Skip to content
The Climate Litigation Database
Litigation

Greenpeace Indonesia and Others v. Bali Provincial Governor

Date
2018
Geography

About this case

Documents

Filing Date
Type
Document
Summary
06/26/2018
Complaint
Amicus Brief submitted by coalition of Indonesian and international environmental groups (English)
01/24/2018
Complaint
Indonesian version
01/24/2018
Complaint
Unofficial translation

Summary

Greenpeace Indonesia and three local residents of Buleleng District, Bali challenged the Bali Governor's granting of environmental permits for the expansion of the Celukan Bawang Coal-Fired Power Plant through Bali Governor's Decree No.660.3 / 3985 / IV-A / DISPMPT. Plaintiffs allege that the Bali Governor violated Environmental Law No.32 of 2009 and international commitments under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change by granting the environmental permits without consideration of the climate impacts of adding two 330 MW coal-fired units to the project. The Celukan Bawang Coal-Fired Power Plant Company is a defendant intervenor in the litigation. Nine Indonesian and international environmental groups filed an amici curiae brief in the proceeding before the Denpasar Administrative Court. They join the plaintiffs in asserting that the project does not comply with the Environmental Protection and Environmental Law No.32 of 2009 and undermines Indonesia’s international climate commitments because the Bali Governor did not conduct a comprehensive analysis of climate change impacts of the plant expansion. Greenpeace Indonesia and Others v. Bali Provincial Governor, 2 / G / LH / 2018 / PTUN.DPS (Denpasar Admin. Ct., filed Jan. 24, 2018; amici brief June 2018). In 2018, the Administrative Court rejected the lawsuit on procedural grounds. This decision was upheld by the Surabaya Administrative High Court (Case No. 221/B/LH/2018/PT.TUN.SBY), cassation appeal before the Indonesian Supreme Court (Case No. 224 K/TUN/LH/2019), and reconsideration application (peninjauan kembali) before the Indonesian Supreme Court (Case No. 67 PK/TUN/LH/2020). The final decision by the Supreme Court was to reaffirm the district court’s decision and ruled against the plaintiffs’ petition.