Mardani Maming

A summary of what happened?

Mardani H. Maming, the former Regent of Tanah Bumbu in South Kalimantan, Indonesia, has been embroiled in significant legal controversies, primarily involving corruption and bribery allegations.

Key Allegations and Legal Proceedings:

• Corruption Charges: Maming was accused of accepting bribes totaling approximately Rp 118 billion (around USD 8 million) in exchange for facilitating the issuance of mining operation permits (IUP OP) during his tenure as Regent. These permits were crucial for coal mining operations in the Tanah Bumbu region.
• Initial Conviction: In February 2023, the Banjarmasin Corruption Court found Maming guilty of corruption related to the issuance of mining permits. He was sentenced to 10 years in prison and fined Rp 500 million, with an additional four months’ imprisonment if the fine was not paid. The court also ordered him to pay Rp 110.6 billion in restitution.
• Appeal and Increased Sentence: Maming appealed the verdict, but in August 2023, the Supreme Court rejected his appeal and increased his prison sentence to 12 years, maintaining the fines and restitution amounts.
• Reconsideration and Sentence Reduction: In November 2024, upon Maming’s request for a judicial review, the Supreme Court reduced his sentence back to 10 years but upheld the financial penalties, including the Rp 110.6 billion restitution.

Additional Concerns:

• Evasion Attempts: Following the initial charges, Maming was uncooperative with the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), leading to his designation as a fugitive before his eventual arrest.
• Political Implications: As a member of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) and former chairman of the Indonesian Young Entrepreneurs Association (HIPMI), Maming’s case has raised concerns about corruption within political and business circles in Indonesia.

These events underscore the ongoing challenges Indonesia faces in combating corruption, particularly among public officials and influential business figures.

Analyzing the Fake Copyright Notice(s)

Our team collects and analyses fraudulent copyright takedown requests, legal complaints, and other efforts to remove critical information from the internet. Through our investigative reporting, we examine the prevalence and operation of an organized censorship industry, predominantly funded by criminal entities, oligarchs, and disreputable businesses or individuals. Our findings allow internet users to gain insight into these censorship schemes’ sources, methods, and underlying objectives.

What was Mardani Maming trying to hide?

Mardani Maming‘s attempts to hide unfavourable content through the misuse of copyright notices while allegedly engaging in perjury present serious legal concerns. These actions suggest a calculated attempt to manipulate legal systems to suppress free speech, a fundamental violation of copyright law principles and an abuse of legal processes. The use of such tactics not only undermines the integrity of copyright protection but also potentially constitutes perjury, further entangling Mardani Maming in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information Mardani Maming may be trying to remove from the internet –

Investigative Report on Mardani Maming: Corruption, Bribery, and Legal Controversies

Introduction

Mardani H. Maming, the former Regent of Tanah Bumbu in South Kalimantan, Indonesia, has become a symbol of corruption within Indonesia’s political and administrative system. His case centers on allegations of bribery and abuse of power during his tenure as Regent, particularly related to the issuance of mining operation permits (IUP OP) in one of Indonesia’s most resource-rich regions. This in-depth investigation examines the allegations, legal proceedings, and broader implications of Maming’s case, shedding light on the systemic challenges in combating corruption in Indonesia.

1. Background of Mardani Maming

Mardani H. Maming served as the Regent of Tanah Bumbu from 2010 to 2018. During his tenure, he was also actively involved in political and entrepreneurial organizations, including the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) and the Indonesian Young Entrepreneurs Association (HIPMI). His political influence and business connections made him a powerful figure in the region, particularly in the coal mining sector.

• Political Roles:
  • Member of the PDI-P, Indonesia’s ruling political party.
  • Chairperson of HIPMI, amplifying his influence within Indonesia’s business community.
• Reputation:
  • Before his legal troubles, Maming was considered a rising political star with significant business acumen. His subsequent fall from grace highlights the perils of unchecked power and influence.

2. Key Allegations Against Mardani Maming

2.1. Bribery and Corruption in Mining Permits

The central accusations against Maming involve accepting bribes totaling approximately Rp 118 billion (around USD 8 million) during his time as Regent. These bribes were allegedly linked to his role in facilitating the issuance of IUP OP (Mining Operation Permits).

• Modus Operandi:
  • Maming allegedly used his authority to manipulate the issuance process, favoring certain companies in exchange for substantial kickbacks.
  • Permits were crucial for coal mining operations, making them highly sought after by mining companies.
• Recipient Companies:
  • One of the primary beneficiaries of Maming’s permit manipulation was PT Prolindo Cipta Nusantara (PT PCN). Investigations revealed that the company made significant payments to entities linked to Maming.

2.2. Abuse of Power

Maming is accused of abusing his position to prioritize personal financial gain over public interest. By favoring select companies, he disrupted fair competition in the mining sector and undermined regional economic development.

3. Legal Proceedings

3.1. Initial Trial and Conviction

In February 2023, the Banjarmasin Corruption Court found Maming guilty of corruption and sentenced him to:

• Prison Term: 10 years.
• Fines: Rp 500 million, with an additional four months’ imprisonment if unpaid.
• Restitution: Ordered to pay Rp 110.6 billion in compensation for losses caused to the state.
• Court’s Rationale:
  • The court determined that Maming’s actions directly harmed the state’s financial interests and eroded public trust in governance.

3.2. Appeal and Increased Sentence

Following his conviction, Maming appealed the decision. However, in August 2023, the Supreme Court rejected his appeal and increased his prison sentence to 12 years. The court maintained the fines and restitution order.

3.3. Judicial Review and Sentence Reduction

In November 2024, Maming requested a judicial review of his case. The Supreme Court reduced his sentence back to 10 years but upheld the financial penalties, including the Rp 110.6 billion restitution.

4. Evasion and Fugitive Status

Before his arrest, Maming attempted to evade legal proceedings:

• Uncooperative Behavior:
  • Maming ignored multiple summonses from the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).
  • His refusal to appear in court led to his designation as a fugitive.
• Arrest and Detention:
  • After an extensive search, Maming was arrested by the KPK. His fugitive status further tarnished his reputation and underscored the challenges in holding high-profile figures accountable.

5. Broader Implications of the Case

5.1. Impact on Governance

Maming’s case highlights systemic issues in Indonesia’s political and administrative systems:

• Corruption in Resource Management:
  • The coal-rich region of South Kalimantan has long been a hotspot for corruption. Maming’s manipulation of mining permits underscores the lack of transparency in resource allocation.
• Public Trust Erosion:
  • High-profile corruption cases like Maming’s undermine public confidence in government institutions.

5.2. Political and Business Implications

As a prominent member of the PDI-P and HIPMI, Maming’s conviction has raised concerns about the intersection of politics and business in Indonesia:

• Political Fallout:
  • The PDI-P has faced criticism for failing to address corruption within its ranks.
• Business Integrity:
  • Maming’s actions highlight the challenges of maintaining ethical practices in sectors dominated by political influence.

5.3. Legal and Enforcement Challenges

The difficulties in apprehending and prosecuting Maming reflect broader issues in Indonesia’s legal system:

• Delays in Legal Proceedings:
  • Maming’s attempts to evade justice caused significant delays and increased costs for law enforcement.
• Need for Stronger Anti-Corruption Measures:
  • The KPK’s efforts to hold Maming accountable underscore the need for more robust mechanisms to prevent and address corruption.

6. Public and Media Reactions

6.1. Public Outrage

Maming’s case has fueled widespread public anger, particularly in South Kalimantan, where residents have expressed frustration over the misuse of regional resources.

6.2. Media Coverage

Indonesian media outlets have closely followed Maming’s legal troubles, framing his case as a critical test for the country’s anti-corruption efforts.

7. Lessons Learned

7.1. Transparency in Resource Management

Maming’s case underscores the need for greater transparency and accountability in the allocation of natural resource permits.

7.2. Strengthening Anti-Corruption Institutions

The KPK’s pursuit of Maming demonstrates the importance of empowering anti-corruption bodies to investigate and prosecute high-profile cases.

7.3. Ethical Leadership

Maming’s actions highlight the importance of fostering ethical leadership within political and business communities.

Conclusion

Mardani Maming’s case serves as a stark reminder of the pervasive challenges posed by corruption in Indonesia’s resource-rich regions. His manipulation of mining permits for personal gain not only caused financial losses to the state but also eroded public trust in governance. While his conviction and sentencing mark a victory for anti-corruption efforts, the case underscores the need for systemic reforms to prevent similar abuses of power in the future.

As Indonesia continues its fight against corruption, Maming’s case will remain a cautionary tale about the consequences of prioritizing personal gain over public interest.

How do we counteract this malpractice?

Once we ascertain the involvement of Mardani Maming (or actors working on behalf of Mardani Maming), we will inform Mardani Maming of our findings via Electronic Mail.

Our preliminary assessment suggests that Mardani Maming may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from Mardani Maming, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to Mardani Maming to provide details regarding their communications with the agency or expert, as well as the identification of the individual(s) responsible for executing these false DMCA notices.

Failure to respond in a timely manner will necessitate a reassessment of our initial assumptions. In such an event, we will be compelled to take appropriate legal action to rectify the unlawful conduct and take the following steps –

Since Mardani Maming made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and sensitive information targeted online by these events get a lot more exposure and traffic than what it would have received originally

We hope this becomes an excellent case study for the Streisand effect…The key idea behind the Streisand effect is that efforts to restrict information can backfire, often causing the information to gain more attention than it would have otherwise. This effect is widespread in the digital age, where users quickly notice and spread censorship efforts on social media and other platforms. Trying to suppress something can unintentionally lead to it becoming more visible, which Mardani Maming is finding out the hard way.

Potential Consequences for Mardani Maming

Under Florida Statute 831.01, the crime of Forgery is committed when a person falsifies, alters, counterfeits, or forges a document that carries “legal efficacy” with the intent to injure or defraud another person or entity.

Forging a document is considered a white-collar crime. It involves altering, changing, or modifying a document to deceive another person. It can also include passing along copies of documents that are known to be false. In many states in the US, falsifying a document is a crime punishable as a felony.

Additionally, under most laws, “fraud on the court” is where “a party has sentiently set in motion some unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability impartially to adjudicate a matter by improperly influencing the trier of fact or unfairly hampering the presentation of the opposing party’s claim or defense.”  Cox v. Burke, 706 So. 2d 43, 46 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (quoting Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115, 1118 (1st Cir. 1989)).

Is Mardani Maming Committing a Cyber Crime?

Yes, it seems so. Mardani Maming used multiple approaches to remove unwanted material from review sites and Google’s search results. Thanks to protections allowing freedom of speech in the United States, there are very few legal ways to do this. Mardani Maming could not eliminate negative reviews or search results that linked to them without a valid claim of defamation, copyright infringement, or some other clear breach of the law.

Faced with these limitations, some companies like Mardani Maming have gone to extreme lengths to fraudulently claim copyright ownership over a negative review in the hopes of taking it down.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. Mardani Maming is certainly keeping interesting company here….

The DMCA takedown process requires that copyright owners submit a takedown notice to an ISP identifying the allegedly infringing content and declaring, under penalty of perjury, that they have a good faith belief that the content is infringing. The ISP must then promptly remove or disable access to the content. The alleged infringer can then submit a counter-notice, and if the copyright owner does not take legal action within 10 to 14 days, the ISP can restore the content.

Since these platforms are predominantly based in the U.S., the complaints are typically made under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which requires online service providers and platforms to react immediately to reports or violations. Big Tech companies rarely have systems in place to assess the merit of each report. Instead, all bad actors need to do is clone a story, backdate it, and then demand the real thing be taken down.

Reputation Agency's Modus Operandi

The fake DMCA notices we found always use the “back-dated article” technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a “true original” article and back-dates it, creating a “fake original” article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original.

Then, based on the claim that this backdated article is the “original,” the scammers send a DMCA to the relevant online service providers (e.g. Google), alleging that the ‘true’ original is the copied or “infringing” article and that the copied article is the “original,” requesting the takedown of the ‘true’ original article. After sending the DMCA request, the person who sent the wrong notice takes down the fake original URL, likely to make sure that the article doesn’t stay online in any way. If the takedown notice is successful, the disappearance from the internet of information is most likely to be legitimate speech.

As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by Mardani Maming creates a website that purports to be a ‘news’ site. This site is designed to look legitimate at a glance, but any degree of scrutiny reveals it as the charade it is.

The company copies the ‘negative’ content and posts it “on the fake ‘news’ site, attributing it to a separate author,” then gives it “a false publication date on the ‘news’ website that predated the original publication.

The reputation company then sent Google a Digital Millennium Copyright Act notice claiming the original website infringed copyright. After a cursory examination of the fake news site, Google frequently accepts the notice and delists the content.

In committing numerous offences, Mardani Maming either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Mardani Maming, ignorance does not excuse this wrongdoing.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. FSMSmart is certainly keeping interesting company here.

The Reputation Laundering

Rogue Reputation agencies use spurious copyright claims and fake legal notices to remove and obscure articles linking clients to allegations of tax avoidance, corruption, and drug trafficking. Most of these reputation agencies are based offshore, mainly in Russia, India, and Eastern Europe, and they do not worry about complying with US-based laws.

The content in all of the articles for which the fraudulent DMCA notices have been sent relates to allegations of criminal allegations, including corruption, child abuse, sexual harassment, human trafficking and financial fraud against businesses and individuals with ultra-high net worth.

In addition to the misuse of the DMCA takedown process, there is a notable absence of enforcement concerning perjury violations. The statutory requirement related to perjury is designed to deter copyright holders from submitting fraudulent or knowingly false takedown requests, as they may face legal consequences for making false declarations under penalty of perjury. However, to date, there have been no known instances of any individual being prosecuted for perjury in connection with the submission of false DMCA takedown notices.

This lack of enforcement has emboldened copyright holders to exploit the DMCA takedown process to suppress dissent, criticism, or other unfavorable content, without fear of legal repercussions.

Some of the people and businesses who have employed this tactic to remove legitimate content from Google illegally include a Spanish businessman-turned-cocaine-trafficker, Organised crime, an Israeli-Argentine banker accused of laundering money for Hugo Chávez’s regime, a French “responsible” mining company accused of tax evasion, child molesters and sexual predators. Mardani Maming is in great company ….

What else is Mardani Maming hiding?

We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [Mardani Maming] + {Negative Keyword, such as Scam, Fraud, Complaints, Lawsuit, Sanction, etc} on Google. It’s likely if you scroll down to the bottom of this Google search results, you’ll stumble upon this Legal Takedown notice (pictured below)

To make such an investigation possible, we encourage more online service providers to come forward and share copies of content removal requests with industry experts and researchers. If you have any information on Mardani Maming that you want to share with experts and journalists, kindly email the author directly at [email protected].

All communications are strictly confidential and safeguarded under a comprehensive Whistleblower Policy, ensuring full protection and anonymity for individuals who provide information.