https://journal.unpad.ac.id/pjih/vol13/iss2/4/
Authors: Zico Junius Fernando, Deviana Yuanitasari, Chairul Huda, Muhammadiyah Jakarta, Muhammad Yamani, Arimbi Fajari Furqon
Abstract
Geoengineering has emerged as a controversial climate technology involving large-scale interventions such as cloud seeding, weather modification, and unregulated carbon capture. While these practices are promoted as solutions to climate change, they also generate significant ecological risks that remain largely unaddressed within criminal law frameworks. This article examines the absence of explicit criminal liability for geoengineering-related harms and explores how comparative legal experiences can inform future penal reform. This research uses normative research methods with several approaches, including comparative, conceptual, and futuristic approaches. The collected legal materials are analysed qualitatively, and content analysis is employed to classify and interpret relevant norms, policies, and doctrines. Through a comparative analysis of selected jurisdictions, the study demonstrates that most countries rely on administrative regulation, precautionary principles, or sectoral liability mechanisms, while avoiding the criminalization of geoengineering risks. This regulatory pattern reveals a global normative gap, as existing legal regimes focus primarily on actual environmental damage rather than anticipatory or risk-based harm arising from experimental climate technologies. The article argues that geoengineering activities with high ecological uncertainty should be reconceptualized as potential environmental crimes, particularly when conducted without adequate oversight or accountability. By drawing comparative lessons, this study proposes tintegratingrisk-based criminal liability into future penal reform ao strengthen ecological protection and align criminal law with the emerging challenges posed by climate engineering.
Source: Padjadjaran Journal of Law