Jakarta, innews.co.id – SERIOUS allegations of abuse of authority and administrative negligence have emerged against the Sea Transportation Administration of Indonesia’s Ministry of Transportation, centering on the issuance of a Work Order (SPK) for the wreck removal of the former Motor Vessel (MV Kuala Mas), a derelict vessel lying on the seabed of Tenau Port, Kupang, East Nusa Tenggara.
A Regulatory Framework Bypassed?
At the heart of the controversy is a troubling claim: that the contractor engaged for the operation proposed the deployment of a foreign-flagged vessel — a move that, critics argue, cuts directly against the grain of Indonesia’s national shipping protection laws.
Under Article 1 of Minister of Transportation Regulation No. PM 21 of 2021, the use of foreign vessels in Indonesian waters is strictly permissible only when no suitable Indonesian-flagged vessel is available. Yet investigators and industry observers are now asking a pointed question: Did the Sea Transportation Administration ever conduct the mandatory identification and verification exercise to confirm that no equivalent Indonesian-flagged specialized work vessel existed before green-lighting the Work Order?
That verification process is not a bureaucratic formality — it is the cornerstone of Indonesia’s cabotage principle, the bedrock legal doctrine that reserves domestic maritime operations for nationally flagged fleets.
A Work Order Issued Prematurely?
The second and arguably more damaging allegation strikes at the sequencing of the approval process itself. Sources familiar with the matter contend that at the time the Work Order was issued, the contractor’s proposed vessel had not yet obtained the requisite Approval for the Use of a Foreign Vessel — known under Indonesian regulatory parlance as an IPKA or PPKA.
Industry protocol and legal convention are unambiguous on this point: the Work Order should only have been granted after every applicable legal and regulatory requirement had been satisfied — the IPKA/PPKA foremost among them, given the foreign-flagged status of the vessel in question.
If the allegations are borne out, they raise uncomfortable questions about the legal standing upon which the Sea Transportation Administration acted. Was a binding government work order issued on the back of an incomplete regulatory file? And if so, who bears accountability for that lapse?
Systemic Failure or Isolated Oversight?
Beyond the procedural irregularities in this specific case, observers warn of a deeper institutional problem. The circumstances point to what may be a critical failure of coordination and synchronization between the relevant units within the Sea Transportation Administration the very authority charged with granting foreign vessel approvals in the first place.
Such a breakdown, if confirmed, would represent more than an administrative misstep. It would constitute a potential violation of Law No. 17 of 2008 on Shipping and its battery of implementing regulations — statutes that the Ministry of Transportation is itself obligated to uphold and enforce.
Calls for Independent Audit Grow Louder
Against this backdrop, mounting voices are demanding a full, independent administrative examination and audit to determine whether the Work Order was lawfully issued — or whether acts of omission, negligence, or outright abuse of authority allowed the mandatory prerequisites for foreign vessel engagement to be quietly set aside.
The stakes extend well beyond a single wreck removal contract. At issue is the integrity of Indonesia’s procurement processes, the transparency of its maritime licensing regime, and the viability of the cabotage principle as a meaningful shield for the country’s domestic shipping industry — not merely a provision cited in regulations and honored in the breach.
Accountability, legal certainty, and the protection of Indonesian maritime enterprise demand nothing less than a thorough, impartial reckoning with what transpired in Kupang. (*)
