The Attorney General's Office (AGO) should thoroughly investigate suspected corruption involving the issuance of cultivation rights (HGU) permits for 85,200 hectares of land for Sugar Group Companies' six subsidiaries in Lampung. If any violations are proven, whoever committed them must be held accountable.

The latest audit by the Supreme Audit Agency (BPK) found that the issuance of an HGU on land belonging to the Indonesian Air Force could potentially result in nearly Rp9.9 trillion in state losses. This is no small amount that can be considered as a mere administrative error. Therefore, this case must be openly examined in court.

This is not the first time the business group owned by "sugar king" Gunawan Jusuf has been caught up in legal trouble. Former Supreme Court official Zarof Ricar, for example, once admitted to receiving Rp50 billion in a civil law case, which was won by the Sugar Group. This confession should pave the way for a more serious and thorough investigation.

It is important to emphasize that this case involves both suspected corruption and the management of state assets. Therefore, the law must be upheld with strict standards of impartiality, consistency, and transparency.

If there is any suspicion of bribery in the issuance of HGUs, accountability does not stop with the beneficiaries. Officials authorized to issue or influence the issuance of such problematic HGUs must also be investigated. The law cannot be one-sided.

Therefore, the Ministry of Agrarian Affairs and Spatial Planning/National Land Agency (ATR/BPN) should not hastily revoke the HGUs for the Sugar Group's sugarcane plantations and sugar factories whose validity periods have already been extended. There are indeed provisions in place that allow for revoking those permits due to administrative flaws. However, HGU permits are legal products derived from decisions of state officials and cannot be revoked arbitrarily.

If an HGU is to be revoked, its corrective mechanism must be implemented transparently and provide room for advocacy. Ideally, such revocation should be carried out after there is a court ruling, allowing for a fair and transparent examination of all facts while minimizing the perception of arbitrariness.

The business world relies on legal certainty. This certainty ensures the government will not act arbitrarily or redraw the economic landscape in a non-transparent manner. Revoking permits without going through a clear mechanism will undermine the sense of security in doing business. Therefore, the law must be upheld with the same standards for all parties, through fair procedures.

The AGO and the Ministry of ATR/BPN are also required to distance themselves from conflicts of interest. When a major concession is revoked, the public has a right to know for what and to whom its subsequent management is given. Without transparency and an accountable process, law enforcement can easily be perceived as a selection mechanism – displacing or replacing one business player to make way for another closer to the halls of power.

The integrity of law enforcement in this HGU case is measured not only by the severity of the actions it takes, but also by its consistency and fairness. The law must not be used as an instrument to reshape the economic landscape according to the preferences of those in power. If that happens, business certainty will collapse, along with the very foundation of the rule of law.

– Read the complete story in Tempo English Magazine

Source: https://en.tempo.co/read/2089160/uncertainty-over-sugar-king-land-permit