Calls grow for stricter law on wildlife trafficking in Indonesia
Calls grow for stricter law on wildlife trafficking in Indonesia
Fidelis Satriastanti, Lusia Arumningtyas, China Dialogue
December 5, 2023
Smoking pipes carved from elephant ivory, multi-coloured cockatoos, and an
Australian frilled lizard: these are just some examples of wildlife and
their products offered for sale online, illegally, in Indonesia. They were
among 996 adverts, posted by 421 social media accounts, logged in a survey
conducted by Indonesia’s environment ministry and NGO the Wildlife
Conservation Society between April 2021 and March 2022.
Parrots were the most frequently listed live animal, with 20 different
species documented in the survey, while elephant ivory was the most
recorded body part, representing 56% of all adverts logged.
“There is an indication of an increase [in online wildlife trafficking]
during Covid-19,” Krismanko Padang, one of the survey authors, tells China
Dialogue.
In January 2023, the Ministry of Environment and Forestry stated in a press
release that in 2022 it had found 638 social media accounts selling
protected wild animals. A total of 1,163 protected animals were being
offered for sale on social media platforms like Facebook and Instagram, as
well as major e-commerce sites such as Tokopedia and Kaskus, the ministry
stated.
Padang says that platforms generally respond to reports of illegal wildlife
trade online by immediately taking down the offending account.
“But this is not effective because if one account is closed down, they can
just set up another 10 new accounts,” notes Dwi Adhiasto, an independent
consultant and expert in wildlife trafficking based in Bogor, West Java.
Instead, he says, stricter punishment that is written into the law is
necessary to tackle online wildlife trafficking.
Revising Indonesia’s Wildlife Law
Indonesia’s House of Representatives is currently discussing a revision of
the Law on Conservation of Living Natural Resources and their Ecosystems.
This law, which came into force in 1990, prohibits trade in protected
wildlife, and is still the legal basis for indicting wildlife traffickers,
including those operating online.
Between 2007 and 2008, the then-Forestry Department (now known as the
Ministry of Environment and Forestry) initiated a public consultation on
updating the 1990 law. The conversation was only resumed in 2016.
In 2017, the lawmakers in the House of Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan
Rakyat, or DPR) released a bill on amendments to the law for discussion
with the government. It aims to strengthen law enforcement, improve
management and funding for conservation, and acknowledge Indigenous peoples.
Based on a draft wording of the law obtained by China Dialogue in April,
some of the changes lawmakers proposed include:
Sanctions for businesses and corporations operating within important
ecosystems outside conservation areas
Expanding the range of evidence admissible in court to include electronic
information, electronic documents, and maps
Additional fines to support ecosystem recovery, replanting, and preservation
Increasing minimum jail terms and fines for wildlife trade-related offences
Including a definition of ‘Indigenous peoples’ and acknowledging their
participation in protecting their customary lands
In 2018, the government decided to stop progress of the bill, saying a
revision was not necessary and the existing law was still relevant.
However, lawmakers decided to continue the discussion, approving it as a
‘DPR initiative bill’ in 2022. Debate is now happening under Commission IV
of the DPR, which oversees issues relating to the environment and forestry,
fisheries, peatlands, mangroves and agriculture. At the time of
publication, discussions between lawmakers and related stakeholders,
including civil society groups and the environment ministry, are ongoing.
Daniel Johan, a member of Commission IV from the National Awakening Party,
says it is important to revise the law because of the severe threat that
illegal wildlife trade and poaching pose to biodiversity and ecosystems.
“Hopefully it [a revised law] can target the main actors, not only the
low-level trader actors in the field,” Johan says.
Conservation Groups Call for Stricter Punishment
Under the current law, those convicted of illegal wildlife trade in
Indonesia face a maximum punishment of five years’ imprisonment and a fine
of 100 million rupiah (US$6,426). Several conservation groups China
Dialogue interviewed argue that this is not strict enough.
“We can understand that [the law] was made in 1990 and, probably at that
time, that amount of money was a lot,” says Adrianus Eryan, a researcher at
the NGO Indonesian Center for Environmental Law (ICEL). “But it is not
relevant in current years, considering inflation, demand, and the value of
these animals, which could be worth a lot more than that.” Eryan adds that,
in practice, the maximum sentence is usually around two years rather than
five.
“ICEL has been encouraging since 2005… a revision [of the law] and pushing
not just criminal fines, but to look at the whole policy,” he says. “It
would be worthwhile if perpetrators did not just serve time, but also paid
for the recovery [veterinary treatment or rehabilitation] of these animals.
The current law does not talk about recovery, and it is not cheap to feed
the animals, care for their medicines, and deal with the release.”
If the bill is passed, the revised law would impose a minimum sentence of
two to five years’ imprisonment, and a fine of between 600 million rupiah
($40,189) and 2 billion rupiah ($134,013), for cases involving the illegal
trade of protected wild animals.
Article 21 of the 1990 law prohibits the capture, injury, killing,
possession, transport and trade of any live protected animal, and the
possession, transport or trade of any dead protected animal.
Krismanko Padang suggests that Article 21 should be amended to refer to
online trading specifically. “I think it will be good to include the word
‘online’ in the revision. For instance, to say: ‘It is forbidden to trade
protected animals through online media’.”
Padang explains that under the current law, authorities must expend
significant effort to track down the seller in person and prove they are in
possession of the illegal item. A revised law could allow electronic
transactions to be used as evidence, he says. “If we can just provide
electronic proof as evidence and [that] there’s money paid for this
transaction, compared to bringing the actual animals, it would make our
jobs easier,” Padang says. “Once they post [on social media] and we can
ensure that these animals exist, we can enforce the law.”
Adhiasto points out that the current requirement to have the actual animal
as evidence is restricting authorities’ ability to apply the law to people
higher up in the trade network. “The officials will try to meet [sellers]
in person and bring the animals to the transaction. You can do this for the
sellers, but not really with the actual organiser, financial backers, or
even those managing the network,” he explains.
“We want to bring a deterrent effect to these perpetrators, because [at
present] we find that one [perpetrator] can do the same crime at least
three times. It means that there’s no deterrent effect,” Padang says,
adding that a minimum sentence should be added to a revised version of the
law. He also notes that punishment for online trading should be heavier,
because such practice holds the potential for illegal cross-border trade
that’s accessible anywhere – not just in Indonesia.
Eryan says that the conservation bill must be passed urgently to be able to
effectively tackle online wildlife trading. “In terms of law enforcement,
this [current] law is really weak. We cannot achieve anything if the
foundation is not better.
“If they’re serious, a month is enough [to get the bill passed] because all
the answers are there,” he says. “This has been going on for 33 years;
there is plenty of research going around. This is just about political
will.”