---
title: "Southeast Asia Has Laws Against Haze. The Smoke Keeps Coming Anyway"
description: "A treaty with no court, a Singapore law that has never been used to prosecute anyone, and a Malaysian bill that was shelved"
author: "Nate Ledger"
published: 2026-10-22T11:19:38Z
modified: 2026-10-22T12:34:17Z
url: https://rews.cc/a/southeast-asia-has-laws-against-haze-the-smoke-keeps-coming--72fa63
language: en
tags: ["haze", "environment", "law", "indonesia", "singapore", "asia"]
publisher: "Rews (https://rews.cc)"
---

# Southeast Asia Has Laws Against Haze. The Smoke Keeps Coming Anyway

*A treaty with no court, a Singapore law that has never been used to prosecute anyone, and a Malaysian bill that was shelved*

By Nate Ledger · October 22, 2026 · https://rews.cc/a/southeast-asia-has-laws-against-haze-the-smoke-keeps-coming--72fa63

## In brief

- Haze from Indonesia’s worst wildfires in a decade has covered Malaysia and Singapore for about two months
- The 2002 ASEAN haze treaty has no judicial enforcement and resolves disputes only through negotiation
- Singapore’s 2014 haze law caps fines at S$2 million and has never been used to prosecute a company
- Singapore has sent preventive notices to 10 Indonesia-based companies this season
- Prabowo criticised countries that “like to insult” Indonesia and promised to expose foreign companies he blames

For about two months, smoke from Indonesia’s worst wildfires in a decade has been drifting over Malaysia and Singapore. As John Power [reports for Al Jazeera](https://aljazeera.com/economy/2026/10/22/southeast-asias-toxic-haze-spurs-calls-for-legal-action-against-polluters), more and more people want someone held legally responsible. The fires are estimated to have burned more than 2 million hectares, and most of the haze that crosses borders has been blamed on Indonesian palm oil plantation owners clearing land. Burning is a cheap way to clear land if you’re the one doing it. Everyone downwind pays the real cost.

That’s the textbook externality, and the textbook fix is to make the burner pay. On paper the region has several ways to do that. In practice, each one has a catch.

## The treaty

Start with the ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution, signed in 2002. It commits ASEAN’s 11 members to “concerted national efforts and intensified regional and international co-operation,” which is an obligation you can meet by holding a meeting. No court is attached to it, and disputes are settled by negotiation. Its coordinating office in Jakarta opened this April, about 23 and a half years after the signing. “It is legally binding, but it does not provide a mechanism for one member state to simply sue another,” Mohd Hazmi Mohd Rusli of Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia [told AFP](https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20261001-indonesia-haze-chokes-neighbours-but-little-legal-recourse). Some people have suggested taking Indonesia to the International Court of Justice. But that court hears a case only when the countries involved consent, so Indonesia would have to agree to be sued. Hazmi also warned that “Transboundary haze does not automatically mean Indonesia is internationally responsible.”

![A giant open cigarette lighter stands against a yellow background, with dark smoke flowing from a small fire among palm trees through its body.](https://rews.cc/img/44b59511f20d6cc2fd32b6b8810648841d86a037.webp)

His diagnosis is ASEAN’s habit of consensus and noninterference, a habit [on display again this month](https://rews.cc/a/a-red-carpet-in-kuala-lumpur-and-asean-opens-the-door-to-mya-c790cc) in another context. “Economic interests and diplomatic considerations also play a role,” he told Al Jazeera. He wants the treaty strengthened with independent monitoring and clearer compliance procedures.

## The law that works best unused

Singapore’s Transboundary Haze Pollution Act, passed in 2014, is the more muscular option. It lets Singapore prosecute conduct abroad that causes or contributes to haze in Singapore. Fines are S$100,000 ($78,300) a day, capped at S$2 million ($1.56m). Do the arithmetic: the cap is reached on day 20. This haze season has run roughly 60 days, so under the cap a company burning all season would hit the maximum fine a third of the way through. After that, each additional day of smoke costs it nothing more.

The National Environment Agency can also order companies to stop burning. On October 19 it said it would send preventive notices to three more Indonesian companies over fires in Kalimantan, [the Washington Times reported](https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/oct/19/singapore-expands-crackdown-indonesian-companies-linked-haze/). That brings this season’s total to 10, after seven earlier notices to agroforestry companies linked to fires in Sumatra. Prime Minister Lawrence Wong has [warned of action](https://www.cnbc.com/2026/10/16/singapore-haze-wong-warning-indonesia.html). Since 2014, the number of companies actually prosecuted under the act is zero. Investigations into four Indonesian companies over the 2015 haze are still open.

Alan Khee-Jin Tan of the National University of Singapore’s law faculty explained why to Al Jazeera. Direct evidence depends on Indonesia investigating and sharing what it finds. He expects companies to argue that “the fires started outside their concessions and spread into their holdings.” So he thinks Singapore would probably prosecute only firms Indonesia has already charged. A failed case would make the law look toothless, and acting alone “could be politically controversial.”

![A dark blue judge’s gavel hovers above a cream sound block, with gray smoke curling between them against a yellow background.](https://rews.cc/img/44325bbbd3ba9650231b4688ef1c9f93c25136be.webp)

Think about what that means. The law deters mainly through the possibility that it might be used, and that possibility is credible only while nobody tests it and loses. The safest way to keep it frightening is not to use it.

Malaysia doesn’t have even that much. In 2023 it dropped a proposed cross-border haze law because evidence would be hard to get. It now says it might consider a law like Singapore’s. A Malaysian lawyer [told The Star](https://www.thestar.com.my/aseanplus/aseanplus-news/2026/10/02/choked-by-haze-limited-by-the-law) that he knew of no private lawsuit over haze that had succeeded.

## Mutual respect

Then there’s the politics. Malaysia and Singapore have mostly avoided criticising Indonesia and have offered firefighting help instead. Jakarta has gone back and forth between welcoming the help and saying it can manage alone. In 2016, when Singapore tried to summon an Indonesian company director, Indonesia’s then environment minister, Siti Nurbaya Bakar, accused Singapore of lacking “mutual respect.” Singapore denied it.

This year a Malaysian politician suggested Indonesia be treated as an “outcast” in ASEAN. On Wednesday, President Prabowo Subianto criticised countries that “like to insult” Indonesia. He promised to expose foreign companies that he says share responsibility, and to “step up our response.” That is a pointed reply to two neighbours whose main legal tool is prosecuting companies. Jakarta’s message seems to be that if the polluters are to be named, it will do the naming.

![Two people in dark suits shake hands as thick black smoke rises from their clasped hands against a teal background.](https://rews.cc/img/6e601b53314070718e5327fd9b0cecd281ccded8.webp)

## Follow the money

The experts Al Jazeera spoke to mostly agree that the law isn’t the real bottleneck. Heng Kiah Chun of Greenpeace Southeast Asia said the response has focused on diplomacy, firefighting and public health while neglecting root causes, including “inadequate corporate accountability.” Eugene Tan Kheng Boon of Singapore Management University sees Indonesia’s inaction as the main obstacle. He suggests making sustainable palm oil certification mandatory and encouraging consumer boycotts. He also said: “Banks that finance these polluters should also come within the enforcement crosshairs.”

I think that last idea is the most interesting one. A plantation burning in a remote province is hard to prove things about. A loan agreement is a document. Lenders answer to regulators, and they don’t like headlines. If what you need is a way to make burning more expensive than not burning, going through the companies’ financing might be quicker than waiting for evidence that has to cross a border.

Matthew Baird of the Asian Research Institute for Environmental Law says it comes down to political will. He points to Beijing’s 30-year effort against air pollution and wants directors and companies held to account, noting that “in every country, it is actually a criminal offence to burn land.” So the burning is already illegal where it happens. The region’s strongest cross-border law works best if nobody tests it in court. And the ICJ can’t hear a case unless both countries consent. Smoke doesn’t wait for consent.