InfoSAWIT, JAKARTA — The Center for Natural Resources Law Studies and Advocacy (PUSTAKA ALAM) has strongly condemned the detention of Kalpendi, Chairman of the Handep Hapakat Multipurpose Consumer Cooperative (KKSU), by investigators of the Central Kalimantan Regional Police since December 31, 2025. The advocacy group views the detention as a blatant act of criminalization against ordinary people who are fighting for the economic rights of plasma farmers amid unequal partnership relations with large corporations.
PUSTAKA ALAM considers the detention ironic, as it occurred while the cooperative was pursuing legal action by reporting alleged embezzlement of plasma plantation proceeds by its partner company to the Criminal Investigation Agency (Bareskrim) of the Indonesian National Police. In this context, PUSTAKA ALAM emphasized the importance of neutrality and impartiality among law enforcement authorities.
PUSTAKA ALAM Director Muhamad Zainal Arifin stressed that law enforcement must be carried out fairly, without selective enforcement. “Law enforcement must be ensured to operate impartially. There should be no impression that residents’ efforts to report alleged embezzlement of plasma funds are instead met with legal pressure that results in the detention of cooperative officials,” he said in a written statement received by InfoSAWIT on Sunday (January 11, 2026).
Furthermore, PUSTAKA ALAM highlighted what it described as serious legal flaws in the construction of charges used by investigators. Initially, cooperative officials were reported under Article 34 of Law No. 1 of 2013 on Microfinance Institutions. However, investigators later added layered charges, including Articles 372 (embezzlement), 378 (fraud), and 266 of the old Indonesian Criminal Code.
According to Zainal, the application of the Microfinance Institutions Law in this case constitutes a forced and irrelevant use of legal provisions.
“KKSU Handep Hapakat is a legally established cooperative under Law No. 25 of 1992 and does not operate as a microfinance institution,” he asserted.
PUSTAKA ALAM also argued that the inclusion of Article 266 of the Criminal Code concerning document falsification appeared to be merely a formal attempt to justify detention. The documents in question—namely the 2010 decree on legal entity ratification and the 2014 amendment of cooperative management—are state administrative products and legally valid.
In addition, allegations of embezzlement and fraud under Articles 372 and 378 were deemed unreasonable.
“All financial management, cost deductions, and distribution of plasma funds have been carried out unilaterally by the partner company. The cooperative is, in fact, the aggrieved party and has questioned where the funds that rightfully belong to plasma farmers have gone,” Zainal explained.
In light of these circumstances, PUSTAKA ALAM urged President Prabowo Subianto and the Chief of the Indonesian National Police to intervene and ensure that law enforcement agencies are not misused as instruments of pressure against small farmers. According to PUSTAKA ALAM, the state’s alignment with farmers and cooperatives must be consistent with Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution, which mandates a people-centered economic system.
The organization also called on the Professional and Security Division (Propam) and the Inspectorate General of Supervision (Irwasum) of the National Police to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the professionalism of the investigation carried out by the Directorate of Special Criminal Investigation of the Central Kalimantan Police, to ensure that there is no abuse of authority that could undermine public trust in the police institution.
PUSTAKA ALAM emphasized that disputes over plasma plantations should be resolved through equitable and fair dialogue, not through criminalization. Partnership relations between nucleus companies and plasma cooperatives, they argued, must be based on good faith, transparency, and deliberation, with the ultimate goal of sustainably improving farmers’ welfare.
“The state must be present as a fair mediator. The use of criminal law instruments in agribusiness partnership conflicts will only deepen social conflict at the grassroots level and undermine the very objectives of the plasma partnership system,” Zainal concluded. (T2)
