Indeed, there are at least three environmental case in Indonesia, where the defendant was forced to conduct the defense of natural disasters as their defense. This article aims to measure the difference between the case of Indonesia with the case of the U.S. litigation involves what is called the 'Power of God' In particular, this article attempts to discuss the question of whether the evidence should be established by the party claiming that suffering from damage caused by natural disastersThus, this article will look for rules underlying in the definition of natural disasters, the relationship between the actions of the defense of God and the rule of liability, and the ability to foresee the needs in the law of indemnity. As a conclusion, this article explains that compared with their peers in the U.S, the Indonesian courts do not have the consistency and logical reasoning in their decisions on the defense of natural disasters. Following the decision about the use of action the defense of God in a U.S court, this article argues that to create consistency in the decision-making of the court, the defense must meet some requirements, such as be amazing, unexpected, and free from human intervention.
