Public engagement is fundamental in any democracy. Yet, the stifling of public voices persists even today.
In response, Dr. Nani Indrawati, a Supreme Court Justice of Indonesia, unveiled her book “Anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) Policy and Environment” during the National Seminar at the UGM Faculty of Law on Friday (Jan. 26).
SLAPP refers to lawsuits or reports initiated by more powerful entities like corporations or public officials to suppress public participation, particularly of individuals or non-governmental organizations.
These cases, often targeting activists involved in environmental issues, have resulted in the criminalization of 174 activists, 940 farmers, and 120 individuals for their environmental engagement. Such figures underscore the challenge of resolving conflicts between stronger and weaker parties.
“I delved into Anti-SLAPP because I noticed that judges lack clear guidance, particularly when handling SLAPP cases. There’s no procedural law governing it, and there is no apple-to-apple writing,” explained Dr. Indrawati.
“Indonesia actually regulates it in Article 66 of Law No. 32 of 2009 concerning Environmental Protection and Management, but it’s unclear how.”
This ambiguity has led to subpar case resolutions despite constitutional environmental management and public participation guarantees.
Dr. Indrawati highlighted the implementation of the SLAPP policy in the United States, which extends beyond environmental concerns. It ensures protection for citizens facing lawsuits for expressing their opinions.
This policy delineates procedural laws for addressing SLAPP cases, defining SLAPP, outlining required steps, and setting time limits for resolving suspected SLAPP cases. SLAPP plaintiffs’ usual tactic is to silence dissent to instill fear, compelling defendants to halt their criticism or participation.
“The surge in SLAPP cases stems from legal breaches, creating an opportunity for those seeking to silence dissent. This poses significant dilemmas,” said Dr. Totok Dwi Diantoro, a lecturer at the Department of Environmental Law, UGM Faculty of Law.
“When the public voices concerns about deteriorating environmental conditions affecting their daily lives and receive no response, they may resort to unlawful actions due to despair.”
More powerful entities exploit this vulnerability to suppress public engagement. From the beginning, conflicts indicate an imbalance in the superior position of one party over the community.
Superior parties such as corporations, officials, and business entities generally have advantageous situations with much more mature legal knowledge. Meanwhile, in various cases, the community or the defendant generally lacks legal strength or equal legal capabilities, requiring assistance from other parties.
This is what causes conflicts surrounding public participation to become prolonged. Implementing the Anti-SLAPP policy is expected to provide more protection to the public in their right to participation.
Author: Tasya