<![CDATA[Burning of land is often done and become a corporate policy to reduce production costs. Although corporations have long been recognized as subjects of criminal law, proof of land-burning in practice is extremely difficult. This study intends to analyze whether corporations can be criminally accountable for the crime of burning land as stipulated in Article 108 Environmental Protection and Management Law (UUPPLH) based on the theory of strict liability? This research is normative research, collecting data is done by studying the literature and then the presentation is arranged in the form of descriptive qualitative. This study uses a conceptual and statute approach. The results show that corporations are normatively irresponsible criminal for the crime of burning of land based on the theory of strict liability, because in UUPPLH regulate that corporate liability with strict liability principle is very limited, only on material compensation, not on criminal liability. In the case of PT Surya Panen Subur (SPS), based on facts revealed in the trial did not prove to be an act of burning, but only the fact that there was a burning land. However, the judge stated that PT SPS was guilty based on the application of strict liability principles. Thus, the judge did not consider the decision carefully. In the future, consideration should be given to extending the application of the strict liability principle to the losses resulting from land fires. Abstrak Pembakaran lahan seringkali dilakukan dan menjadi kebijakan korporasi untuk mengurangi biaya produksi. Meski korporasi sudah menjadi subjek hukum pidana, pembuktiannya dalam praktek sangat sulit, termasuk dalam kejahatan pembakaran lahan. Artikel ini membahas apakah korporasi dapat turut dipertanggungjawabkan pidana terhadap tindak pidana pembakaran lahan sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 108 UU Perlindungan dan Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup (UUPPLH) berdasarkan teori strict liability. Penelitian ini bersifat normatif, pengumpulan data dengan mengkaji kepustakaan dan kemudian penyajian dilakukan dalam bentuk deskriptif kualitatif dengan pendekatan konseptual dan perundang-undangan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa korporasi secara normatif tidak dapat dimintai pertanggungjawaban pidana atas tindak pidana pembakaran lahan, karena UUPPLH mengatur pertanggungjawaban korporasi dengan prinsip strict liability sangat terbatas, yaitu hanya pada penggantian kerugian materiil keperdataan dan bukan pada pertanggungjawaban yang bersifat pidana. Pada kasus PT Surya Panen Subur (SPS), berdasarkan fakta yang terungkap dalam persidangan tidak terbukti unsur perbuatan membakar, melainkan hanya fakta bahwa ada lahan terbakar. Meski demikian, hakim tetap menyatakan PT SPS bersalah berdasarkan prinsip strict liability. Dengan demikian, hakim tidak cermat dalam pertimbanganya. Ke depan, perlu dipertimbangkan perluasan penerapan prinsip strict liability atas akibat dari kebakaran lahan.]]>
