Beneath the Smokescreen: Accountability, Peatlands, and the Hollow Politics of Indonesia’s Forest Fires

By Environmental Reporting Desk

As toxic haze blankets vast swathes of Kalimantan and Sumatera, choking human settlements and wildlife alike, a familiar and bitter ritual is playing out across Indonesia. Plume by plume, smoke transcends administrative borders, turning the sky an apocalyptic amber. Yet, as the ecological crisis deepens, public frustration has shifted from the fires themselves to the political theatrics surrounding them. High-ranking central government officials continue a cycle of landing in disaster zones, offering superficial acknowledgments, and departing—leaving behind smoke, mirrors, and little tangible relief.

Main Facts: A Crisis Beyond Borders

The forest and land fire crisis (kebakaran hutan dan lahan, or karhutla) has once again paralyzed daily life across parts of Kalimantan and Sumatera. In South Kalimantan (Kalimantan Selatan), the human and environmental toll has reached staggering proportions. According to data from the Regional Disaster Management Agency (BPBD), by September 10, the total area incinerated across the province had ballooned to an alarming 20,206.06 hectares, scorching terrain across nearly all 13 of its regencies and municipalities.

Eight regions have been placed under emergency status: Banjarbaru, Banjar, Tapin, Barito Kuala, Tanah Bumbu, Hulu Sungai Selatan, Hulu Sungai Utara, and Tabalong. Kabupaten Banjar bears the heaviest scars, with approximately 5,100 hectares burned, followed closely by Banjarbaru City at roughly 2,539 hectares.

Despite large-scale technological and bureaucratic deployments—including a fleet of 53 aerial water-bombing units and Weather Modification Technology (TMC) operations—the fires refuse to die easily. The core of the crisis lies in the unique vulnerability of tropical peatlands. When drained or dried out, these ancient carbon sinks store subterranean embers that defy surface-level firefighting, turning the earth itself into a slow-burning hazard.

Chronology of Political Visits: The Optics of Disaster

The political response to the 2026 crisis has triggered fierce public debate. Critics argue that central government interventions have devolved into a predictable, cyclical performance: a spike in hot spots occurs, air quality plummets to hazardous levels, and a cavalcade of national officials arrives in private jets for brief, highly publicized inspections.

In September, Vice President Gibran Rakabuming Raka visited South Kalimantan (Bumi Lambung Mangkurat) to inspect karhutla mitigation efforts. However, the visit drew immediate criticism for its brevity and perceived lack of substance. The Vice President reportedly spoke for less than five minutes, issued a formal apology to local residents, and directed law enforcement to crack down on violators before swiftly departing for an inspection near Syamsudin Noor International Airport in Banjarmasin.

"Please, from the police side, enforce the law strictly," Gibran stated before leaving.

This visit followed a string of similar journeys by the President and various cabinet ministers—including Minister of Forestry Raja Juli Antoni—to disaster-hit regions in Kalimantan and Sumatera. While framed as executive oversight, these visits have done little to reassure communities gasping for clean air. In some local circles, public cynicism has grown so thick that residents jokingly—and bitterly—remark that the arrival of high-ranking officials seems to coincide with a rise in hot spots rather than their suppression.

Supporting Data and the Peatland Dilemma

Civil society organizations and legal experts have slammed the government’s tendency to attribute the fires exclusively to natural phenomena. State officials frequently point to extreme weather anomalies, including super El Niño, high temperatures, low humidity, and the inherent flammability of dry peat ecosystems.

Muhamad Pazri, Chairman of the Indonesian Legal Education Foundation (YEHI) and Managing Director of Borneo Law Firm, dismissed this official narrative.

"The conclusion that this is purely a natural disaster is a form of sociological naivety and an abandonment of law enforcement issues," Pazri argued.

Pazri emphasized that while science proves dry peat is highly vulnerable to combustion, it still requires a source of ignition. Utilizing data from the Ministry of Forestry’s Sipongi monitoring system, he argued that authorities should focus on why fires repeatedly break out in identical geographic locations. Rather than relying on seasonal rhetoric, satellite data and objective forensic tracking should answer critical questions: Where did the fire originate? How did it start? What triggered it, and did human activity contribute?

The physical realities of peat fires compound these challenges. Ronny Eka Saputra, Head of the South Kalimantan BPBD, explained that subterranean fires present a uniquely stubborn obstacle.

"The fire is underground, so even though surface flames have decreased, there are still spots emitting smoke," Ronny noted.

To combat this, local authorities have adopted innovative tactics, combining thermal drones to pinpoint hidden subterranean hot spots with targeted ground interventions, such as injecting surfactant chemical concentrates into peat layers—an initiative pioneered by the South Kalimantan Regional Police.

Official Responses: Between Smallholders and Corporate Secrecy

As accountability takes center stage, law enforcement agencies are under pressure to prove they are targeting the root causes of the blazes. As of September 10, the South Kalimantan Regional Police (Polda Kalsel) reported at least five individual suspects in custody, alongside 11 formal investigation reports (Laporan Polisi).

Kombes Pol. Nur Khamid, Head of Public Relations for Polda Kalsel, stated that the number of suspects is expected to rise as investigations proceed. When questioned regarding corporate involvement—the suspected mastermind behind large-scale land clearance—Nur Khamid remained tight-lipped, citing the need for valid data before making public accusations.

"For the reports, there are individuals and there are corporations. Corporations do exist, but we need the exact data. We cannot dare to mention them without verified data," Nur Khamid explained.

According to preliminary police findings, the individual suspects apprehended thus far in Hulu Sungai Selatan, Tanah Laut, and Tabalong are primarily smallholder farmers. Investigators claim these individuals utilized basic methods—such as matches, or sticks wrapped in cloth soaked in fuel—to clear small plots of land out of long-standing tradition.

"This is a tradition, but it is prohibited," Nur Khamid acknowledged.

This focus on impoverished farmers has drawn sharp rebukes from environmental watchdogs, who argue that targeting smallholders while shielding corporate concession holders—known legally as Perizinan Berusaha Pemanfaatan Hutan (PBPH)—creates a profound injustice.

Implications: Demanding Structural Action Over Apologies

The disconnect between political optics and grassroots realities has galvanized environmental groups. Raden Rafiq Sepdian Fadel Wibisono, Executive Director of WALHI South Kalimantan, pulled no punches in rejecting the government’s approach.

"We do not need apologies. What we need is proof of concrete action," Rafiq declared.

He questioned the fiscal responsibility of deploying high-level state officials on costly regional tours if their output is limited to ceremonial apologies rather than structural policy shifts. Rafiq argued that central government representatives should bypass sanitized regional reports and open direct dialogues with impacted communities, indigenous groups, academics, and student activists.

Furthermore, WALHI points to the broader ecological degradation of South Kalimantan, which has suffered from chronic environmental over-burdening. The uncontrolled expansion of mining concessions and the disruption of natural hydrological cycles—including the disappearance of vital natural rivers—have severely compromised the region’s environmental carrying capacity.

From a legal standpoint, experts argue that existing legislation provides more than enough teeth to prosecute corporate negligence. Under Article 69 Paragraph (1) letter h of Law No. 32 of 2009 regarding Environmental Protection and Management (PPLH), land burning is strictly prohibited. Furthermore, Article 88 establishes the principle of strict liability for environmental damages, while Article 108 threatens corporate and individual offenders with up to 10 years in prison and fines reaching Rp10 billion. Similar strict penalties are codified under Law No. 41 of 1999 on Forestry.

Legal advocates like Muhamad Pazri maintain that any PBPH-licensed corporation found guilty of allowing fires within its concession must face immediate, crippling sanctions, ranging from government-enforced compliance orders to the revocation of business licenses.

As the smoke continues to linger over the horizon, the message from the people of Kalimantan and Sumatera is unmistakable. The era of seasonal rhetoric and perfunctory apologies has run its course. What the public demands is not another VIP motorcade, but the political courage to enforce the law against powerful corporate actors and safeguard the lungs of the archipelago.