- Indonesian authorities are wrongfully prosecuting environmental defenders who protest deforestation and pollution as well as Indigenous leaders who defend their land rights.
- The Prabowo administration has intensified the crackdown on free expression by expanding the military’s role in state-owned mining, oil palm plantations, infrastructure projects, and so-called food and energy estates.
- The government should fairly arbitrate disputes over land and environmental damage instead of punishing those who protest abuses.
(Jakarta) – Indonesian authorities are pursuing wrongful prosecutions of environmentalists and Indigenous community leaders who protest deforestation and pollution, or defend land rights, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. Since taking office in 2024, the administration of President Prabowo Subianto has intensified the crackdown on free expression by expanding the military’s role in state-owned mining, oil palm plantations, infrastructure projects, and so-called food and energy estates.
The 70-page report, “Grabbed Land, Silenced Justice: The Persecution of Environmentalists and Indigenous Leaders in Indonesia,” documents how Indonesian police have responded to complaints filed by company officials or politicians by silencing Indigenous villagers who demand their customary land rights and the activists who defend them. The authorities have targeted environmental and Indigenous community defenders using the criminal code and other laws to bring charges ranging from defamation to “spreading communism” to silence protest over environmental harm.
“Successive Indonesian governments have sought to silence activists and Indigenous leaders protesting forced displacement, loss of customary land, and deforestation by prosecuting them for baseless crimes,” said Elaine Pearson, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The Prabowo government, while cracking down on corporate corruption, has ignored local community grievances and instead deployed the military and other heavy-handed measures to pursue its economic objectives.”
Human Rights Watch examined more than 50 cases from 2015 to 2025 from the islands of Java, Sumatra, Kalimantan, Sulawesi, and the Moluccas, as well as the 6 provinces of Papua to select 15 high-profile cases as examples of specific laws and legal provisions used to target activists and community leaders, including in SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) actions. The report is based on 69 interviews with villagers, Indigenous leaders, and environmental activists, as well as lawyers, academics, and government officials, and a review of police and court documents.
The police and prosecutors have accused critics on slender evidence of Criminal Code offenses, Human Rights Watch found. In other cases, the authorities used provisions of the Plantation Law, the Mineral and Mining Law, the Job Creation Law, or the Prevention of Forest Destruction Law. While higher courts eventually rejected most cases, the targeted activists had to spend months rebutting baseless lawsuits.
Haris Azhar, a human rights lawyer who was eventually acquitted of criminal defamation, said: “I had to spend time and energy overcoming attacks from the oligarchs and the police. I lost opportunities to build my advocacy work and to develop my professional career.”
Indonesia is the world’s biggest producer of palm oil; a major gold, timber, paper and pulp producer; and the largest supplier of nickel, a key material for making steel and electric batteries. The Prabowo government has deployed the military to build “food and energy estates,” displacing local communities in South Papua.
Since early 2025, the Prabowo government has seized control of plantations, mining sites, and other resource-rich land on corruption claims, and handed around six million hectares of oil palm plantations, among others, to state-owned companies. But some members of the government task force investigating the companies are themselves facing serious allegations of corruption.
Under international human rights treaties that Indonesia has ratified, the government has the obligation to uphold the rights to life, liberty, speech, peaceful assembly, and association, among others. The duty to protect includes preventing corporations from committing abuses and taking steps to hold them accountable and provide reparation to victims when they do so.
Business enterprises have a responsibility under the 2011 United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights to avoid causing or contributing to human rights abuses. Indonesia's government has drafted but not yet submitted legislation that would legally require companies operating in Indonesia to address the human rights impacts of their operations.
The Prabowo administration should take steps to end the misuse of the Indonesian criminal justice system to harass, intimidate, and improperly punish environmentalists and Indigenous leaders, Human Rights Watch said. It should ensure prompt and equitable resolution of land conflicts between companies and local communities, especially in places such as Sumatra, Kalimantan, Sulawesi, the Moluccas Islands, and the six provinces of Papua. This includes restoring traditional ownership upon seizing illegal plantations and mining operations after consulting with the Registration of Indigenous Peoples, which has been mapping customary land rights.
“The Indonesian government needs to make clear that arbitrarily dispossessing communities of their land is no longer business as usual,” Pearson said. “The authorities should fairly arbitrate disputes instead of punishing those who protest egregious abuses.”
Selected Accounts
Police arrested James Watt, an Indigenous Dayak farmer, who was living in Seruyan, Central Kalimantan, and championing sustainable agriculture in Jakarta on March 7, 2020, based on complaints by a company that the Dayak villagers had “harvested” palm fruits from a disputed 117-hectare site. Police also arrested two other farmers, Hermanus and Dilik. Hermanus died in police detention after being denied proper medical attention. On June 15, 2020, the Sampit district court found James Watt and Dilik guilty of stealing the oil palm fruits under the Plantation Law, sentencing James Watt to 10 months in prison and Dilik to 8 months.
“The Indigenous community's rights were lost, and those who dared to question that decision were criminalized,” James Watt told Human Right Watch. “The governor [of Central Kalimantan] wrote a letter, declaring that those 117 hectares were outside the company’s HGU [right to use land]. His letter was simply ignored. The 10 months in prison is not a short time for me. The dramatic arrest in Jakarta, poor prison cells, and losing a friend [Hermanus], they all have a psychological impact. My good name, my time to be with my three children, my responsibility to find food for my family, to take care of my farm, these are losses that I must bear. They grabbed our lands, silenced those that sought justice. The injustice is clear.”
Haslilin, a homemaker in Torobulu village, South Koname, Sulawesi Island, joined a protest against pollution caused by a nickel mining company on November 6, 2023. The villagers had repeatedly asked the company, as well as government officials, for the environmental impact assessment report (AMDAL), but their demands had gone unheeded. In March 2024, the police charged Haslilin and Andi Firmansyah, another villager, with “hindering” mining operations. On October 1, 2024, the Andoolo district court acquitted them, finding their assertion of a right to a healthy environment legitimate.
“The company began to dig in 2021,” Haslilin said. “It was okay then, pretty far from the residential areas, but by 2023, it had become unbearable because they were digging very close to our houses. My youngest child has lung problems. Our water is polluted. We were curious how this could have happened and wanted to see their AMDAL [environment assessment report]. But they ignored us. So, I stopped the excavator, climbing the wheel and demanding that the operator show me the document. He did not have it. I was protesting because my village, my environment, is destroyed.”
Police arrested Sorbatua Siallagan, an elder of the Indigenous Ompu Umbak Siallagan community in Simalungun, North Sumatra, on March 22, 2024, charging him with theft and arson, including burning eight eucalyptus trees belonging to a pulp and paper company. He was detained for seven months, and finally acquitted by the Supreme Court in June 2025. In January 2026, the Indonesian government revoked the company’s permits along with those of 27 others after authorities linked their alleged forest misuse to floods in Sumatra. Siallagan welcomed the government’s actions but said that the company’s security personnel still patrolled the overlapping territory.
“They wouldn’t let us in” he said. “My friends were angry. The government should let the community return to their land, including for sacred rituals. We ask the government to truly return the land to us.”
Villagers in the Tumpang Pitu area, Banyuwangi, East Java, organized a protest on April 4, 2017, outside the gate of a gold mining company they alleged had polluted the water, air, and soil, displaying protest banners. The company reported that one banner had a hammer and sickle. Police charged Heri Budiawan, nicknamed Budi Pego, a farmer involved in the protest, with “spreading communism.” On September 4, 2017, the Banyuwangi district court sentenced him to 10 months in prison. He appealed, saying that the banner, which was not presented in court, was not theirs. In October 2018, the Supreme Court upheld the decision, sentencing him to four years in prison. He was granted parole in November 2024. He said the villagers were continuing their fight but were demoralized.
“I have concluded that it’s impossible to find the truth and to seek justice in Indonesia,” he said “The court has never presented that particular banner, only the photo. Our strength has been weakened.”
Facts Only
* Indonesian authorities pursue wrongful prosecutions of environmentalists and Indigenous community leaders protesting deforestation and pollution or defending land rights.
* The Prabowo administration expanded the military's role in state-owned mining, oil palm plantations, infrastructure projects, and food and energy estates since 2024.
* Authorities used criminal codes to bring charges against defenders, including defamation and "spreading communism," regarding environmental protests.
* Human Rights Watch examined over 50 cases from 2015 to 2025 across Java, Sumatra, Kalimantan, Sulawesi, the Moluccas, and Papua.
* The legal actions involved provisions of the Plantation Law, Mineral and Mining Law, the Job Creation Law, and the Prevention of Forest Destruction Law.
* Police and prosecutors accused critics on slender evidence of Criminal Code offenses.
* Some targeted activists spent months rebutting baseless lawsuits.
* Specific cases include arrests involving a Dayak farmer for alleged palm fruit harvesting under the Plantation Law.
* A homemaker protested pollution from nickel mining and was eventually acquitted for asserting a right to a healthy environment.
* An elder of an Indigenous community was arrested for theft and arson, which led to eventual acquittal by the Supreme Court.
Executive Summary
Indonesian authorities are pursuing legal actions against environmentalists and Indigenous community leaders who protest deforestation and pollution or defend land rights. This action is set against a backdrop where the Prabowo administration has increased military involvement in resource sectors, including mining and plantations, as well as infrastructure projects. Human Rights Watch documents that authorities have used criminal codes to charge these defenders with offenses ranging from defamation to "spreading communism" in response to complaints filed by company officials or politicians regarding land demands and environmental harm.
The situation involves disputes over land, where authorities seek to arbitrate conflicts instead of addressing the protests themselves. The text details specific cases, including arrests related to palm oil fruit harvesting under the Plantation Law, and incidents involving alleged pollution and property disputes in regions like Sumatra, Kalimantan, Sulawesi, and Papua. While some legal challenges have resulted in acquittals, activists have faced protracted legal battles against charges based on what was deemed slender evidence.
The context suggests a tension between state economic objectives—expanding resource control through military deployment and land seizure—and the constitutional obligations to protect human rights, including rights to protest, property, and environmental health. The report concludes with a call for the government to ensure equitable resolution of these disputes and end the use of the criminal justice system to silence dissent.
Full Take
The narrative highlights a systemic contradiction where governmental enforcement prioritizes economic objectives—specifically resource extraction and corporate interests—over established human rights obligations regarding land, environment, and free expression. The pattern observed is the deployment of state apparatuses, including the military, to facilitate large-scale asset transfers, such as seizing resource-rich lands for plantations and mining operations, followed by the criminalization of those who resist these changes. This linkage suggests a mechanism where legal systems function not as impartial arbiters but as instruments of control designed to solidify economic dominance.
The focus on accountability is consistently undermined by the process itself: activists face charges based on weak evidence, experience protracted legal harassment (e.g., years spent rebutting lawsuits), and face psychological impacts from detention and legal processes. This dynamic shifts the locus of dispute from legitimate land and environmental conflicts into the criminal justice sphere, effectively weaponizing the system against dissent. The juxtaposition of massive resource production (palm oil, nickel) with the silencing of local voices points to a pattern where development goals are pursued through the imposition of imposed order rather than negotiated consent.
The implication for cognitive sovereignty lies in recognizing that legal and administrative actions, regardless of their formal procedural legality, reflect underlying power structures. When disputes over land and environment are resolved through punitive measures against protestors rather than fair arbitration, it signals a fundamental disregard for recognized international human rights principles regarding self-determination and environmental stewardship. The system's failure to effectively adjudicate these conflicts confirms that the mechanisms designed to protect citizens have been subordinated to broader economic imperatives, demanding an analysis of what criteria legitimately define "order" in this context.
Bridge Questions: What specific legal or administrative reforms are necessary to shift dispute resolution from punitive action toward restorative justice for land and environmental conflicts? How can independent monitoring effectively assess the impact of military and corporate involvement on local community autonomy? What structural changes must occur within Indonesia’s legal framework to ensure that environmental defense and Indigenous land rights are prioritized above resource exploitation narratives?
Sentinel — Human
The text functions as a structured summary of a Human Rights Watch report, effectively blending factual claims with powerful testimonial evidence to build an argument for accountability.