<![CDATA[Access to clean water is a fundamental human right. Despite being an archipelagic country surrounded by water, Indonesia faces significant challenges in providing its citizens with adequate access to clean water. This study examines Jakarta’s water governance through the analytical framework of the Public Trust Doctrine (PTD), comparing institutional failures with the Flint water crisis to identify transferable governance reforms. Using qualitative legal analysis and comparative case methodology, this study analyzes Indonesia’s constitutional water rights framework as implemented in Jakarta against documented evidence of implementation gaps, including coverage disparities (60% formal access versus universal constitutional guarantees), water quality violations (93% of groundwater monitoring points exceeding coliform standards), and privatization accountability deficits. The analysis employsthree analytical indicators: (1) accountability mechanism (enforcement pathways and oversight structures), (2) enforceability (judicial remedies and statutory compliance), and (3) participation (stakeholder inclusion in decision-making). The comparative analysis identified five systemic governance dimensions in which both Jakarta and Flint demonstrate institutional failures: fragmented regulatory authority, inadequate monitoring infrastructure, weak judicial enforcement, privatization without public interest safeguards, and limited citizen participation. The study outcome proposes an integrated governance model incorporating watershed management councils, strengthened legal frameworks explicitly incorporating PTD principles, and a multi-level accountability mechanism. This research advances the water governance literature by operationalizing PTD principles through specific institutional reforms adapted to the Jakarta urban context while acknowledging limitations in generalizing the findings to other Indonesian regions with different geographic, demographic, and governance characteristics.]]>
