What began as a flagship policy to tackle malnutrition in Indonesia is now under fire. The Free Nutritious Meals programme (Makan Bergizi Gratis or MBG), championed by President Prabowo Subianto, was launched to provide healthy meals to schoolchildren and later extend to pregnant women and the elderly. Framed as one of Prabowo’s campaign ambitions, MBG carried both nutritional goals and political symbolism as proof of his social welfare agenda. With billions of dollars allocated, it was expected to become a cornerstone of public health.

Yet nine months after its roll-out, MBG has triggered widespread concern. Thousands of pupils and several teachers have fallen ill after eating its meals, exposing weaknesses in planning, execution, and oversight.

Rising cases of poisoning

According to the Indonesian Education Monitoring Network (JPPI), at least 6,452 suspected poisoning cases were recorded by the end of September 2025. The National Nutrition Agency (BGN), the Health Ministry, and the Food and Drug Monitoring Agency (BPOM) reported lower figures of around 5,000. Tempo reports that between mid-August and mid-September alone, 978 students required hospital treatment for diarrhoea, vomiting, rashes, facial swelling, breathing problems, and headaches.

The cases span multiple provinces. West Java recorded 2,012, Yogyakarta 1,047, Central Java 722, Bengkulu 539, and Central Sulawesi 446. JPPI coordinator Ubaid Matraji noted that cases dipped in June during school holidays but surged again when classes resumed. “When schools reopened, MBG distribution increased, and the poisoning cases climbed to the thousands,” he told Tempo during a parliamentary hearing on September 22.

Cases month by month

Tempo reports illustrate the breadth of the problem:

• January: In Sukoharjo, Central Java, ten pupils at SD Negeri Dukuh 03 suffered stomach pain and nausea.
• February: In East Sumba, East Nusa Tenggara, 29 pupils from SD Katolik Andaluri were treated for mild poisoning.
• April: In Bombana, Southeast Sulawesi, 53 of 1,026 meal boxes were deemed unfit, while in Cianjur, West Java, 176 people, including residents, fell ill after consuming MBG food.
• May: In Bogor, West Java, 210 children showed poisoning symptoms, with 22 needing intensive care.
• August: In Lebong, Bengkulu, 427 students became ill after eating noodles, meatballs, vegetables, milk, and eggs.
• September:  In Banggai Islands, Central Sulawesi, 251 pupils fell sick, reportedly from cakalang fish. On the same day in Garut, West Java, 150 students were affected, followed days later by 364 pupils in West Bandung. On September 24 in Ketapang, West Kalimantan, 20 people, including teachers, were hospitalised after eating shark meat.

Government resists suspension

Civil society groups including JPPI, ICW, and KPAI have urged the government to pause MBG for safety reviews. BGN chief Dadan Hindayana has refused, admitting concern but insisting the affected meals were minimal compared with the one billion portions served. He told Tempo that only 4,711 cases were linked to poisoning symptoms.

BGN has pledged tighter monitoring, including investigative teams, closing problematic kitchens, and setting up district offices by 2026. Deputy head Nanik S. Deyang said kitchens must now use stainless steel equipment, cold storage, and certified chefs, with violations leading to closure. Vetting, she added, is conducted with BPOM, the Health Ministry, police, and community representatives.

How the meals are delivered

According to Tempo, MBG meals are cooked in partner kitchens run by local foundations or cooperatives, approved by the Health Ministry, packed into boxes, and transported to schools for distribution during break time. Though promoted as a “short food chain,” the poisoning cases suggest weak control of ingredients, packaging, and transport.

Policy analyst Agus Pambagio told Bisnis.com on September 25 that MBG should be paused for a full audit, criticising the limited role of BPOM during the roll-out and warning of corruption risks. “This is supposed to prepare the golden generation of 2045, not a business venture,” he said.

Confusion has grown from inconsistent official figures: BGN recorded 5,080 cases by mid-September, the Health Ministry 5,207, BPOM 5,320, and the Centre for Indonesia’s Strategic Development Initiatives (CISDI) 5,626 across 17 provinces. Bisnis.com noted that such discrepancies fuel doubts about transparency.

BPOM has since expanded involvement. Its head, Taruna Ikrar, explained that MBG meals are being tested in laboratories, with results shared with BGN. He added that BPOM had already trained kitchen staff and overseen food safety, though its role was seen by the public as limited.

A long road to reform

The recurring incidents, however, highlight systemic weaknesses in food preparation, field supervision, and agency coordination. While the government insists MBG is crucial for long-term development, public concern remains focused on the immediate health of children.

Tempo has reported that BGN’s leadership is dominated by military figures, including its deputy head and several deputies. Critics argue a nutrition-focused programme should be led by dietitians, nutritionists, and doctors rather than retired officers. Involving health professionals in senior roles could be the first step toward meaningful reform.

Ultimately, the central question persists: who benefits from MBG — the organisers, catering partners, or the children it claims to serve? Many victims are from low-income families who rely on the scheme for daily meals, making the failures especially damaging.

In a statement to Tempo, Dadan Hindayana, head of BGN, argued that the current poisoning cases remain within “reasonable limits.” He pointed out that only 4,711 meals had caused illness out of one billion portions served during the programme’s first nine months. Yet to describe any level of food poisoning among schoolchildren as “within limits” is deeply troubling. One case is already too many. It is only logical to suspend, audit, and restructure MBG. Children’s health cannot be weighed against the political ego of delivering a campaign promise.