Indigenous peoples lost a powerful advocate in Indonesia

Arif Munandar, a close partner of Publish What You Pay in Indonesia, held powerful corporations accountable through the use of technology.

Arif Munandar practiced two kinds of activism: one loud, one quiet.

There he was clutching a megaphone and a wad of documents, shouting down Southeast Asian environmental ministers gathered at a 2006 summit. There he was a year later, at COP13 in Bali, with the same stern expression and a fist jabbed in the air.

Then there was Arif in the field, less stern and warmer, documenting the stories of indigenous people struggling to affirm their rights against powerful extractive companies. And there was Arif at home with his wife, Laili Khairnur, an activist herself, editing video footage late into the night.

Kerusakan Danau SemendukPhoto: The site of the former lake that vanished due to bauxite washing © PWYP Indonesia

“I was an independent woman, an activist and at times I didn’t need anyone beside me,” Laili said, describing herself back in 2008 when she met Arif at a Friends of the Earth conference. “But when I saw him, I knew he was the one who would be my partner to build the life I wanted — that is, a life dedicated to the struggle for justice and building a better world.”

On July 7, Arif died of a heart complication at 32. He leaves Laili, three nephews, scores of colleagues and a legacy of ongoing programs, including with Publish What You Pay Indonesia, that continue to promote accountability in the westernmost region of Indonesian Borneo.

“We have been devastated by the loss,” said Arif’s boss, Hermawansyah, director of the Swandiri Institute, a member of Publish What You Pay Indonesia based in West Kalimantan province.

Most recently, Arif had been involved with a revolutionary project using aerial drones to map out indigenous land and to monitor the activities of mining companies. The project has quickly become a model for grassroots, data-based activism in the region, and the courts have validated their methods.

Seeking Hope
Arif Munandar with one of the drones he built © Swandiri Institue

West Kalimantan is rich in bauxite, the ore from which aluminum is derived. Mining for bauxite is a destructive process, requiring companies to clear all vegetation, upturn topsoil and separate the aluminum by “washing” ore with vast amounts of water.

In 2011, bauxite mining came to a small, remote district called Tayan Hilir. At first, the local villagers believed they might benefit from development that would accompany the mining. But that’s not what happened. Electricity never came, and the companies hired few local workers. One lake vanished entirely from bauxite washing, and others began to grow algae. “The soil has turned yellow, dried and cracked. The fish are all dead, gone,” said Pius Tomi, a village leader. The fish they did manage to catch smelled of rubber. Tayan Hilir became the testbed for the drone project.

One of the central challenges of protecting indigenous land and the environment in Indonesia is a shortage of good maps to delineate protected forests and to firmly dispute companies when their activities stray from permitted areas and encroach on other land.

The idea to use drones came from one of Arif’s colleagues, Irendra Radjawali, who taught himself to cobble together fixed-wing aircraft by watching YouTube videos. Arif was a skilled data researcher and video editor. He had always been enthusiastic about the potential of technology to turn his field research into data that could inform policy change.

“His knowledge of GIS [geographic information systems] was self-taught, but because of his strong interest in learning new things, he was quick to master it and become an expert,” Hermawansyah said.

Their progress was swift. Communities were curious about the drones and eager to learn how to build and fly them. By July, Arif and Radjawali had taught thousands of villagers how to make and fly drones as part of their “drone school.” Today, more than 100 drones are in use.

Their biggest victory was a successful 2014 case that went to the Constitutional Court. The drones had photographed a mining company operating outside the boundaries of its permit. The company challenged whether drone images were admissible as evidence in court. The judges ruled they were, found the company in violation and revoked its permit. Everyone was ecstatic. The ruling meant that “technology is not controlled exclusively by certain parties only but also can be used for the public interest and humanitarian missions,” said Hermawansyah.

“Arif was passionate about helping the local communities,” said Rizky Ananda Wulan Sapta Rini, the project’s program manager at Publish What You Pay Indonesia. “It will be impossible to replace his dedication. But he’s left a huge impact: He’s already taught 3,000 people how to use drones to defend their lands.”
With Arif’s passing, the Indonesian activist community was thrown into mourning.

Musri Nauli found out with an early morning phone call. As Arif’s successor directing the Indonesian Environmental Forum, a consortium of NGOs based in Jambi, Musri considered Arif a mentor and friend. “For a moment I froze. My blood drained. My knees went weak,” he wrote. “The idea of ​​using drones helped Arif to develop a new path [of activism]. That strategy was later implemented into programs which have effectively dismantled corporate crime and have been valuable in investigations.”

“Arif could always convince people of something he presented because he had strong data knowledge,” Laili said. “What he says is always based on data and facts he collected on the ground. Arif is an activist who always sides with indigenous peoples and local communities whose lands and forests are seized and destroyed. Arif is the guardian of marginalized people, earth, and environment.”

Why mandatory disclosures matter for Indonesia

The global transparency wave has reached Indonesia. Initiatives such as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) are bringing more transparency to Indonesia and the mandatory disclosures laws of the EU have led to more data on extractive activities in Indonesia becoming available.

But the oil, mining and gas industries are still among the most corrupt sectors and accessing relevant data on the amount of production, marketing, shipment and payment of taxes and other company financial liabilities is difficult. In Indonesia, ranked 90th out of 176 in Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index 2016, the data from the three EITI reports published so far (between 2009 and 2013) is incomplete and out of date. Disclosing data will therefore not be enough to ensure accountability. The data also needs to used in a meaningful way by a range of stakeholders, including civil society.

In this case study, our Data Extractor from PWYP Indonesia used the disclosure of companies’ “payments to governments” data as an entry point to begin comparing the payments recorded by the parent company (listed on EU markets) with those received by the Indonesian government.

This case study was written by Meliana Lumbantoruan from PWYP Indonesia and is part of Publish What You Pay’s Data Extractors programme, a global initiative which trains PWYP members and activists from across our network to use extractives data.

Read our interactive story: The Deadly Mines of Indonesia

Read the interactive version here

It was a hot and humid July day in Sambutan, Indonesia. Junaidi, his brother Ramadhani and their neighbour Miftahul were running and shouting as they raced each other down dirt paths of the spiraling mining pit. Each child was trying to be the first to reach the enticing turquoise pool of water at the bottom of the mine. They arrived at the water’s edge and jumped in to cool off, splashing each other and swimming out into the middle of the expansive body of water.

Hours passed by as the children played in the abandoned pit. As evening fell, their mother waited for their return in time for dinner. With no sign of them, she anxiously alerted her neighbours and the authorities. Early next morning the children’s bodies were found, floating in the blue depths of the abandoned pool.

Stories like these are all too common in the region of East Kalimantan. Since 2011, 26 children’s deaths have been reported around Samarinda where most of the mining pits are concentrated. Their ages range from 3 to 17 years old.

For a city with a population of 727,500 and a vast rural population spread, these deaths have shocked the region. What’s more, other child fatalities could have gone unregistered.

Abandoned mining pits in Indonesia are a huge threat for local communities. There are no protective barriers to stop children playing near the toxic polluted water so the risk is high that many of them will end up drowning if they try and swim.

Parents who have lost children to these ‘death traps’ usually only receive a token compensatory sum of money for their grievances. While some families have started petitions to try and close these disused pits, their outcries usually reach deaf ears.

When 10 year old Muhammad Raihan Saputra drowned in a mining pit 200 metres from his home on 22 December 2014, his mother started a petition on which gathered over 10,000 signatures. She gave the petition to the Indonesian Ministry of Environment and Forestry and has spoken to ministers and national institutions but so far the government hasn’t taken action. The petition has since been restarted in light of more recent fatalities.

What is civil society doing about the situation?

The greatest struggle for these local communities is the lack of knowledge about how to use their rights to stand against mining activities appearing in their neighbourhoods. Once the mining companies have done their work and left a gaping hole in the landscape, communities don’t know how to reach out to the government and appeal for these pits to be officially closed and restored.

Civil society organisations play an incremental role in helping communities appeal against these deadly incidents in East Kalimantan. Many have appealed to President Joko Widodo, elected in 2014, who promised to rectify Indonesia’s poor environmental record. The President, known as Jokowi, was in East Kalimantan on 23 March 2016 when the bodies of two teenagers were found. He then ordered the Mineral Resource and Environmental Ministries to control and check all mining operations – especially small sites which don’t prioritise safety.

Publish What You Pay (PWYP) Indonesia recently conducted a study entitled “The Mining Permits Reform after the Enactment of Local Government Act and One Stop Service Policy” looking at five provinces: Aceh, South Sumatra, West Kalimantan, East Kalimantan and Central Sulawesi.

“This study aims to assess the extent to which mineral and coal mining permits reforms are based on two regulatory changes: the Local Government Act and One Stop Services Policy,” explained Wiko Saputra, the Economic Policy Researcher at PWYP Indonesia. “This study not only focuses on a national level, but also take primary data from 5 provinces to get the whole picture of policy reform by involving local researchers.”

Missing data involving mining permits and extractive activities is a recurring theme mentioned by local authorities and officials in Indonesia. During the mining boom, basic data surrounding thousands of mining licenses was either inaccurate or lost…

Read the full interactive version here

A global transparency wave: the SEC rule and Indonesia

Last month, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) passed a rule that will require resource extraction issuers to disclose the payments that they make to governments for the commercial development of oil, gas and minerals resources. This is a significant step forward also for Indonesia as several companies listed in the US operate in the country and the data of the payments that these companies make to the Indonesian government will now become available. Similar laws already exist in the EU, Canada and Norway. The number of oil, gas and mining companies in the US is huge and, on top of that, they are classified as big extractive companies as they operate around the globe with significant capital.

The meaning of project-level reporting In Indonesia

According to official website of Energy and Mineral Resources Ministry, US oil and gas companies operating in Indonesia include Exxon Mobil, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips. Mining companies that operate in Indonesia are Freeport McMoran and Newmont. Other prominent extractive companies operating in Indonesia include BHP Billiton, Tullow, Statoil and Kosmos. These have all committed to conducting their business activities in a transparent manner. Statoil is subject to Norwegian Law under which, in addition to needing to report the amount of payments that they make, companies also have to provide information about the investment value of their company, its subsidiaries, the number of employees, production volumes, purchases of goods and services, and inter-company interest expenses.

Extractive companies’ payment to Indonesia government (Source: 2015 mandatory disclosure payment to government)

The total state revenues in 2015 from the extractive industries in Indonesia reached $7.7 billion, with around $6.25 billion from oil and gas and $1.45 billion from mining. About 7.62 % of Indonesia’s gross domestic product came directly from the extractive industries in 2015.


Project level reporting is needed so that people know how much revenue is received by the government and so that they can actively participate in monitoring extractive industries happening in their area. Moreover, in Indonesia, the disaggregated data is useful for local government as it allows them to verify the total of government revenues earmarked to be transferred and the allocation of revenue sharing funds. Finally, for businesses, this data on payment is useful in risk analysis and decision-making.

Project level reporting can be one of the most powerful tools to prevent mismanagement of revenues at the local level. Improving extractive industries governance can only happen with public participation. The public has a right to know how much taxes has been paid by companies, how much royalty, bonuses, and other revenues that have been paid by companies and if a company contributed enough to national wealth and the protection of the environment. The environmental impact caused by extractives industries may actually be greater than the amounts that the government received. These questions can be addressed more through further analysis if, among other things, project level data is published and can be easily accessed by the public. For transparency, information disclosure is meaningful and empowering.

Payment disclosures started when Indonesia implemented EITI. Through the EITI, companies that operate in Indonesia are required to report any other material payments to government above an agreed threshold on project level. Some of the payment data included in the EITI report are corporate and dividend taxes, signature and production bonus, over/under lifting, royalties, land rents, and dividends. This data needs to be reconciled with the amounts received by the government to verify whether the values report are correct or not. This is done with someone assigned to review and reconcile these amounts, and report any discrepancies. If there are different discrepancies, it could mean that there are loopholes in the revenue of extractive industry governance in Indonesia, which could lead to corruption or other abuses. The government is expected to act upon these discrepancies.

The absence of comprehensive information leads to poor assessments and gives more rooms for illicit financial activities such as corruption and embezzlement (Olcer, 2009).

The actor(s) behind such illicit revenues also can be identified. As such, project-level reporting can be highly beneficial for addressing corruption, considering the EI sector itself is considered the world’s most corrupt industrial sector (OECD, 2014).

Payment disclosure has a positive impact on EI companies’ financial performance, including price ratios, returns on equity, and invested capital (Toledano and Topal, 2012).

What is subject to project-level reporting

According to Publish What You Pay US, at least 837 companies listed in the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) would be subject to Section 1504 of the Dodd Frank rule. Based on their market cap, of these 837 companies, 453 companies are small issuers, with a market cap less than $75 million and 384 companies are large issuers as they have a market cap over $75 million.
The threshold for the payment that must be disclosed is equal to or exceeds $100.000 for the same fiscal year, whether a single payment or a series of related payments. The types of payments included are taxes, royalties, fees, production entitlements, bonuses, dividends, payments for infrastructure improvements, and CSR payments. All of these must be made at the project level.


According to the diagram above, of these 453 small issuers, 75 companies are subject to EU, Norwegian or Canadian mandatory disclosures laws, -and to voluntary disclosures through the EITI. And of the 384 large issuers, 98 companies are subject to EU, Norwegian or Canadian Law. From the 837 companies, 570 had substantial payments (reported annual revenue of $100.000 or greater) and 267 didn’t.


The diagram above shows that the US Exchanges ranks first with a market value of $4.4 trillion, followed by the Frankfurt Stock Exchange with a value of $1.9 trillion and the London Stock Exchange at $1 trillion. With such a high-value capital from those companies in the US, transparency of the payment amount is considerably significant and worth to be applied shortly

Top 5 extractive companies listed on US Exchange, based on market cap (source: NRGI dataset)

What’s next?

For PWYP Indonesia, this transparent project level reporting will be used as an additional instrument to cross-check the production of mining, oil and gas exploration in resource rich district and help local government to check that fair revenue is transferred by central government so that it would minimise the potential of corruption.

Mining ban in Indonesia can restore millions of hectares of protected and conserved forest land

An immediate prohibition will positively impact Indonesia’s mining sector governance

Publish What You Pay (PWYP) Indonesia is calling for a mining moratorium, meaning a temporary ban on activity, to immediately regulate the problematic mining situation permits on conservation and protected forest land. The permit moratorium based on experience in the Indonesian province of Aceh since 2014 had a positive impact on curbing the acceleration of deforestation and land damage, according to the Coordinator for Anti-Corruption Movement (GeRAK) in Aceh, Askalani.

The moratorium will be able to restore 407,162 hectares of land in Aceh if civil society plays an important role to successfully escort this initiative throughout its duration. Equally, the moratorium policy will establish important law enforcement regarding permit violation, allowing forest land utilisation and forest area designation to be improved.

PWYP Indonesia is asking Joko Widodo, the President of Indonesia, to be serious about his promise to issue a mining moratorium. He has previously spoken about the importance of protecting wildlife and forest area from palm oil and mining permits in Karya Island earlier this year. Yet bad governance of mining in regions like East Kalimantan and Samarinda has led to a number of children dying in mining pits which have not been repaired or regulated.

Carouls Tuah, the Director of Pokja 30, a member of PWYP Indonesia, in East Kalimantan hopes the regulation will be enforced by law. “Indonesia’s Corruption Eradication Commission, Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK) has to be involved with the law enforcement to reduce corruption crime,” said Tuah. “If moratorium remains only a dialogue then we will see many more deaths in mining pits.”

Arif Munadar, a Researcher from the Swandiri Institute in West Kalimantan, stated that the government needs to learn from the moratorium policy. The moratorium map of affected areas indicates violation of law enforcement on forest land, an issue which must be regulated on a governmental level. If a new mining permit map is created then forest exploitation, land utilisation, and any changes in forest area designation can be monitored. This would solve important ecological and social issues in affected areas.

According to Munadar, there is a huge area of overlap between mining permitted areas and protected or conserved forest land. Governments must enforce this urgent moratorium which will not only solve some of the area’s ecological issues, but also resolve social conflict, improve permission governance, and general environmental conditions.

The National Coordinator of PWYP Indonesia, Maryati Abdullan, said the moratorium regulation is expected to detail the technicalities involving its mechanism. Knowing the mechanism will be important information for related ministry and stakeholders such as the Ministry of Forestry, Ministry of Energy, Ministry of Mineral Resource and other regional governments.

“The promise to do a moratorium was announced a month ago, we hope that it is not a promise without realisation. The President has to arrange the regulation immediately,” said Abdullan.

There are 6.3 million hectares of mining permit area on conserved and protected forest land in Indonesia, despite the enforcement of a law created in 1999 which stated those areas have to be free from any mining activity.

Indonesia rainforest infographic (1)

Digging Deeper into the Panama Papers in Indonesia

The Panama Papers, with their revelation of 140 world politicians having offshore companies in 21 tax havens, have caused an uproar in Indonesia as they have exposed a number of influential people from Indonesia. The Panama Papers are a set of 11.5 million secret document obtained from the leak of Mossack Fonseca’s communication server.

The International Consortium of Investigative Journalist (ICIJ), which has previously published offshore leaks in 2013, is the actor behind the exposure of Panama Papers since 11 April. Tempo, an investigative media company in Indonesia and one of the members of the ICIJ consortium, has released the names of several Indonesian known figures that have offshore companies as exposed in the Panama Papers.

“Because this is raw data, the journalists use three main approaches to investigate: they look for public officials, people who have criminal cases in the past, and people who have tax cases in Panama Papers,” said Wahyu Dhyatmika, known as Komang, an investigative journalist with Tempo, during a PWYP Indonesia Knowledge Forum on 15 April.

Bawono Kristiaji, Partner of Tax Research and Training Services at Danny Darussalam Tax Center, explained that high tax for high individual network in 1920-1950s triggers the emerging of tax haven. While the purpose of high tax is for revenue redistribution.

The Panama Papers reveal is a concrete example of a highly growing secretive industry. The existence of secretive industry itself is due to the availability of supply and demand such as tax haven with low tariff tax, high secrecy security, easy to get permits for establishing company and no exchange information.

Panama Papers and Tax Amnesty

The attempts to avoid and evade the tax by high individual network in Panama Papers caused the Tax Justice Forum, a Civil Society Coalition of which PWYP Indonesia became a member, to urge the government to cancel a tax amnesty plan for wealthy people, explaining that this plan would be contra productive to tax revenue optimisation.
However, Aji has another point of view. The revelation from the Panama Papers is a simulation of the Automatic Exchange of Information (AEoI) that will be implemented by G20 countries in 2018.
“This is just a set of data from one law firm, what if all data was being disclosed? Tax amnesty is a bridge to prevent a tsunami of tax dispute,” said Aji.
He added that tax amnesty is not supposed to aim for short-term targets such as increasing tax revenue, but for longer term targets that aim to get the tax payers’ database. Tax amnesty policy also must be followed by institutional improvement and data management.

“It’s difficult to accept that wealthy individuals such as Riza Chalid, nicknamed the Oil Merchant and who avoids and evades tax, will be forgiven. What about differentiating the treatment. There’s a need to settle the crime of tax first,” said Wiko Saputra, Researcher of Economic Policy at PWYP Indonesia.

Other than tax amnesty policy options, we can promote mandatory disclosure from actors/companies and tax promoter. Tax evasion can easily be uncovered by matching the annual tax notification letter, while tax avoidance can be identified by transfer pricing analysis. Country by country reporting also can play key role to reduce tax avoidance.

This post was originally published on the PWYP Indonesia website.

PWYP Indonesia publishes report on illicit financial flows and tax crime in the mining sector

According to a 2014 report from Global Financial Integrity entitled “Illicit Financial Flows from Developing Countries: 2003- 2012”, Indonesia ranks seventh of countries with the largest illicit financial flows (IFF). In 2014 IFF in Indonesia is estimated at a total of IDR 227.75 trillion ($20 billion), the mining sector contributes IDR 23.89 trillion ($2 billion), mainly derived from trade mis-invoicing.
Late 2015 Publish What You Pay Indonesia conducted a study on IFF and tax crime in the mining sector in Indonesia. This is an urgent issue, given the sad reality of Indonesia among the top seven developing countries with highest IFF.

Based on PWYP Indonesia’s calculation, using the GFI methodology, the IFF total of IDR 227.7 trillion in Indonesia is the equivalent of 11.7% of the revised state budget (APBN-P) for 2014. The mining sector contributes to more than 10% of the total IFFs which is around IDR 23.89 trillion. Around IDR 21.33 trillion (80%) comes from trade misinvoicing while the remainder of IDR 2.56 trillion comes from hot money narrow. There is also an unsurprisingly low tax ratio of the mining sector in 2013, only reaching 9.4%. This low number is closely related to the rampant practices of tax avoidance and evasion.

PWYP Indonesia calls for four key recommendations:

1. Overall improvement of tax system and state revenue transparency
2. Improvement of tax compliance, and a strengthening data integration
3. Synergising of regulation in taxation and mining
4. Law enforcement on tax evasion and tax avoidance cases.

Access the full report by clicking here.

Illicit financial flows and tax crime in mining sector in Indonesia

Indonesia ranks seventh in biggest illicit financial flows (IFF) among developing countries for year 2003-2012. While in 2014, IFF in Indonesia in 2014 is estimated reaching IDR 227.75 trillion ($20 billion). Mining sector contributes IDR 23.89 trillion ($2 billion), mainly derived from trade misinvoicing.

Recently, Publish What You Pay Indonesia conducted study on IFF and tax crime in the mining sector in Indonesia. This is an urgent issue, given the fact that Indonesia’s position among the top seven developing countries with highest IFF

Based on PWYP Indonesia’s calculation, the estimation of IFFs in Indonesia in 2014 reached IDR 227.7 trillion, or the equivalent of 11.7% of the revised state budget (APBN-P) for 2014. The mining sector contributes to more than 10% of the total IFFs which is around IDR 23.89 trillion. Around IDR 21.33 trillion comes from trade misinvoicing and IDR 2.56 trillion comes from hot money narrow. There is also a unsurprisingly low tax ratio of the mining sector in 2013, which only reached 9.4%. This low number is closely related to the rampant practices of tax evasion and tax avoidance.

Improving governance of land and forest based extractive sector in Indonesia

“Capable stakeholders, community monitoring, revenue stream and budget analysis, multi-stakeholder dialogues, and open data can pave the way for improvement in the governance of land and forest, especially those used by the extractive sector.” – Agung Budiono, Program Manager of Setapak-PWYP Indonesia.

Lack of governance in the extractives relating to forest and land management has created problems which caused loss of national revenue, deforestation and environmental degradation, and has had severe socio-economic impact across the region. Lack of capacity of responsible authorities, low levels of public participation, scarcity of medium for public involvement, and absence of adequate regulation that secure participation hinder efforts to solve these problems. In addition, low level of transparency and limited public access to information has led to lack of trust and coordination between stakeholder, overlapped use in forest and land, as well as abuse of regulation especially those related to licensing and good mining practices.

Publish What You Pay Indonesia has collaborated with SETAPAK-The Asia Foundation, to initiate efforts to improve governance of forest and land based extractive sector through three areas of focus: (1) strengthening the capacity of stakeholders, (2) building trust, participation and multi-stakeholders dialogues, (3) promoting use of open data. This program is conducted in 5 provinces: Nangroe Aceh Darussalam, South Sumatera, West Kalimantan, East Kalimantan, and Central Sulawesi. We collaborate with Setapak partners in the national and regional level.

In capacity building focus, revenue issues are not used much as tools for advocacy by civil society focusing on the extractive industries, particularly in mining (mineral and coal) and forestry. Advocacy is not related to state loss. That’s why capacity building about revenue issue is important, in order to enrich and strengthen the argument and bargaining position based on advocacy findings in the mining and forestry sectors.

PWYP Indonesia has facilitated a training related to land governance and forestry for the extractive industries. The main goals of the training are: understanding revenue streams, and the technical calculations in state and local revenue in the mining and forestry sectors. This training involve facilitators and experts who understand the issues. The participants consist of local civil society organization and impacted mining community.

At the start of the activity in five provinces; Aceh, South Sumatera, West Kalimantan, East Kalimantan, and Central Sulawesi, there were 75 enthusiastic participants learning about revenue stream mechanism in the extractive sector – from the upstream stage to the allocation of revenue within communities. Participants were also supported in doing innovations in their advocacy. The participants hoped to advocate in the mining sector based on those tools, so that the extractive industries will bring more advantage for the community.

In the multi-stakeholder dialogues and involvement, PWYP Indonesia and its local CSO partners conducted a series of dialogues in five areas; Aceh, South Sumatera, West Kalimantan, East Kalimantan and Central Sulawesi. This helped map the gaps and problems in the extractive sector, especially related to spatial management, land and forest use. Also explored in the dialogues were the topics of transparency of national and regional revenue, and the environmental aspect, including rehabilitation and post mining stages. This forum was attended by various participants from the government, members of parliament, academics, NGOs and community delegations.

Generally, a key achievement from this multi-stakeholder forum has been the growing awareness of participants in problem solving. This is good first step to build dialogues to jointly look for solutions. But this can also be challenging for civil society organisations, as not only do they have to understand the context of problem and provide constructive criticism, but also offer solution as recommendation.

Lastly, in the open data focus, PWYP Indonesia has facilitated the development of a portal that provides data and information in the open data format of mining licenses, spatial information, as well as economic aspect (i.e. potential revenue, post mining, etc.).

This program also became an important partner for the coordination and supervision of a program for the mineral and coal sector. This is an innovation program led by the Anti-Corruption Commission in collaboration with the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources, and Local Governments, that has focused on reviewing the mineral coal sector.

In the last two years, the Corruption Eradication Commission has aggressively taken action to prevent corruption in the natural resources sector, particularly in mining, forestry and plantation, by initiating the “Coordination and Supervision” initiative. So far, the initiative has been effective in improving the governance of the sector as well as protecting natural resources from the legitimate crime, excessive exploitation.

Looking at the advocacy opportunities, PWYP Indonesia has strengthened civil society organizations in Indonesia working on extractives and environmental issues to better monitor the implementation of the Corruption Eradication Commission’s initiative, and of the Coordination and Supervision program, in some regions in Indonesia. Civil society organizations composed and delivered a position paper regarding fundamental problems in mining, forestry and also plantation sector but the paper is still ignored by the government. A comprehensive advocacy strategy for civil society organizations to protect natural resources in Indonesia has also been formulated.

Since then, there have been numerous achievements. The most significant one was the huge increase in non-tax revenue from coal sector reaching IDR 10 trillion, though at the same time its price has decreased by 30% compared to the previous year and ore export has been banned. Around 1000 mining permits in 31 provinces have been revoked for a variety of reasons, including expired permits, over-lapses with other concessions, and other administrative issues.

PWYP Indonesia has also played a role in consolidating CSOs by aggregating data and information, developing CSOs policy papers which have been presented in regional coordination and supervision gatherings in 31 provinces, as well as in building public awareness.

PWYP Indonesia also initiated a project to map actors in the extractive sector. The project focuses on researching Political Exposed Persons (PEPs), those who have access to state accounts and budgets, as well as political exposure. PEPs have a higher risk of corruption and can be potential target for bribes. In this first phase, the focus will be on mapping the coal industry.

This blog was originally posted on the PWYP Indonesia website and has been reposted here with their permission. Read the original blog post by clicking here.


Formed in 2007, PWYP Indonesia was instrumental in the government’s decision to join the EITI in 2010. Since then, the coalition has helped achieve broad implementation of the initiative and has been highly active in using data that emerges from EITI reports. It is currently conducting five sub-regional research projects that track extractive revenues, map concession areas and monitor sub-national payments, among other objectives. PWYP Indonesia has also worked on making EITI data widely available and accessible, for example, using SMS to engage citizens on EITI Issues in West Papua.