On methodology

A no-go zone framework grounded in existing Indonesian law offers a concrete tool for limiting extractive expansion.

Auriga is developing a no-go zone concept for mining areas built on five criteria, all grounded in regulations already in force in Indonesia: Key Biodiversity Areas, including remaining natural forests and essential ecosystems; sustainable food production areas; disaster-prone areas; coastal areas and small islands under 2,000 square kilometers; and Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities territory. The fifth criterion is the direct entry point for PIACI protection. Despite the strength of existing regulations, mining permits continue to be issued in areas that should be protected under all five criteria, including territories where the O'Hongana Manyawa or O’Fongana Manyawa live. Based on  research and interactions conducted by Auriga with the community with which it had established initial contact, the community identifies itself as O’Fongana Manyawa, not O’Hangana Manyawa. Therefore, Auriga has chosen to use the name O’Fongana Manyawa, even though many media outlets use the term O’Hangana Manyawa.

Mapping isolated peoples without direct contact requires methodology Indonesia is still developing, and Latin American experience is directly applicable.

One of the most pressing practical challenges for Auriga is how to map the O'Fongana Manyawa without violating the principle of no contact. The cross-regional exchange at the international convening in Indonesia provided directly applicable guidance: working through buffer zones and through Indigenous communities that have already established initial contact to identify areas where groups remain closed off. That approach is now being implemented in partnership with Fala Lamo in Halmahera. Of the O'Fongana Manyawa groups identified, 12 have established some form of contact and are helping to locate areas where other groups remain in self-isolation. What's still needed, Ki Bagus says, is "sharing knowledge, sharing experiences, and also providing some kind of supervision or guidance" from practitioners in Latin America who have been doing this work for decades.

On barriers

Indonesia has no specific regulatory protection for peoples in voluntary isolation, and the existing recognition process is not accessible to them.

Indonesia has no regulations specifically protecting Indigenous communities in isolation or initial contact. The state recognition process that does exist requires communities to register with local government and have their claims formally adjudicated, a process that is lengthy even for contacted communities, and inaccessible to those in isolation. Two forest areas in Halmahera that fall within O'Fongana Manyawa territory have been designated as protected areas, which offers some environmental protection but simultaneously excludes the communities from the territories where they live, without any formal acknowledgment of their existence. The core problem, Ki Bagus says, is that the state cannot be expected to protect communities it has not yet acknowledged.

The extractive threat to O'Fongana Manyawa territories has a history that shapes how isolated peoples experience outside intrusion.

Before nickel, industrial timber concessions were the dominant extractive pressure on O'Fongana Manyawa territories. According to community members who have established initial contact, movement routes disappeared as logging cleared the land, and rivers that had been part of daily life became timber transport corridors. Transmigration programs during the New Order era further eroded their territories through large-scale land clearing. Nickel extraction is repeating and intensifying that pattern. For organizations working to build trust with communities that have experienced decades of dispossession from multiple directions, this history is an important context.

On the intersection of climate and PIACI rights

Conservation and climate frameworks can protect territory from extraction, but without Indigenous recognition built in, they risk becoming another form of harm.

Ki Bagus sees real potential in linking conservation and climate frameworks to PIACI protection. In the Indonesian context, protected areas can help limit extractive expansion and other forms of development. But conservation measures alone are not enough. Without recognition of the Indigenous communities living within those territories, conservation frameworks can unintentionally reinforce exclusion.

The situation in Halmahera illustrates this challenge. Two forest areas within O'Fongana Manyawa territory have been designated as protected areas, creating a legal basis for limiting development. However, the communities living there have not been formally recognized as part of the process. Indonesian law generally requires communities to register their claims through local government to secure recognition, a process that is inaccessible by definition to peoples in voluntary isolation. As a result, land can receive legal protection while the people living on it remain unrecognized. In Ki Bagus's view, effective protection requires advancing conservation and Indigenous recognition together.

On consolidating PIACI as a global category

Free, prior and informed consent needs to be adapted for the PIACI context, and Indonesia still needs to agree on what "initial contact" means.

Free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) is the international standard requiring that Indigenous peoples be consulted and give their agreement before any project or decision affecting their lands or rights moves forward. FPIC assumes direct interaction with the community, which makes it insufficient as a standard for protecting peoples in voluntary isolation. Ki Bagus argues that a version of FPIC is needed that respects the choice of peoples who do not want contact while still enabling the advocacy required to protect their rights.

A related question is where the "initial contact" category begins and ends. In Halmahera, Ki Bagus encountered first- and second-generation descendants of people who had no outside contact, raising the question of whether they still fall within the PIACI framework. In Latin American practice, initial contact can span two to three generations; Indonesia needs to reach its own working agreement on where the boundary lies.