International Journal of Public Health Science (IJPHS) Vol. 13, No. 4, December 2024, pp. 1990~2004 ISSN: 2252-8806, DOI: 10.11591/ijphs.v13i4.23918  1990 Journal homepage: http://ijphs.iaescore.com Analysis of vaccination policy in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia Nuryanti Mustari 1 , Junaedi 2 , Hafiz Elfiansya Parawu 1 , Hardianto Hawing 2 , Herman 2 , Ulfiah Syukri 2 , Aqmal Reza Amri 2 1 Master of Public Administration, University of Muhammadiyah Makassar, Makassar, Indonesia 2 Government Science Department, Faculty of Social and Political Science, University of Muhammadiyah Makassar, Makassar, Indonesia Article Info ABSTRACT Article history: Received Sep 13, 2023 Revised Feb 27, 2024 Accepted Apr 24, 2024 This study aims to reflect on the pattern of vaccination policies implemented by the Indonesian government and to analyze public sentiment (pro/con) towards vaccination policies and the government's strategy in formulating democratic policies, prioritizing the aspirations of those affected by the policies adopted. This paper uses qualitative research methods with NVivo 12 Plus as a data processing tool. This study's results indicate that vaccination policies tend to be mandatory in Indonesia with an indirect compulsory application polarization. Hence, the government still uses a coercive and restrictive approach to vaccination programs. In Indonesia, vaccination policy intersects with ethical aspects, especially religious values, resulting in diverse public sentiments. Keywords: COVID-19 Mandatory vaccine policy NVivo 12 Plus Public policy Vaccination This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license. Corresponding Author: Nuryanti Mustari Department of Governance Science, Faculty of Social and Political Science Muhammadiyah University of Makassar Makassar, Indonesia Email: nuryantimustari@unismuh.ac.id 1. INTRODUCTION This study aimed to evaluate the Indonesian government's policies and analyze the pros and cons of public policies related to the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) vaccination program. The spread of COVID-19 has become a serious threat to public health around the world, so the government must make policies that support the completion of the reach of the disease and maintain social stability in society [1]. The vaccination policy is one of the strategies implemented by various countries to stop the spread of COVID-19; this gives rise to pros and cons in the community [2], [3]. Vaccinations had a tremendous impact on human morbidity and mortality the past decades saving two to three million lives every year [4]. There are various demands for the government to deal with the pandemic and return people's lives to normal. On the other hand, the public does not believe in the government's efforts in dealing with COVID-19, especially in the vaccine program [5]. In practice, vaccination policy intersects with restrictions on individual freedom because it requires a person to be vaccinated to maintain public health. It has become a worldwide debate, especially regarding coercive vaccination policies [6]. Coercion poses a threat to the principles of autonomy, liberty, and freedom [7]. Furthermore, the vaccination policy has sparked a public debate: Should a person be vaccinated? Is it optional?, and who decides? [8]. The state of emergency prompted the government to impose a vaccination policy on its citizens [9]. Almost every country is engaged in rigorous vaccination campaigns that focus on improving COVID-19 vaccination awareness [10]. As happened in the UK, although the government has