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)