Cogent Social Sciences

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/oass20

Affliction in the post Palu disaster: State failure

to implement human rights standard on disaster
management

Aktieva Tri Tjitrawati & Mochamad Kevin Romadhona

To cite this article: Aktieva Tri Tjitrawati & Mochamad Kevin Romadhona (2023) Affliction in the
post Palu disaster: State failure to implement human rights standard on disaster management,
Cogent Social Sciences, 9:1, 2233255, DOI: 10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group.

Published online: 06 Jul 2023.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 639

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=oass20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

LAW, CRIMINOLOGY & CRIMINAL JUSTICE | RESEARCH ARTICLE

Received: 15 March 2023
Accepted: 30 June 2023
*Corresponding author: Aktieva Tri
Tjitrawati, Department of
International Law, Faculty of Law,
Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya,
Indonesia
E-mail: aktieva.tri@fh.unair.ac.id
Reviewing editor:
Cristina Elena Popa Tache, Law,
Andrei Şaguna University:
Universitatea Andrei Saguna,
Constanţa, Romania
Additional information is available at
the end of the article
Affliction in the post Palu disaster: State failure to
implement human rights standard on disaster
management
Aktieva Tri Tjitrawati1* and Mochamad Kevin Romadhona2
Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to evaluate how the State implement human
rights standard on disaster management and response in Indonesia to explore the
State’s obligation to provide fundamental rights in a state of exigency. This paper
investigates whether the law and regulation on disaster management in Indonesia
have adopted human rights standards and how the standard has been implemen­
ted after Palu Disaster that occurred on 28 September 2018. The investigation was
conducted through field research using a standard human rights implementation
criteria-based questionnaire according to the standard set by The Core
Humanitarian Standard on Quality and Accountability (CHS) 2014. The research was
preceded by an FGD held by stakeholders to obtain more elaborate and balanced

ABOUT THE AUTHORS PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT

Aktieva Tri Tjitrawati
Aktieva Tri Tjitrawati completed her bachelor
degree in Faculty of Law, Universitas Airlangga,
Master degree in Faculty of Law, Universitas
Padjadjaran, and his doctoral in Faculty of Law,
Universitas Padjadjaran. She is Assoc. Professor in
Department of International Law, Universitas
Airlangga, she has teaching concern on Maritime
Law, Air and Space Law, Health Law,
International Trade Law, and Human Rights. She
has been experiences of doing many research
regarding Health Law, Human Right, and
Migration Law. And this research is one of those
her expertise which exploring the Affliction Post
Palu Disaster and State Implemented the Human
Rights Standard on Disaster Management.
Mochamad Kevin Romadhona completed his
bachelor degree in Faculty of Social and Political
Science, Universitas Airlangga, currently he is
working as staff in UP4I Faculty of Law,
Universitas Airlangga, also Journal Asisstant
Editor for Yuridika, Notaire, and Juirist-Diction.
In order to investigate the State’s duty to uphold
basic rights in an emergency, the goal of this
research is to assess how the State applies
human rights standards to disaster manage­
ment and response in Indonesia. This study looks
into whether Indonesian disaster management
laws and regulations contain human rights
standards and how those standards have been
put into practice following the Palu Disaster on
September 28, 2018. According to the criteria
established by The Core Humanitarian Standard
on Quality and Accountability (CHS) 2014, the
inquiry was carried out through field research
with the use of a standard human rights imple­
mentation criterion-based questionnaire. An FGD
was convened by stakeholders prior to the
research in order to gather more thorough and
impartial information between the government
and the disaster victims. Human rights standards
are not being implemented in Palu’s disaster
management, as evidenced by reports of victims
being treated unfairly and inadequate basic
supplies being distributed to them. Here,
a paradox developed between the poor human
rights protection provided by disaster manage­
ment regulations and the propensity of state
authorities to use a positive-legalistic imple­
mentation strategy to such regulations.

© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribu­
tion, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on
which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in
a repository by the author(s) or with their consent.

Page 1 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

information between the disaster victims and the government. Reports of discrimi­
native treatment received by the victims and poor basic needs distribution during
the disaster are a few clues regarding the lack of implementation of human rights
standards in disaster management in Palu. Here a twist happened between the
weakness of human rights protection under the regulation of disaster management
and the tendency of state authority to use a positive-legalistic approach to imple­
ment such regulation.

Subjects: Asylum & Immigration Law; Environmental Law - Law; International Law - Law;
Socio-Legal Studies; Sociology & Social Policy

Keywords: affliction; disaster management; human rights; Palu disaster; state failure

1. Introduction
Indonesia is one of the most disaster-limited countries in the world (Djalante et al., 2017), with
a different risk of various disasters each year (Djalante & Garschagen, 2017). Its geographical
position, as well as the fact that Indonesia is the largest archipelagic country in the world
(Djunarsjah & Putra, 2021), is at risk of hazards ranging from floods (Sunarharum et al., 2016),
landslides (Bachri et al., 2021), and earthquakes to volcanic eruptions (Skoufias et al., 2021),
tsunamis (Mardiatno et al., 2017), tropical storms (Mulyana et al., 2018), and forest fires
(Prayoga & Koestoer, 2021). Based on the 2018 World Risk Report, Indonesia ranks 36th with
a risk index of 10.36 out of 172 countries most prone to natural disasters (Winanto, 2021).
Indonesia’s vulnerability increases with its position within the Ring of Fire (Siagian et al., 2014),
and at the boundary of three tectonic plates (Bock et al., 2003). Palu City is a city in Central
Sulawesi Province, Indonesia, located in the Palu Koro fault area (Patria & Putra, 2020), which is
always actively moving, causing collisions in the earth (Imam Abdullah & Abdullah, 2020). The
disaster that occurred in the afternoon on 28 September 2018 shattered the joints of life in the
Palu community, which, until their recovery, had not been able to return the community to
everyday life (Syamsidik et al., 2019). A tsunami followed an earthquake with a magnitude of
7.4 (Natawidjaja et al., 2020), and The liquefaction that hit Central Sulawesi on 28 September 2018,
not only claimed 4,340 lives, but the natural disaster also caused material losses of up to Rp. 18.48
trillion (Goda et al., 2019). This natural disaster has made many people in Palu suffer losses,
damage, loss of objects that caused displacement and homelessness, as well as damage to houses
and public facilities (BNPB, 2018). The destruction of the joints of life due to natural disasters can
cause the fundamental rights of disaster victims to be threatened (Sena, 2006). Basic needs such
as clean water and food, access to medicines, and equal access to aid are some of the needs that
victims of natural disasters often need (Pourhosseini et al., 2015). The devastating effects of
natural disasters increase the inequalities in the lives of victims in society (Rivera et al., 2022).

Disasters pose a significant threat not only to the survival of populations and societies as
a whole but also to the dignity and safety of individuals (Sommario & Venier, 2018). More often
than not, the havoc caused by calamities results in severe infringements of the entire range of
human rights (Ferris, 2008), with the right to life, private and family life and property featuring
amongst those most at risk. Consequently, human rights bodies have had to grapple with alleged
violations caused by State inaction in the phases preceding and following a disastrous event
(Sommario & Venier, 2018).

The state is obliged to maintain, protect and prosper its people (Sefriani, 2020). As a form of the
legal relationship, the fulfilment of people’s rights to safety and welfare is a legal obligation of the
State which can be fulfilled by the community (Martitah, 2017). Human rights law strengthens this
concept by elaborating what rights citizens can claim against their own country (Broberg & Sano,
2018). A human rights-based approach, therefore, is about empowering people to know and claim

Page 2 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

their rights and increasing the capacity and accountability of individuals and institutions respon­
sible for respecting, protecting and fulfilling rights (Cornwall & Nyamu-Musembi, 2004).

When a major disaster occurs with many victims who need assistance, laws, regulations and
regulations are the first things that are generally thought of Laws (Civaner et al., 2017), laws and
regulations are often considered as matters relating to disaster management’s effectiveness
(Iskandar et al., 2018). However, the absence of handling treatment often causes contributions
and responses to be uncoordinated, inappropriate and wasteful. As a result, disaster victims do not
receive timely, targeted and practical assistance. What happened in disaster management in Palu,
Central Sulawesi can be an example. On 25 October 2018, almost 1 month after the disaster, the
Coordinating Minister for Political, Legal and Security Affairs stated that a lot of aid goods both
from within and outside the country were still piling up at Halim Perdana Kusuma Airport (Jakarta),
Sepinggan Airport (Balikpapan) and Mutiara Airport. (Palu), while on the other hand, there are still
many disaster victims who have not received proper assistance.

International human rights principles should be considered for disaster risk management.
A human rights-based approach leads to accountability and empowerment of those involved in
disaster management. With the fulfilment of international human rights standards, it is ensured
that the basic needs of victims or beneficiaries will be met to reduce the vulnerability of affected
populations and special groups, enable the transition to normalcy and contribute to increased risk
reduction, all within a rights-based framework (da Costa & Pospieszna, 2015). International human
rights law does not explicitly address the right to protection and disaster relief (Maulida, 2020), but
this objective is implied. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights puts it this way in article 3,
Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of person (Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, n.d.). Article 25 covers much the same ground differently Everyone has the right to
a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including
food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in
the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, or old age or other lack of livelihood
in the circumstances beyond his control (The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, n.d.)

The challenging problem is how to apply the rules in an operational context (Aven, 2016). This
paper will explore the issue of protecting human rights in natural disaster mitigation under
Indonesian regulations, focusing on the urgency of operationalising the protection of human rights
in disaster mitigation; and the epistemology of human rights protection related to disaster
mitigation in Indonesia.

2. Research methodology
This research is a type of legal research using a sociolegal approach that explores the old problems
regarding disasters in the context of international law and the government’s failure to apply
human rights principles. This paper was compiled with data collected after the Palu multi disaster
(earthquake, tsunami and liquefaction on 28 September 2018 around Palu, Central Sulawesi,
Indonesia. Researchers used an analytical design for this study. Qualitative data was collected
through primary (field visits), observation, FGD), and secondary sources (published writings, books,
disaster reports) Quantitative Data. Researchers have used analytical and descriptive techniques
for data analysis.

3. Result and discussion

3.1. Human right issue post disaster

Of non-fulfilment of fundamental rights and basic needs of the community, such as the right to
water, clean and food, clothing, shelter, access to health, access to aid, economy, education, etc
(Kumar Chaudhary & Kalia, 2015). The destruction of the residences of disaster victims often raises
new problems related to human rights (Méndez et al., 2020): forced relocation, forced return,

Page 3 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

unequal access to temporary shelter, or compensation that is not following the victim’s property
rights (Hu et al., 2015) .

Natural disasters can also cause horizontal conflicts between disaster victims and disaster
victims with other communities who are not victims of the disaster (Ferris, 2013) or vertical
conflicts between disaster victims and the Government. Citizens of disaster victims brought several
cases of neglect by the State to the courts (Lauta, 2016).

Difficult access to food and air can cause people to fight over the remaining resources because
of one’s survival instinct (Patel, 2009). The destruction of homes for victims of natural disasters can
also be a problem (Dartanto, 2022). Victims are usually evacuated from their homes after natural
disasters occur, actions that have the potential to be followed by other human rights violations,
such as forced relocation, forced repatriation, unequal access to temporary shelter, and unfair
property compensation for victims. At times like this, State organs also find it challenging to fulfil
their obligations to protect their people. This is because the area where the disaster occurred is
becoming very difficult to reach due to the destruction of infrastructure and the inability to
communicate (EL Khaled & Mcheick, 2019). This condition forces the victims to survive on their
own. Even if state appartatus can reach disaster points, they often cannot carry out their functions
due to a lack of resources. The sheer number of victims and a lack of resources can make it difficult
for organs to distribute aid. In addition, the desire to survive and the psychological pressure on
victims of disasters can lead to fighting for the resources provided by the government, which
obliges state organs to work harder to maintain peace while they work.

In addition, large numbers of people are also internally displaced when volcanic eruptions
(Fuady, 2013), tsunamis (Gray et al., 2014), floods (Kakinuma et al., 2020), droughts (Lindvall
et al., 2020), landslides (Burrows et al., 2021), or earthquakes destroy homes (Chen et al., 2016)
and shelters (Conzatti et al., 2022), forcing affected residents to leave their homes or dwellings
(Cantor et al., 2021). Experience shows that the more it continues, the greater the human rights
risk. (IASC, 2011) In particular, discrimination and violations of economic, social and cultural rights
tend to become more systematic over time (Chapman, 1996). Human rights violations in the
aftermath of disasters are usually not used or planned, often more a consequence of inappropriate
policies, neglect or weak oversight by local governments (Sesay & Bradley, 2022). Insufficient
resources and capacity to prepare for and respond to the consequences of disasters increase the
potential for such violations.

The effect of disruption or post-disaster sanitation facilities on human rights protection

(Aronsson-Storrier, 2017). Poor sanitation after the disaster causes health problems due to pol­
luted water for drinking and bathing, and the marginalised are the most vulnerable to becoming
victims (Singavarapu & Murray, 2013). Diseases due to poor sanitation, such as diarrhoea
(Oloruntoba et al., 2014), cholera (Taylor et al., 2015), worm infestation (Riaz et al., 2020),
schistosomiasis (Grimes et al., 2014), trachoma (Stocks et al., 2014), and polio (Lien & Heymann,
2013), have created additional problems in protecting human rights, namely the disruption of the
right to education and development due to the deteriorating access of those who are marginalised
to these rights (Aronsson-Storrier, 2017).

Communities affected by disasters have the potential to address various forms of discrimination
(Davidson et al., 2013), based on race (Leyser-Whalen et al., 2011), colour (Hansson et al., 2020),
sex (Neumayer & Plümper, 2007), language (Uekusa, 2019), religion (Gianisa & Le De, 2017),
political or another opinion (Wood et al., 2013), national or social origin, property, birth (Hansson
et al., 2020), age (Peek, 2008), disability or other essential statuses (King et al., 2019).
Discrimination that includes, as well as policies or activities that are discriminatory (Roscigno,
2019). In the aftermath of disasters, injustice and discrimination often occur between people
directly affected by disasters and those not directly affected, as well as between various groups
among victims (Kaniasty & Norris, 2004). Giving aid only to particular religious groups and making

Page 4 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

aid to attract others to follow a particular religion often occurs after a disaster (Whittaker et al.,
2015). The issue of discrimination is one of the most complex challenges in disaster relief (Math
et al., 2015). People displaced internally due to disasters (Albuja & Adarve, 2011), women and girls,
and other vulnerable groups such as people with disabilities or HIV/AIDS, single parents, parents
without family support, or members of ethnic minorities or indigenous peoples are in a position to
vulnerable to harm.

In extraordinary and uncontrollable situations after a disaster, the state often fails to implement
protection mechanisms for its citizens (Makwana, 2019). Disaster victims are usually vulnerable to
being victims of inhumane treatment either from state officials or from fellow disaster victims,
including other gender-based acts and gender-specific violence or indecent assault and domestic
violence. Women are vulnerable to becoming victims in chaos (Langford, 1998), including when
they have to fight and compete for relief goods to keep their families alive. Chaotic groups use this
situation for personal gain by looting and robbery (Enarson & Meyreles, 2004).

The destruction of their homes and the existence of dangers that still cause consequences often
cause disaster victims to have to leave their original places of residence. They must find a new
place to live, either in the area around the place, in the country’s territory or even move to another
country. The refusal of residents in a new place or the Government is a threat to the right to
freedom of movement and freedom to choose their place of residence. Disasters often destroy the
foundations of everyday family life or cause families to fall apart (Kälin & Schrepfer, 2012). Children
can lose their parents or the people who care for them, which causes them to lose the place they
left behind (Howard et al., 2011). This situation can potentially be used by people who are not
responsible for exploiting their powerlessness for economic purposes, for example, making, child
labour, child soldiers, sexual exploitation, playing games and other human trafficking. Therefore,
after a disaster that has a significant impact, the state must implement a disaster mitigation
system that can protect children from irresponsible people who want to exploit them.

Human rights violations of disaster victims are also potentially carried out by individuals, NGOs
or NGOs who participate in assisting. Lack of coordination and supervision of the State in emer­
gencies, causing their actions outside the standards of disaster management following human
rights provisions. For example, the distribution of aid by certain religious groups that do not assist
victims of other religions is a discriminatory act contrary to human values. Disasters were avoided,
including the government and institutions. Others, national and international, pay attention to
protecting relevant human rights from the outset. Representative of the Secretary General of the
United Nations (RSG) on the human rights of refugees from the evaluation concluded that it is not
only the national level that is often aware of the relevance of human rights norms in the context of
natural disasters. International organisations and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are still
confused about how to incorporate a human rights-based approach into emergency relief and
response, even though many laws and codes of conduct apply in natural disasters, including these
guarantees. Human rights should be the legal basis for all humanitarian work related to natural
disasters. There is no other legal framework to guide such activities, especially in areas where
there is no armed conflict. Suppose humanitarian assistance is not based on a human rights
framework. In that case, there is a risk that the focus will be too narrow, and the basic needs of
victims will not be integrated into the holistic planning process. The integration of risk factors is
essential for disaster recovery and reconstruction planning.

Disregarding the human rights of those affected by natural disasters means providing that such
people do not live under the rule of law. However, they live in countries with laws, rules and
institutions that are obligated to protect them. International human rights principles should guide
disaster risk management, including pre-disaster mitigation and preparedness, emergency relief
and rehabilitation, and reconstruction efforts. Those at risk need to be protected from violence and
taking. Those displaced must be provided with protection and assistance and be able to return to
their original land and property safely and with dignity. If they can be independent or live

Page 5 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

Figure 1. The form of human

rights violations.

Figure 2. Recommendation of
the human rights of survivors of
disasters.

elsewhere, they must be assisted to integrate with local communities in the region or in the
country concerned (See Figure 1).

3.2. Lack of protection of human rights under the Indonesian Disaster Management Law
(IDML) and implementation problems
The occurrence of the Aceh Tsunami disaster in 2004 and participation in the Hyogo Conference in
2007 prompted the Government to issue Law no. 24 of 2007 concerning Disaster Management
(Harits et al., 2019). This law is an effort of a disaster management system that is less planned,
integrated, coordinated and comprehensive. Before this law, there was an authority in several

Page 6 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

ministries and institutions which were not directly in the application/central tasks and functions of
BNPB. In the event of a natural disaster, there would be difficulties in coordinating and a lack of
clarity in implementation and effectiveness in disaster management. It can be said that this law is
a milestone in the regulation of disaster management nationally in Indonesia.

UU no. 24 of 2007 in Article 3 confirms that disaster management in Indonesia is carried out
with the following principles: a. humanity; b. justice; c. equality in law and government; d. balance,
harmony, and harmony; e. and legal certainty; f. togetherness; g. environmental sustainability; and
h. science and technology (Ayuni & Arsil, 2021). Dissertation with the principles of disaster
management that is fast, precise, and coordinated, according to a priority scale.

In its implementation, Law No. 24 of 2007 turned out to contain several weaknesses regarding
disaster management (Butt, 2014), including the realisation of a derivative regulation of the
disaster management law, not yet optimal support for disaster budgets, the slow mechanism of
the disaster management process, the slow response to disaster mitigation and response, and the
weakness of the disaster management system. Coordination between related agencies. This
weakness could be due to the unavailability of derivative regulations of the disaster management
law as the implementation of the law. Several regulatory aspects that must be considered
regarding the ability of this Law to be implemented include: (1) the status and level of disasters
(regulated in Article 1, Article 7, and Article 57 of Law No. 24 of 2007); and (2) regarding disaster
risk analysis and minimum service standards. (Carolina, 2018) Determining the status and level of
this disaster needs immediate regulation, considering that this lack of clarity causes obstacles in
its implementation (AL-Dahash et al., 2016), such as what happened during the earthquake,
tsunami and liquefaction disasters in Palu when the Central Government did not immediately
determine the status as a National disaster (Pramono et al., 2022), while the Governor Central
Sulawesi did not immediately declare it a regional disaster (Mason et al., 2019). The absence of this
status causes the implementation of aid distribution, recovery efforts and coordination of disaster
management implementation to experience a delay. Only on 30 September 2018, or two days
after the disaster, the Governor of Central Sulawesi declared an emergency response period valid
until 11 October 2018 (Kahfi & Sangadji, 2018). In this task, BNPB has the authority to establish an
implementing element for disaster management as referred to in Article 11 letter b, which
coordinates, commands, and implements disaster management implementation (Brown et al.,
2017). This law only regulates, in general, the functions of BNPB by including an implementation
article that further provisions will be issued regarding the formation, functions, duties, organisa­
tional structure, and working procedures of the National Disaster Management Agency through
a Presidential Regulation (Adella et al., 2019). Presidential Regulation No. 08 of 2008 concerning:
The National Disaster Management Agency (Maulida, 2020), does not contain detailed provisions
on how the coordination is to be carried out, so there is still a regulatory vacuum that has the
potential to cause implementation problems in the field, such as: (1) coordination between
institutions often clashes with bureaucratic problems as well as regulations, in the absence of
confirmation regarding the command structure in handling emergency response situations; (2) the
critical role of the TNI has not been included as a vital part in disaster management and relations
with BNPB, despite the fact that the TNI plays a very dominant role as well as the SAR Agency and
other institutions; has not been regulated NGOs or local NGOs and other volunteer institutions (4) it
is not yet regulated regarding the reporting of receipts and utilization of donations/assistance
coordinated by non-government parties, as a result the government is overwhelmed to monitor
whether the donations/assistance has reached its target. To report the receipt and utilisation of
disaster aid to the public is not accountable.

Weaknesses in these laws and regulations are also a concern in formulating national disaster
management policies in the 2015–2019 PB RENAS (Putra & Matsuyuki, 2019). RENAS PB presents
data and information on Indonesia’s existing disaster risk conditions and the government’s plans
to reduce these risks through programs, priorities and targets for the 2015–2019 period (Oktari

Page 7 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

et al., 2022). Disaster risk tends to be greater with increasing problems of geology, climate change,
environmental degradation and demographics (Kelman et al., 2015).

RENAS PB 2015–2019 determines the direction of national policies (Widana et al., 2021): 1.
Implementation of integrated disaster risk reduction (DRR) efforts Implementation of an effective
disaster emergency management system 3. Implementation of efficiency in rehabilitation and
reconstruction efforts 4. Implementing mechanisms and systems for accountability and transpar­
ency, as well as PB management at the central and regional levels. For this reason, the 2015–2019
RENAS PB strategy, which is also its priority focus, is (1) Strengthening the legal framework for
disaster management, (2) Mainstreaming disaster management in development, (3) Increasing
multi-stakeholder partnerships in disaster management, (4) Increasing effectiveness disaster pre­
vention and mitigation, (5) improvement of disaster emergency preparedness and handling, (6)
capacity building for disaster recovery, (7) improvement of governance in the field of disaster
management.

Even though the disaster management policy has made a paradigm shift from responsive to
preventive, following the spirit of implementing HFA, in its implementation, there is still a need for
effectiveness and improvement, including those related to disaster management legislation. As
previously stated, Law no. 24 of 2007 still needs to be readjusted to the current situation, and
there are still many laws and regulations related to the mandate of disaster management
implementation that is still not fully aligned because other sectors also own the mandate of
implementing PB in proportion by their respective obligation. The Ministry of Home Affairs and
the Ministry of Finance have the mandate to regulate the relationship and availability of resources
at the centre and regions regarding disaster management. Ministry of Social Affairs, Ministry of
Health, and Ministry of Public Works handle disaster emergencies. In this legislative issue, there are
unfinished regulations such as disaster status, disaster risk analysis, and minimum service
standards.

In addition, there are weaknesses in national disaster management institutions. BNPB is

a government institution with the primary mandate as the organiser of disaster management
through coordination, command and implementation. Based on Presidential Decree 8/2008 con­
cerning the Establishment of BNPB, BNPB is a non-departmental technical institution led by
a minister-level head. Therefore, it is difficult for BNPB to coordinate with other K/L because
BNPB is a hierarchical body in the Ministry. The existence of BPBD is contained in the derivative
regulation component of the Disaster Law, which is technical. In terms of budgeting, BPBD is under
the local government, which is under the coordination of the Ministry of Home Affairs, not under
BNPB. BNPB only has sub-ordinates on a technical scale to BPBDs. This condition causes various
obstacles to occur. One of them is that not all districts/cities have BPBDs. Minister of Home Affairs
Regulation Number 46 of 2008 concerning Organizational Guidelines and Work Procedures of
Regional Disaster Management Agency does not oblige the establishment of BPBD in a regency/
city area, and the obligation to establish it is only for the provincial government. • BPBDs have
limited quantity and quality of human resources and limited facilities. Of the 403 BPBDs that have
been formed, most do not have an office, and most do not have a 24/7 Pusdalops. Logistics and
equipment are still limited and cannot be present at the time and place needed. High flexibility of
human resources so they are easy to be transferred. Moreover, local politics has minimal legislative
support.

The above conditions are exacerbated by the weak legal framework for disaster management.
The effectiveness of disaster management implementation requires strengthening national com­
mitment by aligning the authorities, duties and functions between ministries and institutions and
local governments in implementing disaster management. Strengthening this commitment is
implemented by strengthening the legal framework. Strengthening the legal framework in disaster
management is also directed at the preparation of technical regulations that focus on (a) budget
allocation for disaster management at the central and regional levels, (b) increasing the

Page 8 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

effectiveness of the national emergency and preparedness system, (c) building partnerships and
(d) establishing disaster status are accompanied by (e) integrated monitoring mechanism across
sectors and institutions at both the central and local governments.

Several provisions in Law no. 24/2007 contain principles that reflect the norms for protecting
human rights. UU no. 24/2007 also recognises the need to protect “vulnerable groups” in emer­
gency response. This group includes infants, toddlers, children, pregnant or lactating mothers,
people with disabilities, and the elderly. This is repeated in Government Regulation 21 of 2008
concerning the Implementation of Disaster Management, which requires BNPB to coordinate
related agencies and institutions in “protection efforts” against vulnerable groups. In addition,
efforts to protect vulnerable groups are also regulated in Regulation of the Head of BNPB Number
14 of 2014 concerning Handling, Protection, and Participation of Persons with Disabilities in
Disaster Management. BNPB has also issued a regulation on gender mainstreaming in disaster
management, namely Head of BNPB Regulation Number 13 of 2014 concerning Gender
Mainstreaming in Disaster Management. Furthermore, in the Regulation of the Head of BNPB
Number 7 of 2008 concerning Guidelines for the Provision of Assistance to Fulfill Basic Needs,
vulnerable groups are groups that are prioritised to receive disaster emergency assistance in the
form of basic needs, even priority for these vulnerable groups is one of the principles in this
regulation. The fact that BNPB has developed and issued its regulations on gender and persons
with disabilities in disaster management is proof that the human rights approach in national
regulations on disaster management has been included. However, its status as a Regulation of
the Head of BNPB implies a narrow practical application because it only applies as a guide for BNPB
organs and not as a guide for parties outside BNPB.

3.3. Indonesia mitigation disaster management, does implemented human right principls
The problem of disaster management in Indonesia, as previously stated, is a small part of the
problem of disaster management in Indonesia. However, these three problems include: First, lack
of clear standard operating procedures (SOP), second, lack of coordination between agencies
dealing with disasters, and third, the development of disaster mitigation has not been carried
out optimally, it can be used as a measure that this nation is still not ready in managing disasters.
The absence of a national standard in disaster management becomes a hot issue when every
disaster strikes this country. The provisions in the Disaster Management Law do not explicitly
regulate disaster management standards, because indeed the conditions in the Disaster
Management Law do not technically regulate up to the implementation level in the field. This is
of course ironic with the objectives of disaster management stated in Article 4 of the Law on
Disaster Management, namely:

(1) give protection to the community from the threat of disaster;

(2) harmonize existing laws and regulations;
(3) ensure the implementation of disaster management in a planned, integrated, coordinated,
and comprehensive manner;
(4) respect local culture;
(5) building public and private participation and partnerships;
(6) encourage the spirit of mutual cooperation, solidarity, and generosity; And
(7) creating peace in the life of society, nation, and state.

However, if examined and analyzed further, actually the regulations regarding SOPs or it can be
said that guidelines for disaster management have been regulated in the Regulation of the Head of
the National Disaster Management Agency Number 10 of 2008 concerning Guidelines for Disaster
Emergency Response which is a mandate from Article 15 paragraph (2), Article 23 paragraph (2),
Article 50 paragraph (1), Article 77 and Article 78 of the Law on Disaster Management and Article
24, Article 25, Article 26, Article 27, Article 47, Article 48, Article 49 and Article 50 PP No. 21 of

Page 9 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

2008. But why is this regulation not socialized to the parties who inherent with disaster events,
even though in the Regulation of the Head of BNPB it is stated that the intent and purpose of this
regulation is to guide BNPB/BPBD, related agencies/institutions/organizations, the Indonesian
National Armed Forces and the Republic of Indonesia Police in handling disaster emergency
response, and aims so that all related parties can carry out the task of handling disaster emer­
gency response in a fast, precise, effective, efficient, integrated and accountable manner

Ignorance stakeholder on guidelines or SOPs that actually have been made unresponsiveness all
parties involved in disaster management, so that they are always stuttered when a disaster
comes. SOPs or guidelines should be disseminated to stakeholders and the public, tested, and
trained continuously for a long time so that the community and stakeholders have experience and
the occurrence of habituation (Wekke, 2021). Dissemination of SOPs or guidelines for disaster
management needs to be carried out among the community so that the community feels the
benefits of these guidelines and in turn automatically plays a role in the implementation of these
SOPs or guidelines (Wekke, 2021). This socialization can be done through various good channels
formal or informal. Through formal channels, education can be carried out, from the lowest level,
namely elementary school, to the highest level, namely tertiary institutions, which are integrated
through the curriculum set by the Government and local governments. Meanwhile, through
informal channels, it can be done through socialization from mass and electronic media such as
newspapers, magazines, radio broadcasts or television broadcasts.

Regarding coordination between institutions or agencies that handle disaster management, in

principle the Law on Disaster Management has regulated it, namely in Article 3 paragraph (2) letter
c, which states that one of the principles in disaster management is coordination and integration.
In the elucidation of the Law on Disaster Management, it is stated that what is meant by the
principle of coordination is that disaster management is based on good coordination and mutual
support. Meanwhile, what is meant by the principle of integration is that disaster management is
carried out by various sectors in an integrated manner based on good cooperation and mutual
support.

Then at the level of implementing disaster management or handling, there are several articles
that regulate coordination, namely Article 4, Article 15 paragraph (2), Article 19 paragraph (2),
Article 23 paragraph (2), Article 36 paragraph (2), and Article 40 paragraph (2). In principle,
disaster management in Indonesia is coordinated by an agency established by the government,
called the National Disaster Management Agency (BNPB). This agency is a government agency
Department ministerial level. The functions of this Agency related to coordination are regulated in
Article 13 letter b, where one of the functions of BNPB is coordinating the implementation of
disaster management activities in a planned, integrated, and comprehensive manner. Meanwhile,
at the regional level, the coordinating function is carried out by the regional disaster management
agency, which is formed by the regional government, where the implementation of their duties
remains in coordination with BNPB. Thus, in fact, arrangements regarding coordination in disaster
management efforts have been clearly regulated in the Law on Disaster Management. This means
that at the implementation level, it is necessary to evaluate the extent to which coordination has
been carried out, whether it has been carried out in a planned, integrated, and comprehensive
manner, or not.

Related to the development of disaster mitigation, this needs to be studied and observed
seriously. In the definition of mitigation in Article 1 point 9 of the Law on Disaster Management,
it is stated that what is meant by mitigation is a series of efforts to reduce disaster risk, both
through physical development and awareness and capacity building in dealing with disaster
threats. In Article 44 of the Law on Disaster Management, it is stated that actually, disaster
mitigation activities themselves are part of the implementation of disaster management in
a situation where there is a potential for a disaster to occur. Furthermore, in Article 47 of the

Page 10 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

Law on Disaster Management, it is stated that mitigation is carried out to reduce disaster risk for
people who are in disaster-prone areas. These activities are carried out through:

(1) implementation of spatial planning;

(2) development arrangements, infrastructure development, building layout; And
(3) organizing education, counseling, and training both conventionally and modernly.

So far, it is not known with certainty how far the government and regional governments have
carried out the mitigation development, considering that it is possible that there is no agency that
has the authority to carry out the development of disaster mitigation. The development of disaster
mitigation can be done by implementing several strategies for disaster events that occur. In the
event that the disaster that occurs is an earthquake, the strategies that can be implemented for
disaster mitigation may include:

(1) build buildings with vibration/earthquake-resistant construction, especially in earthquake-

prone areas.
(2) strengthen the building by adhering to building quality standards.
(3) build public facilities with high-quality standards.
(4) planning the placement of settlements to reduce the level of occupancy density in earth­
quake-prone areas.
(5) make zoning of earthquake-prone areas and regulate land use.
(6) education and outreach to the public about the dangers of earthquakes and ways to save
themselves in the event of an earthquake.

Then for natural disasters in the form of tsunamis, the strategies that can be applied for disaster
mitigation can include:

(1) enhancement vigilance and preparedness for tsunami hazards.

(2) educate the public about the tsunami hazard, especially those living in coastal areas.
(3) construction of a Tsunami Early Warning System.
(4) construction of a tsunami retaining wall on a risky coastline.
(5) construction of safe evacuation sites around residential areas that are high enough and
easy to pass to avoid tsunami height.
(6) increasing the knowledge of the local community, especially those living on the coast, about
recognizing the signs of a tsunami and how to save themselves from the tsunami hazard.
(7) Recognize the characteristics and signs of a tsunami hazard.

Disaster mitigation is also related to disaster education. So far, disaster education has been mostly
carried out by the community, which often does not use a scientific and technological basis. For
this reason, the government can make plans with a combination of directions from above and
explore community participation.[19] Furthermore, in the development of disaster mitigation, it is
necessary to consider the area of this country. Given the vast territory of Indonesia and the varied
potential for each disaster-prone area, disaster management cannot depend on BNPB and BPBD.
There needs to be coordination with institutions related to disaster mitigation. For this reason, the
development of disaster mitigation requires a detailed plan, including a coordination strategy
between institutions related to disaster mitigation, efforts to actively involve all elements of
society in disaster-prone areas through disaster mitigation education for the community, and
budgeting in the APBN and APBD. All of these plans are then integrated into medium-term
development plans and long-term plans.

Page 11 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

3.4. Handling Earthquake, tsunami and liquefaction disasters in the view of victims,
observers and government officials
Inadequacy of human rights protection norms in these laws and regulations creates problems in
their implementation in the field. The tendency of bureaucratic behaviour that is very bureaucratic,
positive legalistic, less flexible and less professional apparatus in dealing with emergencies that
require a quick response worsens the implementation of the 2018 Palu disaster management.
temporary shelter) because they do not have ID cards, many unprofessional refugee management,
poor relocation and disaster zoning arrangements are not socialised to the community (Sangaji,
key person on FGD). The delay of the Governor of Central Sulawesi in issuing an emergency decree
caused the distribution of rice reserves belonging to the Central Sulawesi Government to disaster
victims, so that disaster victims who needed them looted them. This unprofessionalism also causes
poor data collection on the number of affected people in an area which causes uneven distribution
of aid, differences in treatment and handling of victims, differences in the provision of facilities to
victims and even mistargeting of aid delivery (Bahri and Aristi, key person FGD). Bureaucratic
rigidity causes coordination very difficult to do, mainly because no institution can be the coordi­
nator and crisis centre in handling emergencies. This makes it difficult for officers who work in the
field to find solutions if there are obstacles and work optimally in dealing with disaster victims
(Armansyah, FGD key person). This poor coordination suggests that the Government is not serious
in dealing with disasters starting from the emergency response phase to the transition to rehabi­
litation because many budget allocations are inappropriate and not well targeted. As the respon­
sible party, the government has not determined specific standards of obligations that the state
should carry out, so there has been an intentional omission and negligence by state officials at
every stage, including the weak role of the BNPB as a coordinator in disaster management. (Askary,
FGD key person) It is necessary to review each of the existing institutions with their functions in
disaster management so that everyone knows what to do when a disaster occurs. Disaster
management also does not take advantage of local wisdom from people who have lived in the
area for hundreds of years and have faced various natural disasters that are in harmony with
nature. (Lelono, FGD key person)

Human rights violations in disaster management can also occur due to maladministration.
Based on the existing Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) related to disaster management
after 28 September 2018, it can be concluded that there has been a violation of human rights
from the cause and was preceded by maladministration by the Government when the Governor
and the Mayor and Deputy Mayor were not present from the first day to the third day for carrying
out government actions in an emergency so that the community does not receive appropriate
post-disaster management from an early age. Even the Governor seemed less sensitive to the
people’s suffering by stating that the earthquake victims who left Palu City were cowards and were
not expected to return to Palu City. More and more responsive to disaster management is carried
out by NGOs independently. (Lembah, key person FGD) This maladministration occurred from the
stage of development planning and spatial planning by the Regional Government, which was not
sensitive to the condition of the Palu area as an earthquake-prone area. The Regional Disaster
Management Agency (BPBD) has never been allowed to recommend an ideal spatial arrangement
following local conditions. Development is focused on physical development without considering
the sustainability aspects and the area’s uniqueness. (Tangahu, FGD key person) This neglect was
also demonstrated by the absence of disaster management regulations, resulting in unorganised
disaster management and the inability to fulfil the rights of disaster-affected communities. Poor
disaster management has resulted in the inaccuracy of aid targets and even human rights
violations.

The number of fatalities that reached 8000 people shows the poor spatial planning in Palu City.
Areas in the disaster red zone are permitted by the Regional Government to be used as residential
areas. The Central Sulawesi Provincial Regulation on Regional Spatial Planning does not include the
Disaster Management Law (UU No.24 the Year 2007) as one of the laws that should be the legal
basis for spatial planning. The government’s poor performance in collecting data on the types,

Page 12 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

categories and magnitudes of human victims as well as material losses has resulted in the
handling of victims having the potential to become human rights violations. Funds for living
necessities for disaster victims that the Central Government has provided cannot be distributed
immediately due to problems with data that are not integrated with the population system on the
one hand and the other hand. Government officials do not dare to make discretion due to the rigid
and complicated state financial reporting system. Difficulty in distributing funds for living neces­
sities and other aids has caused many refugees to become beggars to fulfil their daily needs.
(Ardiansyah, FGD key person) Poor data has also made it difficult for recovery efforts undertaken
by the Government to provide access for victims to electricity and clean water (Marzuki, key
person FGD)

The poor population registration system also causes difficulties in filing claims for ownership of
goods or land or even claims for aid which are the rights of disaster victims. The disaster has
caused the loss of various proofs of identity and proof of ownership of rights. The loss of proof of
residence makes it difficult for many disaster victims to access temporary shelter assistance from
the Government. The loss of proof of ownership of goods or land also makes it difficult for disaster
victims to obtain bank loans to restore economic activity destroyed by the disaster because banks
continue to enforce business terms as in regular times. (Lahamu, FGD key person)

Maladministration also occurs due to inaccuracies in disaster management funding. The govern­
ment calculated that the losses suffered after the disaster were estimated at 4.7 trillion, but the
requested rehabilitation cost was 14 trillion. The question is how it can happen that the amount of
rehabilitation funds far exceeds the value of the initial development .

How to handle it after the disaster in Palu in 2018 confirms that there are still structural
problems in implementing human rights in disaster management in Indonesia. This problem is
mainly caused by the weak integration of aspects of human rights protection in the management
of handling, prevention and response to disasters. It also includes weaknesses in integrating
disaster mitigation efforts into overall development policies. This is exacerbated by the weak
control function, both supervision by the Government itself and the community, so there is no
misuse of housing development permits in the prohibited zone. Supervision is still weak, for
example, the provisions regarding red zones for building construction are still being bypassed.
Implementing the community’s control function requires the public’s availability for access to
information provided by the State. In a disaster situation, the State is responsible for providing
information on ways to save themselves from danger because it can lead to death if they do not
have access to adequate information. So far, the right to access information seems to be under­
estimated, and this is our wrong perspective, which is a constant omission. From the perspective of
fundamental rights (HAM), it is related to life and death (Tavip, FGD key person).

Human rights demand the duties and responsibilities of the state. The party that can be held
accountable for protecting, respecting and fulfilling human rights, especially after the disaster, is
the State, in this case, the Government and Regional Government, so human rights violations are
structural crimes. The state is obliged to provide access to information so that citizens can know all
the standard provisions for dealing with in situations and post-disasters and deciphering the life
and death of people. Do not let someone’s ignorance and lack of knowledge in dealing with
disasters cause him to die, so that this then makes the state violate human rights because it
does not meet the standards to protect, respect and fulfil human rights (See Figure 2).

3.5. Protection of the human rights of survivors of disasters

Access to help, non-discrimination in the distribution of assistance, relocation, the prevention of
sexual abuse and violence against women, and the inclusion of children in fights are all aspects of
human rights protection and fulfillment. Other issues include document loss, safe and voluntary
transfer, repatriation, and the recompense for lost land. The failure to uphold the rights of disaster
victims in refugee camps is only attributable to procedural administrative issues; there is no other

Page 13 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

explanation. Now, the survivors are dispersed among practically all locations considered safe,
including Palu, Sigi, and Donggala Parigimoutong. It is important to view and react to plans and
strategies for helping survivors as a natural part of the human life cycle. With this perspective, the
incident (nature disaster) should no longer be viewed as an uncommon occurrence unrelated to
regular daily life. Additionally, it is time for us to approach and react to natural disasters in a more
critical and dialectical manner as a result of regular events and processes. As a result, efforts to
combat disasters are no longer concentrated on managing urgent situations or urgent situations
alone, which in reality sees migrants as helpless victims. Which ultimately leads to us forgetting to
promote their participation even though they have a place to stay.

To do so, it is required to pinpoint a development process that has the potential to cause an
existing disaster or to create a brand-new disaster. This is due to the fact that we frequently fail to
encourage them to contribute, if just jointly, to maintaining the cleanliness of the area around the
refuge when we respond. In fact, we disregard and believe that maintaining enthusiasm and
a sense of community is not always necessary, particularly in terms of the separation of gender
roles. Adult men in evacuation areas are nevertheless urged to always act responsibly and make
sure that their primary food supplies, fuel, and clean water are always available. By permitting
a role imbalance to develop and failing to promote the realization of the right to a clean and
healthy environment, we implicitly take donation-preventive action against it rather than treating
it differently. Instead of waiting for victims to fall due to emergency situations, we have really
pushed the community or survivors who are dispersed among evacuation spots to improve their
readiness and disaster management. The emergency response must be viewed as a mechanism
for dealing with emergencies while constantly keeping in mind the principles of viability and
safeguarding human dignity.

The institutional authorities in charge of handling natural disasters must be more creative in
developing systems handling emergency conditions on a local basis. Every agency working on
emergency cases urgently needs an effective and systematic form of emergency response to serve
as a guide in acting quickly and appropriately, if necessary. Along with upholding the requirements
for managing the relevant emergency situations. The necessity to address issues that are directly
related to the disregard or fulfillment of human rights increases when more areas or regions
experience natural catastrophes, both of which go from the emergency response phase to the
reconstruction phase. Every level of managing and caring for victims of natural catastrophes
requires this.

It tells us that there is a very severe risk of claims of major human rights abuses against
survivors based on the experiences of various natural disasters that have occurred. Furthermore,
even after the tragedy had passed for a few weeks or months, those who had left from some
locations did not instantly go back to their houses or start looking for new ones. This is as a result
of the local government officials’ assurance that they won’t be coming back, including as a result
of their sluggish response to the construction project or their failure to provide suitable interim
accommodation that respects human dignity. Discriminatory acts and alleged violations of eco­
nomic, social, and cultural rights in the case of natural disasters, as experienced by the residents of
Palu City, Sigi Regency, Donggala Regency, and the RegencyParismotong, may contribute to the
extension of the evacuation period for those who survived the disasters. In accordance with the
principles for internal displacement, it is generally understood to refer to individuals who are
compelled to flee or leave their homes and/or places of residence for causes other than violence
and disagreements amongst inhabitants, including those caused by natural catastrophes.

Additionally, there are a great deal of obstacles that stand in the way of people being able to
exercise their human rights, particularly in the wake of natural catastrophes. One such obstacle is
having access to aid. Survivors are entitled to assistance and/or have the right to request it, so for
that reason, government officials or designated institutional authorities must provide them with
protection and support in order to meet each survivor’s or affected person’s immediate basic

Page 14 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

needs. A number of international human rights treaties, particularly those relating to the fulfill­
ment of survivors’ rights, generally stress that every country should act quickly to provide huma­
nitarian aid to every survivor of a natural disaster by means of its government authorities. The
present government authorities (central and regional) obviously need outside help in order to fulfill
the desire to provide assistance as soon as feasible in a situation full of limits. This requirement is
a prerequisite for this goal to be realized. Building strategic cooperation with the world community
is the adopted mechanism and the most practical to implement. The requests or pressures of
survivors to acquire their rights cannot be blocked by government officials or appropriately
designated institutional authorities because they are also unable to respond quickly enough
themselves. Similar limitations on aid distribution were seen at the Pantoloan Port for aid from
Tarakan and Nunukan, which did not distribute, making it very challenging for survivors to rapidly
access and get necessary supplies.

After a natural disaster, it is frequently seen (it may go unreported, but it can also be the other
way around) that deliberate discriminatory methods were used in the distribution of humanitarian
aid. The survivors of cases of discrimination in receiving assistance who sought refuge in front of
the Donggala Regency Social Services office fled with several of their family members and other
individuals, constructed tents (on their own) using basic supplies and only with clothing fastened
to their bodies. Knowing that the location where they built their tents and rescued themselves was
not far from the Office of Social Affairs, they attempted to contact officials who were akin to the
head of the field the next time and informed them about the issues and fundamental necessities
required, particularly rice and nice tent blankets. However, for a variety of reasons, he had to wait
days before receiving the meager request he made. It was later discovered that the other victims
referred to were close relatives of the relevant officials, even though the need for similar assis­
tance that had previously been requested, by several others, was immediately provided in suffi­
cient quantities at almost the same time and several days in a row.

Aside from being against humanitarian standards, unfair aid distribution runs the risk of increas­
ing pressure, endangering the safety of the survivors, and causing dissatisfaction with local
government officials. It is hardly unexpected, given the issues raised, that around a week after
the catastrophe, surviving in the Donggala region eventually perished from famine. However, in
Palu City, the local government’s slow response resulted in a huge exodus of dissatisfaction that
quickly transformed into anxiety and fury, to the point where citizens now worry and worry about
the uncertain attitude and actions of the government. Anxiety and worry about surviving quickly
alter people’s behavior, which not only contributes to the occurrence of natural disasters but also
leads them to extend or develop into social disasters due to the uncertainty about the status of the
survivors. As a result, looting—which was initially restricted to food—became widespread once
more, and it wasn’t only limited to basic daily necessities—other objects besides those essentials
were also stolen.

As with the worry, the survivors’ anxiety over the government’s unclear stance and slow
response has implications for the emergence of a sense of disappointment that follows as well
as the shock that a terrible earthquake, which was swiftly followed by a tsunami and even
liquefaction, caused. Even so, the survivors’ disappointment spread quickly through a plan of
consolidation, which in turn caused their anger to turn into protest through coordinated mass
actions. As a result, the Mayor and Deputy Mayor were called upon to resign from their positions.
The Mayor and Deputy Mayor were promptly removed from their positions in an effort to press the
government authorities.

Furthermore, it is not thought to be neglectful or even appear to be purposeful when vulnerable

populations, such as pregnant and breastfeeding mothers and infants, are given special attention.
As a result, sexual harassment, violence against women and children, and child trafficking are all
frequent practices. Another grave peril that frequently affects survivors from weaker groups in
refugee camps. Similar to this is the fulfillment of the right to health for breastfeeding mothers,

Page 15 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255

expectant mothers, and toddlers, particularly in terms of providing calories that are at least close
to the recommended daily intake of 2,100 calories per person, up to access to education for every
school-age child during an evacuation, to the availability of facilities and infrastructure as
a minimum requirement for proper emergency schools that are required to focus on the safety
of children’s souls and bodies, and even to the right to food for every person. Until it comes to the
destruction of critical records as a result of severe natural disasters like earthquakes and tsunamis
that cause liquefaction and cause many survivors to escape for their lives. Their crucial records
were lost in the tsunami, gobbled up by the muck, or buried in the ground along with their homes,
which were also lost or destroyed. A lack of access to health, education, or other public services as
well as to compensation mechanisms or reimbursement for damaged property and buildings
results from the loss of all relevant key documents.

4. Conclusion
Before the enactment of this Law, there was an authority in several ministries and institutions,
which were not directly under the authority/primary duties and functions of BNPB, and in the event
of a natural disaster, would experience difficulties in coordinating and causing delays in imple­
mentation, and ineffectiveness. in disaster management. In its implementation, Law No. 24 of
2007 turned out to contain several weaknesses concerning the disaster management process,
including the absence of a derivative regulation of the disaster management law, not yet optimal
support for disaster budgets, the slow mechanism of the process of disaster management funds,
slow mitigation and emergency response efforts. Disasters, and weak coordination between
relevant agencies. Determination of the status and level of this disaster needs immediate regula­
tion, considering that this uncertainty causes obstacles in its implementation, such as what
happened during the earthquake, tsunami, and liquefaction disasters in Palu when the Central
Government did not immediately determine the status as a National disaster.

In contrast, Governor Central Sulawesi did not declare it a regional catastrophe immediately.
Article 08 of 2008 concerning: The National Disaster Management Agency does not contain
detailed provisions on how the coordination is to be carried out, so there is still a regulatory
vacuum that has the potential to cause implementation problems in the field, such as: (1)
coordination between institutions often clashes with bureaucratic problems as well as regulations,
in the absence of confirmation regarding the command structure in handling emergency response
situations; (2) the critical role of the TNI has not been included as a vital part in disaster manage­
ment and relations with BNPB, despite the fact that the TNI plays a very dominant role as well as
the SAR Agency and other institutions; (3) the role of foreign NGOs or local NGOs and other
volunteer institutions has not been regulated, considering that in practice disaster management
there is still a lack of synergy between NGOs or non-governmental organizations in disaster
management with BNPB; and (4) it is not yet regulated regarding the reporting of receipts and
utilization of donations/assistance coordinated by non-government parties, as a result the govern­
ment is overwhelmed to monitor whether the donations/assistance has reached its target. To
report the receipt and utilization of disaster aid to the public is not accountable. For this reason,
the 2015–2019 RENAS PB strategy, which is also its priority focus, is (1) Strengthening the legal
framework for disaster management, (2) Mainstreaming disaster management in development, (3)
Increasing multi-stakeholder partnerships in disaster management, (4) Increasing effectiveness
disaster prevention and mitigation, (5) improvement of disaster emergency preparedness and
handling, (6) capacity building for disaster recovery, (7) improvement of governance in the field
of disaster management. Strengthening the legal framework in disaster management is also
directed at the preparation of technical regulations that focus on (a) budget allocation for disaster
management at the central and regional levels, (b) increasing the effectiveness of the national
emergency and preparedness system, (c) building partnerships and (d) establishing disaster status
are accompanied by (e) integrated monitoring mechanism across sectors and institutions at both
the central and local governments.

Page 16 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255
Author details
Aktieva Tri Tjitrawati1
E-mail: aktieva.tri@fh.unair.ac.id
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9804-2644
Mochamad Kevin Romadhona2
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0098-8739
1
Department of International Law, Faculty of Law,
Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia.
2
Faculty of Social and Political Science, Universitas
Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the
author(s).
Citation information
Cite this article as: Affliction in the post Palu disaster: State
failure to implement human rights standard on disaster
management, Aktieva Tri Tjitrawati & Mochamad Kevin
Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255.
References
Adella, S., Nur, M., Nisa, N., Putra, A., Ramadhana, F.,
Maiyani, F., Munadi, K., & Rahman, A. (2019). Disaster
risk communication issues and challenges: lessons
learned from the disaster management agency of
Banda Aceh City. IOP Conference Series: Earth and
Environmental Science, 273, 12041. https://doi.org/
10.1088/1755-1315/273/1/012041
Albuja, S., & Adarve, I. C. (2011). Protecting people dis­
placed by disasters in the context of climate change:
Challenges from a mixed conflict/disaster context.
Tulane Environmental Law Journal, 24(2), 239–252.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/43294110
AL-Dahash, H., Thayaparan, M., & Kulatunga, U. (2016,
August 5). Challenges during disaster response
planning resulting from war operations and terrorism
in Iraq. Proceedings of the 2th International
Conference of the International Institute for
Infrastructure Resilience and Reconstruction (IIIRR),
Kandy, Sri Langka.
Aronsson-Storrier, M. (2017). Sanitation, human rights
and disaster management. Disaster Prevention &
Management: An International Journal, 26(5),
514–525. https://doi.org/10.1108/DPM-02-2017-0032
Aven, T. (2016). Risk assessment and risk management:
Review of recent advances on their foundation.
European Journal of Operational Research, 253(1),
1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.023
Ayuni, Q., & Arsil, F. (2021). Acceleration for disasters:
Evaluation of the disaster management act in
Indonesia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and
Environmental Science, 716, 12034. https://doi.org/
10.1088/1755-1315/716/1/012034
Bachri, S., Sumarmi, S., Utaya, S., Irawan, L. Y., Tyas
L, W. N., Dwitri Nurdiansyah, F., Erfika Nurjanah, A.,
Wirawan, R., Amri Adillah, A., & Setia Purnama, D.
(2021). Landslide risk analysis in Kelud Volcano, East
Java, Indonesia. Indonesian Journal of Geography;
53, 3. https://journal.ugm.ac.id/ijg/article/view/40909
BNPB. (2018, October 22). Loss and damage of disaster in
central Sulawesi reach 13,82 trillion Rupiah. BNPB
News.
Bock, Y., Prawirodirdjo, L., Genrich, J., Stevens, C.,
Mccaffrey, R., Subarya, C., Puntodewo, S., & Calais, E.
(2003). Crustal motion in Indonesia from global
positioning system measurements. Journal of
Geophysical Research, 108(B8). https://doi.org/10.
1029/2001JB000324
Broberg, M., & Sano, H.-O. (2018). Strengths and weak­
nesses in a human rights-based approach to
international development – an analysis of a rights-
based approach to development assistance based on
practical experiences. The International Journal of
Human Rights, 22(5), 664–680. https://doi.org/10.
1080/13642987.2017.1408591
Brown, N., Rovins, J., Usdianto, B., Sinandang, K.,
Triutomo, & Hayes, J. (2017). Indonesia disaster
response practices and roles.
Burrows, K., Desai, M. U., Pelupessy, D. C., & Bell, M. L.
(2021). Mental wellbeing following landslides and
residential displacement in Indonesia. SSM - Mental
Health, 1, 100016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmmh.
2021.100016
Butt, S. (2014). Disaster management law in Indonesia:
From response to preparedness? Asia-Pacific Disaster
Management, 183–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-
3-642-39768-4_9
Cantor, D., Swartz, J., Roberts, B., Abbara, A., Ager, A.,
Bhutta, Z. A., Blanchet, K., Madoro Bunte, D.,
Chukwuorji, J. C., Daoud, N., Ekezie, W., Jimenez-
Damary, C., Jobanputra, K., Makhashvili, N., Rayes, D.,
Restrepo-Espinosa, M. H., Rodriguez-Morales, A. J.,
Salami, B., & Smith, J. (2021). Understanding the
health needs of internally displaced persons:
A scoping review. Journal of Migration and Health, 4,
100071. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmh.2021.100071
Chapman, A. (1996). A “violations approach” for moni­
toring the international covenant on economic, social
and cultural rights. Human Rights Quarterly, 18(1),
23–66. https://doi.org/10.1353/hrq.1996.0003
Chen, B., Halliday, T., & Fan, V. (2016). The impact of
internal displacement on child mortality in
post-earthquake Haiti: A difference-in-differences
analysis. International Journal for Equity in Health, 15
(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-016-0403-z
Civaner, M. M., Vatansever, K., & Pala, K. (2017). Ethical
problems in an era where disasters have become
a part of daily life: A qualitative study of health­
care workers in Turkey. PLoS ONE, 12(3),
e0174162. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.
0174162
Conzatti, A., Kershaw, T., Copping, A., & Coley, D. (2022).
A review of the impact of shelter design on the
health of displaced populations. Journal of
International Humanitarian Action, 7(1), 18. https://
doi.org/10.1186/s41018-022-00123-0
Cornwall, A., & Nyamu-Musembi, C. (2004). Putting the
“rights-based approach” to development into per­
spective. Third World Quarterly, 25(8), 1415–1437.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0143659042000308447
da Costa, P., & Pospieszna, K. (2015). The relationship
between human rights and disaster risk reduction
revisited: Bringing the legal perspective into the
discussion. Journal of International Humanitarian
Legal Studies, 6(1), 64–86. https://doi.org/10.1163/
18781527-00601005
Dartanto, T. (2022). Natural disasters, mitigation and
household welfare in Indonesia: Evidence from a
large-scale longitudinal survey. Cogent Economics &
Finance, 10(1), 2037250. https://doi.org/10.1080/
23322039.2022.2037250
Davidson, T. M., Price, M., McCauley, J. L., & Ruggiero, K. J.
(2013). Disaster impact across cultural groups:
Comparison of Whites, African Americans, and
Latinos. American Journal of Community Psychology,
52(1–2), 97–105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-
013-9579-1
Djalante, R., & Garschagen, M. (2017). A review of disaster
trend and disaster risk Governance in Indonesia:
1900–2015. Disaster Risk Reduction in Indonesia,
21–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54466-3_2
Page 17 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255
Djalante, R., Garschagen, M., Thomalla, F., & Shaw, R.
(2017). Disaster Risk Reduction in Indonesia: Progress,
Challenges, and Issues. R. S. Riyanti Djalante,
Matthias Garschagen, Frank Thomalla. (Ed.), Springer
International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-3-319-54466-3
Djunarsjah, E., & Putra, A. P. (2021). The concept of an
archipelagic Province in Indonesia. IOP Conference
Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 777(1),
12040. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/777/1/
012040
EL Khaled, Z., & Mcheick, H. (2019). Case studies of com­
munications systems during harsh environments:
A review of approaches, weaknesses, and limitations
to improve quality of service. International Journal of
Distributed Sensor Networks, 15(2),
1550147719829960. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1550147719829960
Enarson, E., & Meyreles, L. (2004). International perspec­
tives on gender and disaster: Differences and
possibilities. International Journal of Sociology &
Social Policy, 24, 49–93. https://doi.org/10.1108/
01443330410791064
Ferris, E. (2008, October 25). Natural disasters, human
rights, and the role of national human rights
institutions. Brookings.
Ferris, E. (2013). A year of living dangerously: A review of
natural disasters in 2010. The Brookings Institution.
Fuady, A. (2013). Prominent diseases among internally
displaced persons after Mt. Merapi eruption in
Indonesia. Health Science Journal of Indonesia, 4.
Gianisa, A., & Le De, L. (2017). The role of religious beliefs
and practices in disaster: The case study of 2009
earthquake in Padang city, Indonesia. Disaster
Prevention & Management: An International Journal,
27(1), 74–86. https://doi.org/10.1108/DPM-10-2017-
0238
Goda, K., Mori, N., Yasuda, T., Prasetyo, A., Muhammad, A.,
& Tsujio, D. (2019). Cascading geological hazards and
risks of the 2018 Sulawesi Indonesia earthquake and
sensitivity analysis of Tsunami inundation
simulations. Frontiers in Earth Science, 7(February),
1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2019.00261
Gray, C., Frankenberg, E., Gillespie, T., Sumantri, C., &
Thomas, D. (2014). Studying Displacement After
a Disaster Using Large Scale Survey Methods:
Sumatra After the 2004 Tsunami. Annals of the
Association of American Geographers Association of
American Geographers, 104(3), 594–612. https://doi.
org/10.1080/00045608.2014.892351
Grimes, J. E. T., Croll, D., Harrison, W. E., Utzinger, J.,
Freeman, M. C., & Templeton, M. R. (2014). The rela­
tionship between water, sanitation and schistoso­
miasis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS
Neglected Tropical Diseases, 8(12), e3296. https://doi.
org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0003296
Hansson, S., Orru, K., Siibak, A., Bäck, A., Krüger, M.,
Gabel, F., & Morsut, C. (2020). Communication-
related vulnerability to disasters: A heuristic
framework. International Journal of Disaster Risk
Reduction, 51, 101931. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.
2020.101931
Harits, M., Safitri, R., & Nizamuddin, N. (2019). Study of
preparedness for the aceh disaster management
agency in theof the tsunami disaster in Aceh
Province. International Journal of Multicultural and
Multireligious Understanding, 6(2), 644. https://doi.
org/10.18415/ijmmu.v6i2.742
Howard, K., Martin, A., Berlin, L. J., & Brooks-Gunn, J.
(2011). Early mother-child separation, parenting, and
child well-being in early head start families.
Attachment & Human Development, 13(1), 5–26.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2010.488119
Hu, Y., Hooimeijer, P., Bolt, G., & Sun, D. (2015). Uneven
compensation and relocation for displaced resi­
dents: The case of Nanjing. Habitat International,
47, 83–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.
01.016
Imam Abdullah, A., & Abdullah. (2020). A field survey for
the rupture continuity of Palu-Koro fault after
Donggala earthquake on September 28 th, 2018.
Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1434, 12009.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1434/1/012009
Iskandar, J., Salamah, U., & Patonah, N. (2018). Policy
implementation in realizing the effectiveness of dis­
aster management. International Journal of
Engineering & Technology, 7(2.29), 548. https://doi.
org/10.14419/ijet.v7i2.29.13815
Kahfi, K., & Sangadji, R. (2018, September 30). C. Sulawesi
declares 14-day emergency period after earthquake,
tsunami. The Jakarta Post.
Kakinuma, K., Puma, M., Hirabayashi, Y., Tanoue, M.,
Baptista, E., & Kanae, S. (2020). Flood-induced popu­
lation displacements in the world. Environmental
Research Letters, 15(12), 15. https://doi.org/10.1088/
1748-9326/abc586
Kälin, W., & Schrepfer, N. (2012). Protecting people cross­
ing borders in the context of climate change norma­
tive gaps and possible approaches. Legal And
Protection Policy Research Series.
Kaniasty, K., & Norris, F. (2004). Social support in the
aftermath of disasters, catastrophes, and acts of
terrorism: Altruistic, overwhelmed, uncertain,
antagonistic, and patriotic communities.
Bioterrorism: Psychological and Public Health
Interventions, 3.
Kelman, I., Gaillard, J. C., & Mercer, J. (2015). Climate
change’s role in disaster risk reduction’s future:
Beyond vulnerability and resilience. International
Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 6(1), 21–27. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s13753-015-0038-5
King, J., Edwards, N., Watling, H., & Hair, S. (2019). Barriers
to disability-inclusive disaster management in the
Solomon Islands: Perspectives of people with
disability. International Journal of Disaster Risk
Reduction, 34, 459–466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijdrr.2018.12.017
Kumar Chaudhary, G., & Kalia, R. (2015). Development
curriculum and teaching models of curriculum design
for teaching institutes. International Journal of
Physical Education, Sports and Health, 1(4), 57–59.
http://documents.tips/documents/wheeler-modelpdf.
html
Langford, D. R. (1998). Social chaos and danger as con­
text of battered women’s lives. Journal of Family
Nursing, 4(2), 167–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/
107484079800400204
Lauta, K. (2016). Human rights and natural disasters
submit. 91–110.
Leyser-Whalen, O., Rahman, M., & Berenson, A. B. (2011).
Natural and social disasters: Racial inequality in
access to contraceptives after Hurricane Ike. Journal
of Women’s Health, 20(12), 1861–1866. https://doi.
org/10.1089/jwh.2010.2613
Lien, G., & Heymann, D. L. (2013). The problems with
polio: Toward eradication. Infectious Diseases and
Therapy, 2(2), 167–174. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s40121-013-0014-6
Lindvall, K., Kinsman, J., Abraha, A., Dalmar, A., Mohamed
Farah, A., Godefay, H., Thomas, L., Mohamoud, M.,
Mohamud, K., Musumba, J., & Schumann, B. (2020).
Health status and health care needs of drought-
Page 18 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255
related migrants in the horn of Africa—A qualitative
investigation. International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, 17(16), 5917. https://doi.
org/10.3390/ijerph17165917
Makwana, N. (2019). Disaster and its impact on mental
health: A narrative review. Journal of Family Medicine
and Primary Care, 8(10), 3090–3095. https://doi.org/
10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_893_19
Mardiatno, D. N. A. I. N., Malawani, M. N., Wacono, D.,
& Annisa, D. N. (2017). Review on Tsunami risk
reduction in Indonesia based on coastal and set­
tlement typology. Indonesian Journal of
Geography, 49. https://jurnal.ugm.ac.id/ijg/article/
view/28406
Martitah. (2017). The fulfillment of the right of welfare for
women workers in Indonesian. International Journal
of Business, Economics and Law, 12(4), 51–57.
Mason, B., Gallant, A., Hutabarat, D., Montgomery, J.,
Reed, A., Wartman, J., Irsyam, M., Prakoso, W.,
Djarwadi, D., Harnanto, D., Alatas, I., Rahardjo, P.,
Simatupang, P., Kawanda, A., & Hanifa, R. (2019).
Geotechnical reconnaissance: 28 September 2018
M7.5The. Palu-Donggala, Indonesia Earthquake.
https://doi.org/10.18118/G63376
Math, S. B., Nirmala, M. C., Moirangthem, S., & Kumar, N. C.
(2015). Disaster management: Mental Health
perspective. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine,
37(3), 261–271. https://doi.org/10.4103/0253-7176.
162915
Maulida, H. (2020). The implementation of disaster man­
agement and legal protection for disaster relief
volunteers (Case of Central Java Province, Indonesia).
Journal of Law and Legal Reform, 1(3), 415–424.
https://doi.org/10.15294/jllr.v1i3.37091
Méndez, M., Flores-Haro, G., & Zucker, L. (2020). The (in)
visible victims of disaster: Understanding the vulner­
ability of undocumented Latino/a and indigenous
immigrants. Geoforum; Journal of Physical, Human,
and Regional Geosciences, 116, 50–62. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.07.007
Mulyana, E., Prayoga, M. B., Yananto, A., Wirahma, S.,
Aldrian, E., Harsoyo, B., Seto, T., & Sunarya, Y. (2018).
Tropical cyclones characteristic in southern
Indonesia and the impact on extreme rainfall event.
MATEC Web of Conferences, 229, 2007. https://doi.
org/10.1051/matecconf/201822902007
Natawidjaja, D., Daryono, M., Prasetya, G., Udrekh, U., Liu, P.,
Hananto, N., Kongko, W., Triyoso, W., Puji, A., Meilano, I.,
Gunawan, E., Supendi, P., Pamumpuni, A., Irsyam, M.,
Faizal, L., Hidayati, S., Sapiie, B., Kusuma, M., & Tawil, S.
(2020). The 2018 Mw7.5 Palu ‘supershear’ earthquake
ruptures geological fault’s multi-segment separated by
large bends: Results from integrating field measure­
ments, LiDAR, swath bathymetry, and seismic-
reflection data. Geophysical Journal International, 224.
https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggaa498
Neumayer, E., & Plümper, T. (2007). The gendered nature
of natural disasters: The impact of catastrophic
events on the gender gap in life expectancy, 1981–
2002. Annals of the Association of American
Geographers, 97(3), 551–566. https://doi.org/10.1111/
j.1467-8306.2007.00563.x
Oktari, R. S., Dwirahmadi, F., Gan, C. C. R., Darundiyah, K.,
Nugroho, P. C., Wibowo, A., & Chu, C. (2022).
Indonesia’s climate-related disasters and health
adaptation policy in the build-up to COP26 and
beyond. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(2), 1–17.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su14021006
Oloruntoba, E. O., Folarin, T. B., & Ayede, A. I. (2014).
Hygiene and sanitation risk factors of diarrhoeal dis­
ease among under-five children in Ibadan, Nigeria.
African Health Sciences, 14(4), 1001–1011. https://
doi.org/10.4314/ahs.v14i4.32
Patel, R. (2009). Food sovereignty. The Journal of Peasant
Studies, 36(3), 663–706. https://doi.org/10.1080/
03066150903143079
Patria, A., & Putra, P. (2020). Development of the Palu–
koro fault in NW Palu Valley, Indonesia. Geoscience
Letters, 7(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40562-020-
0150-2
Peek, L. (2008). Children and disasters: Understanding
vulnerability, developing capacities, and promoting
resilience: An introduction. Children, Youth and
Environments, 18(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1353/
cye.2008.0052
Pourhosseini, S. S., Ardalan, A., & Mehrolhassani, M. H.
(2015). Key aspects of providing healthcare services
in disaster response stage. Iranian Journal of Public
Health, 44(1), 111–118.
Pramono, B., Yulivan, I., Setiadi, M., Norma Habsari, T.,
Duha, J., & Prakoso, L. (2022). Management earth­
quake and tsunami disaster in Palu Indonesia. Jurnal
Pertahanan & Bela Negara.
Prayoga, M. B. R., & Koestoer, R. H. (2021). Improving
forest fire mitigation in Indonesia: A lesson from
Canada. Jurnal Wilayah Dan Lingkungan, 9(3). https://
doi.org/10.14710/jwl.9.3.293-305
Putra, D., & Matsuyuki, M. (2019). Disaster management
following decentralization in Indonesia: Regulation,
institutional establishment, planning, and budgeting.
Journal of Disaster Research, 14, 173–187. https://doi.
org/10.20965/jdr.2019.p0173
Riaz, M., Aslam, N., Zainab, R., Aziz-Ur-Rehman, Rasool, G.,
Ullah, M. I., Daniyal, M., & Akram, M. (2020).
Prevalence, risk factors, challenges, and the currently
available diagnostic tools for the determination of
helminths infections in human. European Journal of
Inflammation, 18, 2058739220959915. https://doi.
org/10.1177/2058739220959915
Rivera, D. Z., Jenkins, B., & Randolph, R. (2022). Procedural
vulnerability and its effects on equitable
post-disaster recovery in low-income communities.
Journal of the American Planning Association, 88(2),
220–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2021.
1929417
Roscigno, V. J. (2019). Discrimination, sexual harassment,
and the impact of workplace power. Socius, 5,
2378023119853894. https://doi.org/10.1177/
2378023119853894
Sefriani. (2020). The Implementation of the first pillar of
responsibility to protect in Indonesia: Critical analysis
of law on social conflict management. Jurnal Hukum
Ius Quia Iustum, 27(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.
20885/iustum.vol27.iss1.art1
Sena, L. (2006). Disaster prevention and preparedness.
No. 663-A-00-00-0358-00.
Sesay, M., & Bradley, M. (2022). “When the ground
opened”: Responsibility for harms and rights viola­
tions in disasters – Insights from Sierra Leone.
Journal of Human Rights, 21(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/
10.1080/14754835.2021.1935221
Siagian, T., Purhadi, P., Suhartono, S., & Ritonga, H. (2014).
Social vulnerability to natural hazards in Indonesia:
Driving factors and policy implications. Natural
Hazards, 70(2), 1603–1617. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11069-013-0888-3
Page 19 of 20
Tjitrawati & Romadhona, Cogent Social Sciences (2023), 9: 2233255
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2233255
Singavarapu, P., & Murray, E. (2013). Impact of inade­
quate sanitation on the marginalised. https://doi.org/
10.13140/2.1.4310.3529
Skoufias, E., Strobl, E., & Tveit, T. (2021). Constructing
damage indices based on publicly available spatial
data: Exemplified by earthquakes and volcanic erup­
tions in Indonesia. International Journal of Disaster
Risk Science, 12(3), 410–427. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s13753-021-00348-4
Sommario, E., & Venier, S. (2018). Human Rights Law and
Disaster Risk Reduction. Questions of International Law,
49, 29–47. http://www.qil-qdi.org/wp-content/uploads/
2018/04/03_Disaster-Risk_SOMMARIO-VENIER_FIN.pdf
Stocks, M. E., Ogden, S., Haddad, D., Addiss, D. G.,
McGuire, C., & Freeman, M. C. (2014). Effect of water,
sanitation, and hygiene on the prevention of tra­
choma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS
Medicine, 11(2), e1001605. https://doi.org/10.1371/
journal.pmed.1001605
Sunarharum, T. M., Sloan, M., & Susilawati, C. (2016,
September 9). Managing Jakarta’s flood risk after
hyogo: Policy & plan analyses. 6th International
Conference on Building Resilience 2016, Incorporated
with UNISDR Program in Auckland.
Syamsidik, S., Benazir, B., Umar, M., Margaglio, G., &
Fitrayansyah, A. (2019). Post-tsunami survey of the
28 September 2018 tsunami near Palu Bay in Central
Sulawesi, Indonesia: Impacts and challenges to
coastal communities. International Journal of
Disaster Risk Reduction, 38, 101229. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101229
Taylor, D. L., Kahawita, T. M., Cairncross, S., &
Ensink, J. H. J. (2015). The impact of water, sani­
tation and hygiene interventions to control
Cholera: A systematic review. PLoS ONE, 10(8),
e0135676. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.
0135676
Uekusa, S. (2019). Disaster linguicism: Linguistic minori­
ties in disasters. Language in Society, 43(3), 353–375.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404519000150
Wekke, I. S. (2021). Mitigasi Bencana. Penerbit Adab.
Whittaker, J., McLennan, B., & Handmer, J. (2015).
A review of informal volunteerism in emergencies
and disasters: Definition, opportunities and
challenges. International Journal of Disaster Risk
Reduction, 13, 358–368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijdrr.2015.07.010
Widana, I. D. K. K., Apriliani, D., Maarif, S., & Adri, K. (2021).
Knowledge and attitudes of the BNPB leaders
towards nuclear disaster threat in Indonesia:
Expectation and reality – ICDM 2020. IOP Conference
Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 708(1),
12062. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/708/1/
012062
Winanto, A. (2021, December 6). World Bank names
Indonesia as the 12th country with the highest dis­
aster risk: Earthquake, tsunami, and floods the most
vulnerable. VOI.
Wood, L., Boruff, B., & Smith, H. (2013). When disaster
strikes. . . how communities cope and adapt: A social
capital perspective. In Social Capital: Theory,
Measurement and Outcomes.
Page 20 of 20