Residents of Indonesia’s South Sumatra province have filed a lawsuit against three pulpwood companies for a toxic haze that they blame on repeated burning in their concessions.
The three companies — PT Bumi Mekar Hijau (BMH), PT Bumi Andalas Permai (BAP) and PT Sebangun Bumi Andalas Wood Industries (SBA Wood Industries) — are suppliers to the largest pulp and paper producer in Indonesia, Asia Pulp & Paper (APP).
In total, all three concessions experienced 254,787 hectares (629,592 acres) of burning from 2015 to 2020 — an area nearly the size of Jakarta. That makes the companies major contributors to fire-caused haze in South Sumatra during the 2015, 2019 and 2023 dry seasons, the lawsuit contends.
As such, it says, the companies are legally responsible for the damage local residents have had to endure from the haze, ranging from respiratory illness to mental health issues arising from being unable to attend classes and go to places of worship, among others.
“Because of the haze, I felt stressed and worried about the health of my children and myself,” said Marda Ellius, a plaintiff in the lawsuit. “Our family’s finances were disrupted because the smoke prevented us from tapping rubber or catching fish.”
The fires in the three concessions also contributed to climate change because the region comprises carbon-rich peat landscapes, according to Greenpeace Indonesia forest campaigner Belgis Habiba.
“The drainage and destruction of peatlands in these areas, which subsequently leads to out-of-control forest fires and haze, severely exacerbates the climate crisis,” she said. “The increase in carbon emissions due to forest fires and haze also undermines emissions reduction efforts, jeopardising the achievement of Indonesia’s climate targets.”
The lawsuit was brought by 12 plaintiffs at the district court in Palembang, the South Sumatra provincial capital, and is seeking compensation from the three companies. Supporting the plaintiffs is a coalition of NGOs called the South Sumatra Smoke Suit Initiative, which includes Greenpeace Indonesia and Pantau Gambut, an independent watchdog that monitors peatland developments.
“
There’s a serious problem with our law enforcement. When those already found guilty [by a court] still have repeated burning, it means the law enforcement doesn’t have a deterrent effect.
Wahyu Perdana, advocacy manager, Pantau Gambut
The plaintiffs are residents of haze-affected areas — Palembang, and the villages of Bangsal and Lebung Itam villages in neighbouring Ogan Komering Ilir district — and include farmers, rubber tappers, fishers, buffalo breeders and environmental activists.
Among them is Pralensa from Lebung Itam, who harvested swiftlet nests — a delicacy in Chinese cuisine — until fires burned down his swiftlet barn.
“Through this lawsuit, we hope to warn the companies that what they are doing is wrong because it damages our families and the environment,” Pralensa said.
The lawsuit is part of a growing trend in Indonesia where citizens are striking out for justice on their own after failing to get a satisfactory response from the authorities.
In 2016, a group of citizens and environmental activists in Central Kalimantan province, on the island of Borneo, filed a lawsuit against the government, including the president, over the damage from fires in 2015. They accused the government of failing to adopt strong policies and carry out measures to prevent the annual recurring fires that rage through the dry season, and demanded more stringent measures to tackle the problem.
The 2015 fires were particularly catastrophic, razing 2.6 million hectares (6.4 million acres) of land across the country, much of it carbon-rich peat forests, and sending clouds of choking haze billowing across large parts of Indonesia and neighbouring Singapore and Malaysia.
The citizens won their lawsuit in 2018, but the government appealed the case all the way to the Supreme Court, which in 2022 ruled that President Joko Widodo was not liable for the 2015 fires.
The South Sumatra lawsuit also breaks new legal ground: it’s the first time in the province that plaintiffs in such a suit have demanded strict liability for losses incurred from the fires, according to Ipan Widodo from the Palembang Legal Aid Institute, one of the lawyers representing the plaintiffs.
“Thus far, the people of South Sumatra have remained silent about the harmful effects of smoke from forest and peatland fires,” he said. “This struggle marks a new chapter in the development of environmental law in Indonesia and a new style of public resistance against the climate crisis.”
Citizens feel the need to drag companies and public officials to court because current law-enforcement efforts aren’t strong enough to tackle the issue of fires, said Pantau Gambut advocacy manager Wahyu Perdana. He noted that all three companies named in the lawsuit have previously been hit with sanctions and fines for the repeated fires on their land.
BMH, for instance, was found guilty by a court in 2016 in connection with fires on 20,000 hectares (49,400 acres) of its concessions in 2014. Expert witnesses who testified for the prosecution concluded that BMH had deliberately set fire to its concession to clear vegetation to plant acacia trees.
Yet even after that judgment, fires continued to flare up routinely on its concession, most recently in 2023. Analysis by Pantau Gambut of the burned area found BMH’s peat concession had the biggest fire last year out of all the other peat concessions in Indonesia, accounting for nearly an eighth of the 196,249 hectares (484,942 acres) of peat fires nationwide.
This shows that law enforcement in Indonesia isn’t effective enough to prevent fires, Wahyu said. One reason for this, he said, is that the fines imposed are too low to deter companies from continuing to burn their concessions as a cheap way of clearing the land.
In BMH’s case, the 2016 ruling only ordered it to pay for damages but not for restoration of the burned area. As a result, it was required to pay 78.5 billion rupiah (US$5 million), or just 1 per cent of what government prosecutors had sought in fines.
“There’s a serious problem with our law enforcement,” Wahyu said. “When those already found guilty [by a court] still have repeated burning, it means the law enforcement doesn’t have a deterrent effect.”
This story was published with permission from Mongabay.com.
