Strengthening ecological justice through the application of the precautionary principle in environmental law enforcement
Keywords:
Precautionary principle, Ecological justice, Environmental law, Sustainable developmentAbstract
Article 28H paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, which serves as a constitutional guarantee for every individual to obtain a good and healthy environment. In many environmental cases, significant challenges arise due to scientific uncertainty and the complexity of the issues involved, particularly in relation to the mechanisms for assessing environmental damage. This uncertainty necessitates the implementation of the Precautionary Principle as a guiding standard in environmental law enforcement. This study employs a normative legal research approach to examine the role of the Precautionary Principle in strengthening environmental protection to realize ecology justice. This study aims to analyze and evaluate the role of the Precautionary Principle in strengthening environmental protection within the framework of Article 28H paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, particularly in addressing scientific uncertainty and complex environmental damage assessment. The findings reveal that effective implementation of this principle significantly contributes to the realization of ecological justice, as preventive and anticipatory measures embedded within regulatory frameworks enhance the safeguarding of environmental rights and support sustainable resource management. The study concludes that policymakers, legal practitioners, and judicial bodies must reinforce the integration of the Precautionary Principle into environmental law and policy to ensure more responsive, equitable, and ecologically sound governance.
References
C. Paino, “Hari Populasi Sedunia: Pertumbuhan Manusia dan Ancaman Kerusakan Lingkungan.” Accessed: Dec. 19, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://mongabay.co.id/2024/07/11/hari-populasi-sedunia-pertumbuhan-manusia-dan-ancaman-kerusakan-lingkungan/.
2. A. Wijaya, “Luput Dibahas Debat Cawapres: Data Terbaru KLHK Catat Luas Karhutla 2023 Tembus 1,16 Juta Hektare.” Accessed: Dec. 19, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.tempo.co/lingkungan/luput-dibahas-debat-cawapres-data-terbaru-klhk-catat-luas-karhutla-2023-tembus-1-16-juta-hektare-93390.
3. P. Haryadi, “Pengembangan Hukum Lingkungan Hidup Melalui Penegakan Hukum Perdata di Indonesia,” J. Konstitusi, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 124–149, 2017, [Online]. Available: https://media.neliti.com/media /publications/114749-ID-pengembangan-hukum-lingkungan-hidup-mela.pdf.
4. P. M. Marzuki, Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana, 2007.
5. A. G. Wibisana, “Konstitusi Hijau Perancis: Komentar atas Asas Kehati-hatian dalam Piagam Lingkungan Perancis 2004,” J. Konstitusi, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 207–256, 2011, [Online]. Available: https://media.neliti.com /media/publications/111311-ID-konstitusi-hijau-perancis-komentar-atas.pdf.
6. M. Imamulhadi, “Perkembangan Prinsip Strict Liability dan Precautionary dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Lingkungan Hidup Di Pengadilan,” Old Website J. Mimb. Huk., vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 416–432, 2013, [Online]. Available: https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/40608-none-008c028a.pdf.
7. F. Afandi, D. Adianto, P. Listiningrum, and M. W. Lovina, “Penggunaan Bukti Ilmiah dan Penerapan Prinsip Kehati-hatian dalam Putusan Perkara Pidana Materiil Lingkungan Hidup di Indonesia Tahun 2009-2020,” J. Huk. Lingkung. Indones., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 77–120, 2022, doi: 10.38011/j hli.v9i1.500.
8. M. A. A. Afinnas, “Telaah Taksonomi Keadilan Lingkungan dalam Pemenuhan Hak atas Lingkungan,” in Prosiding Seminar Hukum Aktual Fakultas Hukum Universitas Islam Indonesia, 2023, pp. 47–61. [Online]. Available: https://journal.uii.ac.id/psha/article/view/30956.
9. D. Shaligram and S. Bansal, “Precautionary Principle and its Application in Indian Judiciary,” Int. J. Law Manag. Humanit., vol. 5, p. 420, 2022, doi: 10.10000/IJLMH.112488.
10. Wahyu and T. A. Brata, “Penggunaan Scientific Evidence dalam Pembuktian Perkara Pidana Lingkungan,” Wasaka Huk., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 34–49, 2022, [Online]. Available: https://www.ojs.stihsa-bjm.ac.id /index.php/wasaka/article/view/72.
11. H. W. Sawitri and R. W. Bintoro, “Sengketa Lingkungan dan Penyelesaiannya,” J. Din. Huk., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 163–174, 2010, doi: 10.20884/1.jdh.2010.10.2.149.
12. S. Rahardjo, Penegakan Hukum Progresif. Jakarta: Kompas Media Nusantara, 2010.
13. R. Rochmani, S. Faozi, and A. Suliantoro, “Budaya Hukum Hakim dalam Penyelesaian Perkara Lingkungan Hidup di Pengadilan,” in Seminar Nasional Multi Disiplin Ilmu Unisbank 2016, 2016, pp. 511–518. [Online]. Available: https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/174341-ID-budaya-hukum-hakim-dalam-penyelesaian-pe.pdf.
14. S. Mertokusumo, Mengenal Hukum: Suatu Pengantar, 3rd ed. Yogyakarta: Liberty, 2007.
15. B. Gleeson and N. Low, Justice, Society and Nature: An Exploration of Political Ecology. London: Routledge, 2002.
16. Sekretariat Jenderal Komisi Yudisial, Bunga Rampai Memotret Pertimbangan Putusan Hakim dari Berbagai Perspektif, 1st ed. Jakarta: Komisi Yudisial RI, 2024.
17. M. Natsir, F. Fuadi, and Z. Ulya, “Perwujudan Sila Keadilan Sosial Dalam Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup Dikaitkan Upaya Penanggulangan Kemiskinan Di Aceh,” Bina Huk. Lingkung., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 80–93, 2022, [Online]. Available: http://bhl-jurnal.or.id/index.php/bhl/article/view/180.
18. M. Akib, “Pergeseran Paradigma Penegakan Hukum Lingkungan: Dari Mekanistik-Reduksionis ke Holistik-Ekologi,” Masal. Huk., vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 125–131, 2014, doi: 10.14710/mmh.43.1.2014.125-131.
19. A. A. Binawan and T. Sebastian, “Menimbang Keadilan Eko-Sosial Epistema Working Paper No. 07/2012,” 2012, Epistema Institute, Jakarta.
20. A. S. Haward, “Ekologi Integral: Alternatif Dalam Krisis Lingkungan Hidup,” Melintas, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 152–176, 2022, doi: 10.26593/MEL.V37I2.6295.
Downloads
Published
Conference Proceedings Volume
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.