Legal Literacy - The Indonesian government has issued an important policy to maintain national food security by providing Forest Areas for Food Security or Food Estate. However, this policy has sparked controversy because it converts protected and production forest areas for the food estateproject. Along with that, indigenous peoples are victimized by losing their customary land. This article discusses the negative impacts of the food estate policy on the environment and indigenous peoples, as well as criticisms leveled against this project.
By: Jordan Mordekhai (Founder of Circular Economy Society, Alumnus of Faculty of Law, Universitas Padjadjaran)
To maintain national food security, the government of the Republic of Indonesia recently officially issued a crucial policy in the form of the Regulation of the Minister of Environment and Forestry Number P.24/MENLHK/SETJEN/KUM.1/10/2020 Concerning the Provision of Forest Areas for Development Food Estate, the provisions of which were slightly amended in the Regulation of the Minister of Environment and Forestry Number 7 of 2021 concerning Forestry Planning, Conversion of Forest Areas and Changes in the Function of Forest Areas as well as the Use of Forest Areas, where the Provision of Forest Areas for Development Food Estate or what is later written as Forest Areas for Food Security legitimizes production forest areas and/or protected forest areas being converted for the food estateAccording to the Director General of Forestry Planning and Environmental Management, Sigit Hardwinarto, this policy is a national strategic program, so it is considered quite urgent in order to support food sovereignty in the future.[1]
Instead of being considered quite urgent, the policy food estate as stated in the regulation, has instead caused polemics leading to criticism because the policy its regulation has sparked controversy due to Article 19 of the Minister of Environment Regulation Number 24 of 2020 concerning the Provision of Forest Areas for Development Food Estate, which states that; “the provision of Forest Areas for development Food Estate through the mechanism of determining KHKP, is carried out in: Protected Forest Areas; and/or Production Forest Areas. Meanwhile, the intended Protected Forest area according to the legal arrangement is a protected forest that is no longer fully functioning as a protected area in accordance with the provisions of laws and regulations.â€[2]Â
In fact, it is important to know carefully that if the protected forest area referred to in Article 19 of the Minister of Environment and Forestry Regulation is not functioning, it should be restored as stated in the Minister of Environment and Forestry Regulation No. P.105/MENLHK/SETJEND/KUM.1/12/2018 concerning Procedures for Implementing, Supporting Activities, Providing Incentives, and Guiding and Controlling Forest and Land Rehabilitation Activities, not repurposed into providing forest areas for development food estate.
This kind of political-legal ambivalence actually reaps appreciation when the government seems to invite us back to the era of colonialism where the domein verklaring principle is revived, which displaces lands as a synthesis of colonial agrarian legal politics based on the claim that the state owns all land that is not attached to individual property rights, such as protected forests. As a result, the resultant policy food estate is none other than a threat to the degradation of the environment and the welfare of communities living in protected forest areas, one of which is the indigenous community.
Comments (0)
Write a comment