Industrial Pollution of the Citarum River: A Corporate Environmental Crime
A clean and healthy environment is a constitutional right of every Indonesian citizen. However, in the pursuit of economic profit, the industrial sector often sacrifices environmental sustainability through the practice of illegal waste dumping. The case of pollution in the Citarum River by PT. X is not merely an administrative violation, but a serious environmental crime that robs the surrounding community of their right to life and damages the region’s ecological future. According to Prof. Dr. Takdir Rahmadi, S.H., LL.M., an Indonesian Environmental Law Expert, environmental law enforcement in Indonesia must prioritise the Polluter Pays Principle. He stated that legal liability should not stop at administrative fines alone, but must extend to corporate criminal law enforcement and the obligation to restore (remediate) the damaged environment to provide a genuine deterrent effect.
Based on an investigation by the Environmental Agency (DLH) and supporting laboratory data, the Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) and Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) levels exceeded Class II water quality standards by up to 400 percent of the permitted safe limits. The impacted zone includes a 5-kilometre stretch of the river downstream from the factory, which has suffered severe degradation. The social impact is devastating, with 1,200 families across three villages losing access to clean water for their daily needs and agricultural irrigation. The economic losses are substantial, with fish farmers in the downstream area experiencing harvest failure and total losses estimated at Rp 2.5 billion.
PT. X installed a hidden bypass pipe below the water’s surface that led directly to the river. This pipe was used to discharge concentrated chemical waste at night or during heavy rain to deceive supervisory officers. This action indicates an element of intent (dolus) on the part of the company’s management. They deliberately avoided the operational costs of waste treatment at their own treatment plant to reduce company expenditure, despite knowing the impact would damage the environment and endanger public health.
Under Law No. 32 of 2009 on Environmental Protection and Management, as amended by Law No. 6 of 2023 (the Job Creation Law), several provisions apply. Article 69 paragraph (1) letter a prohibits actions that cause environmental pollution and/or destruction. Article 100 paragraph (1) stipulates criminal penalties for anyone who violates emission quality standards, disturbance standards, or liquid waste standards. Article 104 addresses criminal penalties for anyone who carries out dumping of waste and/or materials into environmental media without a permit. Legally, this case fulfils the elements of an environmental crime. The legal subjects are the corporation (PT. X) and the management who gave the orders (command responsibility). The causality in this case is linear: the discharge of hazardous chemical substances directly caused the death of the aquatic ecosystem and water poisoning, with a domino effect leading to economic losses for the community whose livelihoods depend on the river, namely farmers and fish farmers.
Based on the legal analysis, the following recommendations are proposed for case resolution and future prevention. First, the application of multi-door sanctions: the government should not only use administrative sanctions such as permit suspension. Law enforcement must pursue criminal sanctions and compensation payments, as well as corrective actions in the form of an obligation to fund the remediation of the river until it is clean. Second, the revitalisation of local government oversight: the Environmental Agency needs to install digital water quality sensors (an online monitoring system) at the discharge points of every factory, integrated into a central data centre, so that any illegal discharge, even at night, can be immediately detected.