The Illegal Logging Syndicate: Revealing Alleged Corporate Crimes in Southwest Papua’s Forests

Kaoem Telapak has uncovered alleged corporate involvement in illegal logging practices in Southwest Papua Province. This forestry sector crime is suspected to be highly organized. The perpetrators do not act alone; rather, they involve individuals or small-scale investors who play a role in supplying timber raw materials that do not comply with forestry governance to the forestry industry.

Forests in West Papua (now Southwest Papua) are not exempt from the threat of deforestation due to plantations and illegal logging. Data from Global Forest Watch (GFW) reveals that West Papua lost 241 thousand hectares of primary forest from 2022 to 2024.¹ The loss of forest cover in Papua not only destroys the forest but also constitutes a potential financial loss for the state. West Papua faces potential losses in Non-Tax State Revenue (PNBP) due to deforestation reaching approximately Rp 250 billion per year. This breaks down to a potential loss of Forest Resources Provision (PSDH) amounting to Rp 95 billion and a Reforestation Fund (DR) of 11.05 million dollars (or around Rp 154.7 billion).²

Looking at the track record of cases recorded at the Sorong District Court (PN), from 2021 to 2025, out of 13 illegal logging cases, 9 (69.2%) involved the act of transporting, controlling, or possessing timber forest products without a Certificate of Legality of Forest Products (SKSHH), while 4 (30.8%) were cases of protected forest destruction due to mining. Furthermore, of those 13 cases, 11 involved middle-class actors,³ one was a company director or corporate actor, and another was a field worker.

The portrait of forest cover and the cases occurring in Southwest Papua serve as an alarm for law enforcement to exercise full supervision over the remaining forests in Papua’s natural environment. Perpetrators are not only individuals or financiers; it is highly possible that corporate actors themselves are the illegal loggers.

From Mancaraya to Siliwangi

In principle, a concession holding a Forest Utilization Business License (PBPH) must protect the concession within its area. PBPH holders have a number of obligations they must comply with based on prevailing laws and regulations. Law Number 6 of 2023 (concerning Job Creation) establishes core obligations for PBPH holders, such as protecting, maintaining, and preserving the forest they manage (Articles 32, 48, and 50), paying non-tax state revenues (Article 35), as well as being obligated to undertake preventive measures and bear responsibility for forest fires (Article 49). If these obligations are not met, the PBPH holder can face administrative sanctions, ranging from written warnings and administrative fines to suspension and revocation.

However, one PBPH suspected of allowing illegal logging practices within its concession is located in Southwest Papua; this PBPH is PT Mancaraya Agro Mandiri (PT MAM). PT MAM is a natural forest utilization concession located in Sorong Regency, South Sorong Regency, Tambrauw Regency, and Maybrat Regency, Southwest Papua Province, with an authorized concession area of 97,820 hectares.

The villages impacted by PT MAM’s concession logging activities are Klagen, Klaka, and Klakak Villages in the Maudus District, Sorong Regency. In addition, other districts are affected, namely the Sunook and East Sayosa Districts. According to the assessment resume by the Independent Verification Assessment Agency (LPVI) PT Intishar Sadira Eshan (PT ISE), within PT MAM’s concession area, there is also the use of work permit areas without going through the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (KLHK) licensing scheme. This includes the construction of the 41 km (165 Ha) Trans West Papua road, community settlements (specifically Klagen Village in Compartment E57 of the 2019 RKT block covering 9 Ha), community gardens/fields in the 2019 and 2020 RKT Blocks, and illegal logging activities.⁴

Information regarding these illegal logging activities was obtained from local informants. Their testimonies point to timber logging practices outside the concession area that allegedly enter PT MAM. To verify this information, in November 2024, Kaoem Telapak conducted field monitoring in the Sayosa and Maudus Districts, Sorong Regency, Southwest Papua.

The monitoring results confirmed indications of illegal logging within the concession permit area, as well as timber processing activities conducted outside the Annual Work Plan for Forest Utilization (RKTPH) of PT Mancaraya Agro Mandiri (PT MAM), specifically in the 2020 and 2021 RKT blocks. Furthermore, indications of logging were also found outside PT MAM’s concession. These findings are reinforced by the announcement of the annual surveillance on PT MAM from June 9–18, 2025, which noted the presence of illegal logging activities in the 2020, 2021, 2023, and 2024 RKT blocks.⁵

Kaoem Telapak conducted an interview with an operator working inside the PT MAM concession. According to him, processed timber within the PT MAM concession was bought by an operator boss named Saleh, which would then be transported to PT SKS.⁶ According to the informant’s admission, the company provided capital to Saleh to carry out the work. Each collection point for processed timber within PT MAM is owned by different businessmen/investors. Some are named Idon, Bujang, and Lindo—who is now a manager at PT SKS. This was also reported by the Pusaka Foundation, stating that there are around 20-30 timber traders operating in the East Sayosa and Maudus Districts.⁷

In the audit surveillance resume conducted by LPVI PT ISE, it was stated that illegal logging did indeed occur within the PT MAM concession. However, it was not explained that these activities are also strongly suspected to be bankrolled by the company itself. Additionally, according to the documents from the 4th surveillance resume of PT SKS, PT MAM and PT SKS have a Roundwood Raw Material Supply Contract Agreement for the October 2024 – September 2025 period. In that document, PT SKS stated it only receives natural forest roundwood raw materials of the Merbau species from PT MAM amounting to 4,561.96 cubic meters.⁸ Nevertheless, this statement contradicts the facts on the ground as detailed in point 1 above, where field information (from illegal loggers) indicates that the timber was bought by PT SKS.⁹ Based on a search of General Law Administration (AHU) documents, PT SKS and PT MAM are suspected of being under the umbrella of the same corporate group, namely the Mega Masindo Group.

The Mystery of Mancaraya Port

The timber allegedly received by PT SKS is then taken to a port located in Samosa Village, Sayosa District, Sorong Regency, about 40 km away. From Kaoem Telapak’s investigation, it was discovered that the timber transport vessel is named “Armada V”, which is strongly suspected to still be owned by the Mega Masindo Group.

According to a Facebook post by an employee of PT Bagus Jaya Abadi (PT BJA), the Armada V vessel had previously docked in Klayas Village, Seget District, Sorong Regency. This location is believed to be the site of PT BJA itself, which is also suspected of being part of the Mega Masindo Group.

Seeing these field findings, Kaoem Telapak attempted to confirm with the Information and Documentation Management Officer (PPID) of the Ministry of Transportation (Kemenhub) regarding the Special Terminal (Tersus) information for that port.

The Kemenhub PPID stated that the special terminal permit granted to PT MAM’s Tersus port was only issued on November 21, 2025. Meanwhile, the port’s activities had been operating for at least a full year, dating back to when Kaoem Telapak conducted its direct field investigation in November 2024. This means that the port, situated within the forest area, did not have a Tersus for a year of operation, potentially violating Law Number 17 of 2008 concerning Shipping.

Compensation Inequality and Massive Timber Extraction in Moi Land

The activities of timber companies in community areas in Sorong Regency have caused various structural consequences for the social, economic, and political systems of the surrounding Indigenous peoples and local communities. Companies act as the dominant actors in forest resource management, while Indigenous communities experience a decline in control over the territories that have historically been their livelihoods. The expansion of forest utilization companies functions not only as the exploitation of natural resources but also causes structural impacts on the living space of Indigenous communities.

In research published by the Pusaka Bentala Rakyat Foundation (2026) using a case study of PT MAM and PT SKS, from a political economy perspective, one of the main problems faced by the Moi people is the low compensation or payment value for the timber taken from their customary territories. One of the highly valuable timber species utilized by companies is Merbau, known to the local community as ironwood. In practice, the value of the timber received by the community is often determined unilaterally by the company through administrative documents such as Production Yield Reports (LHP) and timber volume measurements by the company.¹⁰ As a result, the compensation value received by the community is often far lower than the commercial value of tropical timber in the national market. The compensation price for Merbau timber given to the Moi Indigenous people is limited on a per-clan basis, at around Rp 100,000–150,000 per cubic meter,¹¹ far below the market price of approximately Rp 10,000,000–15,000,000 per cubic meter once it enters the export industry.

The ongoing corporate activities have also spawned various forms of social and political pressure against Indigenous peoples and local communities who refuse or protest the companies’ activities. In several cases, community protests, such as the installation of customary blockades (palang adat) as a symbol of rejection of corporate operations, are met with security-based responses.¹² The involvement of rogue law enforcement personnel—who should side with the community—in dismantling customary blockades or securing corporate activities indicates a tendency to use state instruments merely to safeguard the companies’ economic activities.¹³ Natural resource extraction, in this case, timber utilization, often ignores the application of the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) principle in every corporate activity process involving Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs).

Ending Corporate Impunity in Papua’s Forests

The cases of PT MAM and PT SKS in Sorong Regency serve as a portrait of forestry governance in Indonesia. From these two cases, the most benefited parties are the company owners themselves, while the state suffers potential financial losses due to the non-payment of Non-Tax State Revenues (PNBP) for the Merbau timber, and the escalation of conflicts with the community is ongoing.

Field findings indicate that forestry crimes are not only committed by small-scale businessmen/investors but also involve alleged affiliations with large corporate actors who secure the raw material supply for their industries.

Furthermore, another issue is the operation of a timber transport port without a special terminal permit (Tersus) for a full year, pointing to loopholes in the supervision by relevant authorities. Cross-sectoral regulatory violations seem to be treated as normal, all in the name of smoothing the timber supply chain out of Papua.

List of References

1. WRI, 28 May 2025, Memperkuat Posisi Masyarakat Adat di Papua dengan Kejelasan Proses Perizinan dalam sektor Kehutanan.
2. Page 132, Seknas FITRA, 2020, Laporan Penelitian Local Budget Analysis (LBA) di Tanah Papua.
3. Individual/Investor/Owner.
4. https://silk.menlhk.go.id/app/Upload/phpl/20240207/b3163e93343942238b2797ed52bb69e8.pdf.
5. Resume Hasil Penilikan Ke-1 PT Mancaraya Agro Mandiri, verifier 1.1.3, Retrieved 26 February 2026.
6. Interview results with Timber Processor, 12 November 2024.
7. Page 36, Yayasan Pusaka, Dampak Ekspansi Perkebunan Sawit dan Industri Kayu Terhadap Masyarakat Adat di Kabupaten Sorong, Papua Barat Daya.
8. Resume Hasil Penilikan Ke-4 PT Siliwangi Karya Sejahtera, verifier 2.1.1, Retrieved 26 February 2026.
9. Interview results.
10. Page 45, Yayasan Pusaka, Dampak Ekspansi Perkebunan Sawit dan Industri Kayu Terhadap Masyarakat Adat di Kabupaten Sorong, Papua Barat Daya.
11. Page 35, Yayasan Pusaka, Dampak Ekspansi Perkebunan Sawit dan Industri Kayu Terhadap Masyarakat Adat di Kabupaten Sorong, Papua Barat Daya.
12. Page 32, Yayasan Pusaka, Dampak Ekspansi Perkebunan Sawit dan Industri Kayu Terhadap Masyarakat Adat di Kabupaten Sorong, Papua Barat Daya.
13. Human Rights Monitor, 4 July 2025, Security-backed intimidation of indigenous community in Sayosa Timur linked to timber exploitation, Retrieved 13 March 2026.