Extractive Islamic Politics after Constitutional Review: Procedural Correction, Structural Persistence and Moral Authority

Indonesia’s preferential mining policy makes religious organisational status a criterion for access to extractive resources, raising questions about institutional dependence and the moral authority of Islamic organisations. This study examines how Constitutional Court Decision No. 160/PUU-XXIII/2025 changes the legal conditions of priority allocation and what these conditions mean for Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) and Muhammadiyah. Using qualitative documentary analysis of mining regulations, the Court’s ruling, official organisational statements and academic literature, the study traces legal developments, codes institutional positions and compares the organisations across common governance and ecological dimensions. The findings show that the ruling conditions priority allocation on clear parameters and objective, transparent and accountable assessment, while preserving eligibility for religious organisation-owned businesses. This coexistence of procedural correction and structural persistence maintains the institutional conditions for state-mediated resource dependence without establishing reciprocal political patronage. NU articulates a managerial approach to moral authority centred on organisational control and collective benefit, whereas Muhammadiyah advances a conditional approach tied to social and ecological consequences. Both are documented positions, not verified outcomes of mining operations. By developing extractive Islamic politics as an analytical concept, the study distinguishes constitutional constraints from changes in organisational conduct and contributes to debates on Islamic politics, religious authority and resource governance.