Malaysians often engage in internal debates about our government's actions concerning the annual transboundary environmental crisis. The urgency of the current haze situation demands immediate attention within our legal framework purview.
Malaysia now faces a pivotal moment where it must seriously consider measures to hold those responsible for this environmental catastrophe accountable, including imposing substantial financial penalties on the perpetrators.
While the transboundary nature of the problem makes it complex, Malaysia could take a decisive stance against Malaysian entities operating on peatlands in Indonesia, particularly those within the oil palm sector.
A significant portion, approximately 700 to 800,000 hectares of peatland in these regions is occupied by oil palm plantations.
During the 2015 transboundary haze, a study revealed that 53 per cent of Indonesia's peatlands were ablaze, contributing to 85 per cent of the smoke that drifted to neighbouring countries like Singapore and Malaysia.
Therefore, Malaysia should consider innovative and practical methods beyond traditional legislation, such as promoting the Transboundary Pollution Act, which presents challenges, including the difficulty of obtaining sovereign information from the countries where the fires originate.
Adopting a haze act might seem politically favourable and justifiable initially. Still, it could backfire if our government cannot prevent fires in Sumatera and Kalimantan in the coming years. This scenario would subject the government to immense pressure to prosecute the perpetrators despite the daunting legal hurdles it would face.
Indeed, the government in Malaysia can pursue a more localised and impactful approach by focusing on the tangible effects of these fires in Malaysia, particularly those caused by Malaysian oil palm companies operating on peatlands in Sumatera and Kalimantan.
Statistically, Indonesia's agencies have shown that 332 palm oil companies operating in the country have foreign investors. Almost all major Malaysian oil palm companies have investments in Sumatera and Kalimantan, with land banks ranging from 20,000 to 150,000 hectares.
While these Malaysian companies are based in Malaysia, they must maintain Indonesian subsidiaries in compliance with local business regulations. It is a well-established fact that Malaysian oil palm companies often engage in partnerships or joint ventures with Indonesian firms, allowing Malaysian stakeholders to distance themselves from majority shareholding and shifting responsibility during haze events.
A common claim by oil palm operators in Indonesia is that fires originate from villagers' land near oil palm plantations, citing a 2007 law mandating that 20 per cent of agricultural land be allocated to local villagers.
However, studies showed that most of these fires, about 80 per cent, were linked to oil palm plantation companies, with the remaining 20 per cent attributed to slash-and-burn practices by local villagers.
Malaysia can adopt a more pragmatic approach rather than persisting with futile attempts to compel the Indonesian government to completely extinguish the fires through diplomatic means, including letters and negotiations at Asean Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution (AATHP) meetings.
This involves holding its own oil palm plantation operators in Indonesia accountable for their actions and encouraging responsible peatland management, especially during fire events that lead to haze in Malaysia.
A promising avenue to realise this accountability is for government agencies and civil societies in Malaysia to rigorously assess the Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) reports submitted yearly by Malaysian oil palm companies to Bursa Malaysia.
ESG reporting has been mandatory for Malaysian companies listed on Bursa Malaysia since 2016.
By closely examining the ESG reports submitted to Bursa Malaysia, Malaysian stakeholders can attain a more precise and transparent understanding of the peatland management practices of these oil palm operators, particularly in Sumatera and Kalimantan.
This scrutiny can exert significant pressure on oil palm companies in Malaysia to assume greater responsibility for managing the peatland and local villagers' lands in Indonesia. Furthermore, it provides a platform for these companies to present their initiatives and address the challenges they've encountered.
ESG reports should not be relegated to mere bookshelf ornaments. An ESG auditing for palm oil companies not only holds the relevant parties accountable for fires on their sites but also empowers Malaysians to become critical stakeholders in mitigating these fires and ensuring that Malaysian operators are held responsible.
It creates a joint responsibility platform where government agencies and the public can actively participate in reducing the impact of these destructive fires.
By utilising ESG reporting and robust auditing processes, we can make tangible strides toward a more transparent and accountable approach to tackling the haze crisis, ultimately benefiting the environment and public health in the region.
Malaysia's route to achieving clearer skies now hinges on holding those responsible for the haze accountable through the framework of ESG reporting submitted annually to Bursa Malaysia.
This underscores the significance of truth and transparency in addressing the haze issue and its broader implications for the region.
The writer is PhD Researcher (Atmospheric Science) at the Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of the New Straits Times