This paper examines ExxonMobil's joint venture operations with Pertamina in Aceh, Indonesia, where the company faced serious allegations of complicity in human rights abuses committed by Indonesian security forces during the Acehnese separatist conflict. The paper evaluates the company's failure to fulfill its corporate social responsibility (CSR) obligations to all stakeholders — including local communities, employees, and society at large — and argues that charitable initiatives alone do not constitute adequate ethical conduct. Drawing on the Aceh case, the paper highlights how ethical and reputational failures can disrupt business operations and underscores the importance of community engagement, ethical corporate governance, and avoiding collusion with questionable government regimes.
The paper employs stakeholder analysis as its core analytical framework, systematically identifying the full range of parties — customers, employees, shareholders, suppliers, competitors, government, community, and society — to whom a corporation owes ethical obligations. By measuring ExxonMobil's conduct against this framework, the paper moves beyond moral assertion to structured critique, showing how the company's actions failed specific stakeholder groups rather than making only a generalized ethical condemnation.
The paper opens with a factual account of ExxonMobil's presence in Aceh and the human rights allegations leveled against it. The second section evaluates the company's charitable counter-claims and exposes their insufficiency as a CSR defense. The final section broadens the argument, drawing lessons about business ethics, reputational risk, and the strategic importance of genuine community engagement — ending with a prescriptive recommendation for ethical corporate governance.
ExxonMobil's joint venture with Pertamina, Indonesia's state-owned oil and gas company, has long been characterized as a mutually beneficial relationship with the government. ExxonMobil operates a major natural gas facility in Aceh province and pays a share of its profits to the Indonesian government. However, the Aceh region has been deeply affected by violence, as Acehnese separatists have fought against Indonesian troops, creating an unstable and dangerous operating environment.
Human rights groups in Indonesia charged ExxonMobil with supporting torture, murder, genocide, and other human rights abuses carried out by security forces in Aceh. The company was also accused of helping the government suppress separatist activities, and ExxonMobil was even alleged to have provided heavy equipment used to dig mass graves. The deteriorating security situation eventually compelled the company to suspend gas production in order to protect the safety of its workers.
Although ExxonMobil denied these charges, critics argued that the company never took meaningful action to end its complicity with the government and continued to pay the military for security services. Additional allegations included paying Indonesian workers below-standard wages, conducting business without properly caring for the environment and surrounding land, and mishandling industrial explosions in the province — allegedly attempting to suppress information about such incidents rather than address them transparently.
The act of knowingly employing military forces with a record of atrocities to protect corporate operations — and thereby abetting human rights violations — is heavily criticized by advocates of ethics, morality, and corporate social responsibility. By maintaining this arrangement and continuing operations despite documented abuses, ExxonMobil became directly implicated in the conduct of the security forces it employed. Critics contend that financial payments to the military, regardless of their stated purpose, provided material support to units responsible for serious violations of human rights.
You’re 40% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.