Judicial Review on Environment Management Act (UU PLH) as pleaded by fictional bioremediation suspect, Bachtiar Abdul Fatah keeps proceeding. In the seventh trial held on Tuesday (9/30), government presented one expert and witness to repel Plaintiff’s argument. Through the witness and expert, government explained implication of haphazard management and citizen’s constitutional rights to gain high quality and healthy wellbeing.

To prove the argument, government presented Ahmad Safrudin to deliver his expertise. Safrudin explained types of pollution implied by the mismanaged waste as he has experienced, such as, manufacture-wasted air pollution and water pollution from wasted batteries.

He found at that B3 Waste sometimes being dumped just the way it is without any cleansing mechanism. This kind of dumping is destructive and hazardous for the environment. In Cinangka, Bogor drained batteries are being dumped offhandedly, resulting in water pollution that affected the children nearby. Due to high concentration of lead, children nearby suffered from skin infection and thyroid intumescence. “Drained batteries dumped offhandedly, polluting the water and air in the environment. Nearby residents are overly exposed to the hazardous elements, throughout foods and respiratory system,” Safrudin said   

For Safrudin, environment management law is utter and necessarily needed.

Protecting Constitutional Rights

It is accentuated from the perspective of criminal code. Expert from Indonesia Islam University, Mudzakir, said that the Articles are included into public administration law, environment law to be specific. Permission of constructing B3 waste management is utter and not negotiable, from legal perspective, the one who has granted the permission is the side that is able to execute the waste management. “The one who has not granted the permission cannot execute the program, although it is obligatory,” Mudzakir said.

Furthermore, Mudzakir said that handing over waste management to the third party due to the disability required permission as well. As determined in Article 59 verse (4) UU PLH.

This sort of regulation is meant to avoid further implication of health hazard. Besides, permission instrument intended to fulfill every citizens’ constitutional rights, notably to gain healthy wellbeing, as determined in Article 28H verse (1) 1945 Constitution.

Meanwhile, applied crime for the careless B3 management applicator is a preventive action. Crime fine as contained in Article 102 is needed merely to prompt legal enforcement in administration legal, concerning destructive character injected in B3 Waste. (Yusti Nurul Agustin/mh/kun)