I have been breathing the haze, on and off, since I was a child. I was 14 in September 1997, when Sarawak declared a state of emergency after Kuching's air pollutant index (API) reading passed 500, and it later peaked near 800.
I was 30 in June 2013, when Muar's API hit 746. Now it is October 2026, and my son, who has asthma, is stuck indoors. Every trip outside is a risk.
On Oct 9, schools across Kuala Lumpur, Putrajaya, Selangor, Melaka, Negri Sembilan and Johor were shut. Nothing in that timeline is new. What has run out is our patience.
For me, the "Asean Way" on dealing with regional issues has reached its limit, especially when it comes to haze. Asean signed its Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution in 2002.
Indonesia, the last member to ratify it, deposited its instrument in January 2015, 13 years later. The agreement has no meaningful enforcement or dispute-resolution mechanism.
In a resource-constrained world, it means nobody is empowered to act when the sky turns brown. The Covid-19 pandemic showed the same gap, with each government improvising its solutions alone.
Thus, Asean needs a tribunal for environmental harm, built on the logic of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which prosecutes individuals for atrocity crimes.
Vanuatu, Fiji and Samoa proposed adding ecocide to the ICC's statute in September 2024. We should not wait for The Hague.
An Asean Environmental Tribunal would need four powers. Firstly, they must have binding jurisdiction over governments and companies for documented, repeated violations.
Secondly, satellite and concession data must be admitted as evidence and published openly. Thirdly, penalties must include fines, suspension of concessions and personal liability for directors.
Lastly, lenders must be held liable, as they finance the companies behind these fires. A 2019 Forests & Finance report counted about US$19 billion in loans and underwriting to 17 groups linked to Indonesia's fires between 2015 and August 2019.
Malaysian banks were the third-largest source, at about US$2.3 billion, behind China and Indonesia.
I would base the tribunal in Singapore. Its strong institutions and zero tolerance for lax standards, rent-seeking and nepotism make it a credible host. But hosting must come with safeguards.
Singapore suffers from the haze, yet its financial institutions also profit from financing groups linked to the fires. Judges should therefore come from countries not involved in the cases, with strict recusal rules to prevent conflicts of interest.
We are entering an era of climate conflict. We are at war with the planet, and the planet does not negotiate.
Young people across Asean have understood this. They have grown up under the same smoke as their parents, and they will not accept another round of statements of concern.
Asean needs a code of conduct with penalties for breaking it, applied equally to governments and boardrooms alike.
PIAL KHADILLA
Managing director — Asean
Global Institute For Tomorrow (GIFT)
© New Straits Times Press (M) Bhd