The important part is bigger than one villa. The case sits at the intersection of tourism development, forest management and Bali’s wider push to enforce planning rules. The Pejarakan site is part of a 700-hectare village forest managed under a formal social-forestry arrangement covering thousands of local households.
01 What was demolished — and why
The Bali Provincial Government says the villa development stood inside the Pejarakan Village Forest social-forestry area in Gerokgak, northern Buleleng. Governor Wayan Koster led the demolition after provincial authorities concluded that the accommodation facilities did not meet the requirements for nature-tourism use inside the forest area.
According to the province’s account reported by ANTARA and independently corroborated by Kumparan, the project had first come to the attention of the Bali DPRD’s special committee on spatial planning, assets and permits. A review then found that the development was not included in the area’s approved Social Forestry Management Plan (RKPS).
Officials also said the owner had received three warning letters but did not dismantle the development voluntarily before the government action on 12 September.
02 Why the social-forest status matters
Pejarakan Village Forest is not simply vacant land beside a tourism area. The official social-forestry arrangement covers about 700 hectares and is managed by LPHD Wana Makmur under a Ministry of Environment and Forestry decree dated 5 June 2020.
Government reporting says the forest arrangement is linked to around 3,262 households. Social forestry is designed to give local communities a recognised role in managing forest land while keeping that use within an approved management framework.
That is why the RKPS matters in this case. The government’s position is not merely that the building paperwork was incomplete; it says the villa development itself was outside the plan governing how the social-forestry area could be used.
03 Officials listed several missing approvals
Provincial officials identified multiple compliance problems. They said the development had no permit for underground-water use even though groundwater extraction had already taken place, no formal Persetujuan Bangunan Gedung (PBG) building approval, and no required landscape-management study.
Kumparan’s report carries the same core permit findings. Together with the RKPS issue and the unanswered warning letters, those gaps formed the government’s stated basis for the enforcement action.
This does not mean every tourism business near a forest or village-managed area is unlawful. It does mean accommodation projects in protected or specially managed land can face overlapping forestry, planning, building and water requirements — and that a normal-looking villa can still be non-compliant if those approvals are absent.
04 A possible foreign-financing link is still being investigated
Governor Koster also said officials had found an indication that a foreign national may have been involved as a financier while a local resident’s name was used in the development process.
That point is not a final finding. Koster said the matter was still being traced and would be followed up. Totally Bali is therefore treating it as an allegation under investigation, not as proof that any particular foreign person broke the law or controlled the project.
The distinction matters because nominee-style ownership and foreign participation in local businesses are sensitive regulatory issues in Bali. Until authorities publish a completed finding, the verified fact is that the province says it is investigating a possible foreign-financing connection.
05 The site is supposed to be replanted
The enforcement action is not meant to end with demolition. Koster instructed Bali’s Environment and Forestry Agency (DLHK) to restore the affected land to its social-forest function and begin replanting.
That makes the next stage measurable. Residents and environmental groups can now watch whether the physical structures are fully cleared, whether replanting actually happens and whether the restored area remains inside the approved community-forest plan.
For legitimate tourism operators, the case also sends a practical signal: Bali’s recent planning-enforcement push is increasingly reaching beyond permit paperwork and into physical development already standing on the ground.
06 Why residents and travellers should care
For residents, the Pejarakan case is about who gets to use community-managed forest land, whether local forestry plans are respected and whether enforcement is applied after warnings are ignored. Those questions affect land, water, livelihoods and confidence in the planning system.
For travellers, it is another reminder that not every villa or accommodation listing is automatically operating on a sound regulatory footing. Guests are rarely in a position to audit land-use documents themselves, but major enforcement cases can affect bookings, access and the reputation of a property or area.
The broader tourism lesson is not to avoid Pejarakan or Buleleng. It is that development in environmentally sensitive areas is under greater scrutiny, and operators should be able to demonstrate that their land use and building permissions are legitimate.
07 What to watch next
- Replanting and restoration. DLHK has been told to return the site to social-forest use.
- The financing investigation. Authorities may clarify whether any foreign party was involved and, if so, whether that involvement breached Indonesian rules.
- Follow-through on other projects. The Pejarakan development was initially flagged through Bali’s wider spatial-planning and permitting scrutiny, so similar cases may receive attention.
- Any formal legal or administrative action. Demolition is confirmed; further sanctions should only be reported if authorities announce them.
