Today, September 28, 2025, we once again commemorate the International Right to Know Day or the International Day for the Right to Information. This date is observed globally as a reminder that access to information is a fundamental right for every individual, as well as the foundation for transparency, participation, and accountability, including in the energy and natural resources (NR) sectors. Amid the global energy transition and demands for sustainability, information openness is not just a slogan, but a foundation for preventing corruption, protecting people and the environment, and ensuring that justice and the benefits of energy and natural resources truly return to the people.
This momentum is not merely a celebration, but a call to reclaim the people’s rights to public information that have long been usurped. Collectively, we must urge governments and companies to stop practices of secrecy, and invite the entire society to actively claim this right—because information is power that must be returned to the hands of the people.
The 17-Year Journey of the Public Information Disclosure Law: Reclaiming the People’s Rights to Public Information
The 17 years of implementation of Law Number 14 of 2008 on Public Information Disclosure (UU KIP) since it was enacted on April 30, 2008. This law, born from the spirit of reform post-1998, with guarantees of every person’s right to public information, the obligation of public bodies to provide information proactively, and dispute resolution mechanisms through the Information Commission—has become an important foundation. However, its implementation over these 17 years has been full of twists and turns, where the people’s rights are still being ignored.
A study by the Central Information Commission (2024) shows that the implementation of UU KIP is not yet optimal, with many public bodies slow in responding to information requests, as well as a lack of firm sanctions for violators. A study by the Indonesian Parliamentary Center (IPC), which collected 2,380 decisions from the Central Information Commission and Provincial Information Commissions from 2010-2016, found that the majority of information disputes in the environmental sector were caused by public bodies not responding to information requests.
The public certainly continues to remember the Supreme Court Decision No. 121K/TUN/2017 regarding the information dispute between Forest Watch Indonesia (FWI) and the Ministry of Agrarian Affairs and Spatial Planning/National Land Agency (ATR/BPN), where the Supreme Court ruled that data on Business Use Rights (HGU) is public information that is open in nature. However, regrettably, to this day the Ministry of ATR/BPN has not implemented that decision.
More recently, the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources (ESDM) filed an objection to the Jakarta State Administrative Court (PTUN) against the Central Information Commission’s decision that favored activist from East Kutai, Erwin Febrian Syuhada, in a public information dispute regarding the AMDAL document of PT. Kaltim Prima Coal, against the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources (ESDM) which apparently has not ended. The objection lawsuit is registered with case number 282/G/KI/2025/PTUN-JKT on August 29, 2025. It should be noted that it took about 3 years for Erwin to be able to dispute at the Central Information Commission regarding the AMDAL. This is calculated based on the information request submitted by Erwin on December 1, 2022.
This shows that the journey of implementing UU KIP is often hampered by complicated bureaucracy and resistance from parties who benefit from secrecy, especially in the extractive sector.
Transparency and Accountability in the Energy and Natural Resources Sector: Deep-Rooted Challenges and Problems
Indonesia’s energy and natural resources sector, which contributes about 20% to the national GDP, should be a model of transparency. However, the reality shows “pseudo-transparency”—where information exists but is difficult to access, or is limited to formal reports without substance. The main challenges include convoluted consequence tests to determine whether information can be disclosed, which often become reasons to close sensitive data such as mining contracts or environmental impacts.
In the energy sector, dependence on fossil fuels (85% of total energy) exacerbates the problem, with regulations vulnerable to “regulatory capture” where regulators are instead influenced by large business interests.
Several real cases illustrate this issue. First, the corruption scandal in the tin sector in Bangka Belitung, where PT Timah Tbk was involved in illegal mining that cost the state trillions of rupiah. This corruption flourished due to the lack of transparency in beneficial ownership, which allowed public officials to hide their involvement. Second, the case of overlapping licenses in the mining sector, where thousands of overlapping permits cause land conflicts and loss of taxes and non-tax state revenues (PNBP), due to a weak company registration system and lack of public access to licensing data. Third, in the oil and gas sector, communities around mines often struggle to access information about environmental permits and mining activities, leading to environmental degradation and social conflicts. These cases are not sporadic issues, but systemic ones, where the community’s right to information—as mandated by UU KIP—is often ignored for corporate interests.
EITI and the Portrait of Openness in the Extractive Sector
The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), where Indonesia has been an implementing country since 2010, should be the main instrument for transparency in the extractive sector. However, its journey shows regression. The latest EITI validation in November 2024 gave a score of 67 points, categorized as “fairly low,” reflecting failures in transparency, stakeholder engagement, and real impacts.
Meanwhile, compliance of reporting companies is increasingly low, as seen from EITI Indonesia data for 2023. In the oil and gas subsector, the number of companies reporting to EITI Indonesia was only 52 out of 79 companies. In the mineral and coal (minerba) subsector, it was worse: coal companies reporting were only 11% or 24 out of 212 companies, and mineral companies were very low, at 0.02% or only 4 out of 212 companies. This data shows that many extractive companies are reluctant to comply with EITI standards, which impacts the loss of state revenue accountability.
Once again, on International Right to Know Day, let us demand real transparency in the energy and natural resources sector. Only with true openness can Indonesia’s energy and natural resources sector truly be sustainable and just for the people.
