POSKO IJO Questions the Stalled Execution of the Court Ruling on the Mass Fish Kill Lawsuit in the Brantas River

Water quality conditions in the downstream section of the Brantas River Basin
are contaminated by detergents. Weak law enforcemet and inadequate
monitoring have caused continued deterioration in water quality.

Environmental activists from POSKO IJO conducted water quality testing in the Brantas River. Weak government oversight has enabled industries along the Brantas River Basin (DAS Brantas) to frequently discharge untreated waste, resulting in a decline in river water quality. 

The Supreme Court ruling should serve as a foundation for transforming river governance from a project-based approach to an ecosystem restoration approach. However, the government continues to treat pollution as an isolated incident rather than a systemic failure. In commemoration of World Wetlands Day, POSKO IJO urges the Governor of East Java and the Minister of Public Works to undertake concrete actions to restore the Brantas River from industrial pollution and plastic waste.

(Gresik, 1 February 2026) The Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia, on Thursday, 21 August 2025, issued Judicial Review Decision No. 821 PK/Pdt/2025, which rejected the judicial review petition filed by the Minister of Public Works and the Governor of East Java. This Supreme Court decision reaffirmed the Surabaya District Court Decision No. 08/Pdt.G/2019/PN.Sby, which had previously been upheld by the East Java High Court and Supreme Court Decision No. 1190 K/Pdt/2024.

The Supreme Court ruling is final and legally binding (inkracht). However, to date it has not been implemented. This failure sets a dangerous precedent, as the Governor of East Java and the Minister of Public Works have not comprehensively executed the court’s आदेश (ruling). It highlights a serious gap between law in the books and law in action. Such non-compliance risks undermining the rule of law and prolonging the ecological degradation of the Brantas River.

“The Surabaya District Court ruling, upheld by the Supreme Court, in Ecoton’s lawsuit over the mass fish deaths in the Brantas River contains ten concrete obligations for the government. Yet until 2025, implementation has remained partial and largely administrative in nature. Failure to execute the ruling risks prolonging the ecological and public health crisis in the Brantas River Basin,” said Rulli Mustika Adya.

Rulli Mustika Adya, a public interest lawyer who assisted Ecoton in the mass fish kill lawsuit, further explained that there are three main problems in implementing the court ruling:

1. Weak enforcement of administrative law against industries;

2. Lack of transparency in pollution data;

3. Minimal public participation in monitoring.

The POSKO IJO Advocacy Team presented an analysis showing that the stalled implementation of the ruling requires serious commitment from the Governor of East Java and the Minister of Public Works to prioritize pollution control in the Brantas River Basin and to allocate clear budgets for Brantas River restoration efforts.

“Industry continues to receive priority, and there is even an impression that the state tolerates destructive industrial practices that degrade the Brantas River’s water quality under the pretext of investment being crucial for Indonesia’s development. The result is law enforcement that is harsh on the powerless and lenient toward those in power, further enabling industries to operate in ways that violate ecological ethics and threaten the sustainability of the Earth,”

Rulli Mustika Adya stated.

---

Evaluation Matrix of the Implementation of Surabaya District Court Decision No. 08/Pdt.G/2019/PN.Sby

No	Court Order	Implementation Target	Implementation Status (as of 2025)	Critical Notes
1	Official public apology	Public statement by the government to Brantas Basin communities	Not implemented	No open apology in national/local media
2	Restoration budgeting	Brantas restoration programs included in national/regional budgets	Partial	Budget not specifically allocated for water quality restoration
3	Waste outlet CCTV	CCTV installed at all industrial waste outlets	Very limited	Only some industries; not transparent
4	Independent DLH audit	Audit involving the public & academics	Not implemented	Oversight remains internal to government
5	Warnings to industries	Official warning letters to all industries	Partial	No publicly available list of industries
6	Administrative sanctions	Warnings up to permit revocation	Weak	Dominated by guidance, minimal strict sanctions
7	Water quality monitoring	Real-time monitoring devices at outlets	Limited	Data not publicly accessible
8	Public health education	Campaigns on risks of contaminated fish & water	Sporadic	Not sustained
9	DLH–industry coordination	Regular reporting & evaluation system	Formalistic	Ineffective in preventing pollution
10	Oversight task force	Active cross-sector task force	Suboptimal	Minimal civil society involvement

---

Policy Recommendations

• Establish an independent task force based on the Supreme Court ruling

• Open access to CCTV footage and water quality monitoring data for the public

• Integrate the Supreme Court ruling into RPJMD and RKPD planning documents

• Apply progressive administrative sanctions