Warning Failure, Recurring Fires and Corporate Interests: Indonesian Civil Groups Sue Government over Peatland Wildfire Response

According to ABC News, several civil society groups in West Kalimantan, Indonesia, recently filed a class-action lawsuit against the Indonesian government at a court in the provincial capital Pontianak, accusing the government of failing to fulfill its duties of early warning, prevention and relief in the face of peatland wildfires that recur almost every year, and of shifting the public health costs onto ordinary residents. The defendants named include the president, vice president, several ministers, the national police chief, as well as a number of provincial governors and mayors.

Glorio Sanen, legal coordinator of "Nafas Kalbar," the civil society group representing the plaintiffs, said outside the court that the El Niño phenomenon had been forecast by the meteorological agency well before the dry season began, but that the government "appeared unprepared for this prolonged drought." Sanen said the plaintiffs were demanding that the government declare the fires a national emergency, intensify firefighting operations, provide free medical care for vulnerable groups, and bring legal action against those responsible. Local indigenous groups and religious youth organizations were listed among the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.

The lawsuit has pushed the structural contradiction between corporate interests and public health into the spotlight. Arniyanti, head of Lembaga Gemawan, a foundation dedicated to protecting West Kalimantan's peatland ecosystems, noted: "According to our investigation, corporations are the driving force behind the arson, and over 70 percent of hotspots are located within corporate concession areas." She also said that practices such as the monoculture planting of oil palm had damaged and dried out peatlands, thereby helping fires spread.

According to official data from the Indonesian Ministry of Health, at least 175,000 fire-related respiratory infection cases have been recorded since August; more than 200 hotspots continue to burn at present, while the rainy season across most of Indonesia is not expected to arrive until November. Millions of people — including those in neighboring Singapore and Malaysia — are shrouded in toxic haze. Sisilius Rami, an independent plaintiff, said that every time she goes out her eyes sting from the smoke and she must wear a mask every day: "Clean, fresh air is nowhere to be found... we still cannot see the blue sky and bright clouds."

Police reported last month that they had identified 196 suspected arsonists and were investigating 96 companies linked to fires affecting more than 25,000 hectares; the Indonesian government has imposed administrative penalties on the companies involved, with 26 of them receiving measures such as the revocation or suspension of permits and orders to restore land. The special crimes division of the police criminal investigation directorate noted that plantation operators and traditional farmers often use burning to clear land, and that investigations into companies suspected of arson are ongoing; the related charges carry a maximum sentence of 15 years' imprisonment.

Indonesia's Communications Bureau told ABC that the government respects the right of citizens and civil society groups to seek legal remedies through the courts, and that "since the case has been submitted to the court, the government will address the issues raised through legal proceedings and allow the litigation process to take its proper course." The agency reported that firefighting operations had tackled around 467 hectares of fire sites across six priority provinces, with a target area of approximately 654 hectares; the joint operation involves more than 69,000 military and police personnel, disaster management agency staff, volunteers and private companies.

This is not the first time Indonesia has been taken to court over inadequate fire response. In 2016, seven Indonesian residents filed a similar class-action lawsuit against the government of then-president Joko Widodo over the 2015 forest fires; a district court initially ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, but the verdict was overturned in 2022. Sanen said in response that the plaintiffs had "prepared their evidence" and countered: "If we ask enforcement agencies to implement forestry and land fire laws in a transparent and fair manner, how can they object? That is their duty. Even if we had not filed this lawsuit, it would still be their responsibility."

With the rainy season delayed, hotspots continuing to burn, and police pressing forward with their investigation of companies suspected of arson, the outcome of this case will once again test the boundaries of Indonesia's legal system in holding corporations and the government accountable for arson and dereliction of duty.