Alfarhat Kasman, a Jatam campaigner, said this law is not made for the people as it was drafted behind closed doors with the sole purpose of benefiting mining oligarchs.

The entire process lacked transparency, ignored public participation, and only served corporate interests," he said as quoted in a statement on February 18, 2025.

The amendment includes provisions that grant mining concessions to religious organizations, cooperatives, and small-medium enterprises under the guise of economic empowerment. 

Critics argue this violates legal principles, as it attempts to legitimize Government Regulation No. 25/2024, which prioritizes resource access for these entities. 

"This is a blatant maneuver to accommodate a lower-ranking regulation by adjusting the higher-ranking law, which is legally unacceptable," Kasman said.

The amendment has been widely criticized for its rushed and opaque nature. Jatam reports that most discussions occurred behind closed doors, including a series of late-night meetings between the DPR, the government, and the Regional Representatives Council (DPD). 

"Instead of focusing on urgent bills like the Domestic Workers Protection Act or Indigenous Peoples Rights Act, the DPR fast-tracked a law designed to benefit the mining industry," Kasman said.

He cited that one of the most contentious aspects of the amendment is the inclusion of universities in mining business arrangements. Though the government claims universities were excluded from direct concessions, the new law allows mining contracts to be awarded in their interest. 

“This effectively integrates educational institutions into the mining economy, raising ethical concerns. This is a trap. Universities that promote sustainability should be ashamed if they accept benefits from destructive mining practices," he stressed.

Despite the DPR's insistence that the revision was necessary to comply with Constitutional Court rulings, only two out of 26 changes address court directives. The majority of amendments focus on expanding mining opportunities for private entities. Critics believe the true agenda behind the amendment is to facilitate mass resource exploitation at the expense of environmental sustainability and local communities.