Documentation:Open Case Studies/FRST522/2024/Dayak Bahau of Long Isun, Kalimantan, Indonesia: Land stewardship, Indigenous forestry, and the resistance of an Indigenous Community

Positionality Statement

I am a Tamil-Sri Lankan with lived experiences passed through family and friends, and from my own time growing up in and leaving Sri Lanka, related to state-sponsored and institutionalized discrimination, violence, and oppression in the post-independence era, continuing until this day. Relatedly, I have a strong interest in exploring themes of devolution and decentralization, localized forms of natural resource governance, and most importantly, the rights-based approach to respecting, honouring, and recognizing the rights and traditions of Indigenous Peoples. Furthermore, beyond a rights-based approach, I also subscribe to the philosophy that doing so can improve the balance between social, economic and ecological outcomes; my relationship with my heritage and culture is centered around animist traditions that understood, honoured, and respected the ecosystems within which we humans live.

Though I spent most of my life and all formal education in Canada, and the early days of my career with multinational corporations even mentioned in this case study (i.e. Procter & Gamble), I have spent the last 7 years of my life and counting working on poverty reduction, food systems transformation, and food security. These experiences have allowed me to learn from friends, peers, and cultures with diverse knowledge systems (from Malawi, Rwanda, Laos, Brasil, Lebanon, Nepal, the UK, Sri Lanka, Jordan, USA, and here in Canada). These experiences have deepened my appreciation for this diversity, but also the shared and collective plights and resistance that resonate with many of us around the world, as we weave together the invisible threads that connect us all. All these pieces of my identity influence how I perceive the facts of this case study, and shape the analyses and recommendations put forth.

I do not speak Indonesian or any of the many languages of the Dayak Peoples, I do not identify as any of the many ethnic groups of Indonesia, and ultimately, I do not have any direct exposure to the lived experience of the people that call Indonesia, or more specifically Kalimantan of Borneo, as home. All that I have learned is through desk research, albeit with the utmost respect towards the people of Indonesia, and most especially the Indigenous Peoples of that land.

Summary of Case Study

The island of Borneo is a hotspot for deforestation, the Indigenous Dayak Peoples’ diverse worldviews of living in harmony, and a battleground for corporations, governments, and activists alike. This case study explores Kalimantan – the Indonesia Borneo – and the resistance of the Dayak Bahau, the stewards of the Long Isun community and customary forests and land. The Dayak Bahau have been resisting the encroachment and violation of their customary rights by the Harita Group and its subsidiaries, fighting to have this injustice reversed, while gaining legal recognition for their customary rights. The case study explores the geographic, political, and economic history that leads us to the case of the Dayak Bahau, the many stakeholders and power brokers involved, and ultimately the institutional arrangements -- both domestically and internationally -- that explicitly oppress and sometimes protect the Indigenous Peoples’ customary rights, knowledge systems, and practices.

Keywords

Indigenous knowledge systems, resistance, Free Prior and Informed Consent, customary law, customary forests, Indigenous sovereignty, regenerative land use, deforestation, oil palm, timber logging, mega-infrastructure development, conservation-development nexus, legal recognition.

Description

Geographic and political context of Borneo Island and Kalimantan

(Left to Right): Global map highlighting the Borneo, snapshot of Borneo highlighting Mahakam Ulu, specific map of Mahakam Ulu District.

Borneo is the 3^rd largest island in the world, and home to approximately 6% of global biodiversity in its tropical rainforests alone. A large intact rainforest referred to as the Heart of Borneo, is equivalent to the total area of England and Scotland together, and is rich with biodiversity; this rainforest itself spans across Indonesia, Malaysia, and Brunei Draussalam, and is the home, source of life, and critical source of ecological services for at least 11 million people.  At least 30% of Borneo’s tropical forest have been destroyed over the last 40 years.

The Mahakam River-landscape covers 4.5 million hectares and stretches 980 kilometers, and so is the second largest river in Indonesia; identified in the map (right). The landscape is home to 298 species of birds, 147 species of freshwater fish, and critically endangered species like the Borneo Orangutan and freshwater Irrawaddy dolphins. The Long Isun community historically have resided on the banks of the Melaseh River, which is a tributary of the Mahakam River in the Mahakam Ulu, generationally.

History and description of the Dayaks, and specifically Dayak Bahau of Long Isun

Going deeper into this Mahakam River-landscape brings us to those inhabiting these areas, commonly known as “Dayaks”, which means the ‘upstream peoples’. Dayaks are considered to have inhabited the island for over 4,000 years; their name was a label placed by Europeans to denote the non-Malay inhabitants of Borneo. The Dayaks are not a homogenous group of people, and each group differs in the way they perceive and interact with the land. This case study primarily follows the Dayak Bahau of Long Isun. The Dayaks’ understanding of their belief system attempts to relate their daily experiences to a greater universal power. They recognize that nature does not exist as it is on its own, but rather they follow a theory of creation, whereby a power called Tamai Tingai created all life. This belief is central to the way the Dayak live and interact with their customary forests and all xxx.

The two federated states of Sabah and Sarawak make up the Malaysian Borneo, and are home to 39 Indigenous Groups. Indonesian Borneo, referred to as Kalimantan, is home to five provinces, including the West, East, and North Kalimantan provinces which make up the borderlands of the island. 42% of the population in West Kalimantan identify as Dayaks, and only 10% do in East Kalimantan. The latter’s Dayak population is lower as a result of Indonesia’s ‘Transmigration Scheme’ that moved people (who are not Dayaks) from Java and Madura islands to resettle in this province.

Traditional forest management approaches

In the case of the Dayak Bahau, land-use decisions are made through community processes led by Indigenous leaders (also referred to as Hipui). Spirituality defines the community’s connection to its land, which is especially respected and reflected in the customary rituals that have been kept alive across generations to honour deities and ancestors. Their fundamental belief that all of nature is imbued with a spirit(s), drives their motivation to live in harmony with nature..

The Dayak Bahau divide their land into different forests, contingent on their unique functions (i.e. sacred, protected, and production forests). Sacred forests cannot be cleared, ever, and are also the burial sites of the deceased. However, low disturbance activities like foraging and hunting are allowed. The need for wood for daily sustenance requires cutting trees, but this is only permitted in the designated production forests; and this is implemented with strict rules and limitations. For example, every cluster of families can cut up to 15 trees per year but are required to plant 2 trees for every tree they cut. The wood itself that is harvested can only be used for internal community needs and is not allowed to be sold commercially outside the community. The non-timber forest products (NFTPs) round out this production, including but not limited to rattan, resam, bemban, biro leaves, purun, pandan. Many of their farming practices (i.e. rice cultivation) are accompanied by customary rituals paying homage to the deity that protects rice, and requesting both permission and blessing for a bountiful harvest.

There are many elements of the Dayak system of forest management/stewardship, that also include swidden agriculture and ancient agroforestry practices. The Dayak often grow rice, cacao, and durian. The Indigenous Dayak system of customary rules and norms is referred to as Handil, which simultaneously also refers to the waterways that are cut through peatland swamps. On either side of these cut waterways, crops can be cultivated or rubber trees are tapped. The waterways not only provide a framework for land governance, but also political governance for land administration and ownership The Dayak system of land management follows what they call the kaleka tradition. This is very much akin to the modern day reference to agroforestry, whereby they plant tree species alongside their food crops, as a form of intercropping. In one instance, Dayaks grow rice and vegetable crops alongside mangosteen, durian, and other fruit trees. The Dayak also follow swidden agriculture, with the intention of lessening their burden on the land. They essentially rotate the lands they use for cultivation. Instead of intensifying agricultural management on one piece of land for too long a period, the Dayaks minimize their negative impact on the land by shifting their agriculture to other pieces of land. This is done through controlled blazes/fires that is used to clear new lands for cultivation, while the previously used land is left to naturally regenerate for a few years without human disturbance. This practice tries to mimic the forests many complex processes of renewal, regeneration, and creation. Alternatively, more intensification in one area would erode crop nutrient value, soil quality, productivity, and other ecosystem services in its vicinity.

Beyond this customary practice of regenerative agroforestry/the kaleka tradition, the Dayak People are known to practice a conservation governance called Tana’ulen. (Eghenter, 2018). While these models are not yet recognized by the Indonesian government, it is a governance structure that was created and shaped by Indigenous people over time, based on traditional knowledge of the ecology of the local forest. The tana’ ulen can also be referred to as ‘restricted forested land’. Access to and activities in these areas are limited by the rule of customary councils and the customary chief, in order to retain the economic and ecological value of the timber and non-timber forest product-rich forest areas.

History and description of the industrial exploitation of Kalimantan

This map represents the parts in which the Harita Group's forest concession overlaps with the Dayak Bahau of Long Isun's customary lands.

The government of Indonesia has allocated much of the forests in East Kalimantan over the last decade, including the customary forests of the Indigenous Dayaks, for logging operations and pulpwood and palm oil plantations. Over 487,631 hectares of forests were destroyed within well-known oil palm, and pulp and timber concessions, between 2009 to 2019. The Long Isun community was among those who had their land stolen, by the Harita Group. The overlap between the community's customary forests and the Harita Groups' forest concessions is shown in the map (right).

The Harita Group is a big player in Indonesia’s palm oil and forestry sectors, and also invests heavily in coal, nickel and bauxite mining operations, smelters, refineries, shipping and property development businesses. Harita Group is a large conglomerate corporation; within which is a timber logging conglomerate, Roda Mas, and companies controlled by the latter: PT. Roda Mas Tbr Kalimantan (PT. RMTK) and PT. Kemakmuran Berkah Timber (PT. KBT) hold the concessions.

President Jokowi promised to recognize Indigenous Peoples’ land rights but has instead diverted most energy, time, and investments towards mega-infrastructure projects. Before their land rights have been recognized, their lands have instead been opened up for coal mining, oil palm plantations, and industrial logging. The West Borneo Economic Corridor promoted by the Asian Development Bank is explicitly focused on extracting raw materials through large companies with vested interests. Meanwhile, the Trans-Kalimantan/Pan-Borneo Highway Project is partially financed by the China Belt and Road Initiative, and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, among other international financiers.

Tenure, Institutional and Administrative Arrangements

Forests, tenure arrangements, and institutional frameworks in Indonesia

The forests, the people that depend on and protect the forests, and all the many stakeholders involved that this case study elaborates on are affected by and exist also within the legal, institutional, and tenure parameters of the Indonesia nation-state. Perhaps the most relevant institutional matter is the interaction between state-owned land/forests and customary forests (i.e. Hutan Adata), and the emergence of the Social Forestry Policy by President Joko Widodo. 2007 is when the UN Committee on the Eradication of Racial Discrimination urged action on addressing human rights concerns; and since then, Indonesia has made no meaningful changes that recognize Indigenous Peoples’ land rights and equality. The following are a list of notable laws that form the history of and the current state of Indonesia’s forests, lands, and Indigenous People:

• 1870 Dutch Agrarian Land Law: During the time of the Dutch colonial state, this law was the first iteration that aimed to consolidate all non-privately owned lands into the hands of the colonial state.
• 1945 Constitution and 1960 Basic Agrarian Law: Upon gaining independence, lands were considered the property of the newly formed socialist republic as opposed to the imperial Dutch East Indies. The aim was to develop the land for the benefit of all. The history and nuances of Indonesia’s resistance for independence is complex and important to understand; but ultimately, independence for the majority brought about a new initiative to exert dominion over Indigenous lands.
• 1967 Basic Forestry Law and Mining Law: Under Suharto’s reign, State bureaucracy was channeled to embrace the goals of free market capitalism. Indonesian forests were all declared state forests, which essentially overrode customary rights for the purpose of national interest represented by the private sector.
• 1979 Law on Village Administration: Local government appointees replaced customary institutions in authority, essentially downgraded and eroding Indigenous decision making processes and governance structures.
• 1999 New Basic Forestry Law: The previous post-independence “New Order” regime as it was called came to an end in 1998 and paved way for new laws from 1999 onwards.  Customary forests were recognized but were still considered within State Forest Areas. Simultaneously, the latter was considered forests with no rights attached. Exploitation rights among logging and plantation concessions were recognized over Indigenous Peoples’ rights.
• 2004 Law on Plantations: Further entrenching the inequalities of the 1999 law, companies were granted power, instead of local government, to handle matters of land transfer from existing landowners to the companies for development. The power imbalances between powerful corporate entities and Indigenous Peoples led to this essential legalization of land grabbing.  
• 2009 Regulation on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) Procedures: This institution continued to add more legally acceptable avenues to create forest concessions, publicly and private, with no regards for the rights of the Indigenous People who lived in, managed, and nurtured these forests.
• 2014 Law on Plantations: In the midst of grand rhetoric and pledges of recognizing Indigenous Peoples’ rights and land-back, this new law in 2014 failed to uphold Indigenous Peoples’ rights to withhold, or give their Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC). While this law introduced a process to recognize customary rights of Indigenous Peoples and communities, this authority has been given to the local government. The process had become time-consuming, opaque, and subject to political manipulation at local government level, a vessel of the State rather than of the Indigenous People.

President Joko Widodo’s land-use sector reforms, and particularly his administration’s Social Forestry policy have and continue to release lands from the National Forest Estate for leasehold management by communities. Under this scheme, the Dayak communities in Pilang Pisau, for example, also benefited. For the social forestry program to work, the local communities have to create a forest management organization, like the Village Forest Management Board (LPHD). However, this is a temporary leasehold forest management scheme and not an official or legal recognition of customary rights. The Dayak Bahau of Long Isun, specifically, have neither a legal recognition of their customary rights or access to a leasehold forest management scheme.

It is a legal requirement in Indonesia for forestry companies to first consult and involve the communities who will be affected by logging operations before a company establishes an operation on their land. Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) is also a fundamental right enshrined in international human rights norms and outlined in the No Deforestation, No Peatland and No Exploitation (NDPE) policies of global brands and traders. However, this requirement is very rarely adhered to by forestry and agribusiness companies that are expanding their operations across Indonesia. When agreements are reached, the process to reach these agreements often falls well short of best practices, as outlined in global norms like the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Customary forests

In Indonesia, Hutan Adat (or Adata) is the name given to customary forests. Hutan means forest, and adat means customary, in Bahasa. Hutan Adat, is a legally recognized customary forest title, and it grants them ownership and management rights, and for their customary forests to be excised from all forestry and agribusiness concessions. President Joko Widodo pioneered an expected game-changing social forestry initiative, meant to reallocate 12.7 million hectares of State Forests to local communities; along with the legal backing that would give them ownership and management rights over those forests for a span of 35 years. However, this development of official recognition is not time-bound and so there does not seem to be any urgency of accelerating this process. For instance, the Ministry of Environment has only recognized 126,911 hectares to date compared to the 7.23 million hectares in all of Kalimantan that is eligible. The Ancestral Domain Registration Agency (BRWA) maps Indigenous Territories across Indonesia, and found that over 775,000 hectares of customary forests in Central Kalimantan alone can be recognized, and a total of 7.23 million hectares in all of Kalimantan.

For instance, the Dayak Indigenous Peoples of Gunung Mas in Central Kalimantan began this process 11 years ago to regain their customary rights to the forests (i.e. Hutan Adata) which was finally recognized. This represents the largest cluster of customary forests to be recognized by the government of Indonesia. 70,000 hectares of forests have been assigned under the customary rights of 15 Indigenous Dayak Communities, which equates to an area that is larger than the area of Jakarta. While there is a long, conflict-ridden, and complex path forward to recognize the customary rights and forests of Kalimantan’s Indigenous Peoples, the case of Gunung Mas presents some momentum in a forward direction, despite the small scale and proportion.

Affected Stakeholders

While the Dayak People are obviously an affected stakeholder, it is important to acknowledge that Indigenous People, including the Dayaks, are not one monolithic homogenous ethnic group. The Dayak Bahau of Long Isun are the focus of this case study, and are a community has a deep-rooted place-based connection to the forest, as their source of life and the resting place for their ancestors and deities. Their customary forest management practices reflect this connection and respect for the land and all living beings; and their dependence on the forest for their food, sustenance, culture, health, and spiritual practices. The Dayak Bahau are affected in the Long Isun community, and across all of Kalimantan (and its neighbours in Malaysia), the Dayak People more broadly are affected stakeholders. The power they have is impactful, as it relates to forest and land management, conservation, and protection. However, with their customary rights not being recognized legally by the government, and even their rights to FPIC being violated, the Dayak Bahau’s level of power compared to the rest of the stakeholders mentioned here is minimal. Their continued resilience and resistance and partnership with other interested stakeholders, however, has had enough power to raise global awareness and consciousness about this issue, which is leading to (a) some progress, albeit slow, in defending their forests and their rights, and (b) a disruption in global oil palm and timber markets, especially coming from Kalimantan, albeit minimal.

Interested Stakeholders

The Government of Indonesia at all levels from district to national, are interested parties. However, the federal/national government is most relevant as it is the one who controls logging concessions, and sets the laws related to forestry, land tenure, and agricultural expansion. Th elocal government has power over handling the administration of the customary rights legal recognition process. As per the historical analysis shared in this case study, the government leans towards infrastructure development, plantation agriculture, and timber logging operations that are extractive. They partner and rely closely on large multinational corporations and Indonesia private sector to meet these development goals, and wield significant power through their legislative powers.

The Harita Group, as introduced above as an interested stakeholder, is the face of this industrial exploitation case. The Harita Group, and more specifically their timber logging conglomerate Roda Mas, as well as the companies controlled by the latter: PT. RMTK and PT. KBT. Both of them hold concessions in Kalimantan with plans to log customary forests which represents over ¼ of the Long Isun community’s lands, for wood products (Keep forests standing, 2023). Their profits and survival are directly tied to logging and planting on these customary forests, and they hold significant financial and political power. Their interests are aligned with the pro-logging and oil palm politics in Indonesia.

Community members of the Dayak Bahau, of Long Isun showcasing a banner related to the Keep Forests Standing Campaign; a plea to palm oil buyers like P&G and Mondelez.

There are upstream corporate partners who source raw materials from Harita Group to be used in their product development and packaging. These companies include the likes of Procter & Gamble, Unilever, Mondelez, Nestle, Colgate-Palmolive, Nissin Foods, and PepsiCo. These companies are further removed from the happenings in Kalimantan, but their product portfolio is heavily dependent on the raw materials coming from the forests, particularly palm oil. They have an interest in either influencing their downstream supplier (i.e. Harita Group) to engage in more equitable business practices to cater to a more eco- and socially conscious customers; for example, Unilever and Nissin Foods accepted the complaint/grievance and advocated for change with the Harita Group. Otherwise, they continue business as usual in which case they might prefer that Indonesia never grant the Dayaks their customary legal rights.

Forest sustainability certification bodies, specifically the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) is an interested stakeholder that has a major influence on the exploitative practiced conducted by the Harita Group, and also provide due diligence and investigations when complaints are raised against the companies/brands that claim to qualify for FSC certification.  FSC has some level of power as they are officially meant to provide the stamp of approval on sustainable forest management, under the Heart of Borneo Initiative. However, the track record of FSC providing certification for companies and concessions that have violated FPIC requirements and customary rights, among others, signals that FSC is not all powerful.  There exists a power imbalance that stems from these certification bodies and NGOs. In the case of the investigation that the Dayak Bahau raised, the FSC, Rainforest Alliance and its auditors conducted their investigation in their community alongside PT.KBT staff, sub-district military, and a police brigade. The power relationship shifted immediately, with the prevalence of coercion and intimidation.

NGOs (i.e. The Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Rainforest Action Network) and organizations that are explicitly focused on the rights of the Dayak People, (i.e. the Forest People’s Programme, BMF) are interested stakeholders in a variety of ways. Due to their connection with the Heart of Borneo (HoB) Initiative, the WWF’s reputation and progress towards their organizational mission is impacted. The violation of the Dayak Bahau’s customary rights, and lack of success against the private and public encroachment of their spaces tarnish the reputation of both the NGOs and the HoB. On the contrary, some other NGOs (i.e. TNC as well as WWF) have both enabled Indonesia to greenwash developments in Kalimantan (i.e. through the HoB Initiative) and have further exacerbated the Dayak Bahau’s struggle. Meanwhile, NGOs like the Forest People’s Programme and the Rainforest Action Network are close allies of the Dayak Peoples and have been supporting their resistance through research, advocacy, and raising global awareness.  The former group of NGOs yields significant reputational, financial, and network power, and more than the latter group who are seen as activist-NGOs who speak truth to power.

The largest banks from Japan, Malaysia and Singapore finance Harita’s operations directly. In 2019 alone, 175 million USD was given in corporate loans from 3 banks (DBS, UOB, OCBC, and SMBC) to Bumitama Agri Limited (Harita’s palm oil company). These are interested stakeholders because their return on investment is directly tied to the profitability and successes of Harita’s timber and oil palm production; and to a lesser extent, their reputation for responsible investing can also be influenced by the social and environmental damage or harm their investments are causing. The former has been a far more powerful incentive to date. These banks hold meaningful amount of power, and could use their investment leverage to explicitly require their clients and their suppliers to adopt and implement a cross-commodity NDPE policy, at the corporate group level. Bumitama Agri Limited. DBS, SMBC, and Maybank all committed to NDPE and so are expected to conduct due diligence of their clients to ensure that their suppliers and wider corporate group all meet the requirements..

Discussion of Critical Issues

The Heart of Borneo – Conservation NGOs, Sustainability Certification, and Extraction

The WWF, TNC, and the Rainforest Alliance coordinate the Heart of Borneo Initiative, focused on protecting and conserving the dense intact forests of Borneo. This initiative began with the support of the governments of Brunei, Malaysia, and Indonesia, whom all share the Borneo island. However, in 2008, the FSC certified PT.KBT, which was then given a concession of 82,000 hectares which overlapped over the territories of six different Dayak groups.  

The track record to date has been mired with disappointments, despite the claims of positive wins. The case of the Dayak Bahau of Long Isun is one such disappointment. Asides from a few exception, the consortium have largely failed Indigenous People as their initiatives have violated customary land rights, while also selling allegedly sustainable, or green, or ethical commodities. The Kayan Meterang National Park has proven to be one such exception and has been effective, primarily because of the participation of various Indigenous Peoples in the park’s protection. Indonesia, Malaysia, and Brunei’s governments have ironically committed to fund the HoB initiative through the income generated from sustainable forest management, while committing that forests won’t be converted to oil palm plantations unless they’re already degraded. Yet again this raises a contradiction, in that timber logging and the alleged sustainable forest management practices are the cause of forest degradation and that is then converted to oil palm.

Industrial exploitation of the forest ecosystem and peoples’ rights

Having established the environment in which this case study comes to life, and the different people, communities, companies, governments, organizations, institutions and stakeholders involved, the industrial exploitation sits right at its core. This exploitation of Kalimantan’s forest ecosystem and the rights of its Indigenous Peoples and fervent land defenders can be attributed to a long list of companies; however, it is the Harita Group in particular that is most relevant to the resistance staged from the Dayak Bahau People of the Long Isun Community. The Harita Group, introduced above as an interested stakeholder, is the face of this industrial exploitation. As one of the most powerful palm oil and forestry corporate groups, they had planned to log customary forests which represented over ¼ of the Long Isun community’s land, for timber products. As in many cases throughout Indonesia, the concessions which overlap with Long Isun’s territory were acquired without consulting the affected communities. As a result, the company began logging Long Isun’s customary forests in 2014 without the community’s consent. Harita failed to respect the community’s right to give or withhold their Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) to logging in their traditional territories. Roda Mas is 1 of the 2 logging companies controlled by Harita Group that have not respected the community rejection of their logging operations.

The Harita Group, introduced above as an interested stakeholder, is the face of this industrial exploitation. As one of the most powerful palm oil and forestry corporate groups, they had planned to log customary forests which represented over ¼ of the Long Isun community’s land, for timber products. As in many cases throughout Indonesia, the concessions which overlap with Long Isun’s territory were acquired without consulting the affected communities. As a result, the company began logging Long Isun’s customary forests in 2014 without the community’s consent. Harita failed to respect the community’s right to give or withhold their Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) to logging in their traditional territories. Roda Mas is 1 of the 2 logging companies controlled by Harita Group that have not respected the community rejection of their logging operations.

In 2014, the Long Isun community understood Harita Group’s Roda Mas’s intention to log their forests and the community sent a letter to the company explicitly objecting the logging. However, Roda Mas’s company PT.KBT continued to log anyway that year. Approximately 2,000 hectares of customary forest which was in an allegedly disputed area of land between the Long Isun and Naha Aruq communities (discussed in Governance section below). The Long Isun community’s invitation to resolve this dispute with PT.KBT was neglected. While the community went on to find evidence of the company’s negligence of their customary land rights, they were then confronted by law enforcement who arrested one of heir community leaders. The conditions of release were tied to granting permission for continued logging operations. With the support of interested stakeholders from a coalition of NGOs, the leader, Tekwan, was released months later. Tekwan can be seen in the image on the right.

Tekwan, a member of the Long Isun community who was arrested during their campaign against Harita Group's concessions, advocating for the legal recognition of Long Isun's customary forests (Hutan Adat)

The Dayak Bahau’s customary rights are not legally recognized by the government of Indonesia, which places their existence at risk due to the industrial scale logging and plantations encroaching on their territory. The Long Isun community is demanding their forests be legally recognized as customary forest (Hutan Adat title), which grants them ownership and management rights, and for their customary forests to be excised from all forestry and agribusiness concessions.The Dayak Bahau of Long Isun, along with allies and activists have been resisting this corporate and political encroachment, and their demands are as follows:

“Land Back: Long Isun community’s rights over traditional territory and resources must be respected by the Harita Group. Harita’s forestry companies must cancel future plans to develop logging concessions on these lands. The community decisions not to log those forests must be respected. Indigenous Rights: The government of Indonesia needs to recognize the rights of this community to own, manage, and use the resources within their traditional territories, and protect them against corporate exploitation. Corporate Action: Banks must immediately stop providing financial services to any entity in the Harita Group, unless the latter permanently ends all future logging plans in the customary forests of the Long Isun community.”

Much pressure was exerted on the companies and Indonesia by the Long Isun community and allies, ultimately resulting in a government mediated agreement between PT.KBT, Long Isun and the neighbouring Naha Aruq community. The contested lands would be processed into customary forests as per Hutan Adat, by law; the village boundary dispute would be resolved through community deliberations; and the forest logging would cease on these contested lands within the larger concession area. This deal was agreed back in 2018, and was still limited because the ruling did not apply to the rest of PT.RMTK’s logging concessions. As of 2023, the logging licenses have not excised the rest of the Long Isun customary forests.

Assessment

Assessment of corporate and Dayak governance structures and FPIC

There exists a fundamental clash between the Dayak Peoples’ customary governance structure and that of the NGOs and corporations that have been involved, that catalyzed much of the struggle for the Dayak Bahau of Long Isun. First and foremost, the Harita Group justified its operations based on maps drawn up in 2009 by TNC, as part of the WWF’s Heart of Borneo project. The maps, made without the knowledge of the community, gifted 3,000 hectares of land to a neighbouring community in Naha Aruq. KBT (part of Harita) claimed that they had the rights to enter the land, having gained consent from Naha Aruq to work in the disputed territory. However, the Long Isun community have refuted this claim and have made reference to a map drawn in 1966 whereby the communities themselves deliberated and agreed on customary borders in the Upper Mahakam region. This mistake that the TNC made, by exercising its power, led the way to a loophole through which the industrialists were able to manipulate and encroach on customary land. They did not recognize, or possibly chose to override, the governance structures between customary councils that oversees the customary borders.

On the other hand, the NDPE provides an important compliance that keeps governance in check. Compliance with the ‘No Exploitation’ aspect of NDPE requires that operations, supply chains, and financing all respect internationally recognized human rights. Affected or potentially affected Indigenous Peoples’ and local communities must have been consulted and their right to give or withhold their Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) respected. Companies are expected to use grievance mechanisms that align with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights to resolve grievances. Some of Harita Groups’ upstream buyers do indeed have compliant grievance mechanisms, and that does provide some influence over actual logging and oil palm plantation operations.

Multi-scalar and multilateral governance mechanism

Governance and/or other mechanisms among international institutions do exist to protect, strengthen, and conserve the earth’s ecosystems and biodiversity. These global institutions, multilateral agreements, and conventions each present an avenue that could incentivize the government of Indonesia to deepen their support of the Dayak Bahau, in this case, and others. For starters, the UN International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention number 107 focuses on the “Protection and Integration of Indigenous and Other Tribal and Semi-Tribal Populations in Independent Countries” and Convention number 169 is labelled the “Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention.” These conventions are established through tripartite negotiations between member state representatives, trade unions, employers’ organizations, and governments to set equitable labour and human rights standards (International Labour Organization, 2024). Neither Indonesia (as it relates to the Dayak Bahau) nor Malaysia have ratified either of these two conventions. This implies limited options for advocating for legal reform for better recognition of Indigenous Territories and customary land rights through international treaties and agreements.

Additionally, the UN Convention on Biodiversity (CBD), and the emerging concept of Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) each present a relevant entry point.  The OECMs present an additional avenue for countries to meet their emission reduction targets, and their commitments to designate 30% of all land and ocean areas as protected areas by 2030. While Protected Areas (PAs) are one such conservation governance mechanism available, OECMs are also viable. Territories and areas conserved by Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities, or Indigenous and Community Conserved Areas (ICCAs), are good candidates for OECMs, when the customary law, traditional knowledge and local institutions are still strong and valued within the communities themselves.  As per International Union for Conservation of Nature. OECMS need to meet a specific set of criteria: cannot already be considered a PA, supports biodiversity conservation, must be set within a geographically defined area, needs to have a governance structure in place that is expected to achieve the in-situ conservation of important biodiversity values, the conservation needs to meet long-term, and needs to prioritize the protection of cultural practices of the Indigenous People or Local Communities who have customary rights in this area (Alves-Pinto et al., 2021).  One such example of Indigenous conserved areas is tana’ ulen or ‘restricted forested land’, a tradition that could classify as an OECM. Tana’ ulen are areas of primary forest rich in valuable timber and non-timber forest products with high economic value for the communities. They have been strictly managed by limiting access and activities under the rule of the customary councils and the customary chief.

Recommendations

The Dayak Bahau of Long Isun, like many of their Dayak kin, have learned how to live in harmony with their customary forests through their spiritual worldview that has been passed down across generations. Their contributions to conservation are well noted here and elsewhere.

The legal recognition of their customary land rights in the eyes of Indonesia law is the necessary solution, but it is evident that this will not happen in isolation. The institutions are set up at present, and have been for decades, to oppress, extract, and profit. The checks and balances found through sustainability certification groups (i.e. FSC), existing institutions (i.e. FPIC), and . Global conventions like the ILO Convention 107 and 169, or the UN Declaration for the Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP) provide a strong legal basis to advocate for the customary rights of the Dayak People but Indonesia has not yet ratified. While the Social Forestry policy has been slow – perhaps intentionally – to fulfill its commitments, it does present a legal grounding for recognizing customary forests. The resistance of Indigenous communities like the Dayak Bahau of Long Isun require solidarity, collective mobilization, and support from affected and interested stakeholders. These movements should continue to apply pressure to certification bodies, financial institutions that can influence such practices through their financial flows/responsible investing mechanisms, and amplify the existing momentum coming out of the UN CBD Conference of Parties 2024 (i.e. the Subsidiary Body granting Indigenous Peoples the space to guide to the Parties, with a priority given to Traditional Knowledge). Finding an incentive for the Indonesian government to protect customary rights by way of converting them to OECMs could also provide an additional avenue to strengthen the will and incentives of the Nation-State.  Ultimately, power imbalances characterize all the elements discussed in this case study. However, if the Dayak Bahau and their kin among other Dayaks continue to resist deforestation, exploitation, and a violation of their customary rights, their allies should stand in solidarity with hope and action.

This case study chooses to conclude with a silver lining, and with words from the Dayak People of East Kalimantan. In 2024, the Harita Group announcing in 2024 that they will permanently end all logging commercial activities in the Long Isun community's Indigenous Territories. Following this announcement, local environmental justice group Walhi East Kalimantan emphasized that this momentum should be carried on by the government to accelerate support for Indigenous rights: ‘“This commitment from the company should encourage proactive action from the local government to accelerate the recognition process of the Long Isun Indigenous community and encourage the central government to immediately designate the Long Isun Indigenous territory as an indicative area for customary forests,” said Fathur Roziqin Fen, Executive Director of Walhi East Kalimantan.