Climate Rights Litigation and Constitutional Remedies in Southeast Asia
Keywords:
Climate Litigation, Constitutional Remedies, Environmental Rights, Southeast Asia, Judicial Review.Abstract
Climate litigation in Southeast Asia is developing through legal systems that differ sharply in constitutional text, standing doctrine, environmental procedure, and remedial technique. This article examines how rights-based climate claims can be translated into judicially manageable remedies through a comparative doctrinal analysis centered on Indonesia and the Philippines, with Malaysia and Singapore used as institutional comparators. The study codes constitutional provisions, environmental statutes, procedural rules, and leading judgments across six variables: rights basis, standing, causal framing, evidentiary pathway, remedial form, and post-judgment supervision. Indonesian doctrine combines Article 28H(1), Article 33(4), environmental legislation, and citizen-suit practice, while Philippine law couples the constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology with specialized remedies including the writ of kalikasan and continuing mandamus. The comparison shows that the principal regional constraint is not recognition of environmental interests but the conversion of diffuse climate harm into reviewable governmental duties and enforceable orders. The article proposes a calibrated remedial model linking the intensity of judicial relief to the specificity of the breached legal duty, evidentiary certainty, institutional competence, and the need for continuing supervision.
Downloads
References
Auz, J. (2022). Human rights-based climate litigation: A Latin American cartography. Journal of Human Rights and the Environment, 13(1), 114–136. https://doi.org/10.4337/jhre.2022.01.05.
Bouwer, K. (2020). The unsexy future of climate change litigation. Journal of Environmental Law, 32(3), 483–506.
Central Jakarta District Court. (2021). Decision No. 374/Pdt.G/LH/2019/PN Jkt.Pst.
Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia of 1945 (as amended).
Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines of 1987, Article II, Section 16.
Fisher, E., Scotford, E., & Barritt, E. (2017). The legally disruptive nature of climate change. Modern Law Review, 80(2), 173–201.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2023). Climate change 2023: Synthesis report. IPCC.
Ismaya, S., & Wafi, M. H. (2024). Climate change assessment in environmental impact assessment and administrative decision-making in Indonesia. Undang: Jurnal Hukum, 6(2), 447–486. https://doi.org/10.22437/ujh.6.2.447-486.
Jakarta High Court. (2022). Decision No. 549/Pdt/2022/PT DKI.
Kumaresan, S., & Franta, B. (2025). Opportunities for corporate climate litigation in Southeast Asia. Asia Pacific Journal of Environmental Law, 28(1), 87–114. https://doi.org/10.4337/apjel.2025.01.04.
Law of the Republic of Indonesia No. 16 of 2016 on Ratification of the Paris Agreement.
Law of the Republic of Indonesia No. 32 of 2009 on Environmental Protection and Management (as amended).
Lin, J. (2026). Climate litigation in East and Southeast Asia. In The Oxford handbook of comparative climate litigation. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/9780197809198.003.0038.
Lin, J., & Kysar, D. A. (Eds.). (2020). Climate change litigation in the Asia Pacific. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108777810.
Metropolitan Manila Development Authority v. Concerned Residents of Manila Bay, G.R. Nos. 171947–48 (Supreme Court of the Philippines, 2008).
Oposa v. Factoran, G.R. No. 101083 (Supreme Court of the Philippines, 1993).
Paris Agreement, Dec. 12, 2015, T.I.A.S. No. 16-1104.
Parker, L., Mestre, A., & Jodoin, S. (2022). When human rights and climate litigation intersect: A typology of rights-based climate cases. Journal of Human Rights and the Environment, 13(1), 64–89. https://doi.org/10.4337/jhre.2022.01.03.
Peel, J., & Lin, J. (2019). Transnational climate litigation: The contribution of the Global South. American Journal of International Law, 113(4), 679–726.
Prihandono, I. (2024). Rights-based climate litigation and the Indonesian legal order. Media Iuris, 7(2), 241–266. https://doi.org/10.20473/mi.v7i2.57628.
Putra, A. P. (2021). Climate change litigation as a means of environmental protection in Indonesia. Jurnal Media Hukum, 28(2), 153–164. https://doi.org/10.18196/jmh.v28i2.10988.
Putra, A. P. (2025). Climate litigation and the development of environmental rights in Indonesia. Chinese Journal of Environmental Law, 9, 160–188. https://doi.org/10.1163/24686042-12340135.
Quising, P. (2023). Intergenerational equity and environmental constitutionalism: Revisiting Oposa v Factoran. European Law Journal, 29(3–6), 422–444. https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12489.
Republic of the Philippines, Supreme Court. (2010). Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases, A.M. No. 09-6-8-SC.
Rodríguez-Garavito, C. (Ed.). (2022). Litigating the climate emergency: How human rights, courts, and legal mobilization can bolster climate action. Cambridge University Press.
Savaresi, A., & Setzer, J. (2022). Rights-based litigation in the climate emergency: Mapping the landscape and new knowledge frontiers. Journal of Human Rights and the Environment, 13(1), 7–34. https://doi.org/10.4337/jhre.2022.01.01.
Sembiring, R., & Baihaqie, M. R. (2020). Private climate litigation in Indonesia: Prospects and limitations. Jurnal Hukum Lingkungan Indonesia, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.38011/jhli.v7i1.215.
Setzer, J., & Higham, C. (2024). Global trends in climate change litigation: 2024 snapshot. Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
Sulistiawati, L. Y. (2024). Climate change related litigation in Indonesia. Communications Earth & Environment, 5. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-024-01684-1.
Sulyok, K. (2024). Transforming the rule of law in environmental and climate litigation: Prohibiting the arbitrary treatment of future generations. Transnational Environmental Law, 13(3), 475–501. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2047102524000116.
Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. (2023). Decision No. 2560 K/Pdt/2023.
United Nations Environment Programme. (2023). Global climate litigation report: 2023 status review. UNEP.
Wartini, S., & Dewi, D. A. S. (2026). Climate change litigation to protect the right to enjoy a healthy environment in Indonesia. Jurnal Media Hukum, 33(1), 118–137. https://doi.org/10.18196/jmh.v33i1.29978.
Wibisana, A. G., & Cornelius, C. (2020). Climate change litigation in Indonesia. In J. Lin & D. A. Kysar (Eds.), Climate change litigation in the Asia Pacific. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108777810.011.
Wonneberger, A., Meijers, M. H. C., & Schuck, A. R. T. (2020). Shifting public engagement: How climate litigation and communication interact. Environmental Communication, 14(5), 617–632.
Yang, T., & Percival, R. V. (2009). The emergence of global environmental law. Ecology Law Quarterly, 36, 615–664.
