'Environmental law should be revised'

'Environmental law should be revised'

JAKARTA (JP): Attorney General Singgih proposed yesterday that
the 1982 law on environmental management should be revised
because it demands material evidence that prosecutors are rarely
able to provide.

The overly tight requirements explain why polluters charged
with environmental damage often escape punishment, the attorney
general said.

Under the current law, material evidence has to be supported
with data on chemical, biological and toxin contents verified by
laboratory testing.

The legislation also requires that prosecutors consider the
possible social effects of their legal action against the
polluter, he was quoted by Antara as saying.

"For example if a factory is closed down for polluting the
environment, what would happen to its workers? But if it is not
shut down, would it really endanger nearby residents?" he said.

Article 22 of the environmental law states that anyone
convicted of knowingly damaging or polluting the environment is
subject to a 10-year prison term or a maximum fine of Rp 100
million.

At present, legal action is used as a last resort after
repeated appeals, dialogs and administrative approaches have
failed to stop the polluter.

So complicated is the procedure demanded by the law, only a
few environmental disputes have ever reached court.

"Prosecutors find it just too difficult to come up with the
evidence required by the law," said Ismudjoko, a justice for
general crimes.

He said laboratory testing was a difficult requirement to meet
due to the limited number of suitable facilities.

Ismudjoko proposed that the government build laboratories in
each province to ensure cases of environmental damage are tackled
properly.

Environmental disputes are mostly settled out of court by the
alleged polluter, the public and the government, he said.

The first prosecution of a polluter was in 1989 when an East
Java soy bean curd factory owner was taken to court on charges of
polluting the River Surabaya.

The accused, Bambang Gunawan, was acquitted after witnesses'
evidence, obtained from data from two different laboratories,
proved to be conflicting.

Bambang was charged with extensive pollution of the river
between March 1986 and July 1988. So serious was the
contamination it killed most of the marine life and the water
could barely be processed into drinking water.

Witnesses from the Surabaya Environment Sanitary Office said
the pollution level had surpassed the maximum tolerable limit but
experts from local industry office reported the level had been
"very low".

The outcome of the trial was a disappointment to both
government officials and the public. (pan)