Penegakan Hak-Hak Alam Di Indonesia Ditinjau Dalam Perspektif Deep Ecology Dan Should Trees Have Standing?
Identification
- Public canonical key
- doi:10.21154/eldusturie.v5i2.13572
- Authors
- Juniarto · Agustinus
- Reported year
- 2026
- Reported language
- en · und
- Source type
- Article
- First detected
- 2026-11-09T19:04:47.666645+00:00
- Last metadata observation
- 2026-11-10T18:12:40.885920+00:00
- Last HTTP verification
- Not checked
Institutions reported by the source
Universitas Gadjah Mada
Reported affiliation countries
ID
Documentary abstract — original language
Abstract: Environmental protection in Indonesia still relies on an anthropocentric paradigm that positions nature as an object of exploitation, not as an entity with a right to exist. This condition is reflected in various legal instruments, ranging from the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, Law No. 32 of 2009 concerning Environmental Governance, Law No. 41 of 1999 concerning Forestry, to Law No. 6 of 2023 concerning Job Creation, as well as in judicial practices that consistently require direct harm to humans as the basis for a lawsuit. This study aims to analyze the state of enforcement of natural rights in Indonesia and formulate a model for its enforcement through the perspective of "Deep Ecology" by Arne Naess and the concept of "Should Trees Have Standing?" by Christopher D. Stone. This study uses a normative juridical method with legislative, conceptual, and comparative approaches to countries that have recognized the rights of nature, such as Ecuador, Bolivia, New Zealand, India, and Colombia. Research findings indicate that regulations and judicial practices in Indonesia have not yet recognized nature as a legal subject, resulting in reactive, rather than preventive, environmental protection. This study identifies four potential actors as guardians of nature: Indigenous Peoples, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations, and the proposed Environmental Ombudsman. Each of these actors has limitations, leading to the formulation of a multi-level and collaborative guardian model as an implementation mechanism. This study recommends environmental law reform through recognizing the legal standing of nature, strengthening independent guardian institutions, and redirecting the AMDAL system and ecological restorative justice to achieve ecologically just environmental law enforcement in Indonesia. Keywords: Rights of Nature; Deep Ecology; Should Trees Have Standing?; Environmental Law Enforcement; Ecological Justice. Abstrak: Perlindungan lingkungan hidup di Indonesia masih bertumpu pada paradigma antroposentris yang memposisikan alam sebagai objek pemanfaatan, bukan sebagai entitas yang memiliki hak untuk eksis. Kondisi ini tercermin dalam berbagai instrumen hukum, mulai dari UUD NRI 1945, UU No. 32 Tahun 2009 tentang PPLH, UU No. 41 Tahun 1999 tentang Kehutanan, hingga UU No. 6 Tahun 2023 tentang Cipta Kerja, serta dalam praktik peradilan yang senantiasa mensyaratkan kerugian langsung pada manusia sebagai dasar gugatan. Penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis kondisi penegakan hak-hak alam di Indonesia dan merumuskan model penegakannya melalui perspektif “Deep Ecology” dari Arne Naess dan gagasan “Should Trees Have Standing?” dari Christopher D. Stone. Penelitian menggunakan metode yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, konseptual, dan komparatif terhadap negara-negara yang telah mengakui hak alam, seperti Ekuador, Bolivia, Selandia Baru, India, dan Kolombia. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa regulasi dan praktik peradilan di Indonesia belum mengakui alam sebagai subjek hukum sehingga perlindungan lingkungan bersifat reaktif, bukan preventif. Penelitian ini mengidentifikasi empat aktor potensial sebagai guardian alam, yakni Masyarakat Hukum Adat, Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan, Lembaga Swadaya Masyarakat Lingkungan, dan Ombudsman Lingkungan Hidup yang diusulkan, yang masing-masing memiliki keterbatasan, sehingga dirumuskan model guardian berjenjang dan kolaboratif sebagai mekanisme implementasi. Penelitian ini merekomendasikan reformasi hukum lingkungan melalui pengakuan legal standing bagi alam, penguatan kelembagaan guardian independen, serta reorientasi sistem AMDAL dan keadilan restoratif ekologis guna mewujudkan penegakan hukum lingkungan yang berkeadilan ekologis di Indonesia. Kata Kunci: Hak-hak alam; Deep Ecology; Should Trees Have Standing?; Penegakan Hukum Lingkungan; Keadilan Ekologis.
Identifiers
- OPENALEX
- W7167012398
- DOI
- 10.21154/eldusturie.v5i2.13572
- OPENAIRE
- doi_________::db23875ee62c50550f751136366e7fdb
Documentary context
- Documentary family
- Scholarship
- Source-reported types
- Article · article
- Jurisdictions studied — explicit sources
- BO · CO · EC · ID · IN · NZ
Entity mentions are not evidence of legal recognition. Jurisdiction studied is separate from author affiliation country.
Sources
OpenAIRE · Record 1
OpenAlex · Record 1 · Record 2
Documented bibliographic relations
Source-declared references and links; they do not establish legal support or UGLC qualification. Up to 20 outgoing references are displayed.
- openalex:w2021883551 · CITES
- openalex:w2253035238 · CITES
- openalex:w2775380678 · CITES
- openalex:w2890611143 · CITES
- openalex:w2971711835 · CITES
- openalex:w3097360901 · CITES
- openalex:w3154288259 · CITES
- openalex:w4319600063 · CITES
- openalex:w4319658740 · CITES
- openalex:w4327648475 · CITES
- Penetapan Alam Sebagai Subjek Hukum · CITES
- openalex:w4409610614 · CITES
- openalex:w4409790018 · CITES
- Should trees have legal standing?: Strengthening the relationship between law and ecology · CITES
- openalex:w7128956946 · CITES
- Rekonstruksi Keadilan Ekologis Berbasis Rights of Nature dalam Perspektif FIlsafat Hukum Lingkungan · CITES
0 incoming references within the detected corpus
Documentary field provenance
Source-backed values and values with unresolved provenance are kept separately. Bibliographic provenance validates no legal claim.
- Title
- Documentary source reported
- Publication
- Documentary source reported
- Authors
- Documentary source reported
- Document type
- Documentary source reported
- Jurisdiction
- Studied subject derived from explicit documentary context
- Court
- Not recorded
- Issuing authority
- Not recorded
- Publisher
- Not recorded
- DOI
- Documentary source reported
- ISBN
- Not recorded
- Official identifier
- Not recorded
- Source URL
- Documentary source reported
- Source-reported status
- Not recorded
- Amendment / repeal
- Not recorded
Cite this reference
Juniarto; Agustinus. Penegakan Hak-Hak Alam Di Indonesia Ditinjau Dalam Perspektif Deep Ecology Dan Should Trees Have Standing?. 2026. https://doi.org/10.21154/eldusturie.v5i2.13572
JSON · CSL-JSON · BibTeX · RIS · CSV · JSON-LD ·
APA, Chicago, ISO 690: bibliographic formats using available fields. OSCOLA / Bluebook: structured data only; full legal citation compliance is not claimed without verification of required elements.
- APA
- Juniarto; Agustinus. (2026). Penegakan Hak-Hak Alam Di Indonesia Ditinjau Dalam Perspektif Deep Ecology Dan Should Trees Have Standing?. https://doi.org/10.21154/eldusturie.v5i2.13572
- Chicago
- Juniarto; Agustinus. Penegakan Hak-Hak Alam Di Indonesia Ditinjau Dalam Perspektif Deep Ecology Dan Should Trees Have Standing?. 2026. https://doi.org/10.21154/eldusturie.v5i2.13572
- ISO 690
- Juniarto; Agustinus. Penegakan Hak-Hak Alam Di Indonesia Ditinjau Dalam Perspektif Deep Ecology Dan Should Trees Have Standing?. 2026. https://doi.org/10.21154/eldusturie.v5i2.13572
UDTR Global Rights of Nature Legal Library. Penegakan Hak-Hak Alam Di Indonesia Ditinjau Dalam Perspektif Deep Ecology Dan Should Trees Have Standing?. Documentary record: https://www.declarationuniverselledesdroitsdelarbre.org/global-rights-of-nature-radar/reference/r-d3edcca2e9e86529a9064dc5e4edfbbb/ · Last HTTP verification: not performed
Field provenance and record version
Version 45ab704b7d9b7e5e · udtr-reference-1.1.2
- Title
- OpenAIRE · source · 2026-11-09T19:08:26.392934+00:00
OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-10T18:12:40.885920+00:00 - Authors
- OpenAIRE · source · 2026-11-09T19:08:26.392934+00:00
OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-10T18:12:40.885920+00:00
Multiple reported values; disagreement retained. - Year
- OpenAIRE · source · 2026-11-09T19:08:26.392934+00:00
OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-10T18:12:40.885920+00:00 - Identifiers
- OpenAIRE · source · 2026-11-09T19:08:26.392934+00:00
OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-10T18:12:40.885920+00:00
Multiple reported values; disagreement retained. - Source URL
- OpenAIRE · source · 2026-11-09T19:08:26.392934+00:00
OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-10T18:12:40.885920+00:00
History tracks record metadata and does not certify the state of the law.
94f03af548b6e13b · 2026-11-09T19:17:01.605177+00:00
7bd9b9944044875a · 2026-11-09T19:17:01.605177+00:00
2b498fcf3a84a910 · 2026-11-09T19:17:01.605177+00:00
8687672c18d3bbfc · 2026-11-10T18:12:40.885920+00:00
45ab704b7d9b7e5e · 2026-11-10T18:12:40.885920+00:00
Research dossiers and documentary relations
Source roles
Discovery source · https://doi.org/10.21154/eldusturie.v5i2.13572
Discovery source · https://openalex.org/W7167012398
An authority link alone does not verify a legal claim. Abstracts and full texts remain subject to their source terms.
Documentary status
Relevance pending
Library
This identity is not yet included in the Legal Library.