Jakarta, Indonesia Sentinel — The Pontianak High Court has acquitted Yu Hao, a Chinese national previously convicted of illegal gold mining in Ketapang, West Kalimantan. The decision Spark controversies as its overturned previously lower court’s ruling that sentenced Yu Hao to 3.5 years in prison and a fine of Rp30 billion.
Previously, Yu Hao had been found guilty by the Ketapang District Court for engaging in illegal gold mining activities that reportedly caused state losses of Rp1.02 trillion. These losses included the extraction of 774.27 kilograms of gold and 937.7 kilograms of silver.
Despite the significant evidence and financial damages, the High Court accepted Yu Hao’s appeal, sparking widespread controversy.
Court’s Decision
According to CNBC Indonesia, Chief Judge Isnurul S. Arif of the Pontianak High Court ruled that Yu Hao was not proven guilty of illegal mining charges under the prosecution’s case. The court annulled the previous verdict by the Ketapang District Court issued on October 10, 2024.
“The court declares that the defendant, Yu Hao, has not been proven legally and convincingly guilty of committing the criminal act of illegal mining as charged by the prosecution. Therefore, the defendant Yu Hao is acquitted of all charges,” the ruling stated.
The High Court also ordered release and restoring Yu Hao’s rights and status. “The court restores the defendant’s rights, including his dignity and reputation. The prosecutor is instructed to release Yu Hao immediately.”
Background of the Case
In October 2024, Yu Hao was convicted of engaging in unlicensed mining activities, a crime that caused significant losses to the Indonesian state. The court found him guilty of violating Indonesia’s Mineral and Coal Mining Law, which carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison and fines of up to Rp 50 billion.
However, the judge handed down a lighter sentence with three years and six months in prison and a fine of Rp30 billion.
Illegal Mining Operations
Yu Hao’s illegal gold mining activities spanned four months, from February to May 2024. The investigation by civil investigators from the Directorate General of Mineral and Coal revealed that 2,687.4 cubic meters of gold ore were extracted. Laboratory tests confirmed the high-grade quality of the mined gold, with ore samples containing up to 337 grams of gold per ton.
Yu Hao and his associates exploited licensed mining tunnels designated for maintenance. Instead of adhering to regulations, the tunnels were used for unauthorized extraction, including the use of explosives and on-site gold refining. The illegally mined gold was then smelted and sold as ore or bullion.
Implications and Reactions
Yu Hao’s release has drawn criticism from environmental groups, including the Indonesian Forum for the Environment (Walhi). Rere Christianto, Walhi’s Campaign Manager for Mining and Energy, described the ruling as a troubling precedent for law enforcement in Indonesia.
Rere expressed concern that the court decisions in the case of illegal mining could create the perception that mining permits are easily obtainable.
“Mining permits should serve as a mechanism to limit and protect certain areas, ensuring that not every location or individual can engage in mining activities. These restrictions are essential to safeguard communities and the environment,” Rere said, on Thursday, January 16, 2025, as reported by Tirto.
Read also : How Chinese Nationals Exploited Indonesia’s Gold for Over 300 Years
He emphasized that permits are not merely tools for allocating mining rights to individuals or groups but also represent the government’s commitment to protecting the environment and nearby residents. “When these protections fail due to illegal activities, it leads to a lack of accountability and threatens surrounding communities,” he said.
Rere also pointed to Yu Hao’s modus operandi, noting that the case highlights broader issues with weak oversight and poor governance in Indonesia’s mining sector. The lack of rigorous permit enforcement and supervision, he added, has exposed significant flaws in the system.
As the High Court comes to decision, the acquittal of Yu Hao has drawn criticism, with many questioning the ruling’s alignment with the evidence and legal framework.
(Raidi/Agung)
