Tapera was established to help the people.
However, workers consider the 3% funding cut
to be detrimental. This can answer the question
of how the idea of public housing savings is seen
from the principles of good governance. This
research aims to increase knowledge about the
concept of public housing savings by looking at
the general principles of good governance.
Doctrinal law research is carried out using a
legislative approach. This tapera program is
considered non-transparent because it uses
unclear terms to explain how funds are used.
Workers felt disadvantaged by the deduction of
tapera funds, so they filed a material appeal to
the constitutional court. The Tapera program was
then evaluated because the concept was similar
to the three million houses program.