māwardī emphasized that political power must be regulated by moral principles to ensure justice and protect public interests. Ibn Khaldūn, meanwhile, analyzed power relations from a sociopolitical perspective and warned that excessive concentration of authority often leads to moral decline and institutional fragility. Their insights remain relevant for contemporary political systems in which power concentration and elite dominance continue to pose ethical challenges.

Despite the relevance of these ethical perspectives, contemporary discussions on dual office-holding in Indonesia are often framed primarily in legal or procedural terms. Ethical analysis grounded in Islamic political thought remains relatively limited. This article seeks to address this gap by examining power relations and dual office-holding practices through the lens of Islamic political ethics. By doing so, the study aims to contribute to broader discussions on ethical governance, political accountability, and the moral boundaries of power in modern democratic systems.In recent years, concerns over dual office-holding have been increasingly echoed by oversight institutions, civil society organizations, and legal scholars in Indonesia. Reports and public statements from anti-corruption bodies highlight that overlapping positions may intensify conflicts of interest and weaken governance oversight, particularly when political actors hold executive roles alongside positions in state-owned enterprises or party structures (KPK, 2023). Similar concerns have been raised by Transparency International Indonesia, which identifies power concentration and role duplication as structural risk factors that facilitate corruption and undermine institutional integrity (Transparency International Indonesia, 2023).

Legal debates surrounding dual office-holding have also intensified following constitutional and regulatory developments. Several policy discussions emphasize that while certain practices may not explicitly violate statutory law, they nevertheless pose ethical challenges that existing legal frameworks struggle to address adequately. Judicial interpretations and public policy debates increasingly acknowledge that formal legality alone is insufficient to ensure ethical governance, particularly in contexts where political power is highly centralized. These developments suggest a growing awareness that governance problems related to rangkap jabatan cannot be resolved solely through procedural regulation.

Within this context, the limited engagement with ethical perspectives, especially those rooted in Islamic political thought, becomes increasingly evident. While Islamic ethical principles continue to influence public morality and political discourse in Indonesia, they are rarely articulated systematically in academic analyses of governance practices. This gap is significant given the historical contribution of Islamic political ethics to debates on authority, accountability, and the moral restraint of power (Hamoudi, 2011). Addressing this gap allows for a more comprehensive understanding of dual office-holding as both a political and ethical phenomenon, rather than merely a technical or legal issue.

Despite the growing attention to dual office-holding practices in Indonesia, most existing studies tend to focus on legal and institutional aspects, particularly in relation to regulatory compliance. However, limited attention has been given to the ethical dimensions of power accumulation, especially from the perspective of Islamic political ethics. As a result, the moral implications of dual office-holding in shaping power relations and political accountability remain insufficiently explored (Melchert, 2008).

This study offers a contribution by integrating Islamic political ethics into the analysis of dual office-holding practices in Indonesia. It emphasizes the ethical limits of power and provides a normative perspective to assess political authority beyond formal legal frameworks.

Based on this background, this study addresses three main questions. First, how does dual office-holding reflect patterns of power relations and power accumulation in Indonesia. Second, how can dual office-holding practices be evaluated from the perspective of Islamic political ethics. Third, what are the ethical implications of dual office-holding for governance and public accountability.

2.1. Islamic Political Ethics and Political Authority
Islamic political ethics views political authority as a moral responsibility rather than a personal entitlement. Power is understood as a trust that must be exercised in accordance with ethical principles such as justice, accountability, and responsibility toward society. Within this framework, leadership is evaluated not only by effectiveness or legal legitimacy, but also by the ethical conduct of those who hold authority.

The concept of amānah plays a central role in Islamic political ethics. Authority is seen as a responsibility that requires moral integrity and self-restraint, particularly when decisions affect public welfare. Ethical leadership, therefore, demands a clear separation between personal interests and public responsibilities. When this boundary is blurred, the legitimacy of political authority becomes ethically questionable.

Scholars of Islamic political thought emphasize that ethical authority is inseparable from moral accountability. Al-Māwardī argues that political power derives its legitimacy from the ruler’s ability to uphold justice and protect public interests, rather than from coercion or personal dominance (al-Māwardī, 1996). Authority that prioritizes personal or factional interests over collective welfare is therefore considered ethically deficient, even if it operates within formal legal boundaries. This perspective highlights that ethical evaluation precedes legal justification in assessing political leadership.

Similarly, Ibn Khaldūn conceptualizes political authority as a social necessity that must be restrained by ethical norms to prevent domination and moral decay. He observes that when power becomes concentrated and detached from moral responsibility, governance gradually shifts from serving society to preserving elite interests (Ibn Khaldūn, 1967). This insight underscores the importance of ethical restraint in maintaining political stability and institutional legitimacy.

Contemporary scholars further note that Islamic political ethics offers a normative framework capable of addressing modern governance challenges, including conflicts of interest and power accumulation. Islamic ethical principles emphasize that authority must remain oriented toward public welfare (maṣlaḥah) and collective justice, rather than individual advantage (Kamali, 2016). From this perspective, political authority that lacks ethical restraint risks undermining both institutional integrity and public trust, regardless of its formal legality.

2.2. Power Relations in Classical Islamic Political Thought
Classical Islamic political thinkers provided systematic reflections on power relations and the ethical limits of authority. Al-Māwardī emphasized that political power must be regulated through moral principles and institutional rules to prevent injustice and administrative abuse. For him, the legitimacy of authority depends on the ability of rulers to protect public interests and maintain social order without domination.

Ibn Khaldūn offered a broader sociopolitical analysis of power relations. He argued that power is a social necessity, yet inherently prone to excess when not constrained by moral and institutional limits. According to Ibn Khaldūn, the concentration of authority within a narrow elite often leads to moral decline and institutional fragility. His analysis highlights the relationship between power accumulation and ethical decay in governance.

These classical perspectives demonstrate that Islamic political thought does not endorse unlimited authority. Instead, it emphasizes balance, restraint, and ethical responsibility as essential conditions for political stability.

Classical Islamic political thought also recognizes that power relations are shaped not only by moral ideals but by social dynamics and historical conditions. Ibn Khaldūn explains that political authority emerges from social cohesion (ʿaṣabiyyah), which enables rulers to maintain control and legitimacy within a given society. However, he warns that when authority becomes concentrated and detached from ethical restraint, power shifts from serving collective interests to preserving elite dominance, ultimately weakening political institutions and social trust (Ibn Khaldūn, 1967).

2.3. Dual Office-Holding and Ethical Challenges
From an ethical standpoint, dual office-holding presents significant challenges to good governance. When political actors occupy multiple strategic positions simultaneously, the risk of conflicts of interest increases. Divided loyalty and overlapping responsibilities may compromise impartial decision-making and weaken institutional accountability.

In the context of Islamic political ethics, public office exists to serve the common good rather than individual or group interests. Practices that concentrate authority or create structural advantages for certain actors contradict this ethical orientation. Dual office-holding becomes ethically problematic when it undermines fairness, transparency, and equal access to political opportunities.

Ethical governance requires clear boundaries of authority and mechanisms that prevent the excessive accumulation of power. Without such limits, political systems risk normalizing practices that weaken institutional integrity and public trust.

From an ethical perspective, dual office-holding represents a structural challenge to good governance because it increases the risk of divided loyalty and conflicts of interest. When political actors occupy multiple positions simultaneously, decision-making processes may become biased toward personal or institutional interests rather than public welfare. Scholars of governance ethics argue that role duplication weakens accountability mechanisms and creates conditions that allow power to be exercised without adequate moral or institutional restraint, particularly in political systems with high levels of elite dominance (Transparency International Indonesia, 2023).

2.4. Islamic Ethics and Contemporary Governance
In contemporary political systems, discussions on dual office-holding are often framed in legal or administrative terms. However, Islamic political ethics offers an additional moral dimension that emphasizes ethical leadership and responsibility. This perspective encourages a critical evaluation of political practices beyond formal legality, focusing instead on their ethical consequences.

By integrating Islamic ethical principles into discussions on governance, power relations can be assessed more comprehensively. This approach contributes to broader debates on political accountability, ethical leadership, and the moral boundaries of power within modern democratic systems.

This study employs a qualitative research approach with a literature-based design. The research focuses on examining dual office-holding practices and power relations through the lens of Islamic political ethics. Rather than measuring variables statistically, this study emphasizes interpretative analysis to understand ethical meanings, power structures, and normative implications within political governance.

The data sources consist of primary and secondary literature relevant to Islamic political thought and contemporary governance. Primary sources include classical works of Islamic political ethics, particularly writings by scholars such as al-Māwardī and Ibn Khaldūn, which discuss authority, leadership, and moral responsibility in political life. Secondary sources include peer-reviewed journal articles, academic books, policy documents, and reports issued by public institutions and civil society organizations addressing governance ethics, conflicts of interest, and dual office-holding practices in Indonesia.

Data collection was conducted through systematic documentation and critical reading of selected texts. The selection of literature was guided by relevance to the research focus, academic credibility, and consistency with the scope of political and social sciences. Only sources with clear authorship and institutional or scholarly recognition were included to ensure the reliability of the analysis.

The data analysis process involved thematic and normative analysis. Relevant texts were examined to identify key ethical concepts such as power, responsibility, justice, and accountability. These concepts were then interpreted within the framework of Islamic political ethics and connected to contemporary discussions on governance and dual office-holding. Through this approach, the study seeks to provide a critical ethical assessment of power relations and institutional practices without reducing the analysis to purely legal or procedural considerations.

4.1. Dual Office-Holding as a Form of Power Accumulation
Dual office-holding reflects a broader pattern of power accumulation within political systems. When a single political actor occupies multiple strategic positions, authority is no longer exercised within a single institutional mandate but extends across organizational boundaries. This condition allows political influence to expand beyond formal accountability mechanisms and increases the risk of institutional dominance by a limited elite.

In the Indonesian context, public debates surrounding rangkap jabatan demonstrate growing concern over how overlapping roles may distort governance processes. When political authority is concentrated, decision-making becomes less transparent and more vulnerable to personal or group interests. This pattern aligns with broader theories of power relations, which argue that unchecked authority often leads to domination rather than representation.

From the perspective of Islamic political ethics, power is not inherently problematic. However, it becomes ethically questionable when it exceeds its moral and functional limits. Authority is expected to serve public welfare rather than reinforce personal influence. The accumulation of power through dual office-holding challenges this ethical expectation, as it increases the likelihood of prioritizing political loyalty over public responsibility.

The accumulation of power through dual office-holding also reflects broader patterns of elite consolidation in contemporary politics. Studies on Indonesian governance indicate that overlapping political and administrative roles often strengthen informal networks of influence, allowing political elites to bypass institutional checks and balances. This condition reinforces asymmetric power relations, where decision-making authority is concentrated among a limited group of actors with privileged access to state resources and political leverage (Mietzner, 2015).

From a governance ethics perspective, such concentration of authority undermines the principle of accountability that is essential to democratic systems. Oversight institutions and civil society organizations have repeatedly emphasized that dual office-holding complicates transparency and weakens institutional control mechanisms, particularly when political loyalty outweighs professional responsibility. These dynamics suggest that power accumulation through role duplication is not merely a procedural issue, but a structural ethical challenge that threatens institutional integrity and public trust (KPK, 2023).

4.2. Ethical Implications of Divided Loyalty and Conflict of Interest
One of the most critical ethical problems arising from dual office-holding is divided loyalty. Political actors who hold multiple positions may face conflicting obligations, making it difficult to act impartially. This situation creates a structural conflict of interest, where decisions in one role may benefit another position held by the same individual.

Islamic political ethics strongly emphasizes moral clarity in leadership. Authority is expected to be exercised with integrity and responsibility, ensuring that public interest remains the primary consideration. The Qur’an highlights this ethical principle through the concept of trust and justice in governance:

إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَأْمُرُكُمْ أَنْ تُؤَدُّوا الْأَمَانَاتِ إِلَىٰ أَهْلِهَا وَإِذَا حَكَمْتُمْ بَيْنَ النَّاسِ أَنْ تَحْكُمُوا بِالْعَدْلِ

“Indeed, Allah commands you to render trusts to whom they are due and when you judge between people to judge with justice.” (Qur’an 4:58)

This verse underscores that authority must be exercised with fairness and responsibility. When political actors hold multiple offices, the risk of failing to fulfill this trust increases, especially if institutional roles overlap or contradict one another.

Divided loyalty resulting from dual office-holding has significant implications for ethical governance, particularly in relation to decision-making impartiality. Empirical studies on public administration indicate that officials holding multiple positions are more likely to face competing institutional priorities, which can distort policy outcomes and weaken professional judgment. In such situations, ethical considerations are often subordinated to political loyalty or organizational interests, reducing the capacity of institutions to act independently and objectively (OECD, 2020).

From an accountability perspective, conflicts of interest generated by overlapping roles also complicate mechanisms of oversight and public scrutiny. Transparency reports in Indonesia show that role duplication frequently obscures lines of responsibility, making it difficult to determine where accountability lies when governance failures occur. This condition not only weakens institutional control but also erodes public confidence in political leadership, reinforcing perceptions that authority is exercised for elite benefit rather than public service (Transparency International Indonesia, 2022).

4.3. Classical Islamic Perspectives on Power and Ethical Restraint
Classical Islamic political thinkers were deeply aware of the dangers associated with excessive power concentration. Al-Māwardī argued that political authority requires ethical regulation to prevent injustice and administrative abuse. For him, legitimacy arises not from the expansion of power, but from the ability to govern justly and maintain institutional balance. Ibn Khaldūn further developed this idea by explaining how power, when concentrated, tends to weaken moral restraint. He observed that political dominance often leads to ethical decay, particularly when authority is no longer subject to effective oversight. His analysis suggests that the ethical decline of leadership is closely linked to the accumulation of power beyond reasonable limits.

These classical insights remain relevant in contemporary governance, particularly in democratic systems facing elite consolidation. Dual office-holding can be understood as a modern manifestation of power concentration, where ethical restraint becomes increasingly difficult to maintain and institutional accountability is often compromised. In such contexts, overlapping roles may enable political actors to consolidate influence across multiple domains, thereby reducing checks and balances. This situation risks normalizing conflicts of interest and weakening public oversight. Moreover, the absence of clear ethical boundaries may encourage the prioritization of personal or political interests over public welfare. Over time, this can erode institutional credibility and diminish citizens’ trust in governance systems. Therefore, incorporating ethical perspectives, particularly those rooted in Islamic political thought, becomes crucial to critically assess the limits of power and reinforce accountability mechanisms in modern political practice.

4.4. Dual Office-Holding and Public Trust in Governance
Public trust is a crucial element of democratic governance. When political actors hold multiple positions, public perception of fairness and transparency may decline. Citizens may question whether decisions are made for public benefit or personal advantage. This erosion of trust weakens institutional legitimacy and undermines democratic accountability.

Islamic political ethics places significant emphasis on protecting public welfare (al-maṣlaḥah al-ʿāmmah). Authority is justified only insofar as it serves society as a whole. Practices that generate suspicion or reduce transparency contradict this ethical orientation. The Qur’an warns against exploiting authority for unjust gain:

وَلَا تَأْكُلُوا أَمْوَالَكُمْ بَيْنَكُمْ بِالْبَاطِلِ وَتُدْلُوا بِهَا إِلَى الْحُكَّامِ

“Do not consume one another’s wealth unjustly or use it to influence authorities.” (Qur’an 2:188)

Although this verse addresses economic injustice, its ethical implication extends to governance practices that involve the misuse of authority and conflicts of interest.

These ethical concerns are also reflected in empirical assessments of public governance in Indonesia, where the concentration of authority has been shown to weaken public trust in political institutions. Studies indicate that overlapping political and administrative roles reduce transparency and complicate public oversight, particularly when accountability mechanisms are already fragile. As public confidence declines, the legitimacy of political leadership is increasingly questioned, reinforcing the perception that authority is exercised to protect elite interests rather than to serve the broader public (Transparency International Indonesia, 2023).

4.5. Ethical and Governance Perspectives on Dual Office-Holding
Dual office-holding can be examined through different analytical lenses, particularly governance ethics and Islamic political ethics. From the perspective of modern governance, the primary concern lies in procedural accountability and institutional efficiency. Regulatory frameworks are designed to prevent conflicts of interest by defining formal boundaries between offices, roles, and responsibilities. However, these mechanisms often rely heavily on legal compliance and administrative oversight, which may not fully capture the ethical implications of power concentration (OECD, 2020).

In practice, governance-based regulations tend to address dual office-holding as a technical issue rather than a moral one. As long as legal provisions are not explicitly violated, overlapping roles may continue despite ethical concerns. This approach reflects a minimalist understanding of accountability, where ethical responsibility is subordinated to formal legality. Such limitations have been widely discussed in governance studies, particularly in political systems characterized by elite dominance and weak oversight institutions (Mietzner, 2015).

Islamic political ethics offers a contrasting perspective by emphasizing moral responsibility as the foundation of political authority. Authority is not merely a legal mandate but a moral trust that must be exercised with restraint, integrity, and commitment to public welfare. From this viewpoint, practices that concentrate power, including dual office-holding, are ethically problematic when they undermine justice, transparency, and public trust, regardless of their legal status (Kamali, 2016).

This ethical framework shifts the evaluation of dual office-holding from procedural legality to moral consequence. The key question is not whether overlapping positions are formally permitted, but whether they compromise ethical leadership and the public good. Islamic political ethics therefore complements governance approaches by providing a deeper normative evaluation of power relations and institutional practices.

The relevance of this ethical perspective becomes evident in contemporary Indonesian politics, where public debates increasingly question the moral legitimacy of power accumulation. Reports from oversight institutions and civil society organizations indicate that dual office-holding often weakens accountability mechanisms and blurs institutional responsibility, particularly when political loyalty overrides professional standards (KPK, 2023).

To clarify the analytical distinction between these perspectives, the following table presents a comparative overview of governance ethics and Islamic political ethics in assessing dual office-holding:

Comparison in Table 1 demonstrates that Islamic political ethics does not replace governance mechanisms but enriches them by adding a moral dimension often absent from procedural approaches. By integrating ethical evaluation into governance discourse, dual office-holding can be assessed more comprehensively as a problem of power relations rather than merely administrative overlap.

Ultimately, addressing dual office-holding requires both institutional regulation and ethical leadership. While legal frameworks remain essential, they are insufficient without moral restraint and ethical commitment from political actors. Islamic political ethics provides valuable insights into how power can be limited ethically, thereby strengthening accountability, restoring public trust, and reinforcing the moral boundaries of authority in democratic governance.

4.6 Dual Office-Holding Practices in Indonesia

In the Indonesian context, dual office-holding practices can be observed in the appointment of public officials to strategic positions in state-owned enterprises (SOEs), while they simultaneously maintain roles within government institutions or political parties. This phenomenon has attracted public attention in recent years, particularly when active or politically affiliated officials are appointed as commissioners or supervisory board members in state-owned companies. Such arrangements raise concerns about potential conflicts of interest, especially when public policies intersect with the institutional interests of the positions they hold.

Reports from the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK, 2023) indicate that dual office-holding practices increase the risk of corruption and weaken oversight mechanisms, as lines of accountability become blurred. Similarly, Transparency International Indonesia (2023) highlights that such practices contribute to the consolidation of elite power and reduce the effectiveness of checks and balances within governance systems.

Furthermore, legal and policy debates in Indonesia show that dual office-holding does not always explicitly violate existing regulations. However, these practices remain ethically problematic. This situation reflects a gap between formal legality and ethical governance, where actions may be legally permissible but morally questionable (Transparency International Indonesia, 2022).

These conditions demonstrate that dual office-holding in Indonesia is not merely a theoretical issue, but a concrete governance problem with direct implications for institutional integrity and public trust. From the perspective of Islamic political ethics, such practices contradict the principles of amānah (trust) and justice, as they create divided loyalty and increase the likelihood of prioritizing personal or political interests over the public good.

This study demonstrates that dual office-holding is not merely a procedural or legal matter but an ethical issue deeply embedded in power relations. Through the lens of Islamic political ethics, political authority is understood as a moral responsibility that requires restraint, integrity, and commitment to public welfare. Practices that concentrate authority, such as holding multiple strategic positions simultaneously, risk undermining accountability and weakening institutional boundaries, even when they operate within formal legal frameworks.

By engaging classical Islamic political thought and contemporary governance perspectives, this article highlights the ethical limits of power accumulation. Insights from Islamic political ethics emphasize that legitimacy in leadership is derived not only from legal compliance but from ethical conduct that prioritizes justice and the public good. In this sense, dual office-holding becomes ethically problematic when it blurs responsibilities, generates conflicts of interest, and erodes public trust in political institutions.

Ultimately, strengthening governance requires more than regulatory reform. Ethical leadership and moral restraint are essential to preventing the misuse of authority and restoring public confidence in democratic institutions. Islamic political ethics offers a valuable normative framework to enrich contemporary debates on governance, accountability, and the moral boundaries of power, particularly in political contexts where authority tends to concentrate within a narrow elite.