Beyond Extraction: The Urgent Call to Overhaul Indonesia’s Forestry Governance

PADANG – In a move signaling a potential turning point for environmental policy in Indonesia, the Regional Sumatra Coalition has issued a stern ultimatum to the government and the House of Representatives (DPR). The coalition is demanding a comprehensive, substantive overhaul of Law No. 41 of 1999 on Forestry, arguing that the current legal framework is a relic of the colonial era that prioritizes industrial extraction over ecological resilience and human rights.

The demand was formalized during a declaration held in Padang on May 29, 2026, where a unified front of civil society organizations and indigenous communities insisted that the revision of the forestry law must move beyond technical adjustments. According to the coalition, the survival of Sumatra’s remaining ecosystems depends on shifting the legal paradigm from "forest as a commodity" to "forest as a living, protective ecosystem."

The Ecological Catastrophe: A Wake-Up Call

The urgency of this demand is rooted in a series of recurring ecological disasters that have plagued Sumatra. The coalition points to the massive environmental crisis of late 2025—a tragedy that claimed more than 1,190 lives and forced 131,500 residents to flee their homes—as the most devastating evidence of a broken system.

Nora Hidayati, Advocacy Manager at the Perkumpulan HuMa Indonesia, argues that labeling these events as "natural disasters" is a dangerous misnomer. "The ecological disasters in Sumatra reveal one fundamental truth: forest destruction never stops at the concession boundary," Hidayati stated. "It manifests as floods, landslides, crop failures, the erosion of livelihoods, and systemic conflicts that are passed down to future generations."

The coalition contends that the vulnerability of Sumatra’s environment is the direct result of decades of policies that favored extractive industries—such as large-scale oil palm plantations, mining, and industrial logging—over the protection of local habitats and the rights of forest-dependent communities.

Chronology of Crisis and Legal Stagnation

To understand the depth of the crisis, one must examine the trajectory of deforestation in Sumatra over the last three decades. Between the mid-1990s and 2026, Aceh, North Sumatra, and West Sumatra have lost approximately 1.2 million hectares of forest cover. Strikingly, 690,777 hectares of this lost land were converted into industrial oil palm plantations.

A History of Patchwork Regulation

The legal framework governing this decline, Law No. 41/1999, has been under fire for years. While the law was born in the post-reform era, critics argue it never fully shed the colonial-era Domein Verklaring (State Domain Declaration) mindset, which treats the state as the absolute owner of forest lands, often disregarding the centuries-old presence of indigenous and local communities.

• 2004: The first major disruption occurred with the issuance of a Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (Perpu).
• 2013: The introduction of the Law on Prevention and Eradication of Forest Destruction added layers of bureaucracy without solving core issues.
• 2023: The controversial Omnibus Law (Job Creation Law) significantly altered the forestry landscape, further centralizing power and favoring investment.
• 2010–2017: A period of intense constitutional scrutiny saw nine separate challenges brought before the Constitutional Court (MK). While the MK ruled in favor of petitioners in several instances—effectively challenging the state’s total control over customary forests—the legislature failed to translate these rulings into meaningful changes in the text of the law.

This disconnect between judicial intent and legislative action has created a "legal gray area," where the state continues to interpret forest governance through executive regulations that often circumvent the spirit of Constitutional Court decisions.

Structural Weaknesses: Why the Current Law Fails

The "Reset Forestry Coalition" has developed a counter-academic draft that highlights five fundamental flaws in the 1999 Law. These flaws, they argue, make the current law fundamentally incompatible with the realities of the 21st century.

1. Distortion of State Control: The "Right of State Control" (HMN) is frequently misused as a justification for the state to claim ownership, effectively dispossessing communities of their ancestral lands.
2. The Burden of Proof: Indigenous communities are forced to prove their existence and rights to the state, rather than the state recognizing them as the rightful stewards of their traditional territories.
3. Extraction-Oriented Policy: The legal framework is designed to facilitate permits and concessions, treating forests as timber reserves rather than living, carbon-sequestering, and life-supporting ecosystems.
4. Absence of Conflict Resolution: There is no robust, institutionalized mechanism to resolve the rampant tenurial conflicts between corporations and local communities.
5. Weak Ecological Restoration: The law lacks an enforceable mandate for the restoration of degraded landscapes, focusing instead on exploitation and management.

The Call for Eight Strategic Reforms

The Regional Sumatra Coalition has proposed eight pillars of reform to transform the forestry sector. They argue these are not merely suggestions, but prerequisites for avoiding future ecological collapse.

1. Redefining the Forest

The law must stop treating forests as administrative categories. Instead, it should define them as living ecosystems with cultural, spiritual, and ecological dimensions that serve as the fundamental space for human life.

2. Reforming the "Right of State Control"

The interpretation of the HMN must shift from "ownership" to "stewardship." The state’s mandate should be restricted to management and oversight aimed at the prosperity of the people, rather than the commodification of land.

3. Equal Legal Status for Customary Forests

Indigenous and local forest management models must be recognized as legally equivalent to state or private management. The burden of proof must be removed from the communities.

4. Empowerment of Community Institutions

Perhutanan Sosial (Social Forestry) programs must be elevated from temporary access permits to permanent, secure land-tenure rights for local communities.

5. Decentralization and Local Governance

Management must be brought closer to the "tapak" (site) level. Strengthening the Forest Management Units (KPH) is essential to ensure that policies reflect local ecological realities and community needs.

6. Mandatory Transparency and Public Consent

The principle of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) must be a legal prerequisite for any forestry policy or permit that impacts local populations. Transparency and public accountability must be baked into the legal structure.

7. Proactive State Protection

The state should be legally required to actively identify, register, and protect customary forests, rather than waiting for indigenous groups to navigate the arduous and costly legal procedures to secure their own land titles.

8. Specialized Protection for Small Islands

Given their extreme vulnerability to climate change, forests on small islands require a distinct protection status. Industrial exploitation that threatens the ecological integrity of these islands should be strictly prohibited and existing harmful permits revoked.

Implications: A New Social Contract

The coalition’s demand represents more than an environmental plea; it is a call for a new social contract between the Indonesian state and its people. By pushing for a complete "reset," the advocates are aiming to dismantle the vestiges of colonial extraction that have prioritized foreign and industrial interests at the expense of local sovereignty.

As climate change accelerates, the frequency and intensity of environmental crises are expected to rise. The failure to reform the forestry sector will not only lead to further degradation of biodiversity—including the vital habitats of the Sumatran orangutan and the siamang—but will also exacerbate social inequality and state-sanctioned human rights abuses.

Rifai, a spokesperson for the Regional Sumatra Coalition, emphasized that the time for incremental change has passed. "We are not looking for a pragmatic tweak to a broken system," he declared at the conclusion of the forum in Padang. "We are demanding a foundational shift. Our future depends on recognizing that the forest is not a commodity to be sold, but the very foundation upon which our survival, and the survival of the next generation, is built."

As the government considers its next steps for the revision of the Forestry Law, the voices from Sumatra provide a clear, evidence-based roadmap. Whether the legislature will choose to listen to these communities or continue on the path of extractive growth remains the defining question for the future of Indonesia’s natural heritage.