Jakarta, 11 February 2016 – The enactment of Law No. 23 of 2014 concerning Regional Governments (or Regional Government Law) may cause some legal uncertainties in the management of natural resources, especially regarding the division of functional authority in the law between the central government, provinces, and regencies.

Asep Yunan stated that Law No. 23 of 2014 constitutes a centralization of authority in the management of natural resources. Asep Yunan is a researcher from the HuMa Association who conducted a study on the Legal Review of Law No. 23 of 2014. “This study was carried out because in Indonesia, when it comes to natural resources, decentralization issues always arise, where most of the authority in managing natural resources will shift from regency/city governments to provincial governments,” explained Asep Yunan. The Regional Government Law emerged precisely when the management of resources at the regency/city level was chaotic. Therefore, the strategic sectoral position is questioned. How the authority in managing natural resources is transferred from regency/city governments to provincial governments. “The government needs to ensure precise services for the public in the management of natural resources related to the implementation of this Regional Government Law,” Asep emphasized.

Joni Purba from the Sub-Directorate of Recognition of Customary Forests, Ministry of Environment and Forestry, responded that if regional authority is still important to be granted, especially regarding social forestry. “I think it is sufficient to emphasize that the recognition of customary forests is in the hands of regional governments, because the prerequisite for recognizing customary forests is the recognition of customary legal communities,” said Joni Purba.

“The fate of customary forests should be in the hands of regional governments; our performance at the center will be meaningless without good intentions from regional governments,” added Joni Purba. Joni Purba also gave an example of the success of the struggle of indigenous communities in Kajang in obtaining Customary Forests because the regional government issued a Regional Regulation on the Recognition and Protection of the Kajang Customary Legal Community. It is also important to refer to regulations in other sectors, or regulations from other ministers, which are more progressive in granting management rights to communities related to natural resources.

Another issue, as conveyed by Adam Kurniawan from the Balang Institute at a different time (16/12/2015), according to him, this will complicate the advocacy process of communities in managing natural resources that have been ongoing at the regency level. This law is then designed to retract the authority of regency/city governments to provincial governments (as an extension of the central government), especially in the forestry, marine, and fisheries sectors, to achieve work effectiveness and efficiency. “This can escalate agrarian conflicts in regions that threaten people’s living land,” Adam emphasized.

From the discussions and studies conducted, the HuMa Association recommends several things related to the implementation of Law No. 23 of 2014 concerning the management of natural resources for the community. First, revise the Forestry Law to adjust to the decentralization arrangements in the forestry sector stipulated in Law No. 23 of 2014. At the regulatory level, there needs to be a reassertion of the division of authority in the forestry sector and sub-sectors as regulated in Law No. 23 of 2014 by creating separate articles. There needs to be a change in the wording of the provision on the authority to recognize the presence of customary legal communities, by determining that the authority lies with the province and regency/city. Such provisions will end the differing interpretations regarding the term ‘regional regulations’ in Article 67 paragraph (2) of the Forestry Law. That the arrangement regarding the procedures for recognizing the presence of customary legal communities is not further regulated by the issuance of a separate Government Regulation (PP), but simply by stating ‘referring to existing laws and regulations’.

Second, with the shift of the focus of regional autonomy