Corporate responsibility for environmental human rights violation

A case study of Indonesia

Achmad Romsan, Suzanna Mohamed Isa

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The volcano mudflow of 2006 in Sidoarjo, East Java was one of the most devastating environmental disasters in Indonesia. Many argue that it was the failure of PT. Lapindo during the drilling process but the verdict of the District Court of South Jakarta decided that it was a natural disaster. Environmental crime provision is stated in The Environmental Management Act 2009 No. 32 but this stipulation does not reduce the number of corporate environmental crimes as there are other factors involved such as enforcement. The protection of people's environmental human rights is also recognized under The Law of 1999 No. 39 on Human Rights. Regrettably, prosecuting corporate environmental crime from the angle of human rights is at a dead-lock due to the fact that the Indonesian Human Rights Court is only authorized to prosecute genocide crimes and crime against humanity. Nevertheless, the corporate sector should take the responsibility to restore the ecosystem where disasters have occurred. In view of this gap, some primary data, like statutes, regulations and international conventions; also secondary data such as articles, reports and news papers have been obtained from literature study and internet sources and are descriptively and qualitatively analyzed. This article aims to rationalise that the jurisdiction of the Indonesian Human Rights Court should include environmental crime in The Law of 2000 No. 26 in Human Rights Court and provide output for the decision makers in Indonesia to consider that environmental crime is a crime against humanity.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)111-130
Number of pages20
JournalPertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities
Volume22
Issue numberJanuary
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2014

Fingerprint

environmental crime
human rights violation
Indonesia
human rights
responsibility
offense
disaster
district court
Law
genocide
environmental management
statute
Corporate responsibility
Human rights
Violations
Crime
Responsibility
Human Rights
decision maker
jurisdiction

Keywords

  • Corporate crime
  • Corporate liability
  • Environmental human rights
  • Environmental pollution
  • Indonesia

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Arts and Humanities(all)
  • Business, Management and Accounting(all)
  • Economics, Econometrics and Finance(all)
  • Social Sciences(all)

Cite this

Corporate responsibility for environmental human rights violation : A case study of Indonesia. / Romsan, Achmad; Mohamed Isa, Suzanna.

In: Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities, Vol. 22, No. January, 01.01.2014, p. 111-130.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{488b7d28858a4e74bd09b22a1afbe461,
title = "Corporate responsibility for environmental human rights violation: A case study of Indonesia",
abstract = "The volcano mudflow of 2006 in Sidoarjo, East Java was one of the most devastating environmental disasters in Indonesia. Many argue that it was the failure of PT. Lapindo during the drilling process but the verdict of the District Court of South Jakarta decided that it was a natural disaster. Environmental crime provision is stated in The Environmental Management Act 2009 No. 32 but this stipulation does not reduce the number of corporate environmental crimes as there are other factors involved such as enforcement. The protection of people's environmental human rights is also recognized under The Law of 1999 No. 39 on Human Rights. Regrettably, prosecuting corporate environmental crime from the angle of human rights is at a dead-lock due to the fact that the Indonesian Human Rights Court is only authorized to prosecute genocide crimes and crime against humanity. Nevertheless, the corporate sector should take the responsibility to restore the ecosystem where disasters have occurred. In view of this gap, some primary data, like statutes, regulations and international conventions; also secondary data such as articles, reports and news papers have been obtained from literature study and internet sources and are descriptively and qualitatively analyzed. This article aims to rationalise that the jurisdiction of the Indonesian Human Rights Court should include environmental crime in The Law of 2000 No. 26 in Human Rights Court and provide output for the decision makers in Indonesia to consider that environmental crime is a crime against humanity.",
keywords = "Corporate crime, Corporate liability, Environmental human rights, Environmental pollution, Indonesia",
author = "Achmad Romsan and {Mohamed Isa}, Suzanna",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "22",
pages = "111--130",
journal = "Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities",
issn = "0128-7702",
publisher = "Universiti Putra Malaysia",
number = "January",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Corporate responsibility for environmental human rights violation

T2 - A case study of Indonesia

AU - Romsan, Achmad

AU - Mohamed Isa, Suzanna

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - The volcano mudflow of 2006 in Sidoarjo, East Java was one of the most devastating environmental disasters in Indonesia. Many argue that it was the failure of PT. Lapindo during the drilling process but the verdict of the District Court of South Jakarta decided that it was a natural disaster. Environmental crime provision is stated in The Environmental Management Act 2009 No. 32 but this stipulation does not reduce the number of corporate environmental crimes as there are other factors involved such as enforcement. The protection of people's environmental human rights is also recognized under The Law of 1999 No. 39 on Human Rights. Regrettably, prosecuting corporate environmental crime from the angle of human rights is at a dead-lock due to the fact that the Indonesian Human Rights Court is only authorized to prosecute genocide crimes and crime against humanity. Nevertheless, the corporate sector should take the responsibility to restore the ecosystem where disasters have occurred. In view of this gap, some primary data, like statutes, regulations and international conventions; also secondary data such as articles, reports and news papers have been obtained from literature study and internet sources and are descriptively and qualitatively analyzed. This article aims to rationalise that the jurisdiction of the Indonesian Human Rights Court should include environmental crime in The Law of 2000 No. 26 in Human Rights Court and provide output for the decision makers in Indonesia to consider that environmental crime is a crime against humanity.

AB - The volcano mudflow of 2006 in Sidoarjo, East Java was one of the most devastating environmental disasters in Indonesia. Many argue that it was the failure of PT. Lapindo during the drilling process but the verdict of the District Court of South Jakarta decided that it was a natural disaster. Environmental crime provision is stated in The Environmental Management Act 2009 No. 32 but this stipulation does not reduce the number of corporate environmental crimes as there are other factors involved such as enforcement. The protection of people's environmental human rights is also recognized under The Law of 1999 No. 39 on Human Rights. Regrettably, prosecuting corporate environmental crime from the angle of human rights is at a dead-lock due to the fact that the Indonesian Human Rights Court is only authorized to prosecute genocide crimes and crime against humanity. Nevertheless, the corporate sector should take the responsibility to restore the ecosystem where disasters have occurred. In view of this gap, some primary data, like statutes, regulations and international conventions; also secondary data such as articles, reports and news papers have been obtained from literature study and internet sources and are descriptively and qualitatively analyzed. This article aims to rationalise that the jurisdiction of the Indonesian Human Rights Court should include environmental crime in The Law of 2000 No. 26 in Human Rights Court and provide output for the decision makers in Indonesia to consider that environmental crime is a crime against humanity.

KW - Corporate crime

KW - Corporate liability

KW - Environmental human rights

KW - Environmental pollution

KW - Indonesia

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84942944823&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84942944823&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 111

EP - 130

JO - Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities

JF - Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities

SN - 0128-7702

IS - January

ER -