ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
What is Environmental Sustainability?
Environmental sustainability is making decisions and taking action that are in the interests of protecting the natural world, with heavy emphasis on preserving the capability of the environment to support human life.
It is currently an important topic as people are realizing the full impact that businesses and individuals can have on the environment.
Environmental sustainability is about making responsible decisions that will reduce a business' negative impact on the environment. It is not just about reducing the amount of waste a business generates or conserving energy , but it is about being concerned with developing processes that will lead to businesses becoming completely sustainable in the future.
Currently, environmental sustainability is a topical issue that receives plenty of attention from the media and from various governmental departments. This is a result of much research assessing the impact of human activity on the environment. Although the long term implications of this serious issue are not yet thoroughly understood, it is agreed that the risk is high enough to warrant an immediate response. Businesses are expected to lead in the area of environmental sustainability as they are considered to be the biggest contributors and are in a position where they can make a significant difference.
Environmental Pollution in Indonesia:
The environmental issues of third world countries have been described on problems of environment and natural resources in Asia- Pacific as having reached a critical point. This crisis is likely to endanger development programs of these countries unless immediate measures are taken. (Environmental Crisis in Asia-Pacific 1984). One of the manifestations of this critical situation is environmental pollution.
In Indonesia, environmental pollution is defined by Act No. 4 of 1982 on the Basic Provisions for the Management of the Living Environment (henceforth referred to as Act No. 4) as:
The entry or introduction of living organisms, matters, energy, and/or necessary components into the environment, and/or changes in the environmental system due to man's activities or natural processes, resulting in the decline of the environmental quality to such a level which causes the environment to function insufficiently or to lose its proper function.
In the narrow sense, environmental pollution is a criminal act regulated in articles 202 and 203 of the Penal Law, and further in article 22 of Act No. 4/1982, and widely associated with the violation of the rights of the individual to a good and healthy living environment (article 5 of Act No. 4/1982). In this connection, rights can be classified into five different, yet inter-related, levels. First is the right not to have one's life or health harmed or endangered as a result of environmental pollution, the health effects of which are known, predictable, serious and relatively immediate.
Second, is the right to a reasonable quality of environment, even when a particular pollutant or pollution source cannot now be identified as the cause of specific health damage or risk, on the grounds that serious pollution of the environment will threaten human life and health. (It is assumed that there are particular, identifiable victims though the process of victimization is not yet known.
Third, is the right to a level of environmental quality which is not violated by pollution, hence depriving one of the use and enjoyment of the environment, even when there are no health effects or dangers.
Fourth, is the right of the environment to be protected from serious pollution, even if pollution incidents should result in no direct or indirect risk or harm to human health or limitation upon the use or enjoyment of nature.
Fifth, is the right to have one's private property protected from damage by pollution caused by others.
Crime against the environmental pollution, in particular, includes acts that may range from carelessness to criminal acts that may endanger the safety of the public (Danusaputro 1981)
A number of issues in connection with these matters have arisen, particularly because of the failure to pinpoint presence of social injury. An example is the case of water pollution which directly affects the lives of many Indonesians; however, a specific definition is needed here to determine whether or not pollution actually occurs.
Cases of Environmental Pollution:
'At present, no comprehensive data is available in Indonesia on environmental pollution and damage. Nevertheless, from a study of environmental pollution that can be harmful to mankind undertaken by a team from the Institute of Criminology at the University of Indonesia and a team from the National Legal Development Board of the Ministry of Justice, the following picture emerges (Ministry of Justice 1985).'
~ A Picture of the Occurrence of Environmental Pollution
Pollution by Mercury
Water below a battery factory in Cimanggis proved to contain mercury poison. Factory workers used the water for drinking, and this had caused more than half of them to suffer from kidney diseases. The sample showed that the water contained 0.014 PPM, which was three times the permissible limit of mercury.
Carbon-Monoxide Pollution:
A number of studies of the carbon monoxide content of air in Yogyakarta indicated high levels: in the downtown area and the bus station the CO content was 99 mgr/lt; around the post office it was 56 mgr/lt and near the rail-road crossing it was 78 mgr/lt (Warta Konsumen 1985).
Pollution by Pesticides:
In Indonesia, Secretariat of the Commission for Pesticides of the Ministry of Agriculture showed that there are now available 352 brands of pesticides with 150 types of formulation; in 1980 there were only 286 brands with 75 types of formulation. The pesticides industry has been growing rapidly because agricultural development is a priority in Indonesia's development program. There are now 50 licence-holders representing pesticides companies abroad. Some cases resulting from pesticides are as follows:
Execution of Environmental Legislation:
The fact that environmental legislation is now being put into effect does not mean that all cases of environmental pollution and damage have been directly and completely solved. One of the problems faced in the execution of this legislation is: the constraints found in the procedural technique for the law, particularly as related to such matters as proof that require skill in data analysis. Some of the problems are indicated by the following cases.
The case of the 'Tahu' (soybean cake) waste:
This case was brought to trial as an environmental offence, namely for the pollution of the Surabaya River. The judge decided that the accused was proven to have committed the offence, but that it was not a criminal act, is it did not cause environmental pollution. However, the public prosecutor appealed against this verdict. In the meantime, a study of the files of the case revealed that the case did not belong to the environmental offence category based on UULH legislation because violation of the quality of the environment is technically not the same as environmental pollution. Rather, such violations should be subject to administrative sanctions.
In Indonesia, the application of Act No 4 is relatively new. This presents a challenge to law-enforcers, police, public prosecutors, judges and lawyers.
The strategy of development without damage or pollution of the environment, in combination with the efforts to develop organisations protecting the environment, is, in theory, an appropriate one for preventing and dealing with criminal acts against the environment.
Nevertheless, the success of this strategy, especially in dealing with corporate crime, lies in taking into account aspects of structure and culture. Clinard & Yeager (1980) stated that in studying crimes that are related to businesses it is necessary to consider the presence of a 'sub-culture of industrial deviance' and a 'sub-culture of violence' that affect people engaged in businesses in facing particular situations.
They also state that violations by companies are affected by factors like the pursuit of profit and weakness in execution of legislation. In respect to the second point, they refer to the attitudes of companies and legal bodies which do not look upon violations by business companies as 'crimes or criminals', from a moral point of view (Clinard & Yeager 1980).
Based on the above description of the nature and the scope of the problems of crime against the environment, it can be said that the determination of criteria of such crimes must be made by considering the two aspects: first, the social impact of the offence and second, the physical impact on the environment. Both these aspects can be assessed as crimes.
The process of criminalisation of such actions is bound to proceed amidst difficulties, because violations of rights to a good and healthy living environment cannot in principle be disconnected from the issue of the 'privileges' of the violators, who are usually the ones who enjoy the benefits in the existing power relations.
For success of the process of criminalization, the following steps are necessary:
Environmental sustainability is making decisions and taking action that are in the interests of protecting the natural world, with heavy emphasis on preserving the capability of the environment to support human life.
It is currently an important topic as people are realizing the full impact that businesses and individuals can have on the environment.
Environmental sustainability is about making responsible decisions that will reduce a business' negative impact on the environment. It is not just about reducing the amount of waste a business generates or conserving energy , but it is about being concerned with developing processes that will lead to businesses becoming completely sustainable in the future.
Currently, environmental sustainability is a topical issue that receives plenty of attention from the media and from various governmental departments. This is a result of much research assessing the impact of human activity on the environment. Although the long term implications of this serious issue are not yet thoroughly understood, it is agreed that the risk is high enough to warrant an immediate response. Businesses are expected to lead in the area of environmental sustainability as they are considered to be the biggest contributors and are in a position where they can make a significant difference.
Environmental Pollution in Indonesia:
The environmental issues of third world countries have been described on problems of environment and natural resources in Asia- Pacific as having reached a critical point. This crisis is likely to endanger development programs of these countries unless immediate measures are taken. (Environmental Crisis in Asia-Pacific 1984). One of the manifestations of this critical situation is environmental pollution.
In Indonesia, environmental pollution is defined by Act No. 4 of 1982 on the Basic Provisions for the Management of the Living Environment (henceforth referred to as Act No. 4) as:
The entry or introduction of living organisms, matters, energy, and/or necessary components into the environment, and/or changes in the environmental system due to man's activities or natural processes, resulting in the decline of the environmental quality to such a level which causes the environment to function insufficiently or to lose its proper function.
In the narrow sense, environmental pollution is a criminal act regulated in articles 202 and 203 of the Penal Law, and further in article 22 of Act No. 4/1982, and widely associated with the violation of the rights of the individual to a good and healthy living environment (article 5 of Act No. 4/1982). In this connection, rights can be classified into five different, yet inter-related, levels. First is the right not to have one's life or health harmed or endangered as a result of environmental pollution, the health effects of which are known, predictable, serious and relatively immediate.
Second, is the right to a reasonable quality of environment, even when a particular pollutant or pollution source cannot now be identified as the cause of specific health damage or risk, on the grounds that serious pollution of the environment will threaten human life and health. (It is assumed that there are particular, identifiable victims though the process of victimization is not yet known.
Third, is the right to a level of environmental quality which is not violated by pollution, hence depriving one of the use and enjoyment of the environment, even when there are no health effects or dangers.
Fourth, is the right of the environment to be protected from serious pollution, even if pollution incidents should result in no direct or indirect risk or harm to human health or limitation upon the use or enjoyment of nature.
Fifth, is the right to have one's private property protected from damage by pollution caused by others.
Crime against the environmental pollution, in particular, includes acts that may range from carelessness to criminal acts that may endanger the safety of the public (Danusaputro 1981)
A number of issues in connection with these matters have arisen, particularly because of the failure to pinpoint presence of social injury. An example is the case of water pollution which directly affects the lives of many Indonesians; however, a specific definition is needed here to determine whether or not pollution actually occurs.
Cases of Environmental Pollution:
'At present, no comprehensive data is available in Indonesia on environmental pollution and damage. Nevertheless, from a study of environmental pollution that can be harmful to mankind undertaken by a team from the Institute of Criminology at the University of Indonesia and a team from the National Legal Development Board of the Ministry of Justice, the following picture emerges (Ministry of Justice 1985).'
~ A Picture of the Occurrence of Environmental Pollution
Pollution by Mercury
Water below a battery factory in Cimanggis proved to contain mercury poison. Factory workers used the water for drinking, and this had caused more than half of them to suffer from kidney diseases. The sample showed that the water contained 0.014 PPM, which was three times the permissible limit of mercury.
Carbon-Monoxide Pollution:
A number of studies of the carbon monoxide content of air in Yogyakarta indicated high levels: in the downtown area and the bus station the CO content was 99 mgr/lt; around the post office it was 56 mgr/lt and near the rail-road crossing it was 78 mgr/lt (Warta Konsumen 1985).
Pollution by Pesticides:
In Indonesia, Secretariat of the Commission for Pesticides of the Ministry of Agriculture showed that there are now available 352 brands of pesticides with 150 types of formulation; in 1980 there were only 286 brands with 75 types of formulation. The pesticides industry has been growing rapidly because agricultural development is a priority in Indonesia's development program. There are now 50 licence-holders representing pesticides companies abroad. Some cases resulting from pesticides are as follows:
- 12 people died because the food they ate at a feast held in Plaeng, Klaten (Central Java), contained DDT.
- 3 persons in Bojolali died because their food was contaminated with DDT.
- 18 transmigrants in North Lampung became the victims of rat poison.
- In Java, thiodan pesticide killed fish on farms.
- 36 persons died in Tulungagung because the flour and frying oil they used were contaminated by pesticides.
Execution of Environmental Legislation:
The fact that environmental legislation is now being put into effect does not mean that all cases of environmental pollution and damage have been directly and completely solved. One of the problems faced in the execution of this legislation is: the constraints found in the procedural technique for the law, particularly as related to such matters as proof that require skill in data analysis. Some of the problems are indicated by the following cases.
The case of the 'Tahu' (soybean cake) waste:
This case was brought to trial as an environmental offence, namely for the pollution of the Surabaya River. The judge decided that the accused was proven to have committed the offence, but that it was not a criminal act, is it did not cause environmental pollution. However, the public prosecutor appealed against this verdict. In the meantime, a study of the files of the case revealed that the case did not belong to the environmental offence category based on UULH legislation because violation of the quality of the environment is technically not the same as environmental pollution. Rather, such violations should be subject to administrative sanctions.
In Indonesia, the application of Act No 4 is relatively new. This presents a challenge to law-enforcers, police, public prosecutors, judges and lawyers.
The strategy of development without damage or pollution of the environment, in combination with the efforts to develop organisations protecting the environment, is, in theory, an appropriate one for preventing and dealing with criminal acts against the environment.
Nevertheless, the success of this strategy, especially in dealing with corporate crime, lies in taking into account aspects of structure and culture. Clinard & Yeager (1980) stated that in studying crimes that are related to businesses it is necessary to consider the presence of a 'sub-culture of industrial deviance' and a 'sub-culture of violence' that affect people engaged in businesses in facing particular situations.
They also state that violations by companies are affected by factors like the pursuit of profit and weakness in execution of legislation. In respect to the second point, they refer to the attitudes of companies and legal bodies which do not look upon violations by business companies as 'crimes or criminals', from a moral point of view (Clinard & Yeager 1980).
Based on the above description of the nature and the scope of the problems of crime against the environment, it can be said that the determination of criteria of such crimes must be made by considering the two aspects: first, the social impact of the offence and second, the physical impact on the environment. Both these aspects can be assessed as crimes.
The process of criminalisation of such actions is bound to proceed amidst difficulties, because violations of rights to a good and healthy living environment cannot in principle be disconnected from the issue of the 'privileges' of the violators, who are usually the ones who enjoy the benefits in the existing power relations.
For success of the process of criminalization, the following steps are necessary:
- Clear defining statement of what exactly crime against the environment is;
- Application of that definition by the authorised apparatus in court;
- Communication with the public so that it will be possible to receive support for the enforcement of the laws against such environmental crimes.