Lawmakers Criticize Borobudur Mgmt: Visitor Quota to Local Involvement

Member of Commission X of the Indonesian House of Representatives (DPR RI) Abdul Fikri Faqih requests a thorough review of the plan to increase Borobudur Temple's daily visitor quota from 1,200 to 4,000 people. 

“Borobudur's capacity, originally allowing a maximum of 1,200 people, now becoming 4,000 visitors daily for eight hours, appears to require deeper study,” he stated on Tuesday, December 2, 2025.

Beyond Mere Capacity Calculations

Borobudur is no ordinary destination. Every stupa, relief, and step holds layers of history vulnerable to time. 

Therefore, Fikri emphasized that determining visitor limits must not solely rely on physical factors.

According to him, setting visitor quotas should consider area size, unit space, and rotation factors, as per standard carrying capacity calculation procedures. 

However, he asserted that approach remains insufficient. Temple preservation requires more holistic analysis—from rock durability and potential micro-damage from human activity to tourist movement patterns affecting cultural heritage structural stability.

Overlooked Social Dimensions

During Commission X's Specific Working Visit to Magelang Regency, Fikri also highlighted social aspects often missing from grand temple tourism narratives. 

He noted that local community involvement still lacks proper recognition. Such involvement, he added, remains charity-based or merely at management's discretion rather than a system-guaranteed right.

Fikri argued that community and local government participation in Borobudur's utilization should have clear legal foundations. 

“Communities and local governments are already involved in Borobudur's utilization, but this remains fragile as it relies on management's goodwill rather than regulation-based collaboration,” he said.

Demanding Compliance with Cultural Heritage Law

Thus, he urged the government to implement what is mandated by regulations. Article 97 of Law Number 11 of 2010 concerning Cultural Heritage stipulates forming a Management Body involving government, regional governments, businesses, and communities.

Yet this body's presence is crucial. Without it, Borobudur's management risks leaning toward business interests. 

Fikri stressed that cultural heritage must not become profit for a select few, but rather a life center delivering tangible, dignified economic impact for Magelang residents.

“I hope these critical notes prompt serious evaluation to make future Borobudur management more transparent, participatory, and principled,” he affirmed.

Amid post-pandemic tourism recovery efforts, the greatest challenge lies in balancing public access with preservation responsibility. 

Borobudur is not just a monument but a living space for thousands of families in Magelang, Central Java—and a silent witness to the archipelago's spiritual journey. (Antara)