302
A. G. Wibisana and S. N. Setyorini
legislative and administrative powers to the fullest extent possible to prevent the fires from
being started by the commercial enterprises. Once these fires had been detected and transboundary harm occasioned to the injured States, Indonesia further failed to control the actions
of the commercial enterprises and to compel them to cease their harmful conduct. Further,
based upon the lenient penalties imposed to date, it would appear that Indonesia has breached
its responsibility to punish the offenders adequately in order to prevent future violations.
A similar opinion is also put forward by Tay, arguing that according to the Principle
21 of the Stockholm Declaration and Principle 2 of the Rio Declaration, “Indonesia
should be held responsible and accountable to the countries which have been affected
by the fires for the consequences of its failure to enforce its own laws and to control
the fires. This would arguably be so even if the activities causing the haze may be
traced to private companies in distant areas, over which the government in Jakarta
may have little effective control” (Tay 1998, 206).
In the last few years, however, legal reforms have taken place related to Indonesia’s
peatland management. Having realized the importance of peatlands, the Indonesian
government has initiated various efforts in improving the protection and management
of peatlands. New regulations have been issued to strengthen the peatland protection
and the prevention and control of fires. These include Peatland Regulation, that is,
Government Regulation (GR) Number 71 of 2014 as amended by GR 56 of 2017
on peatland protection, and various regulations of Minister of the Environment and
Forestry (MoEF) in 2017. As a response to the 2015 fires, the President signed the
Presidential Regulation Number 1 of 2016 on the Peatland Restoration Agency, as
the agency is responsible for accelerating peatland restoration in seven provinces
worst affected by the fires.
The regulatory responses above take place along with the increase in the number
of law enforcement against companies accused of triggering fires. In this regard, one
could note that since 2015, the Ministry of the Environment (MOE), later becomes
Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF), has imposed various administrative
sanctions to some companies. There are also increased criminal prosecutions against
the companies and their CEOs since in recent years. In September 2015 alone, the
MoEF imposed four administrative sanctions in terms of government coercion, four
suspensions of permits, and two revocations of permits. During the same period,
there were also 18 companies named as suspects for forest fires (MoEF 2016). This
is a significant increase, because from 2010 to 2014, there were no administrative
sanctions imposed, and there were only two corporations that were named suspects
(MoEF 2016, 191).
This chapter aims to analyze the legal aspects of peatland protection and management in Indonesia. In this regard, the chapter discusses the importance of the various
regulations on peatland, and the challenges faced in implementing these regulations.
The chapter also analyzes how such regulatory measures addresses the issue of peatland recovery. The chapter argues that the recovery of peatlands needs to be conducted
under the polluter-pay principle. Consequently, law enforcement, including lawsuits
against concession holders, should play an essential role in financing the recovery
of peatlands.
A. G. Wibisana and S. N. Setyorini
legislative and administrative powers to the fullest extent possible to prevent the fires from
being started by the commercial enterprises. Once these fires had been detected and transboundary harm occasioned to the injured States, Indonesia further failed to control the actions
of the commercial enterprises and to compel them to cease their harmful conduct. Further,
based upon the lenient penalties imposed to date, it would appear that Indonesia has breached
its responsibility to punish the offenders adequately in order to prevent future violations.
A similar opinion is also put forward by Tay, arguing that according to the Principle
21 of the Stockholm Declaration and Principle 2 of the Rio Declaration, “Indonesia
should be held responsible and accountable to the countries which have been affected
by the fires for the consequences of its failure to enforce its own laws and to control
the fires. This would arguably be so even if the activities causing the haze may be
traced to private companies in distant areas, over which the government in Jakarta
may have little effective control” (Tay 1998, 206).
In the last few years, however, legal reforms have taken place related to Indonesia’s
peatland management. Having realized the importance of peatlands, the Indonesian
government has initiated various efforts in improving the protection and management
of peatlands. New regulations have been issued to strengthen the peatland protection
and the prevention and control of fires. These include Peatland Regulation, that is,
Government Regulation (GR) Number 71 of 2014 as amended by GR 56 of 2017
on peatland protection, and various regulations of Minister of the Environment and
Forestry (MoEF) in 2017. As a response to the 2015 fires, the President signed the
Presidential Regulation Number 1 of 2016 on the Peatland Restoration Agency, as
the agency is responsible for accelerating peatland restoration in seven provinces
worst affected by the fires.
The regulatory responses above take place along with the increase in the number
of law enforcement against companies accused of triggering fires. In this regard, one
could note that since 2015, the Ministry of the Environment (MOE), later becomes
Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF), has imposed various administrative
sanctions to some companies. There are also increased criminal prosecutions against
the companies and their CEOs since in recent years. In September 2015 alone, the
MoEF imposed four administrative sanctions in terms of government coercion, four
suspensions of permits, and two revocations of permits. During the same period,
there were also 18 companies named as suspects for forest fires (MoEF 2016). This
is a significant increase, because from 2010 to 2014, there were no administrative
sanctions imposed, and there were only two corporations that were named suspects
(MoEF 2016, 191).
This chapter aims to analyze the legal aspects of peatland protection and management in Indonesia. In this regard, the chapter discusses the importance of the various
regulations on peatland, and the challenges faced in implementing these regulations.
The chapter also analyzes how such regulatory measures addresses the issue of peatland recovery. The chapter argues that the recovery of peatlands needs to be conducted
under the polluter-pay principle. Consequently, law enforcement, including lawsuits
against concession holders, should play an essential role in financing the recovery
of peatlands.