Jakarta – Indonesia Climate Justice Literacy (ICJL) questions the government’s narrative of “economic equality” and “community empowerment” as reasons for granting cooperatives and community organisations (ormas) permits to manage mineral and coal mines covering up to 2,500 hectares.
For ICJL, this step is not merely an economic policy—it is a strategy to normalise environmentally destructive policies packaged with rhetoric about public welfare. “This narrative of economic equality is just a cover. The government is trying to get the public accustomed to policies that actually exacerbate the ecological crisis,” said Firdaus Cahyadi, founder of ICJL, in a statement on Friday, October 10.
The sharp criticism was in response to the issuance of Government Regulation (PP) No. 39 of 2025 concerning the Implementation of Mineral and Coal Mining Business Activities. This regulation expands mining permits for cooperatives and mass organisations to 2,500 hectares.
For the government, this policy is touted as a concrete step toward supporting regional economic equality and strengthening the people’s economy. However, for environmental activists, this logic is dangerous.
“The mining sector, regardless of who manages it, remains high risk to the environment,” Firdaus asserted. “Don’t be fooled by the term ‘people’s cooperative’. An area of 2,500 hectares is not small — it is enough to clear the forest cover, pollute the water, and destroy biodiversity.”
According to ICJL, this policy reflects a misguided perspective: that mining can be a tool for equitable development. In fact, the long history of extractive industries in Indonesia shows the opposite—economic inequality and ecological damage always go hand in hand.
From capacity to social conflict
ICJL highlights three main risks of this cooperative and community organisation-based mining policy. First is weak environmental capacity. According to Firdaus, managing such a large mining area requires technical expertise, financial resources, and a complex monitoring system. In many cases, cooperatives and community organisations do not have the capacity to meet standards for post-mining reclamation, acid water management, or hazardous waste management.
“If this permit is granted without technical and financial readiness, the risk of permanent pollution becomes very high,” he said.
Second, the potential for agrarian conflict. The second concern relates to land conversion and social conflict. With the priority scheme without tenders, many potential mining areas overlap with conservation areas, customary lands, or productive agricultural land.
“This opens the door to land overlap, resource competition, and horizontal conflicts at the grassroots level,” said Firdaus. “Instead of empowering the people, this policy could actually displace them from their living spaces.”
Third, gaps in supervision and potential disasters. The third risk is increasingly weak supervision. The large number of small licensed entities has the potential to fragment the government’s control system. “When licenses are granted on a massive and widespread basis, supervision becomes ineffective. This is where illegal mining can hide behind formal legality,” explained Firdaus.
ICJL believes that the cumulative ecological impact of many small mines is far more dangerous than the operations of a single large company that is subject to strict environmental impact assessments and open data disclosure requirements.
ICJL urges the government to review PP No. 39/2025 and ensure that all economic policies are in line with the principles of sustainability. “If the government truly wants to empower the people, it should provide access to sectors that strengthen ecological resilience — not destroy it,” said Firdaus. (Hartatik)
Banner photo: Burley Packwood/Wikimedia Commons
