"It's beautiful here, it reminds me of home," says Arif Pujianto. He stands on the shore of Lake Geneva in Switzerland, watching the sunlight reflect off the water's surface. Nearby, local fishermen empty their nets in a wooden shack.
Pujianto, 54, also lives near the water. He has a house on the beach on Pulau Pari, a small island in Indonesia. His son is a fisherman, and he repairs motorcycles and boat engines. But the sea, on which his family's livelihood depends, is becoming a threat.
The water level keeps rising, and floods periodically submerge roads and homes. Saltwater contaminates freshwater wells. Fishing and tourism, the island's main economic activities, are at risk. "We're losing our island because of climate change," says Pujianto during a meeting in Tolochenaz, organised by the relief organisation of the Protestant Reformed Church (HEKS) at the end of August.
For Pujianto, one of the culprits has a clear name: Holcim. The Swiss multinational, headquartered in Zug, is one of the world's largest cement producers. According to the Climate Accountability Institute, it is among the 180 companies that have produced the most CO₂ emissions globally since the pre-industrial eraExternal link.
Together with other island residents, Pujianto has filed a civil lawsuit against Holcim for its role in the climate crisis. The people of Pulau Pari have not contributed to global warming, yet they suffer its consequences, he laments. "It's unfair."
Whether Holcim must be held accountable for this injustice will be determined by a Swiss court. On September 3, a preliminary hearing at the Cantonal Court of Zug will decide whether the case is admissible.
This is the first legal action of its kind against a major cement company. It is also the first lawsuit filed by Indonesian citizens against a foreign company for climate-related damages.
The Holcim case could set a precedent for similar lawsuits in Switzerland and around the world. "We are climate victims. We want to fight for our rights," says Ibu Asmania, one of the plaintiffs who will accompany Pujianto to the historic first hearing.
Pulau Pari is located about 30 kilometres northeast of Jakarta, Indonesia's capital. Its 1,500 residents live on an area of roughly 0.5km². The island's highest point is just 1.5 metres above sea level.
Tidal floodings have long been part of life on Pulau Pari. But with the climate crisis, floods are becoming more frequent and reaching further inland. "Once, the water came at night. We had to save our electronics at lightning speed and get ourselves to safety," Pujianto recalls, referring to the 2021 flood.
Environmental organisations say that by 2050, most of Pulau Pari could be underwater.
Residents want to reinforce the foundations of their homes or rebuild further from the shore. They've planted mangroves to protect the coast from erosion, but breakwaves are also needed. "This is very costly, and we can't afford it," Pujianto says.
In 2021, the World Bank projected that around 48.4 million people in East Asia and the Pacific, a region that includes Indonesia, could be forced to leave their homes by 2050 due to climate-related disasters.
Pujianto does not want to leave his island. However, he is asking for compensation for part of the damage suffered and support to protect his home.
That is why in January 2023, he filed a civil lawsuit in Switzerland against Holcim together with three other residents of Pulau Pari. They are supported External linkby HEKS, the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), and WALHI, Indonesia's largest and oldest environmental NGO.
The plaintiffs allege a violation of personality rights under the Swiss Civil Code due to Holcim's CO₂ emissions. According to a study by the Global Climate ForumExternal link, the damage on Pulau Pari is indeed caused by global warming linked to greenhouse gases emissions.
Cement production accounts for about 8% of global CO₂ emissionsExternal link. If it were a country, the cement industry would rank among the most polluting nations.
Holcim's activities emitted more than seven billion tonnes of CO₂ between 1950 and 2021, according to calculationsExternal link by the Climate Accountability Institute (CAI), a US-based nonprofit research organisation. This represents 0.42% of all global CO₂ emissions since 1750.
This figure, 0.42%, is also the share of climate damages that the four Indonesian plaintiffs are demanding Holcim pay for its historic contribution to global warming. That amounts to about CHF3,600 ($4,500) per person, or roughly CHF14,700 in total.
The plaintiffs also demand that Holcim reduce its emissions by 43% by 2030 and by 69% by 2040 compared to 2019 levels, in line with the Paris Agreement goals.
The case combines two different approaches - compensation and emission reduction - and is therefore "groundbreaking", says Miriam Saage-Maass, legal expert at the ECCHR.
The legal case against Holcim is part of a global and growing movement. The Columbia University database lists more than 2,000 climate-related legal proceedings in courts across more than 40 countries, mostly in the US. In 2024 alone, 258 new cases were filed, compared with 91 a decade earlier.
On July 23, the International Court of Justice in The Hague declared that countries, and their companies, are obligated to address the "urgent and existential threat" of climate change by reducing emissions and compensating victims. In 2024, in a historic ruling, the European Court of Human Rights condemned Switzerland for not doing enough to protect its own people from the effects of global warming.
"In many places in Europe, people are taking legal action against states and companies in order to compel them to protect the climate," Saage-Maass says. However, the case against Holcim is only the second in the world initiated by people affected in the Global South.
>> The ruling of the European Court of Human Rights against Switzerland is unprecedented:
Holcim does not comment directly on the ongoing case. In an email to Swissinfo, Livio Brandenberg, the company's spokesperson, said the question of who is allowed to emit CO₂, and in what quantity, is a "matter for the legislature and not a question for a civil court".
Holcim argues that lawsuits targeting individual companies are not an effective mechanism for addressing the global complexity of climate action.
The Swiss multinational says it has significantly reduced its carbon footprint and aims to lower it further by 2030. The company claims it will produce climate-neutral and fully recyclable construction materials by 2050.
The Cantonal Court of Zug is the first Swiss court to rule on the case. Based on the arguments presented by both sides during the September 3 hearing, it will decide on the admissibility of the complaint. A decision is expected in the coming days or weeks.
If the court allows the case to proceed, it will examine the plaintiffs' claims. A favourable ruling would clarify that no legal vacuum exists under Swiss civil law regarding the consequences of climate change, and that those affected have access to legal protection, according to the NGOs supporting the case. In similar cases in Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, and New Zealand, they say, the courts have clearly affirmed the justiciability of comparable climate complaints.
If the case is deemed inadmissible, it will be dismissed. However, this does not mean the end of the proceedings: the decision may be appealed before the second instance Cantonal Court. It can be assumed that, regardless of the verdict following the preliminary hearing, the case will be taken to the Federal Court, Switzerland's highest judicial authority.
Arif Pujianto and Ibu Asmania remain hopeful. They say their arguments are based on solid scientific data and the real impacts of climate change. With compensation, they want to reinforce their homes, plant more mangroves and build breakwaves with rocks.
"We want to save our island and be a source of inspiration for everyone fighting for climate justice - not only in Indonesia, but around the world," Asmania says.