Master's Student from UTA 45 Jakarta Criticises Indonesia's Marine Spatial Governance
A presentation of legal scholarship at the Master of Law programme at Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 (UTA 45) Jakarta sparked cross-sectoral discussion regarding the fate of Indonesia’s 2.2 million small-scale fishermen. The presentation delivered by student Johan Rosihan was titled “Legal Policy on Marine Spatial Governance: Protection of Small-Scale Fishermen Amid Investment Expansion and Administrative Regulation”.
The presentation highlighted a paradox in small-scale fishermen’s protection amidst coastal investment expansion. In his exposition, Johan emphasised that Indonesia, as the world’s largest archipelago nation, has yet to provide adequate protection for small-scale fishermen, the majority of whom operate vessels under 10 gross tonnes with simple equipment.
He identified three structural factors weakening small-scale fishermen’s protection: asymmetry of representation in policymaking, fragmentation of authority among institutions, and weak law enforcement in remote coastal areas.
“Law does not exist in a neutral space. It is a product of power relations that determine who gains access, who is protected, and who is marginalised,” said Johan in a written statement on Friday (27 February 2026).
The discussion held on Thursday (26 February) featured diverse perspectives from practitioners at PT Pelindo, a subsidiary of PT Krakatau Steel in the port operations sector, financial analysts, and students from Maluku and East Nusa Tenggara.
Johan emphasised that conflict between large investment and small-scale fishermen is not a permanent dichotomy, but rather a consequence of the absence of equitable negotiation forums and consistent rules of engagement.
He proposed an integrated value chain model, with small-scale fishermen as upstream catch producers, cooperatives or state-owned enterprises as mid-stream aggregators, and Pelindo facilities as downstream export gateways.
The issue of border fishermen also emerged, particularly regarding apprehension by Australian authorities. Johan viewed this as linked to the narrowing of fishing grounds due to investment expansion, and inadequate dissemination of the Indonesia-Australia Memorandum of Understanding concerning traditional fishermen’s access rights.
In the fiscal dimension, Johan proposed an earmarking mechanism for fishing-related Revenue Allocation Funds (Dana Bagi Hasil) for small-scale fishermen’s protection through revision of the Law on Fiscal Balance Between Central and Regional Governments, establishment of regional budget regulations, and utilisation of Village Funds.
“The fiscal instruments already exist. What is lacking is political will to lock them into law so they cannot be redirected to other budget lines,” he stated.
The study formulated three regulatory reform recommendations. First, to the House of Representatives and the Government to harmonise marine spatial governance regulations with protection of fishermen’s rights as non-negotiable boundaries.
Second, to the Coordinating Ministry for Maritime Affairs, the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, the Ministry of Public Works/National Land Agency, and regional governments to establish cross-sectoral coordination mechanisms and accelerate the Coastal Zone and Small Island Spatial Planning that recognises traditional fishing grounds.
Third, to the Supreme Court, the Judicial Commission, legal aid institutions, and universities to develop progressive jurisprudence and expand access to legal assistance in remote coastal areas.
“As long as small-scale fishermen continue to be treated as development objects rather than active legal subjects, coastal justice will remain an unfulfilled promise,” Johan concluded.