Merauke resident Liborius Kodai Moiwend detailing his constitutional impairment due to a national strategic project in Papua at a judicial review hearing of Law No. 6 of 2023 on Job Creation, Monday (9/22/2025). Photo by MKRI/Panji.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — People directly affected by the national food estate program, which part of the National Strategic Projects (PSNs), testified before the Constitutional Court (MK) at the seventh hearing for the material judicial review of Law No. 6 of 2023 on the Stipulation of the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No. 2 of 2022 on Job Creation into Law on Monday, September 22, 2025 in the plenary courtroom. The case No. 112/PUU-XXIII/2025 was filed by the Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI), the Indonesian Forum for Living Environment (WALHI), and 19 others, consisting of foundations and advocate associations.

Liborius Kodai Moiwend, a resident of Wogekel Village, Ilwayab District, Merauke Regency, was presented by the Petitioners before Chief Justice Suhartoyo and the other constitutional justices. The head of the Moiwend clan testified that he was a victim of the national strategic project (PSN) of national rice granary in Papua. As a witness for the Petitioners, he recounted that the project had proceeded without any dialogue with the indigenous community.

“The first time the PSN came in, [the organizers] never sat down with the village elders. They entered [the region] like thieves,” Moiwend said. He added that on August 12, around 300 excavators were brought in through a port owned by a fishing company.

He claimed that said national rice granary PSN has destroyed forests, swamps, and lands that had long been the sources of livelihood for his community. Protests in the form of blockades failed to stop the activities, as the forest clearing was even escorted by the military (TNI). “So, they tore down the forests, with the TNI present. Our people couldn’t do anything—our swamps and forests were all destroyed by this PSN,” he said, declaring his rejection of the project.

He further explained that the lands long safeguarded by the local community were now dismantled, leaving them unable to find food and water there. He also criticized visits by the South Papua governor and the local regent to the PSN site. “They claimed there was a grand harvest, but that was a lie. It wasn’t a harvest—it was a fraud,” he said.

Beneficiaries

In contrast, two Government witnesses shared positive experiences. Syamsuddin, a local resident, testified that he benefited from the Rempang Eco City PSN project. He said the project provided housing, land, and land ownership certificates, stressing that the relocation process involved no coercion.

“At first, I rejected it and even joined the protests. But with housing, land, and certificates, the community is now more prosperous,” he explained.

Another Government witness, Mohammad Utsman, testified that many local residents had gained from the Gresik Special Economic Zone (KEK) PSN.

“Some work on the construction project, some serve as security guards, others opened food stalls for workers, while some opened boarding houses or even bought cars for employee shuttle services. My elder brother and relatives from my mother’s side also benefited—about 10 of them now work in various companies within the Gresik KEK,” he stated.

Utsman expressed hope that the Gresik KEK would continue to grow and attract more investors, thereby reducing unemployment in the region.

A New Paradigm

The Government also presented Professor Faisal Santiago of the Faculty of Law, Borobudur University. In his testimony, he stated that PSN projects regulated under the Omnibus Law on Job Creation represent a new paradigm in national development. According to him, this policy grants the government special authority to accelerate infrastructure development while still safeguarding citizens’ constitutional rights.

“This model recognizes that uniformity does not always equate to justice. Distributive justice, in fact, requires differentiated approaches according to the needs of each region,” said Faisal, emphasizing that PSN regulations in the law do not conflict with absolute human rights.

Meanwhile, Professor Danang Parikesit of Gadjah Mada University highlighted the importance of governance and integration of PSN with other sectoral policies. He argued that infrastructure development should be viewed as an instrument of socio-economic transformation rather than an end in itself. He stressed the need for evidence-based planning, outcome-based evaluation, public participation, and fiscal and social sustainability.

Parikesit noted that in Indonesia, PSN projects in toll roads had brought significant benefits by reducing intercity travel times and supporting national logistics distribution. However, as shown in a study by the Fiscal Policy Agency (BKF), toll roads’ contribution to lowering logistics costs remained limited unless integrated with other modes of transport, improvements in freight management, and better urban distribution systems. This finding is consistent with an OECD (2015) study emphasizing that infrastructure quality, rather than sheer quantity, is what drives productivity.

Also read:

Ease, Acceleration of National Strategic Projects in Job Creation Law Questioned

Petitioners of National Strategic Projects Acceleration in Job Creation Law Revise Petition

Govt Ensures Environmental Protection Amid Strategic Projects Acceleration

Expert: PSN Acceleration Is at the Expense of Citizens’ Rights

The Petitioners assert that the provisions in the Job Creation Law, particularly those concerning the facilitation and acceleration of National Strategic Projects (PSN), have undermined the fundamental principles of the rule of law as enshrined in Article 1 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution.

They argue that the provisions on the acceleration and facilitation of PSNs have triggered socio-economic conflicts that infringe upon citizens’ constitutional rights. They contend that the norm is vague, citing ambiguous phrases such as “adjustment of various regulations” and “facilitation and acceleration,” which lack clear operational limits. Such vagueness, they argue, opens the door to the appropriating of public policy for political interests and diminishes the space for meaningful public participation.

Additionally, they also challenge several other provisions within the Job Creation Law, such as Article 123 point 2, Article 124 point 1 paragraph (2), Article 173 paragraphs (2) and (4), and Article 31 paragraph (2). These provisions, they argue, have distorted the concepts of public interest and state control as mandated by Article 33 paragraphs (3) and (4) of the 1945 Constitution.

Accordingly, the Petitioners request that the Constitutional Court declare those provisions of the Job Creation Law unconstitutional and not legally binding. They hope that through this petition, the Court will ensure the accountability of state actors in fulfilling their constitutional obligation to protect the fundamental rights of citizens.

Author         : Utami Argawati
Editor          : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR               : Fauzan Febriyan
Translator     : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case of any differences between the English and the Indonesian versions, the Indonesian version will prevail.

---