Indonesia needs environmental courts
Indonesia needs environmental courts
SURABAYA, East Java (JP): Attorney General Singgih, lamenting the poor enforcement of environmental laws, has proposed the establishment of a special court for trying cases of contamination for commercial gain, with emphasis on environmental pollution.
Singgih told The Jakarta Post after opening a seminar on environmental protection laws here on Sunday that such crimes are getting more complicated in form and as such a court is urgently needed to handle them more effectively.
The establishment of such a court would also help the government's drive to instill corporate responsibility, he added.
The seminar was held by the East Java Prosecutor's Office in cooperation with the Airlangga University's Law School. Singgih reminded the participants that, in contrast to other crimes, environmental cases usually have greater impact on the people.
In addition, environmental pollution cases are especially sensitive because very often they degenerate and trigger riots, which could then be exploited by "the third party", he said.
He cited as an example last month's attacks by hundreds of local people of Pasuruan, East Java, of a South Korean-owned food seasoning plant for allegedly polluting the Rejoso River.
Police arrested dozens of protesters, some of whom turned out to be out of town students.
The Environmental Impact Management Agency, however, said it is likely the pollution came from other sources and that the company had a fine record in complying with environmental regulations.
The agency also said that the water in the river met with the minimum standard for a river, at least for "agricultural purposes" and not necessarily for drinking.
"If we had such a special court, the legal procedures for environmental destruction for commercial gain could be handled efficiently and in ways which are less time consuming," Singgih said.
Singgih acknowledged that very often poor law enforcement on environmental destruction cases is caused by the inadequate bases upon which the authorities can establish evidence of crimes. The condition is particularly relevant for cases of contamination by toxic liquid, he said.
"For instance, it's very difficult to trace pollution of deep- wells and other underground rivers by such toxic liquid," he said. "We often find it difficult to get even a sample for evidence."
He cited as another example of crime for commercial gain the 1992 case involving a manufacturer of bean curd cakes in Sidoarjo, East Java. The residents of the surrounding areas lost their lawsuit because the local authority could not find strong evidence of contamination, he said.
Singgih also proposed the establishment of "command posts" in industrial estates, whose task would be to take complaints and other reports of possible pollution from local people.
In his speech, Singgih also called for clarification on environmental law and regulations.
"We have yet to establish a unified perception on whether crimes or civil cases concerning environmental pollution can be classified as a general crime, an commercial crime, or as a special environmental crime," he said.
In the United States and Canada, environmental destruction is classified as general crime, but the countries have special prosecutors, police and judges to handle such cases, he said.
The Attorney General's office several years ago sent some 60 prosecutors to the Netherlands to study environmental laws and legal procedures there, but so far the experience has not been applied.
"Not one among them has handled environmental cases yet because they are posted somewhere else and because of a number of other reasons," he said. (15/swe)