Volume 3, No. 8 August 2024 - (1740-1750)

p-ISSN 2980-4868 | e-ISSN 2980-4841

https://ajesh.ph/index.php/gp

Directorate General of Immigration's Strategy in the Role of Border Security: An Index Study of Immigration Security

Dita Dhikadara^1*, Arthur Josias Simon Runturambi², Eko Daryanto³

^1,2,3SKSGUniversitas Indonesia, Depok, West Java, Indonesia

Email: dhikadara46@gmail.com^1*,simonrbi@yahoo.com², ⁠⁠eko.daryanto151@gmail.com³

ABSTRACT:

Global migration crossing national borders impacts national security, prompting societies to seek security from cross-border challenges. Enhancing security is vital due to threats such as illegal immigration, transnational crime, smuggling, trafficking, terrorism, and refugees threatening Indonesia's sovereignty. The Directorate General of Immigration's strategic planning focuses on achieving security stability through immigration. This research aims to determine the border security strategy implemented by the Directorate General of Immigration against state security threats using the immigration security index. This study employs a qualitative approach, including interviews, observations, and document analysis, to examine the achievements of the immigration security index and explore the implementation of border security strategies. The immigration security index serves as a performance indicator to detect and prevent threats within immigration functions. Key elements of this index include intelligence, investigation, Immigration Administrative Action (TAK), supervision, complaints, and prevention, which are all influenced by border conditions. The measurement results from this index provide insights into the effectiveness of the Directorate General of Immigration's strategies and guide policy formulation for enhancing border security. The findings indicate that through enhanced prevention, supervision, and enforcement of immigration policies, national resilience can be significantly strengthened.

Keywords: Border Security, National Resilience, Immigration Security Index, Prevention, Supervision and Enforcement.

INTRODUCTION

The increasing intensity of human crossing as a result of the development of technology, communication, and transportation around the world has an impact on the ease with which people connect with each other (Bagloee et al., 2016; Cerruela García et al., 2016; Woods & Dekker, 2000). This condition seems to blur national and geographical boundaries, but it cannot physically limit the flow of people in and out of the country and cannot be replaced by data identification. Currently, the global migration trend is a challenge for immigration agencies to be able to continue to adapt and update policies or regulations that apply globally (McLeman, 2019). According to this general recognition, immigration regulations are essential to maintain the legal sovereignty of a country in its territorial territory, and any foreigner who enters the territory of the country will be subject to the laws of that country as well as its own citizens (Bhatti, 2003).

Immigration in Indonesia has been regulated in Law Number 6 of 2011 (Widyawati & Arifin, 2018) concerning "matters concerning the traffic of people entering or leaving Indonesian territory and its supervision in order to maintain the upholding of state sovereignty." Immigration functions have also been outlined in regulations, including immigration services, law enforcement, state security, and facilitators of community welfare development (Benavides et al., 2021; Rhodes et al., 2015; Torres et al., 2018). The implementation of this function is an immigration step in maintaining stability and national resilience. National resilience is basically a condition of a country that shows its ability to face various threats, challenges, obstacles, and disturbances both from within and outside the country. The state security function in the field of immigration, in this case, is inseparable from the correlation of various aspects in the constitution, including ideology, politics, economy, socio-culture, defense and security, as well as geography, demographics, and natural resources that apply throughout the territory of Indonesia to the border.

The government's border management policy has changed from inward-looking to outward-looking to help economic and trade exchanges with neighboring countries. The complexity of cross-border flows and conflicts has challenged traditional understandings of borders and border controls. In response, countries continue to step up their border control measures in an effort to maintain national resilience. The government reconfigures borders by making changes, repairs, and border control controls in this process. This reorientation itself has 3 (three) approach strategies, namely the approach to developing (Gülzau et al., 2021) prosperity, security, and environment. Referring to the goal of the 2020-2024 National Medium-Term Development Plan (RPJMN), namely the fulfillment of access to justice that is in line with the president's mission order to protect the entire country and provide a sense of security to every citizen, the Directorate General of Immigration as an element of implementing the duties and functions of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights in the field of immigration also supports the Ministry's mission, namely participating in maintaining security stability through the role of immigration.

The internal security of a country is characterized by a safe and orderly situation in society, law enforcement, and the existence of protection, protection, and services for the community (Chmyr et al., 2023; Lavenex & Nicole, 2013). The dynamic condition of this society requires a national development process to achieve goals that support the ability to foster, prevent, and overcome violations of the law and all other forms of violations. Following up on the matter as referred to, the Directorate General of Immigration carries out a state security function that aims to increase the role of immigration in the context of state security by making preventive efforts (Djamin, 2000) through increasing intelligence and immigration supervision as well as immigration enforcement through TAK and projustitia. Whether these efforts can be an instrument in controlling violations is worth considering considering that the purpose of immigration policy is to screen the crossing of people and shape the behavior of foreigners entering the destination country. According to , over the last 2 (two) decades efforts to deport offenses committed by foreigners have increased and in many ways have effectively integrated the immigration system and criminal provisions. In particular, the practice of deporting foreigners who commit crimes may have become the most important tool for screening out immigrants who commit offenses (Miles & Cox, 2014).

The challenges of state security policy, in this case are related to border security and threats and risks of national law enforcement that are cross-sectoral. As in Australia, national security policy issues addressed by border security agencies and national law enforcement agencies are consistently a direct problem for the federal government. Policies in this space are focused on (Coyne et al., 2016) real-time disruption of widespread threats. The risks associated with such threats are unlikely to be fully mitigated. The strategic goal of the Directorate General of Immigration in order to participate in maintaining the stability of the security and sovereignty of the Republic of Indonesia is one of the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to measure the success of performance achievements in responding to organizational challenges. The success indicator is in the form of the Immigration Security Index (GPI) in order to achieve the goal of creating a safe border area from crossings and activities of foreigners/Indonesian citizens who do not have documents according to procedures and disturb public order. Increased security needs to be carried out, considering that in global developments, there are cross-border security threats such as illegal immigrants, transnational organized crime, human smuggling, human trafficking, terrorism, and refugees that threaten the sovereignty of the Republic of Indonesia. This index is a benchmark in encouraging efforts to secure the level of work units through prevention, supervision, and immigration enforcement.

This Immigration Security Index indicator is applied both at the central and regional levels. Based on the 2023 Government Agency Performance Report (LKjIP) of the Directorate General of Immigration, an Immigration Security Index survey has been carried out, which was attended by a total of 3,273 respondents, consisting of 1,457 internal respondents, 1,438 external respondents, and 378 Rudenim respondents with a combined average index value of 3.71. The score was obtained from the assessment of each element of the survey, which was different according to the classification of respondents who had duties and functions in the context of securing immigration. The information on the index value obtained has been categorized based on the scale of the calculation results with the index unit where the value of 3.71 is included in the very good category. In 2023, the outcome of the index needs to be optimized and further analyzed, considering that there are many elements of security in it and how this index can describe the condition of border security through immigration as a phenomenon that occurs in the field.

The immigration security index can be used to detect as early as possible potential vulnerabilities in the immigration sector that threaten national security (Andersson, 2016; KARAKOÇ DORA, 2020). When potential vulnerabilities occur, various things that lead to security and public order disturbances can be handled immediately. The existence of this index is expected to be one of the solutions to solve various threats and issues that disrupt the stability of national resilience, both from outside and within the country. This indicator emphasizes more on the quality aspect of the index value that has been measured so that it can be an outcome for border security policies as well as increasing the capacity of human resources and better institutions in the future. This study aims to examine further the immigration security index in describing the implementation of border security in Indonesian territory and to determine the strategy of the Directorate General of Immigration in carrying out border security functions based on the study of the immigration security index.

RESEARCH METHODS

Based on this type of research, the researcher will conduct a case study, namely exploring in depth the achievement of the immigration security index that has been measured and its relationship with the role of border security in maintaining national security stability. The study's secondary data is obtained from existing data from the 2023 Directorate General of Immigration Government Agency Performance Report (LKJIP).

This study uses a quantitative method with a descriptive approach. The descriptive strategy was used to find out how the respondents' perception of intelligence indicators, investigations, TAK, supervision, complaints, and prevention in immigration security efforts. According to Sugiyono (2016), quantitative research is research by obtaining data in the form of numbers or qualitative data that is raised. This quantitative descriptive method uses numbers from questionnaires or qualitative data that are calculated using a Likert scale.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Overview of Immigration Security Index Indicators in Indonesia's Border Areas

Immigration security in Indonesia is carried out through prevention, supervision, and enforcement measures by the Directorate General of Immigration and the Immigration Technical Implementation Unit throughout Indonesia. Since 2021, the Immigration Security Index (GPI) survey has been carried out annually by the Directorate General of Immigration using an electronic questionnaire. In 2023, the survey was conducted from October 18 to 27 involving 3,273 respondents from 33 Divisions and 139 Immigration Work Units.

To get the value of the Immigration Security Index in its entirety, the following calculations are made:

Value

GPA

(internal value 𝑥 internal respondents) + (external value 𝑥 external respondents)

total number of internal and external respondents

Based on the data collected, internal and external parties who became respondents in the 2023 Immigration Security survey were 3,273 respondents spread throughout Indonesia from 172 (one hundred and seventy-two) immigration work units, namely:

1. 33 (thirty-three) Immigration Division;

2. 126 (one hundred and twenty-six) Immigration Offices; and

3. 13 (thirteen) Immigration Detention Houses.

By using the data of 172 (one hundred and seventy-two) work units, the GPA value of the Directorate General of Immigration can be obtained using the following formulation:

where:

X = GPA

And = Respond

i = Satker ke …

Based on the average score obtained from each region, it is known that there are 3 (three) regions that are also border areas of Indonesia with other countries such as West Kalimantan with Malaysia, East Nusa Tenggara with Timor Leste, and also Papua with Papua New Guinea. The results of the immigration security index from the three regions are as follows:

Table 1. Average Internal GPA Survey Score

INDICATOR	WEST KALIMANTAN	NTT	PAPUA	NATIONAL AVERAGE
Understand	3.72	3.82	3.70	3.78
Investigation	3.53	3.56	3.62	3.61
YES	3.73	3.86	3.70	3.79
Supervision	3.70	3.86	3.71	3.81
Complaints	3.70	3.69	3.47	3.80
Prevention	3.70	3.86	3.68	3.78

Table 2. Average External GPA Survey Score

INDICATOR	WEST KALIMANTAN	NTT	PAPUA	NATIONAL AVERAGE
Understand	3.48	3.56	3.59	3.62
Investigation and TAK	3.50	3.62	3.59	3.63
Supervision	3.61	3.68	3.69	3.71
Complaints	3.51	3.55	3.57	3.62
Prevention	3.51	3.55	3.60	3.62

Further analysis of the three tables shows that the West Kalimantan region in general tends to be slightly below the national average in almost all indicators, although there are several indicators that are close to or exceed the national average. There are several areas that need to be improved, especially in investigation and supervision. The perception of respondents, both internal and external, is that border security, especially in the West Kalimantan region, has shortcomings in effective supervision of the activities and presence of foreigners. Of course, this will have implications for law enforcement efforts in maintaining the stability of national resilience. On the other hand, the ability to investigate in the context of law enforcement of immigration crimes in West Kalimantan needs to be improved to provide a deterrent effect for immigration violators at the border.

In the NTT region, the performance tends to be better than the national average in several indicators in the internal GPA survey of the Immigration Division and the Immigration Office, but this is not balanced by the perception of external respondents which tends to be lower than the national average. Border security in the NTT region illustrates that various efforts such as intelligence, TAK, surveillance, and prevention have been carried out well as an effort to create a safe border area from crossings and activities of foreigners/Indonesian citizens who do not have documents according to procedures and disturb public order. The investigation and response efforts in handling complaints need to be improved in support of more effective and efficient border security. The value of the indicator of external perception that is not better than the national average, indicates that there are challenges faced in border security efforts that can be the focus of improvement in the future.

On the other hand, the performance of GPA in border areas, especially in the Papua region, tends to be lower than the national average. Significant challenges in various aspects of border security are still efforts that must be improved in increasing national resilience from various threats of immigration violations both from within and outside the country. The perception of the respondents, both internally and externally, in this case, views that the potential for improvement and improvement of duties and functions in the aspects of prevention, supervision, and enforcement can continue to be carried out according to procedures so that border security can be carried out effectively and efficiently.

The GPA value above describes the implementation of border security that has been carried out by the region, both from the perception of employees in the immigration work unit and external perceptions related to immigration duties and functions in the Foreigner Supervision Team (Timpora). The results of the study show that of a number of internal respondents who have filled out the immigration security survey, both the Regional Office of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights of West Kalimantan and Papua showed a score lower than the national average. Meanwhile, at the NTT Regional Office of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, it is seen that only 2 (two) indicators have not met security expectations in their area. It can be said that respondents' perception of security indicators from an internal perspective is still not enough to describe the effectiveness of border security in terms of the main factors, namely prevention, supervision, and enforcement. On the other hand, from an external point of view, it can be assumed that coordination and collaboration between agencies still do not represent significant efforts in dealing with threats at the border.

Based on the overall score of the GPA survey respondents, a comparison of the average score can be obtained as follows:

Table 3. Comparison of Average GPA in Border Areas and National GPA

AVERAGE SCORE	NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS	INDEX
GPA in Border Areas (West Kalimantan, NTT, Papua)	446	3.61
National GPA	3.273	3.71

The GPA indicator actually provides an overview of the effectiveness and quality of border security in Indonesian territory. Based on the data provided for the three border areas (West Kalimantan, East Nusa Tenggara, and Papua), as well as their comparison with the national average of all regions of Indonesia, these three border areas account for 13.77% of respondents' perception of various indicators of immigration security at the borders of Indonesian territory. Several key indicators can be identified to understand how border security is being implemented in these regions. These three border regions have a combined GPA value below the average national index score. This indicates that in a wider scope, immigration security in these border areas still does not reach national standards in terms of prevention, supervision, enforcement, and even in responding to existing complaints.

Strategy of the Directorate General of Immigration in the Border Security Function

Threats, challenges, obstacles, and disturbances to the immigration function as a goal in securing immigration must be detected immediately and even prevented. Therefore, immigration security performs a strategic task to collect information that can hinder immigration functions or cause violations, immigration crimes, and criminal acts, both immigration and general. Border areas, as one of the objects in securing immigration, allow the entry of negative foreign influences as well as the occurrence of transnational criminal activities, human trafficking, illegal immigrants, and even human smuggling that threaten the stability of national security and sovereignty.

State sovereignty, which starts from the border, is a threat with new challenges that exist today. Referring to the results of the Immigration Security Index that has been carried out through a survey of all respondents in the Indonesian region, including borders, this security strategy can be implemented by optimizing existing indicators as an effort to realize national resilience. The country's security stability and sovereignty have responded to these new challenges by strengthening territorial boundaries through border posts. The Directorate General of Immigration has a strategic role in maintaining the country's security and supporting national development programs. As part of the implementation of these two tasks, the Directorate General of Immigration acts as the gatekeeper of the country on the border of Indonesian territory. This is supported by the provision of facilities at Immigration Checkpoints (TPI) and Cross-Border Posts (PLBN), but also at certain locations on the border with traffic lanes for people entering and exiting Indonesian territory, in accordance with Nawa Ima's vision to build Indonesia from the periphery. The country's security at the border aims to strengthen the role of immigration by prioritizing prevention efforts through strengthening intelligence and immigration supervision. Borders themselves have proven to be a formidable surveillance tool for a country through adaptation in various ways.

On the other hand, the Directorate General of Immigration has also transferred border control by using various means such as visa policies or cooperation agreements between stakeholders and countries in border areas. In addition, digital surveillance technology with data integration and the use of autogates is also a state security tool. On April 28, 2018, the President of the Republic of Indonesia issued Presidential Instruction (Inpres) Number 6 of 2015 concerning "Acceleration of the Construction of Integrated Cross-Border Posts (PLBNT) and supporting infrastructure facilities in the border areas of PLBN Entikong, PLBN Aruk, PLBN Nanga Badau, PLBN Wini, PLBN Motain, PLBN Motamassin, PLBN Skouw, PLBN Jagoi Babang, PLBN Sota, PLBN Long Midang, and PLBN Sei Nyamuk", where the Directorate General of Immigration has facilitated through the provision of an immigration system or Border Control Management (BCM).

The strategy for transforming the role of immigration in border security includes various aspects such as policies, processes, human resources, information and communication technology, as well as facilities and infrastructure. First, in policies and processes, immigration balances the prosperity and security approach with data integration, collaboration between agencies, countries, and international organizations, as well as a welfare approach through a culture of serving the community. Second, efforts to adapt human resources from traditional to non-traditional security systems, with skill improvement and training. Third, the development of information and communication technology as needed, including in the grand design of SIMKIM, to accommodate services and security, as well as the prevention of transnational crime.

The concept of national resilience, which in this case is based on ways or methods to develop the potential of national strength, is also carried out through the development of law enforcement policies that focus on strategic goals, expectations for institutions, and their resources. Consideration of a broader and more relevant measure of performance is focused on the strategic impact on threats and risks to society. Therefore, the overview of immigration security indicators in its implementation at the border is a policy step in an effort to maintain the stability of national resilience.

CONCLUSION

The reorientation of border policies from inward-looking to outward-looking reflects a response to the complexity of cross-border flows. The Directorate General of Immigration implements a preventive approach through prevention, supervision, and law enforcement in the face of cross-border security threats. The Immigration Security Index (GPI) identifies potential vulnerabilities and improves security, especially at borders. The 2023 GPA survey with 3,273 respondents from 33 immigration divisions and 139 immigration work units shows that the GPA values on the borders of West Kalimantan, East Nusa Tenggara, and Papua tend to be below the national average. This indicates the need for an improvement in several assessment indicators such as internal and external investigations and supervision. Efforts to improve security are carried out through strengthening border posts, visa policies, the use of digital surveillance technology, and collaboration between stakeholders. The goal is to increase security effectiveness and maintain national resilience's stability.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Andersson, R. (2016). Europe’s failed ‘fight’ against irregular migration: ethnographic notes on a counterproductive industry. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 42(7), 1055–1075. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2016.1139446

Bagloee, S. A., Tavana, M., Asadi, M., & Oliver, T. (2016). Autonomous vehicles: challenges, opportunities, and future implications for transportation policies. Journal of Modern Transportation, 24(4), 284–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40534-016-0117-3

Benavides, Q., Doshi, M., Valentín-Cortés, M., Militzer, M., Quiñones, S., Kraut, R., Rion, R., Bryce, R., Lopez, W. D., & Fleming, P. J. (2021). Immigration law enforcement, social support, and health for Latino immigrant families in Southeastern Michigan. Social Science & Medicine, 280, 114027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114027

Bhakti, Y. (2003). Hukum Internasional: Bunga Rampai. Alumni.

Cerruela García, G., Luque Ruiz, I., & Gómez-Nieto, M. (2016). State of the Art, Trends and Future of Bluetooth Low Energy, Near Field Communication and Visible Light Communication in the Development of Smart Cities. Sensors, 16(11), 1968. https://doi.org/10.3390/s16111968

Chmyr, Y., Moshnin, A., Tsymbal, B., Shchokin, R., & Balashov, A. (2023). Societal Content and Main Determinants of “National Security” Phenomenon in the Information and Communication Context (pp. 25–41). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_2

Coyne, J., Connery, D., Norton, S., Alvarez, C., & Davis, M. (2016). BORDER SECURITY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT. In Agenda for change 2016 (Strategic Choices for the next Government). Australian Strategic Policy Institute. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep04227.10

Djamin, A. (2000). Administrasi Kepolisian RI Menghadapi Tahun 2000. Sanyata Sumasana Wira.

Gülzau, F., Mau, S., & Korte, K. (2021). Gülzau et al. (2021) Borders as Places of Control. Fixing, Shifting and Reinventing State Borders. An Introduction, Historical Social Research 46 (3): 7-22. Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, 46, 7–22. https://doi.org/10.12759/hsr.46.2021.3.7-22

KARAKOÇ DORA, Z. (2020). INTERNATIONAL MIGRANTS AS A MATTER OF SECURITY: OPEN DOOR POLICY AND SYRIANS IN TURKEY. Güvenlik Bilimleri Dergisi, 9(2), 501–524. https://doi.org/10.28956/gbd.830065

Lavenex, S., & Nicole, W. (2013). The external governance of EU internal security. In The External Dimension of Justice and Home Affairs (pp. 81–100). Routledge.

McLeman, R. (2019). International migration and climate adaptation in an era of hardening borders. Nature Climate Change, 9(12), 911–918. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0634-2

Miles, T. J., & Cox, A. B. (2014). Does Immigration Enforcement Reduce Crime? Evidence from Secure Communities. Journal of Law and Economics, 57(4), 937–973. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ucp:jlawec:doi:10.1086/680935

Rhodes, S. D., Mann, L., Simán, F. M., Song, E., Alonzo, J., Downs, M., Lawlor, E., Martinez, O., Sun, C. J., O’Brien, M. C., Reboussin, B. A., & Hall, M. A. (2015). The Impact of Local Immigration Enforcement Policies on the Health of Immigrant Hispanics/Latinos in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 105(2), 329–337. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2014.302218

Sugiyono. (2016). Memahami Penelitian Kualitatif. CV Alfabeta.

Torres, S. A., Santiago, C. D., Walts, K. K., & Richards, M. H. (2018). Immigration policy, practices, and procedures: The impact on the mental health of Mexican and Central American youth and families. American Psychologist, 73(7), 843–854. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000184

Widyawati, A., & Arifin, R. (2018). The Protection of Illegal Immigrants under Indonesian National Law and International Law. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Indonesian Legal Studies (ICILS 2018). https://doi.org/10.2991/icils-18.2018.58

Woods, D., & Dekker, S. (2000). Anticipating the effects of technological change: A new era of dynamics for human factors. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 1(3), 272–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/14639220110037452