Corporate Social Responsibility: A Constitutional Perspective


  • Muchamad Ali Safa’at Dosen Fakultas Hukum Universitas Brawijaya Malang



Corporate Social Responsibility, Constitutional Law, Human Rights


Originally, the concept of CSR was come from business ethic values that impose corporation’s ethical responsibly to their social and natural environment. That development of ethical business was part of social consciousness on the degradation of environment as impact of corporation activities. This reality also raised the deep environmental ethic or deep ecology which challenge anthropocentrism economical development and urged ecocentrism development. In Indonesia, this phenomenon was marked by the enactment of Act 4/1982 on Environmental Management.The constitutional debate on CSR just began when the Indonesian Constitutional Court heard and decided the judicial review case of Act 40/2007 on Limited Liability Company which stipulate CSR mandatory law for corporation that have activity in natural resources areas. In its decision, Constitutional Court refused the petition. This means that the court affirmed that CSR mandatory law is not contrary to the Constitution. However, the legal argumentation of the court was not shifted from economical and environmental perspectives. The constitutional basis of the decision is Article 33 (4) concerning national economic principles and Article 33 (3) concerning state power on land, water, and natural resources. The Constitutional Court did not use the human rights concept as the source of CSR mandatory law.In constitutional law perspective, we can justify the CSR mandatory law from human rights guarantee on the constitution. CSR is one of the obligations to respect, to protect, to fulfill, and to promote human rights. Those obligations are not only bind over the government, but also corporation and all citizens. In that perspective, CSR should be mandatory law not only for the corporation which manage or correlate with natural resource, but for all corporations that operate in the middle of the society.


Augenstein, Daniel, Study of the Legal Framework on Human Rights and the Environment Applicable to European Enterprises Operating Outside the European Union, The University of Edinburgh. of_the_Legal_ Framework_on_Human_Rights_and_the_Environment_applicable_ to_European_Enterprises_operating_outside_the_European_Union_Study_for_the_ European_Commission_ENTR_09_045_2010_, accesed 3/5/2013.
Corbett, Angus and Peta Spender, 2009, Corporate Constitutionalism.. 31, Sydney Law Review.
Edi Suharto, 2008, Corporate Social Responsibility: What is and Benefits for Corporate, Presented Paper on Conference “CSR: Strategy, Management and Leadership”, Jakarta 13-14 February.
European Commission, 2011, Communication From the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee on the Regions, A renewed EU strategy 2011 – 14 for Corporate Social Responsibility, Brussel; European Commission.
Jimly Asshiddiqie and Muchamad Ali Safa’at, 2012, Teori Hans Kelsen Tentang Hukum, Jakarta: Konstitusi Press.
Lynch, Philip, 2006, Human Rights and Corporate Social Responsibility, Submission to the Corporation Markets Advisory Committee Inquiry into Corporate Social Responsibility, Melbourne: Human Rights Law Resources Centre.
Rabet, Delphine, 2009, Human rights and Globalization: The Myth of Corporate Social Responsibility?, Journal of Alternative Perspectives in the Social Sciences, Volume 1, Nomor 2.
Rawls, John, 1971, A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
United Nation, 2003, Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights, art 15, UN Doc E/CN.4/Sub.2/2003/12/Rev.2.




How to Cite

Ali Safa’at, Muchamad. 2016. “Corporate Social Responsibility: A Constitutional Perspective”. Jurnal Konstitusi 11 (1):1-17.




Most read articles by the same author(s)