Politik Hukum dan Keabsahan Izin Pertambangan Nikel di Raja Ampat

Article 33, paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution mandates that the management of land, water, and natural resources be carried out within the framework of a welfare state and sustainable development, so that legal policy must ensure a balance between economic growth, social justice, and ecological preservation. However, the controversy surrounding the issuance of nickel mining permits in the Raja Ampat Islands—a marine conservation area, a center of mega-biodiversity, and a strategic tourism destination—represents a serious disharmony between the Mining and Energy Law regime and the spatial planning, coastal-small island, forestry, and environmental protection regimes. This study aims to analyze the legal politics and validity of the Raja Ampat nickel IUP in the context of normative conflicts, while also assessing the adequacy of the sectoral framework and the need for lex specialis instruments in high-value tourism areas. This study uses normative legal research with a statute, conceptual, and case approach, based on primary legal materials (1945 Constitution, Minerba Law, coastal-small island, spatial planning, and PPLH), secondary materials (literature), and limited non-legal materials (media) for the construction of a conflict chronology. The results show that there are 16 companies with nickel permits, five of which are active. Four permits were revoked because the mining area was located within a 36,600 km² geopark with protected status, was indicated to have damaged mangroves, did not have wastewater management, and/or did not have approval for the use of forest areas. PT Gag Nikel continued to operate because it was deemed to have complete permits and was located outside the geopark. These findings confirm the weak protection of the coastline as intended in Article 35(k) of Law 27/2007 and the impact of the recentralization of authority following Law 23/2014 and Law 3/2020, which reduced regional participation, the community, and FPIC, even though the Constitutional Court (Decision 37/PUU-XIX/2021) views centralization and decentralization as a continuum. The study concludes that the dominance of the downstream economic agenda has shifted the constitutional orientation of “state control” as management for and with the people; therefore, it is necessary to harmonize the hierarchy of norms and formulate special laws based on prudence, legal morality, and the involvement of local governments and traditional elders (living law) to prevent the recurrence of pollution tragedies such as the Buyat Bay case and ensure the legitimacy of the Raja Ampat ecosystem’s protection.