The Voice Of Rejection Of The Odd Revision Of The Minerba Law

Photo by Ilham VOI

JAKARTA - President Prabowo Subianto's administration suddenly proposed a revision of Law Number 4 of 2009 concerning Mineral and Coal Mining (UU Minerba). This proposal shocked the public because it was submitted in the middle of the DPR's recess. The revision, which is claimed to be the initiative of the DPR, is in the spotlight because it is considered not transparent and rushed.

This sudden revision raises many questions, especially because the Minerba Law is not included in the list of 47 priority laws in the 2024 National Legislation Program (Prolegnas). The public suspects that the push for revision comes from the government, not the full initiative of the DPR. Rumors say, the idea of this revision originated from the meeting of the Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources (ESDM), Bahlil Lahadalia, who proposed granting mining permits to community organizations (Ormas) to respect their role in maintaining political stability during the previous administration.

This rule was previously designed through PP 96 of 2021, which was later changed to PP 25 of 2024. However, the PP cannot be implemented because it contradicts the law which requires an auction mechanism in granting mining permits. Therefore, the government is trying to change the Minerba Law so that it is in accordance with the policy of granting mining permits through priority schemes.

This revision process took place very quickly, even within hours after the working committee meeting. The DPR immediately held a closed plenary meeting to approve the revision. The chairperson of the trial, Ahmad Sufmi Dasco, asked that the views of the factions be given in writing to save time. As a result, the revised academic paper only appeared after the plenary meeting was completed, sparking criticism from various parties.

This revision also reaps polemic because it includes not only granting mining permits for mass organizations, but also for campuses, cooperatives, and MSMEs. The reason is that the campus can take advantage of mining income to reduce tuition fees and support research, while cooperatives and MSMEs are expected to increase economic independence. However, many have questioned the urgency of this policy.

Mining Permits For Mass Organizations

The granting of mining permits to Ormas is based on PP 25 of 2024, which was designed as a form of appreciation to religious organizations for their contributions during the previous administration. The Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources, Bahlil Lahadalia, has argued that Ormas has played an important role since the era of the struggle for independence, but has never received a real reward.

However, this PP is hampered because it does not have a legal link at the level of the law. In the existing law, mining permits can only be granted through an auction mechanism. Priority schemes such as in PP 25/2024 are considered contrary to these provisions, so this policy cannot run without the revision of the Minerba Law.

Campuses And MSMEs In Revision Of The Minerba Law

Apart from Ormas, the revision of the Minerba Law also included a clause on the granting of mining permits for campuses and MSMEs. The government argued that universities could take advantage of mining income to reduce tuition fees and improve educational facilities. The chairman of the DPR Legislation Body, Bob Hasan, even called this an effort to reduce the cost of Single Lecture Money (UKT). The campus is also expected to be able to use mines as a field laboratory for students.

However, this reason sparked criticism. Many suspect that this policy was used to tame campuses and students who are often the motor of criticism of the government. In addition, the involvement of MSMEs in the mining sector is also questioned. It is feared that the existence of mining will actually damage the ecosystem and kill other small businesses, such as the natural-based tourism sector.

Urges To Cancel

Various irregularities in the revision process of the Minerba Law sparked sharp criticism. The public highlighted the lack of transparency, the absence of public participation, and the process of legislation which was considered rushed. ICW, one of the organizations that vocally oppose this revision, said that this step was unconstitutional for violating the Constitutional Court's decision on public participation in the formation of legislation.

In addition, ICW also criticized the granting of mining permits through a priority scheme, which is considered to open up great opportunities for corrupt practices, such as bribery to local officials. They considered that this revision was nothing more than an effort to distribute mining permits to certain parties for weak reasons.

This revision is considered contrary to Indonesia's commitment to environmental protection. A study from the Center for Energy and Mining Law Studies (PUSHEP) said that this revision did not meet the formal requirements because it did not go through clear planning and did not enter the Prolegnas. The Director of PUSHEP, Bisman Bhaktiar, assessed that granting mining permits for campuses, cooperatives, and MSMEs was only a political gimmick without a solid basis.