Establishing an Environmental Court in Indonesia: Addressing Legal Challenges for Environmental Justice in Line with SDG 13 and SDG 16

Le résumé fourni par la source

Objectives: This study examines the challenges facing environmental law enforcement in Indonesia, particularly in achieving environmental justice. Theoretical Framework: This research is based on environmental justice theory, which emphasizes fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people in environmental law and policy. Additionally, the principles of sustainable development and constitutional mandates for environmental protection serve as the foundation for analyzing Indonesia's legal framework and its alignment with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 13 and SDG 16. Method: This study uses a normative legal research approach, analyzing relevant laws, regulations, legal principles, and universal environmental management frameworks to assess Indonesia's current environmental legal structures and the necessity of an Environmental Court. Results and Discussion: The establishment of an Environmental Court is proposed as a solution to address Indonesia’s environmental law enforcement issues. This court would provide a legal forum for environmental disputes, promoting community access to justice and enhancing public participation in environmental protection. Aligned with SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions) and SDG 13 (Climate Action), the court would uphold the constitutional right to a healthy environment, reinforcing Indonesia’s commitment to sustainable development and strengthening its legal framework for environmental justice. Research Implications: The study suggests that a dedicated Environmental Court could fill a crucial gap in Indonesia’s environmental governance structure. Originality/Value: This research contributes original insights by proposing the establishment of an Environmental Court in Indonesia, a concept not yet fully explored in existing literature.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.