The Bill on Climate Change Management and the Missing “Emergency” Status

By Leonyta Nugroho

19 Mar 2026 04:41 WIB 19 March 2026 04:41 WIB 4 minutes reading time: 4 minutes 3 read

The Bill on Climate Change Management neglects victims and corporate accountability. This regulation has the potential to legitimize climate damage.

RUU Pengelolaan Perubahan Iklim: respons memadai atau sekadar bahasa dingin di tengah krisis yang mendesak? (Source: AI Gemini, Redaksi Literasi Hukum Indonesia)

Opinion Note

This opinion article was written by a contributor/columnist. The views expressed are entirely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors.

CONTRIBUTOR PROGRAM

You can become a columnist at Legal Literacy.

Submit your legal opinion/analysis writing. If it is published, you have the opportunity to obtain a payout/honorarium in accordance with the provisions.

Submit Article Read Guidelines

Table of Contents

The Problem of the Terminology "Management" that Covers Up the Crisis
Absence of Victims and Structure
Who Pays?
Reducing the Crisis to a Market Mechanism

Baca tanpa iklan.

Gabung Membership

Section 2/3: Absence of Victims and Structure

Absence of Victims and Structure

One of the fundamental flaws in this Bill is the disappearance of humans as subjects who must be protected. The law should have partiality, but in this draft, the mechanism of loss and damage, both economic and non-economic such as the loss of culture and biodiversity, is not regulated at all.

The government seems to assume that the massive impact has not yet occurred. In fact, residents in Bedono Village, Demak, have lost their hamlets due to rising sea levels, and residents of Pari Island continue to struggle with tidal floods that damage their water sources and economy. This Bill regulates climate change systemically, but neglects to regulate the fate of the humans who are destroyed by it.

Who Pays?

The Climate Change Bill fails to place large emission-producing corporations as the main actors causing the crisis. There is no obligation for corporations to be responsible for their historical emissions, pay compensation for damage and loss, and bear the adaptation costs of affected communities.

The existing sanctions are only administrative and are left to derivative regulations without any guarantee of a deterrent effect. This is a real form of "privatizing profits and socializing losses", that is, when corporations enjoy profits from the extractive industry, while ordinary people bear the costs of the disaster.