[Kabar-Irian] News: May 24-26 2006 (2)
Too much mail? Switch to the digest version. Info provided at the end of this
email.
To leave this list follow the instructions at the bottom of this email. As a
matter of policy we DO NOT handle requests except in emergencies.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
The following articles taken from DTE
Down to Earth
International Campaign for Ecological Justice in Indonesia
59 Athenlay Road, London SE15 3EN, England. Email: dte@gn.apc.org Web:
http://dte.gn.apc.org
(Bahasa: http://dte.gn.apc.org/inews.htm)
- ---
The Tangguh gas project: Indonesia's biggest
FDI project
Investors: The British company BP holds the biggest share (37.16%) along
with Japanese and Chinese shareholders.
Investments: Tangguh is expected to cost around US$5.5 billion, with $2bn
covered by BP and partners and $3-3.5bn through loans. This will be
Indonesia's biggest FDI project since the the economic crash of 1997. In
December last year, the ADB voted to contribute $350 million towards the
project, despite protests from Indonesian and international NGOs.
Income for Indonesia and Papua: Over the next 30 years, the Tangguh project
could earn up to US$8.7 billion for the central government of Indonesia and
US$3.6 billion for the Papuan Government (see DTE 65:11,
http://dte.gn.apc.org/65TUP.HTM).
Impacts: This massive project has seen various impacts, even before
construction begins in earnest. These do include some positive measures for
certain villages which receive grants from BP. But problems include:
disruption of fisheries; loss of livelihood and dependency on handouts for
resettled villagers; social tension between communities who receive
benefits and those who receive less or none; immigration into the region
and economic domination by outsiders; and reported increase in alcohol
consumption in the village of Saengga, located near the Tangguh base camp.
Update: Key concerns over social and environmental impacts, security and
human rights and legitimacy in Papua's wider political context continue to
dog BP's giant Tangguh gas project under development in Bintuni Bay. The
increases in military personnel in Papua, continuing violence by the
security forces against demonstrators, protests against Freeport-Rio Tinto
and the legal tangle surrounding the creation of 'West Irian Jaya' province
within Papua province, do not bode well for this project's success (see DTE
65:2, http://dte.gn.apc.org/65TAN.HTM and DTE 68:6,
http://dte.gn.apc.org/68adb.htm for background).
These concerns may account for why sixteen countries, including the UK,
Canada and fourteen European countries, abstained from voting when the ADB
considered financing the project in December last year.
Nevertheless, the ADB loan was agreed, and, as of January this year, seven
banks had been shortlisted for the US$1bn international commercial loan
portion of the US$3.5bn being raised for the project. These include three
Japanese banks (BTM-UFJ, Mizuho Corporate Bank and SMBC), plus BNP Paribas
(France), Fortis Bank (Belgium/Netherlands), ING Barings (Netherlands) and
Standard Chartered (UK/Hong Kong).
(ADB minutes of 14/Dec/05 meeting at
http://www.adb.org/Documents/Board/Minutes/2005/M45-05.pdf ; Engineers
Against Poverty website
http://www.engineersagainstpoverty.org/index.asp?PageID=122; DTE 65:pages
1-11, http://dte.gn.apc.org/65TAN.HTM; Project Finance International,
11/Jan/06)
- ---
Chinese company plans massive timber operation
in Papua
Investor: State-owned Chinese company, named as China Light.
Investment: Plan to invest US$1 billion in a timber processing plant and
acquiring merbau logs, announced by forestry minister Malam Sambat Kaban in
April this year.
Impacts: This plan links the 2008 Olympic Games to stripping Papua's
forests of the highly valuable merbau hardwood. Forestry minister Kaban
told reporters that the Chinese company needed 800,000 cubic metres of
merbau logs (400,000 m3 of processed wood) to construct sports facilities
for the 2008 Olympics.
Illegal exports of merbau (Instia spp) are supplying Chinese factories and
western consumer demand for hardwood flooring. This illegal trade, which
generates huge profits for timber dealers whilst depriving Papuans of their
customary resources has been exposed by EIA and Telapak in their new report
Behind the Veneer. (For more on Papuan forests see separate article, below,
and DTE 65:12, http://dte.gn.apc.org/65FOR.HTM).
If the investment plan goes ahead - and the minister said he expected the
deal to be concluded this year - this will effectively legalise the
destruction of Papua's already hard-pressed forests (see also separate
article, below). By setting up a processing mill and exporting the merbau
as processed timber, the Chinese company would be able to get round
Indonesia's log export ban.
According to the forestry department's Forest Production Development
Director General, Hadi S Pasaribu, Indonesia could use 300,000 cubic metres
of timber confiscated under last year's crack-down on illegal logging in
Papua, to supply the Chinese operation. The rest, he said, could be
supplied from private timber concessions (HPH) operating in Papua. He also
said China had agreed to develop timber plantations for the pulp and paper
industry in the region.
The announcement may well set off a power struggle between central
government in Jakarta and Papua's provincial government, which has already
complained about the lack of decision-making power delivered under special
autonomy measures introduced four years ago. The investment, which can be
expected to accelerate the marginalisation of indigenous Papuans in the
logging zones, is also likely to fuel political unrest amongst a population
already angry about outsiders profiting from Papua's natural riches. The
lack of benefits from decades of exploitation was underlined last year when
the World Bank reported that 40% of Papuans remained below the poverty
line, more than twice the national average for Indonesia (see DTE 68:7,
http://dte.gn.apc.org/68adb.htm).
(Source: Jakarta Post 19/Apr/06; New York Times 29/Apr/06; Republika Online
19/Apr/06 http://www.republika.co.id/koran_detail.asp?id=244312&kat_id=4)
The EIA/Telapak report is at:
www.eia-international.org/files/reports117-1.pdf
Pulp and paper - UFS
The United Fibre Systems development of a chip mill and proposed pulp mill
in South Kalimantan is a prime example of unsustainable FDI. The
Singapore-based company has got financing from an Austrian bank for the
chip mill and from China for the pulp plant. Andritz AG, an Austrian
company, will supply equipment for both mills. Akzo Nobel, a Dutch chemical
pulled out of supplying the pulp mill project after opposition from local
and international groups who say that the mills will increase forest
destruction and threaten the livelihoods of local people. See DTE 68:18,
http://dte.gn.apc.org/68pul.htm for background.
Merrill Lynch, ANZ Bank and Cornell Capital are now working with UFS to
secure financing for pulp production at Kiani Kertas in East Kalimantan,
formerly owned by timber tycoon Bob Hasan.
A DTE report on this project is currently being finalised.
- ---
Freeport - Rio Tinto: new reports expose impacts
Investors: Freeport-McMoRan Copper and Gold Inc., based in New Orleans,
USA, and Anglo-Australian multinational mining company Rio Tinto.
Investment: The Freeport - Rio Tinto joint venture, in which Rio Tinto
invested around US$1.7 billion, exploits a massive open-pit gold and copper
deposit in West Papua. It is one of the world’s largest gold producers.
The giant Grasberg mine last year produced 273,900 tonnes of copper,
1,676,000 oz of gold and 3,410,000 oz of silver
Profits: Freeport’s profits more than quadrupled in 2005, due to high
copper and gold prices and high levels of production. Net income totalled
US$995.1 million.
Personal profits were huge too: Freeport’s chairman, Jim Bob Moffet and
Richard Adkerson, president and chief executive gained almost US$59m after
taxes by cashing in stock options. This followed 2005 compensation packages
worth a total of US$77.3m.
Rio Tinto’s profits reached US$5.2 billion last year, with $232 million
coming from Grasberg.
These corporate and personal gains contrast starkly with the fact that 40%
of Papuans remain in poverty.
Revenues for Indonesia and Papua: Freeport estimates it has provided more
than $33 billion in direct and indirect benefits to Indonesia from 1992 to
2004. The company paid $1.2 billion in taxes, royalties, dividends and fees
to the Indonesian government in 2005, with $64 million spent on community
development projects around the mine. Local people say they have never
enjoyed a fair share of this, and have instead suffered from the
devastating environmental and social impacts. Indeed most profits go to
Indonesia, not Papua: 87% are paid to the national government, with only
13% reaching the Papuan provincial and local governments.
Security payments: Between 1998 and 2004, Freeport paid individual military
and police officers and military units nearly $20 million. For local
people, Freeport security translates as human rights violators: military
guards have a long history of abuse, including torture, disappearances and
killings.
Update: WALHI has completed an investigative report on the environmental
impacts of the Freeport mine, produced with the assistance of Down to
Earth. The report documents severe environmental damage and clear breaches
of environment law, based on a number of unreleased company and government
monitoring reports, including an Environmental Risk Assessment never made
available to the public.
The report reveals that freshwater aquatic life has been largely destroyed
through heavy metal pollution and habitat destruction in the watercourses
which receive tailings. Controlled tests and field sampling show that
plants grown in tailings accumulate these heavy metals in their tissues,
posing risks to wildlife that feed on them. The alpine portion of the
Lorentz National Park World Heritage site, adjacent to the mine, is
affected by polluted groundwater from Freeport-Rio Tinto's acid and copper
producing waste rock dumps. Meanwhile, the coastal portion of the Lorentz
National Park is affected by copper pollution through deposition of
tailings released from the Ajkwa Estuary into the Arafura sea, and carried
eastwards into the World Heritage area.
The English copy of the report is summarised and the full version available
for download at
http://www.eng.walhi.or.id/kampanye/tambang/frpt-report-may-06/
Parliamentary investigation
The Indonesian Parliamentary Special Investigative Commission on Freeport
has been holding hearings in parliament over the past couple of months, and
sent a delegation to visit the mine site and the town of Timika from the
4th - 7th of May 2006. Upon their return, parliamentarian and
ex-environment minister, Sonny Keraf, confirmed the findings of WALHI's new
report that millions of tonnes of hazardous waste had caused severe
destruction to the Arafura coastline1. While visiting Timika, the
parliamentarians met with Amungme leader 'Mama' Yosepha Alomang, who
discussed environment and development issues associated with the mine.
Yosepha also presented the commission with a briefing paper produced by
Papuan NGOs Yahamak, a Timika-based organisation for the empowerment of
women and children, and the human rights group ELSHAM Papua.
The Yahamak/ELSHAM briefing paper2 is the only recent independent report on
social issues to emerge from the tightly controlled mine area. Read
together with the WALHI report on environment al impacts, an unfortunate
picture emerges of the current situation for local people and the
environment. The Yahamak/ELSHAM report condemns failures of
company-sponsored community development schemes, and documents the current
security situation and the rise of small-scale mining activity in the
Freeport-Rio Tinto concession area. The following is a summary of some of
the key findings of the report.
Failures in community development
The Amungme and Kamoro Community Development Organisation (LPMAK) was
established by Freeport to distribute money from the Freeport Partnership
Fund, more commonly known as the ‘1% Fund’. LPMAK is governed by
representatives from the company, government and local community. The funds
are disbursed in conjunction with the Amungme organisation, LEMASA and the
Kamoro organisation, LEMASKO.
The report claims that Freeport 'plays with' local organisations including
Yahamak, LEMASA and LEMASKO, and that the company too often intervenes in
NGO decision-making, with a 'we know best' attitude. The 1% Fund is cited
in the report as a source of conflict: "What is this money for? Where does
it come from? There is no explanation. Stick a leg of beef in the middle of
the road and you make everyone fight. Even the dogs will join in."
Unfortunately, according to the Yahamak/ELSHAM briefing paper, the purpose
of the funds is not clear. Is it ‘riot money' paid to settle violence in
1996? Is it rent in exchange for traditional land rights? Or is it
compensation for environmental damage? Yahamak and ELSHAM also question the
process of disbursement of these funds, which they say is increasingly
hazy:
"Unfortunately, in the development of its investment, PT Freeport Indonesia
[PTFI] has provided minimal benefits for the Amungme and Kamoro peoples. On
the other hand, the company has brought negative impacts through its
exploration for gold and copper: tailings which destroy the habitats and
ecosystems which provide livelihoods for the Amungme and Kamoro. It is
unclear what the benefits are for these two indigenous peoples because
there is no clear accountability in the community development process.
Many progress reports which are produced by Community Development [of PTFI]
are not in accordance with the real situation and problems faced by the
community."
The report says much of the 'development' money is wasted on helicopter
journeys, contractors who are not properly audited and training courses
held in hotels.
There is a conspicuous failure to prevent conflict through providing
appropriate benefits for the local people, the report says:
"The success of community development is not measured in the building of
roads, bridges and buildings. Development is a success if people say 'I am
prosperous, satisfied and peaceful'. If people are continuously
demonstrating, if they are forced to pan for gold amongst the dangerous
chemicals, then that's not a success."
Around 75% to 85% of the LPMAK funds are marked for education and health,
yet the report asks, "Where are the Kamoro and Amungme university
graduates? You can count with your fingers the number of graduates in the
last decade. These are the people who are directly impacted. Where have the
funds gone?" The briefing paper also cites data from the local public
health service which shows an increase in the incidence of tuberculosis in
the mine area over the past several years, 265 residents having been
treated for tuberculosis since 2004. Local people's business ventures, such
as seafood collection and export to Australia, and vegetable growing for
marketing outside the area, are deemed to have failed for lack of support
from the company.
Gold panning
The floatation method employed to extract metals from ore processed at the
Freeport mine leaves significant quantities of gold, copper and other heavy
metals in the tailings. What the briefing paper refers to as 'traditional
mining' consists of panning for gold in these tailings, which Freeport-Rio
Tinto disposes of into the Aghawagon-Otomona-Ajikwa river system. This gold
panning began around the year 2000, apparently initiated by panners evicted
from an earlier site in Nabire (in northern Papua, relatively far from the
Freeport area), which was closed due to conflict between local people and
outsiders.
According to Yahamak and ELSHAM, local people participate in gold panning
because of the difficulty of making a living in the new industrial
environment, particularly since most of the traditional landowners have
little or no formal education. There are around 500 - 1000 people taking
part in gold panning. They are mostly from the nearby Lani, Dani, Moni,
Ekari, Damal, Nduga, Amungme and Kamoro indigenous peoples, although some
participants come from as far away as Manokwari and Biak, and some are
non-Papuan transmigrants.
Gold panning can be quite profitable: at the 'Mile 72' location near the
Amungme village of Banti, only a few kilometres downstream from Freeport's
tailings outlet into the Aghawagon river, a day's panning produces an
average 6 - 10 grammes of raw gold particles, and a 'lucky' day can bring
up to 20g. This raw gold is sold to Timika gold stores for Rp50,000 to
Rp200,000 per gramme, depending on quality. This immediate income is very
attractive, and even compares favourably with wages at Freeport, so that
some off-duty staff take part in panning. Gold panning also takes place at
locations further downstream such as Mile 50 and Mile 32. However gleanings
at Mile 32 may total only 20 to 25g a month.
Dangers of gold panning
The authors of the briefing paper express concern for the long-term health
of local people engaged in panning for gold in Freeport-Rio Tinto's
tailings stream. They note that gold panners often forget to wash their
hands before handling food, and that the alcohols and other processing
chemicals present in the tailings can be ingested in this way. The main
danger, however, is of gold panners working in the steep river valleys
being swept away in flash floods or crushed in landslides. Yahamak and
ELSHAM estimate that between 7 and 36 people have died in this way over the
past few years.
Military and police extortion and illegal businesses
Gold panning is considered illegal because PTFI's 1967 Contract of Work
grants the company the exclusive right for mineral extraction in the area.
This ‘illegality’ enables the military and police to extort large sums
from participants, by seizing panning equipment and releasing it in return
for payment.
The only road which leads from the lowland town of Timika up to the gold
panning area near the village of Banti and the Freeport mine is off-limits
to the public and guarded with numerous security checkpoints. Gold panners
who wish to travel along this road must pay the military a sum of 400,000 -
700,000 rupiah to ride in a personnel bus, or charter a vehicle driven by a
military or police officer for 3 million rupiah.
Strategic reserve command (Kostrad) troops sell food from the PTFI canteen
to gold panners, at a rate of one packaged meal in exchange for one gramme
of gold particles. Alcohol and other items are likewise bartered for gold.
Some Brimob (special forces police) personnel act as gold buyers so that
gold panners do not have to travel back to Timika to sell on the market
there.
Acts of violence by security forces and gold panners
According to the Yahamak and ELSHAM briefing paper, much of the concession
area is off-limits to all but company staff, and even traditional
landowners are excluded from various areas by security which is strictly
enforced. Countless indigenous landowners have been evicted 'like dogs'
from the Freeport concession area, the briefing paper states. Local people
who are found in the company residential area, canteen, or anywhere in the
exploration area are liable to be kicked and beaten, then evicted, and some
have been shot dead over the years.
The company policy is to attempt to inform people of the dangers of gold
panning and to encourage them to leave. Freeport's civilian security does,
on occasion, attempt to remove people from the gold panning areas although,
according to the briefing paper, it is only panners in small numbers who
are removed, while larger groups are ignored.
Intelligence operations and fabricated separatist threats
According to Indonesian security forces, the OPM (Free Papua Organisation)
led by Kelly Kwalik have continues to pose a danger in the area around the
Freeport mine over the last five years. However, according to Yahamak and
ELSHAM, various acts have been carried out or rumors circulated which are
falsely attributed to Kelly Kwalik in order to generate a profitable
situation for the security forces. Local people contend that the security
forces have fabricated the seriousness of the separatist threat. As one
person cited in the report notes:
"When the Task Force staged an operation to control the gold panning, and
burnt the tents, inside the tents they found an album. In the album there
were local people photographed holding firearms and wearing military
jackets. It's a trick. The military always go down there. The military sit
there and guard the gold panning. It is the military themselves that give
their weapons to the local people to pose and act up for the camera...So in
the end this photo is used in a report saying 'There are armed separatists
in this river area, so we have to send in an operation.' I just laugh
because this is purely engineered by them."
The briefing paper reports that Freeport's security department includes a
section called ‘Security - Intelligence Collection’ which conducts
intelligence operations inside and outside the Freeport operation area,
particularly gathering information on the danger of separatism. Around 30
people have reportedly been trained as company intelligence agents by an
instructor from BIN, the Indonesian national intelligence agency.
The report makes the following recommendations:
1. The company should not be allowed to employ military officers in civil
positions in the security department. These positions should be returned to
civilians.
2. The security department should dissolve its intelligence-gathering
facility.
3. Retired military officers must not be employed in the civilian
security
force.
4. The company must build good relations with the community via
traditional
landowner institutions and other means.
5. The ‘separatist’ label should not be applied to Papuans, neither
staff nor community members.
6. The company should build partnerships with external organisations such
as NGOs, churches, and university students. As long as the company is not
open there will not be peace.
7. End recruitment of staff from outside Papua.
8. Develop the skills of Papuan staff and Papuan organisations.
(Sources for initial Freeport-Rio Tinto section: Rio Tinto 2005 Annual
Report; Businessweek Online, accessed May17, 2006; Financial Times
11/Apr/06; Metal Bulletin 2/Feb/06; New York Times 19/Jan/06 & 5/Apr/06;
WALHI report on Freeport - Rio Tinto, 2006)
References:
(1) M. Taufiqurrahman and T.B. Arie Rukmantara, The Jakarta Post, May 12,
2006: 'Lawmakers confirm report of pollution at Freeport'
(2) Yahamak (Yayasan Hak Asasi Manusia Anti Kekerasan) and ELSHAM Papua
(Lembaga Studi dan Advokasi Hak Asasi Manusia), May 2006, Briefing Paper:
Penambangan Tradisional Ilegal Di Areal Konsesi PT Freeport Indonesia.
- ---
forests / indigenous rights
The future for Papuan forests
Papuan forests are the focus of a power struggle between Jakarta and
Jayapura. Legal and illegal logging are causing rampant deforestation, but
have also disenfranchised the indigenous population. While a coalition of
NGOs is calling for a complete stop to large-scale logging in West Papua,
Indonesian and Papuan forestry authorities are trying to work out a new
logging policy under Special Autonomy to benefit local livelihoods and
manage forests sustainably.
How much is left?
Forest Watch Indonesia (FWI) recently analysed the official data and
available maps for West Papua. Their results show that Papua's forests are
disappearing much faster than had been thought (see box).
The main cause is large-scale commercial logging. As lowland forests in
Sumatra and Kalimantan are progressively logged out, timber companies have
shifted their attention to eastern Indonesia and Papua. The most extensive
remaining forests are in Papua. The Indonesian government has zoned some
22 million hectares of Papuan forest as 'production forest'. Of the over 11
million hectares given to 65 logging companies, four million are in Papua's
remaining intact forests - areas that conservationists are calling
'Paradise forests' (see box).
"Unless large-scale logging concessions are stopped, Papua's forests are
doomed", said Christian Poerba, FWI's director. There is little monitoring
of logging operations, particularly in remote locations, and companies
often log illegally outside their concessions. So much larger areas are
logged than permitted under their licences. Logging trails made by
concessionaires also provide access for other illegal logging operations.
Papuan forest figures
Population of West Papua 2,380,980[1]
Population growth rate/year 3.22%
Area of West Papua 40.8 million ha [2]
Area under Forestry Dept control 39.7 million ha [3]
Marine protected areas 1.9 million ha
(included in above)
Area of state forest 36.8 million ha
Area of Protected Forest 8.1 million ha [4]
Area of Protection Forest 9.1 million ha [5]
Area of Production Forest (total) 22.4 million ha [6]
zoned for conversion 9.3 million ha
zoned as Limited Production Forest 3.7 million ha
zoned for production 9.9 million ha
Area granted as logging concessions 11.6 million ha (65
companies) [7]
Area of concession areas consisting of 1.7 million ha [8]
badly damaged secondary forest (2000)
Official forest cover 32.3 million ha[9]
Intact forest 17.9 million ha (45% of
Papua's forests)[10]
Forest which is not allocated to concessions 13.8 million ha (30% of
Papua's forests)[11]
Legal log production Papua province (2004) 373,869m3 [12]
Legal log production West Irian Jaya (2004) 356,437m3
Merbau logs leaving Papua per month (2004) over 300,000m3 [13]
Notes:
1. Sensus Pertanian BPS 2003
2. Forest Planning Agency (Baplan) 2005 Report, calculated from satellite
imagery analysis from 2002/2003 data
3. Baplan forest zoning 1999-2004
4. ibid
5. ibid
6. Baplan 2004, http://www.dephut.go.id/INFORMASI/INFPROP/Inf-Irja.PDF
7. Baplan 2005 report
8. Baplan 2004, op cit
9. Baplan 2005, op cit
10. FWI
11. FWI
12. Department of forestry, Bina Produksi, most recent available figures
13. The Last Frontier, EIA/Telapak, Feb 2005
Threats to 'Paradise forests'
Greenpeace's flagship, Rainbow Warrior, arrived in Jayapura in March as
part of its campaign to save the 'Paradise forests' of the Asia-Pacific
from illegal and destructive logging. It then sailed along the Papuan coast
and docked in Jakarta in April, where activists met forestry minister Kaban
and environment minister Witoelar. Their message was that forest
degradation and destruction threaten the livelihoods of West Papua's 2
million population and its wealth of flora and fauna (see box).
"A handful of companies have wiped out much of Indonesia's forests. They
must be stopped from finishing off our last intact forests in Papua. The
Indonesian government must put in place a moratorium on large-scale
commercial logging activities in the intact forest landscapes of Indonesia,
starting with Papua, until national and local forestry policies have been
reviewed, proper landscape planning has been conducted and a significant
increase in protected areas have been established," said Emmy Hafild,
Executive Director of Greenpeace Southeast Asia.
If the Indonesian government is serious about controlling illegal logging,
it should carefully monitor the activities of the six large wood-processing
plants in West Papua which handle all the timber felled by the logging
companies. When the Rainbow Warrior visited Sorong, activists watched
plywood from the Henrison Iriana mill, a subsidiary of Kayu Lapis Indonesia
(KLI) - one of Indonesia's largest logging companies, being loaded onto two
ships. The shipments of 9,000 cubic metres of timber - equivalent to more
than 2,500 trees - were destined for Korea, Japan and the US.
Greenpeace has handed this information and other data that shows companies
with large-scale concessions to have broken forestry regulations and
destroyed forests to the Forestry Department and Environment Ministry and
is pressing them to take action. It also presented KLI with its 'Golden
Chainsaw Award' and plans to target international buyers in a campaign to
stop them buying KLI wood, which is exported mostly to the US, Japan,
Canada and Netherlands.
Papua’s rich biodiversity
The island of New Guinea - of which West Papua is the western part - has
one of the largest areas of intact forest remaining on earth. These forests
have huge biodiversity and a high proportion of the plants and animals
found there are unique to the island.
Researchers from Indonesia, America and Australia discovered dozens of
completely new species of plants and animals in the Foja Mountains early
this year, including four butterflies, five palms, twenty frogs, two
lizards and a bird - the orange-faced honeyeater. They also found a type of
tree kangaroo previously only known from one mountain in PNG and took the
first photos of a six-wired bird of paradise and the golden-fronted
bowerbird. Co-leader of the expedition, Conservation International's Bruce
Beehler described it as "as close to the Garden of Eden as you're going to
find on Earth".
The Papuan conservation office now wants the 1.7 million ha Foja-Mamberamo
area of forest to become a National Park. CI has had a conservation
management programme in the Mamberamo basin for a couple of years. The
customary guardians of this forest, the Kwerba and Papasena people, are
(according to CI) keen to work with the conservation agencies.
(Source: Conservation International press release 7/Feb/06; CenPos
8/Feb/06)
Political incentives for change
Greenpeace is one of many CSOs calling for small-scale community logging as
an alternative to large-scale concessions in West Papua. They point to PNG
and the Solomon Islands as models of forest policy which respect indigenous
rights while meeting local communities' needs. An Ecoforestry Forum, in
which WWF-Sahel plays a leading role, has held meetings and field visits to
PNG over several years to explore the possibilities for Papua. Forestry
officials from Jakarta and Papua have been working together on a new policy
for Papua's forests incorporating these inputs since September 2005. The
political need for this is obvious for several reasons. Papuans are
increasingly aware that while their rich natural resources - minerals and
fisheries, as well as forests - make the biggest contribution to state
revenues, they remain in poverty. In 1999, for example, production by
industrial timber concessions in the Province reached 4.98 million m3,
according to Forestry Department statistics. This would have generated
approximately US$250 million in forest revenues (PSDH), plus an additional
US$65 million in money for the national Reforestation Fund (DR). The
reality is that extensive tracts of Papua's forests still have a high
potential for timber extraction. Yet if a map of community land use is
overlaid with the zoning for large-scale forest exploitation, the potential
for further conflict in West Papua is immediately apparent.
The issue of who has the authority to determine forestry use has been a
bone of contention since Indonesia introduced regional autonomy in 2001 -
the more so in West Papua where Jakarta dragged its heels in implementing
Special Autonomy.
In particular, there was no legal clarity over local concessions for
co-operatives in the transition to decentralisation. According to Jakarta's
interpretation of the national Forestry Act (No 41/1999), the only legal
basis for communities to access timber was the 20 m3 per family allowed by
regulation PP34/2002. Meanwhile, the Papuan authorities issued community
logging permits (IPKMA) to cooperatives (Kopermas) which they considered
legal, with the intention of increasing economic opportunities for
indigenous Papuans - in line with Special Autonomy.
Matters came to a head when central government launched Operation Hutan
Lestari II to curb 'illegal logging'. All community logging licences were
withdrawn, leaving communities with no legal alternative to generate income
from their forests. Marthen Kayoi, a senior Papuan forestry official, was
charged with violating forestry law and detained for three weeks (see DTE
65:12-14, http://dte.gn.apc.org/65FOR.HTM). In February 2006, the court
dismissed the cases against him - Jakarta and Jayapura have now agreed that
issuing IPKMA was outside the definition of 'illegal logging'.
Challenges
Forestry officials from local and central government have had to confront
several other dilemmas in their attempts to redefine Papua's forest policy
over the last eight months.
Papua's governor and other elected representatives are keen to improve
people's livelihoods and timber is the most obvious marketable product to
generate higher incomes. However, selling Papua's resources quickly and
cheaply to outsiders is a political bombshell: forests are a resource that
must be protected for future generations. Meanwhile, Jakarta must face up
to the fact that, under Special Autonomy, there is no 'state forest' in
Papua as it all comes under the definition of community land. On the other
hand, it does not want to set the precedent of granting logging rights to
indigenous communities. Both sides recognise the need to avoid the problems
of IPKMA permits, and to improve the Kopermas system (see box).
A radical forest policy
The result of the negotiations is a new forest policy for Papua with a
sustainable system of forest management units (KPHP) based on river
basins/watersheds (DAS) and adat territories. This means that the zoning of
Papuan forests, imposed by Jakarta in the Suharto era, will have to be
renegotiated.
Customary rights (adat) are a central element, partly because they can
operate at a very small-scale: most clans (the smallest adat unit) control
around 100 hectares. Another reason is that special autonomy legislation
recognises adat. So one of the challenges now becomes how logging of adat
forests can be supported legally. The most likely vehicle is a Perdasus -
provincial legislation under the Special Autonomy law (No21/2001).
The draft Papuan forestry regulation gives Papuan communities the rights to
manage small-scale logging businesses, similar to those in PNG. It will
also bring Papua into line with the likely requirements for Voluntary
Partnership Agreements (VPAs) which European Union member states will soon
be negotiating with Indonesia as a means of stamping out the trade in
illegal timber. It is, in many respects, a unique and ambitious policy
instrument.
Firstly, a Perdasus has significant status. Unlike the usual local
regulations (Perda), they can be issued without an Operating Regulation
(PP) being issued at national level under Indonesian law. The only other
Perdasus issued to date has been the one to establish the Papuan People’s
Assembly (MRP), now the highest authority in Papua. The only other Perdasus
issued to date has been the one to establish the Papuan People's Assembly
(MRP), now the highest authority in Papua.
Secondly, this regulation has far-reaching powers, providing the basis for
the renegotiation of land allocation between communities and large-scale
investors. It mandates the mapping of customary land; the recognition of
customary institutions; and the involvement of Papuan people in all aspects
of forest management, from planning to harvesting. Other progressive
elements include the requirement for transparency in decision-making about
licences; mechanisms for consultations with communities before land is
allocated; an Ombudsman to investigate complaints; other mediation
procedures; and third party audits.
Thirdly, central government and logging companies with an interest in
long-term sustainable forest management have, so far, welcomed the
proposal. Only 23 HPH are still operational in West Papua. The rest are
stagnant or bankrupt. This partly reflects escalating conflict with local
communities in the absence of adequate land administration. Others have
lost out to hit-and-run operators. So a key argument behind the Perdasus is
that it works to provide legal certainty for all involved - security of
livelihoods for communities, security of investment (and incentive for SFM)
for concessions, as well as security of revenues for government. It remains
to be seen whether the forestry minister is prepared to do away with the
production forest zoning which the new policy implies.
Strengthening local institutions
The proposed regulation will be meaningless unless politicians in Jakarta
stop using West Papua's resources as their personal bargaining chips. Even
as forestry officials were striving to reach agreement over the final form
of the new policy, a massive deal to sell Papuan timber to China was
announced (see FDI section, above).
The Papuan forestry service will also need to be strengthened if it is to
implement the new Perdasus successfully. This includes substantial capacity
building and service provision to communities in mapping and managing their
forest resources. Illegal military control over forest resources is another
barrier to sustainable forest management which must be eliminated.
Last, but not least, the Papuan people need a good understanding of their
legal rights. International governments and organisations that want to
protect Papuan forests should therefore look to developing strong civil
society organisations, not stop at marvelling at new species in the 'lost
world' of West Papua.
(Sources: Reuter 1/Mar/06; Greenpeace press release 15/Mar/2006, 12/Apr/06;
Antara 12/Apr/06; Kompas 15/Apr/06; Jakarta Post 21/Apr/06)
IPKMA: small but not beautiful
The more than 300 community logging co-operatives (Kopermas) set up in West
Papua since the late 1990s have been widely blamed for increasing forest
destruction. However, some of the problems derive from the very nature of
the local (IPKMA) logging permits.
IPKMA cover an area of 1,000 hectares, but this is far too large for a
traditional Papuan community to manage. So many joined up with logging
companies owned by local entrepreneurs. A second problem is that all IPKMA
were originally issued for forest zoned for conversion. So, from the start,
they were seen as a tool for forest clearance rather than sustainable
forest management. Also, these one-year licences were issued to any
community group or adat leader who signed the contract. The only condition
was that the business institution or 'co-operative' registered with the
local co-operatives office by completing a form.
The nature of the co-operative, including its capacity to manage forests,
was not a criterion for receiving an IPKMA from the local forestry office.
The following year, the co-operative could get another IPKMA - regardless
of whether it had logged legally or illegally - and there was nothing to
stop a co-operative holding several licences at once.
Some co-operatives were completely fictitious and others became a means for
powerful elites to get access to valuable timber under the guise of 'Papuan
communities'. Many illegal operations were backed or run by the police and
military. The community cut timber - willingly or unwillingly - and sold
this to the military who then declared it legal. The amount received by
local communities was usually a tiny fraction of the timber's value on the
international market.
- ---
Subscription information for DTE:
DOWN TO EARTH is the newsletter of the International Campaign for
Ecological Justice in Indonesia. If you want to receive the newsletter on a
regular basis, please fill out the form provided. We would welcome
information about your work in the field of environment and development in
Indonesia. Please indicate whether you would prefer printed or email (rtf
file – no graphics) version. (The email version is free of charge).
Name.................................................................
Organisation...............................................................
....................................................
Address....................................................................
...........................................................................
.
The subscription is £10 a year (for printed version) for institutions and
those organisations or individuals who can afford it. Please add equivalent
of £1.50 if paying with non sterling cheque. Please make cheques payable
to Down to Earth and send to Down to Earth, 59 Athenlay Road, London SE15
3EN, UK. Email: dte@gn.apc.org tel/fax: +44 (0) 16977 46266
Down to Earth is a project of the Asia-Pacific Peoples' Environment Network
c/o SAM, 27 Lorong Maktab, 1250 Penang, Malaysia
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Desktop 9.0.6 (Build 6060) - not licensed for commercial use:
www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBRHbA8hVsCeqMjcnGEQK3rQCgvnMfiKuJAMjfJ8PcPl8e6LCRwGQAoOMf
hQH6PnHzJ4nJOZMjORh6nuY/
=L93v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
KABAR IRIAN ("Irian News") www.kabar-irian.com
NOTE: "All items are posted for their news/information content. They are
not necessarily the views of IRJA.org or subscribers. "
To join, leave or change options:
http://www.kabar-irian.com/mailman/listinfo/kabar-irian
or send an email to kabar-irian-request@kabar-irian.com and place in the
subject header SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE (Depending which it is you want to
do). Typing Help as a subject will give more info.