Jumarding, a resident of Anggana District, Kutai Kartanegara Regency, is suspected of experiencing criminalization by the PT SKN Coal Mining Company which operates in Kukar. Jumarding's protest asking for help from PT Sinar Kumala Naga (SKN) to stop land clearing activities on his land led to problems.

Jumarding was instead reported to the police on charges of obstructing the activities of a company carrying out mining activities, even though mediation had previously been carried out between Jumarding and the company but no agreement was found regarding land acquisition.

It is known that SKN submitted its report in March 2023, and will only begin the trial at the Tenggarong District Court around January 2024.

Jumarding was accused by the Public Prosecutor (JPU) of obstructing or disrupting the mining business activities of IUP, IUPK, IPR or SIPB holders who had fulfilled the requirements as intended in Article 70, Article 86F letter b and Article A 136 Paragraph (2).

So the Defendant was charged with violating as regulated and threatened with criminal penalties in Article 162 of Law No. 03 of 2020 concerning amendments to Law No. 4 of 2009 concerning Mineral and Coal Mining in conjunction with Article 162 of Law No. 6 of 2023 concerning the stipulation of Government regulations in lieu of Law Number 2 in 2022 concerning Job Creation becomes law.

Due to Defendant Jumarding's actions which were considered to be obstructing the company's activities, the prosecutor demanded that he be sentenced to 6 months in prison.

Now the fate of Defendant Jumarding is in the hands of the Panel of Judges, who will decide this case.

"The case is just waiting for the verdict, our client is being sued by the prosecutor for 6 months," said Jufri Musa SH together with Zaenal Muktaqin SHI and Makmur Ratno Jaya SH MH to journalists, Tuesday (7/5/2024).

The Defendant Jumarding's Legal Team revealed the facts of the trial which presented expert witnesses, that the defendant's actions which were deemed to be obstructing the company's activities by asking the field supervisor to stop land clearing operations on his land according to the expert witness, were not a criminal act as intended in Article 162.

Expert witness Ougy Dayyantara SHMH explained that actions that could be categorized as obstructing or disrupting mining business activities were if the defendant installed ropes, made tents or built huts on the haul road or ordered dump truck and excavtor operators to stop their activities.

"From everything that was explained by the expert witness at the trial, none of it was done by our client," said Zaenal Muttaqin accompanied by Jufri Musa and Makmur when holding a press conference at Cafe Yen's Delight Samarinda, Tuesday (7/5/2024) afternoon. Makmur added that in the well-known legal adage it is better to acquit a thousand guilty people than to punish one innocent person.

"We hope that the Panel of Judges in their decision will pay attention to aspects of evidence, in order to ensure that our client is innocent and can be acquitted. "said Makmur.