Who gains from saving nature
Ledger 1 : 33 — For each dollar financing nature-based solutions in 2023, about $33 financed activities harmful to nature. (UNEP)
Cases / Protected area / relocation · Indonesia · 2015–2017

Jakarta counted 113 forced evictions in 2015, most without resettlement housing

Short record: the main facts, with sources. A full case file has not been prepared.

Nature's voice · report
No measurement of the harm done to me here is on record.
Did nature suffer? Not measured.
What the record lacks: 2 none on record · 1 insufficient · 1 not measured · 1 unclear See the gaps

LBH Jakarta, a legal aid group, counted 113 forced evictions in Jakarta in 2015 that affected 8,145 household heads. Resettlement housing was not provided at 72 of the sites; the cited evictions were tied to river normalisation and a sea-wall plan, and the sources reviewed describe no effect on the rivers or sea.

What?
Forced evictions in Jakarta, counted by LBH Jakarta at 113 in 2015, affecting 8,145 household heads and 6,283 businesses. Republika
Where?
Jakarta, Indonesia: Bukit Duri on the Ciliwung river and Kampung Akuarium on the coast. Tempo
When?
Evictions counted for 2015 (reported May 2016); Kampung Akuarium evictions in 2016; court stage in January 2017. Republika
Who?
Gained
None on record
Lost
  • Households and businesses at the 113 eviction sites — Evicted: 8,145 household heads and 6,283 businesses counted Republika
Harmed
  • Residents at 72 eviction sites — No resettlement housing provided Republika
Why?
Ciliwung river normalisation for Bukit Duri; a sea wall and marine tourism plan for Kampung Akuarium. Tempo
How?
Forced evictions, with resettlement housing not provided at 72 of 113 sites (about 64%), per LBH Jakarta. Republika
6 of 6 questions answered from the record

What happened

The record, in order.

LBH Jakarta, a legal aid group, counted 113 forced evictions in Jakarta in 2015 under the Ahok administration, affecting 8,145 household heads and 6,283 businesses, Republika reported in May 2016.

Resettlement housing was not provided at 72 of the 113 sites, about 64%, according to the same count.

The sources record that Bukit Duri residents, whose homes were demolished for Ciliwung river normalisation, won the first stage of an administrative court case in January 2017.

Tempo reported that no deal was reached with Kampung Akuarium residents, who were evicted in 2016 for a sea wall and marine tourism plan.

    In court and with insurers

    Every proceeding and every insurer decision on record.

    Lawsuits and rulings

    1. Outcome not on record
      Bukit Duri residents' case over Ciliwung normalisation demolitions
      Administrative court, Jakarta · Administrative · Bukit Duri residents → Not stated in the sources reviewed

      Residents won the first stage, according to the sources; later stages are not stated.

    Insurers

    No insurer decision on record.

    What we don't know

    Undisclosed, unproven, untried: recorded as data.

    Nature

    • Not measured Harm to nature: The record holds no measurement of harm to nature.

    Court

    • Unclear Bukit Duri residents' case over Ciliwung normalisation demolitions: outcome not on record.

    Record

    • None on record Beneficiaries of the normalisation and sea-wall plans are not named in the sources reviewed.
    • Insufficient Reported but not verified: a Liputan6 headline quotes a minister saying the Kampung Pulo evictions were not wrongful; the article text was not reviewed.
    • None on record The outcome of the Bukit Duri case after its first stage is not stated in the sources reviewed.

    Did the harm stop?

    Not stated in the sources reviewed.

    Who paid?

    Not stated in the sources reviewed.

    Sources

    Voices on record: — Company or project— Government and regulators— Courts✓ Press and investigations— Communities and civil society— Researchers

    Press and investigations

    Connected cases

    Related matters, and cases linked to this one through the same organisations, with the role each played in both.
    Similar cases
    Protected area / relocation · International · 2019–2020
    WWF independent review (Pillay panel) and US funding suspension
    Same type: Protected area / relocationSame regionCourt: outcome not on record
    Protected area / relocation · Carbon credits · Nepal · 2000–2026
    Nepal community forestry
    Same type: Protected area / relocationSame regionCourt: outcome not on record
    Mining · Protected area / relocation · Indonesia · 2025
    Raja Ampat nickel licences revoked
    Same type: Protected area / relocationSame countryHarm to nature not measured
    Killings and repression of defenders · Protected area / relocation · India · 2013–2017
    Kaziranga shoot-on-sight killings (India)
    Same type: Protected area / relocationSame regionCourt: outcome not on record
    Carbon credits · Protected area / relocation · Cambodia · 2015–2025
    Cambodia REDD+ indigenous consultation failure
    Same type: Protected area / relocationSame regionCourt: outcome not on record
    Urban greening and displacement · Protected area / relocation · Philippines · 2019–2025
    Manila Bay rehabilitation resettlement and Pasig riverwalk
    Same type: Protected area / relocationSame regionCourt: outcome not on record