Borobudur Law and Society Journal

Proving fault is the main obstacle to holding corporations criminally liable for environmental harm, because a corporation has no mind of its own and Indonesian enforcement has leaned on strict liability, which is a civil doctrine. This normative study asks how the due diligence principle is framed in international and Indonesian law, whether it works as an element of proof, a defence or an evaluative factor in corporate criminal liability, and what the case of PT National Sago Prima shows. It applies statutory, conceptual and comparative approaches to Law No 32 of 2009 as amended by Law No 6 of 2023, Law No 1 of 2023 on the Criminal Code, Supreme Court Regulation No 13 of 2016, decisions of the International Court of Justice, and doctrine from England, Canada and the Netherlands. Due diligence is a standard of conduct, not of result. Indonesian law already gives it a place: article 48 of the Criminal Code and article 4(2) of the Regulation make a failure to take preventive steps a basis of corporate fault. Due diligence is therefore best used as a relevant factor in assessing fault, rather than a universal element or an automatic exemption. The PT National Sago Prima proceedings turned on strict civil liability and a modest fine, not on due diligence. Clearer guidance on compliance evidence is recommended.