eia up for grabs 2009 press final-1

8/9/2019 Eia Up for Grabs 2009 Press Final-1

1/28

UP FOR GRABSDeforestation and Exploitationin Papuas Plantations Boom


2/28

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSEIA/Telapak thank the Rufford Maurice Laing

Foundation and the Body Shop Foundation for theirsupport. EIA/Telapak also thank the communitygroups, NGOs and individuals in Papua whocontributed to this report.

This report was written and edited by theEnvironmental Investigation Agency and Telapak.

Report design by:www.designsolutions.me.uk

Many thanks to Emmerson Press for the printing ofthis report. (Emmerson Press: +44 (0) 1926 854400)

Printed on recycled paper

November 2009

ISBN: 0-9540768-8-5

INTRODUCTION

PAPUA THE LAST FRONTIER

PAPUAS PLANTATIONS BOOM

FORESTS FOR THE PEOPLE

RECOMMENDATIONS

REFERENCES

1

2

10

22

24

25

CONTENTS

ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY (EIA)

62/63 Upper Street, London N1 0NY, UKTel: +44 (0) 20 7354 7960Fax: +44 (0) 20 7354 7961email: [email protected]

www.eia-international.org

FRONT COVER:

Oil palm replacing forest in Modan, Sorong,

West Papua, April 2009. The plantation has

not received relevant permits.

EIA/Telapak

TELAPAK

Jalan Pajajaran No. 54, Bogor, IndonesiaTel: +62 251 393 245 /715 9909Fax: +62 251 393 246email: [email protected]

www.telapak.org

TERMINOLOGY

In this report the term Papua applies to the Indonesianpart of the island of New Guinea. Papua Province andWest Papua Province refer to the two provinces whichmake up Papua. The term district refers to local regenciesor kabupatens, the local administrative units which makeup a province.

For Land Areas:1 hectare (ha) = 2.47 Acres / 10,000 M2/ 0.01KM2/0.0038 Square Miles. For an idea of what this means,30,000 hectares is equivalent to the size of Malta,300,000 hectares is roughly three times the size of HongKong, and 1 million hectares is roughly the size of Cyprus.

Jayapura

Merauke

Mimika

Manokwari

Jakarta

Sorong

I N D O N E S I A

M A L A Y S I A

BRUNEI

KALIMANTAN

SUMATRA

JAVA


3/28

The unique forests of Papua are undersiege from the rampant spread of plantations.Up to five million hectares of land have

been targeted for conversion to growcrops like oil palm, with the projectedglobal demand for biofuels driving muchof this conversion.

At stake is a major part of the last tropicalforest wilderness in the entire Asia-Pacific

region. Papuas forests host an amazingarray of biodiversity, provide livelihoodsfor indigenous communities and are a vitalcarbon store.

The plantations boom in Papua is beingpromoted by the Indonesian governmentas a means of bringing development toPapua, and as a means of helping to curbclimate change through increased use of

biofuels. Neither of these claims stand upto close scrutiny.

Field investigations by the EnvironmentalInvestigation Agency (EIA) and Telapak

reveal that in fact ill-prepared indigenousPapuan communities are being enticed,tricked and sometimes coerced intoreleasing large swathes of forested land

to powerful conglomerates, backed byoverseas investors and facilitated by thecentral and provincial governments.

Management of the plantations sector inPapua is chaotic. Unclear institutionalarrangements between different levels andagencies of government, coupled with achronic lack of transparency, create greyareas which the plantation companies areable to exploit. It is virtually impossible to

get reliable figures from the governmentas to which plantation licences have beengranted to which companies. In someareas firms have begun operations beforereceiving the necessary permits.

Evidence shows that negotiations betweenindigenous land owners and plantationcompanies are unequal and exploitative.Promised benefits, such as schooling,electricity and houses are seldom delivered.Compensation payments for land and

timber are meagre. Children as young asfour are required to sign contracts so that

the firm can ensure it ties the land up fordecades. It is the well-connected

conglomerates and overseas investors whostand to capture the financial benefits ofthe massive plantation expansion, and notthe Papuans.

The notion that the planned increase inpalm oil production for biofuels willsomehow assist efforts to tackle climatechange is illusory. Felling Papuasforests on the planned scale will causefar greater greenhouse gas emissions thanany potential biofuel benefits. Given thata fifth of greenhouse gas emissions arecaused by deforestation, the fate ofPapuas forests is of global concern.

The government of Indonesia deservescredit for taking decisive action to tackleillegal logging over the last few years.

The tide was turned by an unprecedentedenforcement operation in Papua in 2005.

Yet its policy on plantations now poses agreater threat to Papuas forests thanillegal logging.

An urgent review of the plantations sectorin Papua is needed, and policies put inplace to safeguard the needs of localcommunities and to protect the remainingforests, rather than the current destructive

land grab.

EIA/TelapakNovember 2009

1

E

IA/Telap

ak,

April2009

INTRODUCTIONABOVE:Oil palm seedling nurseries,

like Medco Groups in

Manokwari, above, are

springing up across Papua

as plantations spread.


4/28

2

Papuas unique forests form part ofthe last substantial tracts of intacttropical forest in the whole of the Asia-Pacific region, and the third largestremaining tropical forest wilderness in

the world, after the Amazon and CongoBasin. As such Papuas forests are of

global significance.Indonesias forests once stretched fromSumatra in the west to Papua in theeast. Yet rampant deforestation over thelast two decades has decimated theseforests, with massive illegal logging,unsustainable legal logging and therapid expansion of oil palm andindustrial timber plantations takingplace. The fate of Indonesias forestshas been dubbed an environmental crimeon an epic scale. EIA/Telapak havedocumented how the once vast forestsof Sumatra and Kalimantan have been

pillaged by rapacious logging andplantation barons facilitated by corruptpolice, military and government officials,

with exploitation increasingly shifting toPapua and West Papua provinces.

Papuas forests harbour an incrediblearray of unique biodiversity, approximately60 per cent of that found anywhere inIndonesia.1 In recent years these forestshave been described as a garden ofEden after international teams ofexplorers discovered a host of speciesnew to science and the world.

These forests are also home to over 250distinct tribal groups, some of the mostculturally and linguistically diversepeoples in the world. These communitieshave managed the forests for generations,

precisely because their daily livelihoodsare inextricably linked to the forestresources. Papuas forests also containliterally hundreds of millions of tonsof carbon.

Yet the unique forests of Papua are

increasingly imperilled by Indonesiangovernment policies aiming to convertmillions of hectares into monocultureplantations, prompting a huge land grab

by notorious conglomerates backed upby shadowy overseas investors.

FORESTS AND CLIMATE CHANGE

As global attention increasingly focuseson the threat of climate change, theimportance of preserving forests has

become more urgent. Forests sequesterhuge volumes of carbon from the

atmosphere, while carbon emissionsfrom deforestation and land use changecurrently produce up to 20 per cent ofglobal carbon emissions. In 2000deforestation worldwide generated eight

billion tons of carbon dioxide (CO2)emissions.2 It is now recognised that anyefforts to limit dangerous temperatureincreases are bound to fail if deforestationcontinues at the current rate.

Indonesia is a prime example of thisdynamic. With one of the worlds worstdeforestation rates, averaging at around

two million hectares a year in the first

half of the decade, the country has thethird largest CO2 emissions in the worldafter China and the U.S. Up to 75 percent of these emissions stem fromdeforestation. In 2007, forest loss and

ABOVE:Forest slated for conversion to oil

palm for PT. Matoa Rimba Lestaris

plantation in Urunum Guay District,

Papua Province, September 2009.

E

IA/Telapak

PAPUA - THE LAST FONTIER


5/28

3

land use change in Indonesia caused

2.56 billion tonnes of CO2 emissions nearly 32 per cent of global emissionsfrom these sources.3

Recent research indicates that Indonesiais highly vulnerable to the likelyimpacts of climate change. The AsianDevelopment Bank predicts that SouthEast Asian countries such as Indonesia

will suffer far worse impacts fromclimate change than other areas of the

world, and has estimated that inactionin Indonesia could cost 6.7 per cent ofGDP by 2100, compared with an averageglobal cost of 2.6 per cent.4 In terms of

South-East Asia, the Indonesian islandof Java is highly vulnerable to theimpacts of climate change, such aslandslides, floods and droughts, with

the capital Jakarta at particular risk.5

THE BIOFUELS CONTRADICTION

Rather than implementing policies toreduce deforestation and better serve

the needs of local communities, theIndonesian government is pressingahead with industrial-scale plantations,certain to provoke even higher emissions.

To a large extent this policy is beingdriven by projected demand for biofuels,

which have been heavily promoted bythe international community as the basisfor renewable green energy.

Indonesia is seeking to cash in on thisnew demand, and investors are rushing

in to secure land banks to produce thegreen-gold, as biofuel feed stocks likeoil palm and other crops are commonlydescribed. Indeed, Indonesias statedgoal of biodiesel providing 5 per cent of

ABOVE AND LEFT:Burning forests for oil palm

plantations, as in Samarinda,East Kalimantan (pictured), has

resulted in Indonesia becoming

the third largest source of

carbon emissions, with 75%

stemming from deforestation.

Demand for biofuels is

hastening such deforestation

in Papua.

E

IA/Telapak

E

IA/Telapak


6/28

4

domestic fuel consumption by 2025, willrequire around 1.4 million hectares ofnew oil palm plantations alone.6 Supplyinga significant share of projected globaldemand for oil palm or other sources of

biofuels, as Indonesia is planning to do,will dramatically increase the area givenover to plantations.

An October 2009 report by the UnitedNations Environment Programme(UNEP) found that: 95 per cent of theincreased production of palm oil inMalaysia and Indonesia was driven by thegrowing demand for biodiesel, and thattwo-thirds of the current expansion ofpalm oil cultivation in Indonesia is basedon the conversion of rainforests. UNEPsummed up as follows: If current trendscontinue, in 2030 the total rainforestarea of Indonesia will have been reduced

by 29 per cent as compared to 2005, andwould only cover about 49 per cent of itsoriginal area from 1990. 7

Indonesias National Climate ChangeCouncil recognises that the countryscarbon emissions are expected to jump

by two per cent per annum, reaching3.6 gigatons by 2030, and hasrecommended a halt to deforestation toavert this increase.8Yet the Indonesian

government still claims biofuelsproduction will not mean deforestation.

At a public meeting in Jakarta in 2007 todiscuss the findings of the Stern Reviewon the Economics of Climate Change,

the Secretary General of the Ministry ofForestry stated: In terms of biofuel thegovernment will use already convertedland or bare land. It will not use naturalforest. Environment Minister Rachmat

Witolaer concurred, claiming Indonesiawill not sacrifice any trees to develop

biofuel plantations. Such statementsare at odds with realities on the groundin Papua.

POLITICS ANDFORESTRY IN PAPUA

In 2001 the government of Indonesialaunched special autonomy for Papua,developed as an alternative to theprotracted independence struggle thathas divided the two sides for decades.Despite this progressive policy,numerous reports point to ongoingconflict, increased militarisation, anda ban on foreign journalists.

Under the spirit of special autonomyprovincial governments could explicitlyprotect the rights of indigenous Papuans

to own and manage their land, resourcesand assets. Yet this aim has still to be

realised. Vital regulations -Perdasi andPerdasus required to translate the spiritof special autonomy into real changes in

the lives of Papuans have not beeneffectively implemented, eight yearsafter the autonomy law was passed. In

this void Papuas natural resources arestill controlled by outside interests.

A plethora of overlapping agencies andoffices at the local, provincial andnational levels now regulate Papuasforestry and natural resources,including its current plantations boom.

With poor communication between these

multiple institutions, bureaucraticinexperience, and corruption, theregulatory framework governingPapuas plantations sector is chaoticand non-transparent.

CLIMATE IMPACTS OF PALM OIL

Recent research shows how converting forests into oil palm plantations forbiofuel actually worsens climate change. A pilot study in Sumatra and Kalimantanlooked at the emissions from land clearing and oil palm cultivation and processing,compared with potential climate benefits of the biofuel produced. Oil palm wasfound to store less than 40 tonnes biomass on average over a 25 year lifespan.Logged-over forest stored 70-200 tonnes carbon per hectare. Untouched forests

contain even more, sometimes in excess of 400 tonnes per hectare.

The report showed that clearing even logged-over forest for oil palm results in aclear carbon debt more greenhouse gas emissions are produced than avoided.It recommends limiting conversion for oil palm to land with less than 40 tonnesof carbon stock per hectare; meaning shrubland or grasslands.9

BELOW:Peoples Representative Council,

Jayapura, Papua Province.

Unclear regulations on land use

and forestry under special autonomy

have produced a legal black hole

easily exploited by investors and

political interests.

E

IA/Telapak


7/28

5

The lack of clear regulations on land useand forestry has produced a legal blackhole which is being exploited by investorsand those with political interests inPapua. Responding to this, in June 2008Papuas main NGO coalition, Foker LSMPapua, and EIA/Telapak called for a halt

to new forestry and plantations dealsuntil Perdasi and Perdasus on forestry,land rights and natural resources wereimplemented in ways which protected

the rights and interests of indigenousPapuans.10Yet the deals and land grabshave continued.

ILLEGAL LOGGING IN PAPUA

Indonesias poor track record of forestgovernance and rampant illegal loggingis well documented11As the forests ofSumatra and Kalimantan have beendecimated by years of over production,illegal logging and corruption, thecountrys untouchable timber bosseshave increasingly turned their attention

to Papua.

Between 2000 and 2005 massive illegallogging and timber smuggling activitiesfocusing on merbau timber in Papua led

to 300,000 cubic metres of logs flowingunimpeded to China every month for theflooring sector. This was a billion dollara year racket coordinated by internationalcriminal syndicates facilitated bycorrupt officials and security apparatusat the highest levels. In Indonesia

commercial stocks of merbau are onlyfound in Papua. Papuans were beingrobbed, typically receiving just US$ 10for timber fetching over US$ 250 inChina and sold as flooring for US$ 2, 288in the EU. Corrupt military officials were

taking US$ 50 per cubic metre to ensure

that illegal log shipments left thecountry unhindered.12

To its credit the Indonesian governmentof President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyonoled an effective crackdown on illegallogging in 2005, but none of the bigplayers have been successfullyprosecuted. Instead of taking on thecriminals, the government revokedmost community forestry permits.

A study into corruption in Papuasforestry sector found that local Papuansreceive less than five per cent of theUS$ 400 million overall value of thelogging industry.13

Since 2005 Papuas provincialgovernment has tried to introduce araft of measures designed to channel

the value of Papuas forests to Papuans,including a prohibition on shipments oflogs out of Papua to encourage local

timber processing industries. Thegovernor of Papua Province has pledged

to return the forest to the peopleunder special autonomy laws on forestryand land rights.

Yet central government policies stillpromote heavy logging of merbau withfew benefits for local Papuans. In 2008,following EIA/Telapak reports ofcontinued smuggling by merbau traders,

the Ministry of Trade gave those samesmugglers special dispensations tocircumvent export rules for merbau,and subsequently weakened the law on

exports of merbau, but no otherspecies.14 In 2008, merbau made upabout 15 per cent of Indonesias entireregistered timber harvest volume. Over2007 and 2008, merbau made up anaverage 31.4 per cent of Indonesias

total woodworking exports.15

BELOW:Illegal merbau logs seized in 2005

are guarded by Kostrad Special

Forces border troops prior to

shipment from Haltekamp, Jayapura,

Papua Province, in June 2007.

E

IA/Telapak


8/28

THE PUSH FORPLANTATION EXPANSION

As the price of oil increased rapidlyfrom 2005 the Indonesian economy wasinfluenced in two ways. President

Yudhoyono was forced to make politicallypainful domestic fuel subsidy cuts, andcrude palm oil (CPO) prices boomed.Consequently, during 2006 and 2007,

while Indonesia was gearing up to hostthe United Nations FrameworkConvention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)conference in Bali, the government rolled

out an ambitious long term programmeof plantations expansion, focused largelyon oil palm, with a major biofuelsdevelopment strand. The plan targets anexpansion of oil palm nationwide fromsix million to twenty million hectares.

By early 2007 a range of policies had beenlaunched to accelerate this programme,including Presidential Decree 5/2006 onNational Energy Policy and PresidentialInstruction 1/2006 on supply and utilizationof biofuel, both of which establishedambitious targets for significantlyincreased domestic biofuels consumption

requirements. The government alsopassed a major new law designed toattract more foreign investment, andissued instructions to provincialgovernments to simplify plantation landuse permits.16 In the same year Indonesiafinally reached its avowed goal ofsurpassing Malaysia to become the

worlds biggest palm oil producer.

To accommodate its ambitious plantationexpansion plan the government specificallylooked to Papua, launching various lawsand major projects seeking to enticeplantations investors there. The February

2007 regulation on plantation licensingprocesses dramatically increased the areaof land that one company can exploit perprovince, from 20,000 to 100,000 ha,

but dictated that the limit of the size ofplantation business areas in PapuaProvince shall be twice the maximumlimit 19 In the same year a PresidentialInstruction to expedite the developmentprocess in Papua was released.20

In May 2008 the Director General forPlantations at the Indonesian Ministryof Agriculture stated: "After Sumatraand Kalimantan became too dense for

new palm oil plantations, the only landavailable is in Papua".21 Businesses have

been heeding the call by targeting thelast frontier forests of Papua forplantation expansion.

6

IndonesiaArea Planted (000 ha)CPO Production (000 tonnes)CPO Exports (000 tonnes)

Major MarketsIndia:China:Netherlands:

MalaysiaArea Planted (000 ha)CP0 Production (000 tonnes)CPO Exports (000 tonnes)

Major MarketsChina:India:Netherlands:Pakistan:

2000

4,1587,0014,110

1,639438593

3,37710,8428,140

1,0091,9464891,025

2005

5,45411,86210,376

901493383

4,05114,96213,192

2,8821,1471,239890

2008

7,00818,09014,650

4,48817,73415,300

FROM ILLEGAL LOGGING TO OIL PALM

Some of the characters involved in Indonesias rapidly-expanding oilpalm sector have dubious business backgrounds. A prime example isformer parliament member Abdul Rasyid. In 1999 EIA/Telapakrevealed how Rasyid was behind the systematic theft of valuable

timber from Tanjung Puting National Park in Central Kalimantan.17

Rasyids activities led him to be listed as one of the biggest illegallogging bosses in the country by the Ministry of Forestry. Despitethis Rasyid was never prosecuted and has now reinvented himself asa palm oil tycoon. Through his oil palm company PT Citra BorneoIndah Rasyid has acquired a land bank of around 50,000 ha, aroundhis stronghold of Pangkalanbun in the south of Central Kalimatan,

worth around $200 million once the oil palms become productive.This land acquisition has been part-funded by loans from BankNegara Indonesia. Rasyid continues to profit from high-levelconnections. A ceremony to break ground on one of his plantations

was attended by the then Minister of Agriculture Anton Apriantono,media tycoon Surya Paloh and the governor of Central Kalimantan. 18

E

IA/Telapak

Sources:- Production Figures: Ministry of Agriculture 2009; Malaysian Palm Oil Board 2009.

cited in Palm Oil: The Sustainable Oil, World Growth, September 2009- Trade Data: FAO & USDA

Indonesia & Malaysia CPOProduction & Trade 20002008

LEFT:Untouchable timber criminals like Abdul Rasyid,

left, are supported by the highest echelons of

Indonesias government when reinventing

themselves as legitimate plantations operators.


9/28

NATURAL RESOURCES ANDDEVELOPMENT IN PAPUA WHO BENEFITS?

As well as holding the Asia Pacificregions largest forests, Papua is

blessed with an abundant wealth of

natural resources, including huge volumesof precious timber, gold, copper, nickel,coal, gas and other resources. The

worlds biggest copper and gold mine,PT Freeport McMoRan, is located incentral Papua and is Indonesias biggest

taxpayer, contributing US$1.7 billion tothe state in 2007.

Yet despite being rich in resources thepopulation of Papua lags far behind therest of Indonesia in terms of humandevelopment. Papua and West Papuaprovinces suffer some of the lowestHuman Development Index (HDI) scores

in the country, with a 2005 score of 62.1against a national average of 69.6.22

According to the government of PapuaProvince, in 2007 some 486,857households representing 80 per cent ofPapuans still live in poverty. A 2005United Nations Development Programme(UNDP) report found that Papua has

the lowest level of adult literacy in thenation, standing at 74.4 per cent. Thereport added that only 47 per cent ofchildren in Papua attend junior secondaryschool, and only 19 per cent attendsenior secondary school.

UNDP also estimated that the regionhad only one doctor for every 2,000 23,000 people, depending on location.23

Given Papuas disproportionatesusceptibility to HIV/AIDS this is aparticularly serious problem. Papua has

the second highest HIV/AIDS infectionrate in the country after the capital

Jakarta. Without intensive intervention,HIV/AIDS infection is estimated to grow

to 7 per cent of the population by 2025,a rate widely considered to be epidemicand unsustainable by experts.24

These human development indicesillustrate that despite decades ofnatural resource exploitation in Papuafew of the benefits have trickled down

to the local communities. Given the pasttrack record, the chances of Papuansbenefiting from the plantations boomseem remote.

While oil palm plantations do indeed

create jobs, the scale of the plannedexpansion will create a need for farmore workers than the currentpopulation of Papua can provide. Indeed,in July 2007, the Minister for NationalPlanning, Paskah Suzetta, said that theplantations investment and developmentplan for Papua would mean there will

be many more people coming intoPapua, not just from other provinces,

but also from other countries. So thepeople of Papua must be prepared. 25

EIA/Telapak analysis shows that thevolume of jobs created by the massive

7

BELOW:Despite the huge wealth

generated from Papuas natural

resources, only 47% of children

attend junior secondary school,

and merely 19% attend senior

secondary school.

E

IA/Telapak


10/28

plantations expansion in Papua couldresult in Papuans being marginalised bymillions of new migrants. One millionhectares of oil palm requires 333,000

workers - more than double the 135,000unemployed in Papua. With thegovernment planning at least five millionhectares of plantations, a huge influx ofmigrant workers could take place, with

the potential to greatly reduce the ethnicPapuan proportion of the population.Such a change will undoubtedly resultin marginalisation and alienation ofindigenous Papuans in their own land,likely leading to conflict.

With a history of systemic corruption,Indonesias natural resources sectorhas traditionally seen the countrysmassive riches largely captured bypolitical, commercial and military elites.Despite strong actions by the Anti-Corruption Commission (KomisiPembarantasan Korupsi) since 2005,a recent Transparency Internationalstudy into corruption in the loggingindustry indicated that 60 per cent of

business people still admit to payingbribes to Indonesian officials in order toacquire licences.26

This revenue capture is particularlypronounced in Papua. A 2008 reportsummarising the complex political,social, security and environmentalissues in Papua highlighted the negativeimpacts of natural resource exploitation:

Up to the present, national economicdevelopment in Papua has concentratedon the exploitation of its naturalresources. This is regarded as havingignored the wishes and the rights of

the indigenous population to theirtraditional land. Taking peoples landfor economic programmes has led toconflicts between the owners of theland and the companies as well as thegovernment. When these conflictsoccur, the security forces alwaysdefend the interests of the companiesor the government. 27

Overall government funds are alsocertain to rise from tax and otherplantation company revenues. While this

will in turn bring potential benefits toPapuans, there are serious concerns

that provincial and district governmentsin Papua are using special autonomyfunds unwisely, or corruptly, and haveso far failed to provide real benefits forPapuans. Although increased provincial

budgets for Papua and West Papuahave been made available by Jakarta,

there is growing evidence thatsubstantial amounts have beensquandered. One senior West PapuaProvince official recently claimed thatRp 30 trillion (US$ 3 billion) had beensquandered on government offices andofficials through incompetence, andexpressed regret that the anti corruptionagency (KPK) had not fully investigated

the provinces.28

8

S

PKKAM,

November2007

BELOW:Marind Tribe members in Bade,

Boven Digul. Most rural

Papuans still rely on forestresources for their livelihoods.

OPPOSITE PAGE

TOP:Illegal logging in Wasur

National Park, Merauke,

January 2006.

BOTTOM:Forest Cover in Papua in 2006.


11/28

At the local level government officialsare being targeted by powerfulcompanies which preach the economic

benefits of oil palm plantations in termsof local government revenue anddevelopment. Often it is an unequalnegotiation. Even more unequal is thelobbying done by companies to persuadelocal communities to sign away theirland for promised revenue and a host of

benefits. Field investigations byEIA/Telapak reveal a catalogue of

broken promises and pitiful paymentsfor land rights

The government itself foresaw theseproblems in a 1998 review ofagricultural development in Papua,

which stated: To take deliberately themost negative scenario, once theprovince becomes more attractive toinvestors there will be a rush ofapplications for oil palm and otherestate crops and for timber plantations.Unless management of implementationimproves, there will be outbreaks ofmalaria and other diseases, rampantpoaching of the unique wildlife andother forest products, disruption of thehydrological cycle, and alienation of theindigenous peoples. 29

Over ten years later investigations byEIA/Telapak reveal that these fears arenow becoming reality.

F

orestWatchIndonesia(FWI),

2006

9

E

IA/Telapak

Airport/HarbourBare LandWater BodiesCloudDry Rice LandDry Rice Land Mixed With ScrubFish PondHousingMiningNo DataPlantationPlantation ForestPrimary Dry Land ForestPrimary Mangrove ForestPrimary Swamp ForestRice FieldSavannahScrub LandSecondary Dry Land ForestSecondary Mangrove ForestSecondary Swamp ForestSnow

SwampSwamp ScrublandTransmigrationOcean

Papua Province

West PapuaProvince

Land Cover Papua

LAND COVER TYPE


12/28

10

In April 2007, the governors of Papuaand West Papua provinces announced

they were committed to develop a pilot[REDD] project that encompasses anarea of no less than 500,000 ha. Bothprovinces are committed to reallocate up

to 5 million ha of conversion forest forcarbon trading. 30 REDD stands forreducing emissions from deforestationand forest degradation an ambitious

global plan to assign an economic valueto forests which makes them worthmore standing than felled.

At the UNFCCC climate talks in Bali inDecember 2007, the Governor of PapuaProvince, Barnabas Suebu, announcedhis new forestry policy From Forestsfor Death to Forests for Life. In it heclaimed that Papuas forests would bemanaged sustainably in a way that

would return the forest to the people,tackle land conflict, encourage localtimber industry, and ensure only lowconservation value forest would be used

for plantations and biofuels development.The forests of Papua, he said, werededicated to save planet Earth and thefuture humanity.31 During his speechGovernor Suebu announced he wouldreduce the area of forest marked forconversion in Papua from 20 per cent toonly five per cent, funded by carbon

trading under a future REDD framework.

Yet by the following year suchcommendable aims already appeared to

be unravelling. At a meeting with carbontraders Governor Suebu said:"Papua now has 31.5 million hectares

of forests, 50 percent of which areconservation forests, 20 percent areproduction forests and the remaining 30percent are to be converted for multi-purpose use, including plantations,

agriculture and housing," It seemednine million hectares, the same areaclassified as conversion forest by thecentral government, were still to

be cleared.32

Indeed, since late 2006 governmentofficials in Jakarta and Papua have

been preparing the way for investmentsfrom business tycoons seeking

multi-million dollar land deals for amassive expansion of industrial scaleplantations, mainly for oil palm and

wood pulp production. A brief glance atthe names of some of the key playersinvolved in Papuas plantation boomdemonstrates how wealthy, politically-connected individuals and companies aresecuring huge areas and are set to make

billions of dollars.

EIA/Telapak encountered a chronic lackof transparency, coupled with confusingand overlapping government institutionalarrangements making hard data on just

how much land in Papua has been legallyreleased for conversion to plantationsdifficult to obtain. Research byEIA/Telapak indicates that since late2006 at least five million hectares offorests in Papua have been targeted byplantations companies working with thegovernment, representing a huge landgrab. Not all of the companies seekingland have already established plantations,and not all of the land under negotiation

will be cleared and developed at once.In February 2009, the government ofPapua Province indicated that 89companies had received permission for

plantations, but only ten had begunactivities on the ground.33 Financialconstraints following the global economiccrisis have deterred some of the largeplantation investments in Papua over

PAPUAS PLANTATION BOOMABOVE:Oil Palms replace Mooi tribe

forests in Klamono, within the

plantation of PT Henrison Inti

Persada, a subsidiary of the

Kayu Lapis Indonesia Group,

April 2009.

E

IA/Telapa

k


13/28

the past two yeas, but with economicgrowth picking up in Asia this couldprove to be a temporary respite.

Since early 2007 various governmentplanning and investment maps haveoutlined up to 2.8 million hectares ofplantations in Papua Province alone.Data from the Papua ProvincePlantation Office in 2008 indicatedspecific applications by named investors

targeting at least 2.4 million hectares.Yet, largely additional to this, at leastfive companies have targeted muchlarger areas of between one millionhectares (Sinar Mas, Genting Group,Medco Group & the obscure Api MetraPalma). Such deals have been pursuedlargely behind the scenes.

Major areas being targeted forplantations in Papua Province includeMerauke, Boven Digul & Mappi, areasaround Jayapura (Arso, Lereh, Keerom,Sarmi, etc), Nabire, Mamberamo,

Waropen, and Mimika. In West PapuaProvince, plantation hotspots include,Sorong, South Sorong, Manokwari,Kaimana, and Bintuni.

Previous programs to introduce oil palmplantations in Papua have not beensuccessful, or provided credibledevelopment benefits to local Papuans.In Prafi district, Manokwari, in WestPapua Province, state run company PTPerkebunan Nusantara II (PTPN II), has

been operating since the early 1980s

and has 10,500 ha of planted oil palm.By 2007 local communities had onlyjust begun receiving payments ofRp. 1,000 per kilogramme for oil palmfruits, well below the promised priceand landowners admitted regrettingsigning up to the scheme. In 1996PTPN II opened another oil palmplantation in Keerom district, PapuaProvince. By 2008 local landowners

were receiving just Rp. 300,000 ($30)per month due to difficulties in

transporting the oil palm fruits to theprocessing factory.

EIA/TELAPAK FIELDINVESTIGATIONS

In a bid to document the impacts of theinitial phase of expanding plantationsin Papua, in 2009 EIA/Telapakinvestigators undertook a series of field

visits to six remote regions in Papuaand West Papua provinces whereplantations are being planned or arealready under development.

EIA/Telapak gathered testimony fromlocal communities revealing that realconcrete long term benefits for Papuansare uncertain and rarely contractual.Shockingly low compensation for land,mostly informally paid, is a common trend,as are low to non-existent revenues from

timber clearance. In most areas visitedlocal communities had not discussed theactual detail of concrete compensationand benefit sharing. Such first handaccounts paint a stark picture ofexploitation, coercion and broken promises.

WEST PAPUA PROVINCE

KAYU LAPIS INDONESIA GROUP

Kayu Lapis Indonesia Group (KLI) wasfounded by Gunawan Sutanto but is nowrun by Agus Sutanto. KLI is the biggestforestry and plantations operator in theSorong region of the Birds Head, WestPapua Province. KLI holds a 333,000 ha

logging concession (PT Intimpura TimberCo.), a plywood factory, (PT HenrisonIriana), and now four oil palm plantationcompanies, namely: PT Henrison IntiPersada (HIP), PT Inti Kebun Sejahtera(IKS), PT Inti Kebun Sawit, and PT IntiKebun Lestari. In total the four oil palmsubsidiaries have already secured or areseeking a land area of 142,000 ha forplantations. All of the KLI groupsoperations in the area are on the land of

the Malamooi (or Mooi) tribe, who havebeen in conflict with the company since itcame to Sorong.

11

L

andsat7ETM+images

L

andsat7ETM+images

BELOW LEFT:Forest clearance by PT HIP in 2003,

two years before the company

received a permit

BELOW RIGHT:Forest Clearance by PT HIP by 2009.


14/28

Following the Asian financial crisisof the late 1990s the KLI Group waspermitted by Indonesias FinancialSector Policy Committee to restructureoutstanding debts of US$ 140 million tostate-owned Bank Mandiri, to be paid

back in 2011. Some of its governmentdebt was focused on its oil palmoperations, but most was for itsplywood mills.34

This debt restructuring deal effectivelyincentivizes the government to ensure

the commercial success of KLIs

operations. While owing the stateUS$ 140 million, the company appears

to have avoided prosecution or licenserevocations when violating forestrylaws, and has now embarked on anambitious expansion plan.

In April 2009, EIA/Telapak visited Mooicommunities and met land owners in

two KLI Group plantations; PT HenrisonInti Persada (HIP) in Klamono districtand PT Inti Kebun Sejahtera (IKS) inSalawati district.

PT Henrison Inti PersadaIn Malalis village landowners from theKlasibin, Gilik and Doo clans toldEIA/Telapak how PT HIP firstapproached them in 2004. Based onpromises of payments for schooling,housing, vehicles and other benefits, theKlasibin and Doo clans agreed to releasea total 830 ha of forest to HIP. In 2005

the two clans received just Rp. 20 million(US$ 2,000) each as celebration moneyfor the land.

Villagers told EIA/Telapak that beforefull clearing began in 2006, KLIs logging

company PT Intimpura extracted all ofthe large trees, followed later by acontracted company which cleared all

the remaining trees. No payments weremade for trees below 60 cm diameter.

During conversations with local villagersEIA/Telapak heard how KLI employed arange of underhand techniques to ensure

that the Mooi people release theirresources and land.

In Klawana, EIA/Telapak met MaryodiMalak, who related how HIP hadpersuaded her husband, Kefas Gifim,and son, Manu Gisim, to sign a landrelease document for four hectares offorest they owned. At the time her son

was just four years old well below thelegal age to sign a contract. Mrs Malaksaid of the deal: He gave his signature

when he was four years old. So thiscompany tricked him. PT HIP reportedly

told Mrs Malak that they wanted theson of a clan leader to sign land releasedocuments so that that if the father died

there was proof that the next generationhad entered into the agreement for thefull 25 years, which could be extendedfor another 30 years. Mrs Malak saidshe had never received a copy of thedocument signed by her sons

thumbprint. She also revealed how herrequest to HIP to leave a small area offorest land for her family to support

their livelihoods was not honoured, andthat the company had cleared more thanthe four hectares agreed.

Villagers that EIA/Telapak met inKlamono all agreed that the localgovernment has unwaveringly promoted

the business interests of HIP, whiledoing nothing to protect the interests

of the community during negotiationswith the company. In a 2006 meetingat the district officials (Bupati) officea 12 point plan of issues such as roads,schooling, housing, water, electricity,and other developments sought by thepeople was agreed. Yet the communitiesin Malalis, Klamono and Klawanasaid they had received none of these

benefits when EIA/Telapak met themin April 2009, and have becomeincreasingly frustrated.

These frustrations have led to occasionalblockades by community members who

see their resources being taken withoutadequate permission or compensation.When such conflicts have arisen,company representatives arrive withgovernment officials to placate thecommunities with payments equivalent

to a few hundred dollars. Yet the lackof any written legal contract means

that more conflicts will likely breakout in the absence of an equitable long-

term deal.

Overall, the people felt let down in allof its interactions with the KLI group.Lucas Doo, who had at one point

agreed to lease 400 ha to HIP, said:The oil palm still is the same asIntimpura before. Completely thesame. Tricking the community. Now

we are suffering.

12

ABOVE:Mrs Maryodi Malak and her

six year old son, Manu, survey

deforestation by PT HIP in

Klamono in April 2009.

Manu was forced to sign a

land release document when

he was four years old.

E

IA/Telapak


15/28

Before travelling to the Mooi landsEIA/Telapak had heard some of thehistory of the tribes bad experiences

with the KLI. In September 2006, aformer Secretary General of the Ministryof Forestry revealed how officers from

the Sorong military command hadintimidated Mooi land owners into selling

their timber at drastically reduced pricesto PT Intimpura.35

HIP received a permit from the Ministerof Forestry for a 32,546 ha oil palmplantation in Klamono district in 2006.36

In November of the same year a Ministryof Forestry audit found that Intimpurahad illegally utilized timber cleared from600 ha of land while only having apermit covering 200 ha. The Ministry

tracked the ensuing illegal timber to PTHenrison Iriana, KLIs plywood mill inSorong. KLIs plywood supplies the

Japanese, European and American markets.The Forestry Minister, M S Kaban,recommended that PT Intimpura shouldanswer questions concerning utilizationof illegal timber from 400 ha of land,and instructed the head of the WestPapua Forestry and Agriculture Office

to evaluate and revoke KLIs relevantwood utilization permits.37

In a documentary film released inNovember 2007 by the Sorong-basedNGO Triton, oil palms in PT HIPsconcession were already bearing fruit.

As oil palms take at least three yearsto fruit, the film clearly showed HIP

had been operating its oil palmplantation before all the relevantpermits were acquired.38

Despite such evidence, in December2007 the KLI Group was granted moreMinistry of Forestry permits to harvestover 100,000 cubic metres of timber onover 6,000 ha of the Mooi tribes land,

within the HIP conversion area.39

PT Inti Kebun SejahteraIn April EIA/Telapak met the Masinauand Matowol clans in Ninjimor village,Modan, who said they had released1,340 ha to PT Inti Kebun Sejahtera(IKS), one of KLIs three new plantation

ventures lying to the south of the PTHIP concession.

During discussions EIA/Telapak heardthat in 2003 IKS and the local governmenthad told the villagers that releasing landfor plantations would improve theirlives. The community did not consentand no deals were done. Incessantpressure from local government officialscontinued. In November 2007, the villagehead and land owner Lois Masinau went

to a meeting at the Bupatis office andwas told to accept the deal from IKS asthe Bupati only gives permits to goodcompanies. The previous November theBupati of Sorong, John P. Wanane hadissued a principle permit for three newKLI Group plantations totalling 110,000ha40 and a year later the companyapplied to the provincial forestry officefor Plantation Business Licences for the

three new areas.

Two clans from Ninjimor released forestland on the basis of these governmentrecommendations and the companys

13

BELOW:Lois Masinau, received merely

US$ 1,000 for renting 441 ha of

forest land in Modan to PT IKS,

for an unknown period of time.

BOTTOM:Oil palm seedlings ready to

be planted out for PT IKS

plantation on newly deforested

land, Modan, Sorong, April 2009.

E

IA/Te

lapak,

April2009

E

IA/Telapak


16/28

14

promises of new housing, roads, vehicles,and long term education for local children,as well as revenues from timber harvesting.

Yet the community signed no legalcontract with IKS, KLI, or the government,so none of these incentives are legallyguaranteed. For the 1,340 ha of forest,

the two clans told EIA/Telapak theyhad received merely Rp. 20 million(US$ 2,000) between them, equivalent tounder one and a half dollars per hectare.

They were unaware of the lease length.

On agreeing to release the land, locals

also asked that timber from the clearancebe collected at log ponds, where it couldbe sorted, scaled, graded and auctionedat market price to get the best return. Inresponse IKS told land owners that only

valuable timber, such as merbau, was ofinterest, for which the company wouldpay an average of Rp. 25,000 (US$25)per cubic metre, regardless of species.

This is around a tenth of the marketprice for merbau within Papua. Thecompany then proceeded to sell the

timber off immediately upon forestclearance, without revealing the volumeof valuable timber felled.

From the 300 ha of formerly dense forestalready cleared when the forestry officefinally surveyed the area in September2008, local land owners had received

only Rp. 50 million between them(US$ 5,000) for the timber. At theprice offered by IKS this representsmerely 2,000 cubic metres of timber,equivalent to only 6.6 cubic metres perhectare. Yet KLIs permit to clearforests in the HIP concession, a similarforest area, stipulated a timber densityof 16.5 cubic metres per hectare,indicating communities in Modan have

been deceived.

EIA/Telapak investigations suggestthat IKS has also carried out illegal

land clearing activity similar to thatcommitted by HIP. Meetings with locallandowners affected by IKS operationsalso highlight a pattern of exploitationof the Moi communities, with woefullylow compensation.

In August 2009 government data on oilpalm plans for the Sorong area listedIKS as being in the process of licenceacquisition for 38,300 ha.41WhenEIA/Telapak visited the Modan area in

April 2009 PT IKS was still activelyclearing the forest, having far exceeded

the 300 ha cleared by September 2008.

The community in Ninjimor informedEIA/Telapak that the company actuallystarted forest clearance operations inModan in January 2008, just two months

E

IA/Telapak

ABOVE:An excavator tears down forest

in Modan, Sorong, in April 2009.

The company does not have a

permit to operate.


17/28

15

after initially requesting a permit forplantation operations. In terms of thelegal requirement to conduct anenvironmental impact assessment(AMDAL), all the community wasaware of was a visit by forestry officeconsultants to survey the land inSeptember 2008 after at least 300 hahad already been cleared. Requirementsunder the AMDAL process to carry outconsultations with affected communitieshad not been carried out.

The illegality of IKS land clearancewas raised during a September 2008disagreement between the company andan oil firm operating in the area. Duringdiscussions between the two parties itemerged that IKS did not have thenecessary permits from the localforestry office, with the oil firm claiming

that the land was legally designated toit by the Indonesian Ministry of Energyand Natural Resources.

In response, rather than seeking toprosecute the company the localgovernment set about legalising IKSplantation operations. A local parliamentmember said in the media: OK, they areoperating, but the company must assoon as possible arrange all the conditionsrelated to official permission so they arenot illegal but legal. 42

Given the track record of illegal practicesand exploitation by KLI, a full officialinvestigation into the firms activities is

long overdue.

THE MEDCO GROUP

Medco Group is a huge Indonesiancorporation with interests in oil, gas,property and more recently oil palmand industrial forestry, notably inPapua. The group is controlled by ArifinPanigoro, an influential businessmanand political player in Indonesia. Medcohas been one of the most successfulcompanies to date in Papuas plantations

boom, having already secured an 18,000

ha oil palm plantation in Manokwari,West Papua province, and a 259,000 hatimber plantation in Merauke, Papuaprovince. Medco is reportedly seekingone million hectares for various pulpand paper and oil palm and biofuelsinvestments in Papua.43

Medco Group, through its subsidiaryPT Medco Papua Hijau Selaras (MPHS)has received licences for 18,000 ha ofland, much of it forested, for oil palm in

the Manokwari region as part of anagricultural development zone established

by the government.44 Medco has also

asked local authorities for an option toexpand this to 40,000 ha.

In 2008 local NGOs revealed thatMedco was paying the local Meyah tribe

landowners as little as US$ 45 perhectare for a 35 year lease of the land.In April 2009, EIA/Telapak travelled toSidey and Masni districts in Manokwari

to find out more details of the negotiationsbetween villagers and Medco.

In Waramuy village in Sidey, EIA/Telapakmet landowner Frans Aska whoexplained that Medco first approached

the community in 2007. At this time notall of the clans approached agreed with

the plan. According to Aska, Medcoreturned repeatedly, and subsequentlyflew him and nine other clan leaders tomeet the company in Jakarta. Eventually,after having been promised education for

their children, houses, bikes and othergoods and services, they signed formalcontracts in Manokwari in December2008 the only contracts seen byEIA/Telapak at all six plantations areas

visited in 2009. Aska admitted he couldnot read well and had signed thecontract with his thumbprint.

Scrutiny of Askas land rental and usagecontract with MPHS reveals that Medcohas bought the rights to utilise 36 ha of

Askas land, covering anything existingabove and/or below the land, including

timber, for a period of 35 years. Theserights presumably extend to any minerals,or gas and oil or potential carbon rights.In return Aska received a total Rp. 16million (US$ 1,640). This is equivalent

to just over one dollar per hectare peryear. When EIA/Telapak visited the area

Medco had already cleared sevenhectares of Askas land for an oil palmseedling area. Aska and his family were

Telapak

/EIA

E

IA/Telapak

BELOW:Franz Askas thumb print on

his contract with Medco Group.

The company pays landowners

merely US$ 45 per hectare.

BOTTOM:Part of 7 ha of Franz Askas land

in Sidey, Manokwari, cleared

for Medco Groups oil palm

plantation nursery. April 2009.


18/28

16

being paid Rp. 44,000 a day to workin the seedling area, which is below

the minimum wage set by theprovincial governor.45

In Sidey village EIA/Telapak also metlandowner Arnesus Moktis, who hadsigned a Medco contract in December2008 for 139 ha. Both Aska and Moktissaid they had been told that signing theland release contracts would lead tonew housing, roads, electricity, water,and education for their children. Yetnone of these services are mentionedin their contracts.

The benefits for landowners are

extremely uncertain and will involveprofound lifestyle changes. Foragreeing to rent 18,000 ha for 35

years, EIA/Telapak estimate that theentire Meyah tribe will be paid justUS$ 800,000. Medco can expect tomake in the region of US$ 2.5 milliona year, as it did on a 12,000 haplantation in Sumatra in 2007.46

Indeed, it seems the Meyah tribe werepressured by Medco and the government

to release their lands at such low prices.Moktis told EIA/Telapak: There waspressure from the company, from the

regional government. There was amanager of the company that pressuredus when we tried to stop. He also said

the company had more than halved theirasking price for land payments.

PAPUA PROVINCE

SINAR MAS GROUP

The Sinar Mas Group, a subsidiary ofthe Widjaja family-owned Singapore listedGolden Agri Resources (GAR), is oneof Indonesias biggest plantations

companies, and has been responsible forhuge deforestation across Indonesia. InMarch 2009 GAR claimed to cultivate396,000 ha of oil palm plantations inIndonesia, making it one of the largestlisted vertically integrated oil palmplantations and producers of crude andrefined palm products in the world. 47

GAR is also the parent company ofAsia Pulp and Paper (APP),Indonesias biggest pulp and paperproducer. The companys supplierscontrol an estimated 1.4 millionhectares of forest in Indonesia.48

During 2007, companies linked toAPPs timber sourcing were accusedof massive illegal logging in Riau,Sumatra, and in November 2007, aspecial team set up by President

Yudhoyono to investigate the caserecommended that the companies wereprosecuted. Yet despite strong evidence

the case was dropped by police.49

In March 2009, a conservation groupclaimed that: APP is estimated to havepulped more than one million hectaresof natural forests in Riau and Jambi

provinces in Sumatra.50

After facing years of controversy for itsforest destruction in Sumatra, SinarMas is now aggressively expanding itsoperations in Papua. The companyalready has 11,000 ha of establishedplantations in Papua, but in the past two

years has been seeking at least a furthermillion hectares of land for expansion.

In January 2007 Sinar Mas announcedplans to invest US$ 5.5 billion with aChinese state-owned firm to develop oilpalm-based biodiesel production, centred

on Papua and Kalimantan. By March,local Papuan parliamentarians wereannouncing their plan to find one millionhectares of land for Sinar Mas in BovenDigoel, Mappi, Merauke, Sarmi and

Jayapura.51 Despite this deal nowappearing to be on hold, Sinar Mas ispushing forward with its expansion plans.

Since early 2007 Sinar Mas has beenscreening films promoting the companyand its oil palm expansion plans under

the banner of development. One of thefilms shows, landowners from BovenDigul being given a tour of Sinar Mas

plantations in Pekanbaru, Sumatra.52

Such trips have been provided by manyplantations companies in their efforts topersuade landowners to sign away landin Papua.

TOP:Sagu forest being cleared and

drained by Sinar Mas Group in

Mambruk, Jayapura, West

Papua province, in 2008.

ABOVE:Arnesus Moktis had to fight to

retain a copy of his 139 hectare

land rental contract with the

Medco Group.

G

reenpeaceSouthEastAsia

E

IA/Telapak


19/28

17

Internal planning documents from 2007,seen by EIA/Telapak, cite that to evaderestrictions on one company controllingmore than 200,000 ha of oil palm inPapua, Sinar Mas had established a hostof front companies to apply for plantations,including six companies seeking637,725 ha in Mappi and six companiesseeking 914,117 ha in Boven Digul.53

Sinar Mas is seeking to fund part of itshuge expansion plans through a shareissue in Golden Agri Resources (GAR).

At least US$ 4 million of the capitalraised will support the company'sorganic growth by funding theacquisition of land, the planting ofpalm trees, and the building of newmills and refineries. 54

In September 2009, EIA/Telapaktravelled to Lereh in Kaureh district,Jayapura, to meet members of theKaureh-Yapsi tribe and learn about theimpact of Sinar Mas activities. Again

the story was one of frustration and angerat the limited benefits the communityhad derived from the plantation, despitepromises of development.

In Sisik, near Lereh, landowners andcommunity members explained how

their parents had released land to SinarMas in 1991. Locals stated that at the

time they had had requested a truck foreach clan in exchange for the land, andhad been promised compensation equal

to 0.5 per cent of the value of palm oil

from the plantation once it beganproducing. The landowners also receivedRp. 11 million (US$ 1,100) per clan inland release payments. Yet again suchassurances were verbal with no bindingcontract with the company.

Over the ensuing years, the promisedbenefits of Sinar Mas plantation failed

to materialize. The communitycomplained that they have neverreceived the trucks from Sinar Mas, andonce payments for CPO sales began inaround 2001 they were paltry up toRp. 500,000 (US$ 50) per clan every

three months. Although payments hadrisen to one million rupiah (US$ 100) in

August 2009 there was no guaranteethis increase was permanent.

One community member, Simon Yamle,said: We thought this money did notsuffice for all of the member residents ofeach clan. Because the amount of money

was very minimal, very small. Anotherlocal man, Octavianus Bitaba said: Untilnow we have already been waiting more

than ten years. This company Sinar Masonly lives and works on the basis ofpromises. Thirteen years after agreeing

to give up their land the local communityhas yet to see the promised developmentand income.

Due to growing dissatisfaction landownersare now demanding substantialcompensation from Sinar Mas for theexploitation of their land and resources.EIA/Telapak was given copies of letters

written to Sinar Mas in September 2008and August 2009 and copied to a host oflocal and national government officials.

The documents cite failure by thecompany to pay for timber felled on clanlands, in contravention of a decree by

the provincial governor, and contraventionof a Ministry of Agriculture regulation

setting aside twenty per cent ofplantation areas for local communities.In total the landowners are seekingaround Rp. 235 billion ($24 million)in compensation.

EIA/Telapak learned that the communityhad received no help from the governmentin negotiating a better deal with Sinar

BELOW:

Sagu forest replaced with SinarMas oil palms in Mambruk,

Jayapura, 2008. Sagu is the

staple food for rural Papuans.

The Yapse Kaureh tribe

landowners have claimed

US$ 24 million compensation

from Sinar Mas.

G

reenpeaceSouthEastAsia


20/28

18

Mas, and most locals assume thegovernment and the company work

together. Again, this is a commonfeeling amongst villagers in Papuasplantation areas.

Sinar Mas is currently expanding theLereh concession into Mambuk, where

thousands of hectares of dense forestsare being cleared. The potential forconflict with disgruntled communities ishigh. In its share issue document GARstates: The Groups principal socialconcern relates to possible conflicts

with local communities around itsplantations. Yet the group alsoreassures potential investors by stating:Environmental regulations and socialpractices in the countries in which theGroup operates tend to be less stringent

than in developed countries. 55

RAJAWALI GROUP

PT. Tandan Sawita Papua, a subsidiaryof the Rajawali Group, has a permit toclear 26,000 ha of forest for oil palm inEast Arso district, Keerom, adjacent to

the border with Papua New Guinea.This is despite local Manen tribecommunities repeatedly refusingRajawalis advances. The RajawaliGroup is owned by influential tycoonPeter Sondakh, reportedly Indonesiasfifth richest person. Its core activitiesare a rapidly expanding plantations

business, property and mining.56

Efforts by the community to promotea model of small-scale chocolatecultivation rather than widespreadclearance for oil palm have beenrebuffed by the local government. Alocal clan leader, Augustine. P. F. Kres,explained the resistance to palm oil:The people of Keerom have life because

they have indigenous land and forest.If the traditional forest is finished thenmankind and his life is finished, adding

that it is necessary to restrict the oilpalm plantation that will transform theforest to nothing. 57

Having granted the final permit toRajawali, Governor Suebu spoke at theopening ceremony for the plantation in

January 2008, claiming it would usher ina new day for a better future. A future

that is more secure, peaceful, just andprosperous for us all. DaryotoSetiawan, who heads up RajawalisKeerom plantation, said: In some years

to come, Papua will stand out as one ofthe biggest and the best palm oildevelopment centres in the world.58

It seems that local communities aredeeply sceptical of the promised newfuture. After being persuaded to give up

land during a Rajawali-organised trip totour a plantation in South Kalimantan,and inducement payments being given tolocal leaders, the lack of compensationled community members to seize thekeys to bulldozers in a bid to haltRajawalis land clearance.59

On visiting Yetti village in East Arsoin September 2009, EIA/Telapakinvestigators learned that the communityhad refused the plantation three times

because they did not want all of theirland to be converted to oil palm.

EIA/Telapak heard from the tribal leaderof Yetti, Martin Putuy, how negotiationsbetween the government and companysince the protests had resulted in someland owners being prepared to give upland, though many still did not agree. Heestimated that perhaps half of the landRajawali has a permit for might bereleased, though no final agreement had

been made.

While in Yetti, EIA/Telapak heard howseveral teams of forestry departmentofficials, accompanied by the military,

were surveying the forests with local

leaders to establish which areas couldbe converted. Some locals were still nothappy, and had built road blocks to prevent

the officials accessing their land. Effortsto resist the plantation are complicatedby the fact Keerom is part of a heavily-militarised red zone. Local NGOs andhuman rights activists have reportedrepeated intimidation by securityapparatus in relation to forestry andplantations development in Keerom.60

The Rajawali Group is a member of theUnited Nations Global Compact. In its

Progress report for 2007-2008,Chairman Peter Sondakh said: Ourplantation business unit is guided bystrong commitment towards protectionand conservation of the environment.61

BELOW:Manen tribe leader, Augustine.

P. F. Kres: It is necessary to

restrict the oil palm plantationthat will transform the forest

to nothing.

BOTTOM:Rajawali Groups Daryoto

Setiawan In some years to

come, Papua will stand out as

one of the biggest and the best

palm oil development centres

in the world.

F

okerLSMP

apua,

January2008

F

okerLSMP

apua,

January2008


21/28

19

MERAUKE POLITICALPLANTATIONS

Having been one of the earliesttransmigration sites in Papua during theSuharto regime, the southern region ofPapua Province, composed of the districtsMerauke, Boven Digul and Mappi, has

seen the biggest impacts of Papuasplantation boom. The regions flat

terrain and its forest stock make thearea attractive for logging, plantations,and other agricultural activities, and itcontains the largest areas of forestmarked for conversion in the province.

The region contains a unique variety ofecosystems, including tropical lowlandforests, mangroves, eucalyptus forests,and savannas. It features part of the

world renowned Transfly eco-regioncovering more than ten million hectaresand spanning both Papua and PapuaNew Guinea. Wasur National Park,

which runs from near Merauke town upto the border with Papua New Guinea,is a globally significant protected

wetland site.

Between January and August 2007,local government officials grantedprinciple permission for a range of largeplantations, including oil palm and

timber, covering at least 1.5 millionhectares.62 In late 2007, the Bupati ofMerauke announced that a further 4.5million hectares were available for

plantations, effectively the entire district.

63

Data from the provincial forestry officeindicate that of 1.2 million hectares ofland being targeted for plantations inMerauke, almost one million hectaresare classified as forested.64

Among the main plantations investors inMerauke is the Medco Group, which isspending Rp. 20 trillion (US$ 2 billion)in a huge industrial timber plantationand factory for the production of pulpand paper. Through its subsidiary PTSelaras Inti Semesta (PT SIS) the firmhas secured permits for a 259,000

timber plantation.65

Analysis of thesepermits indicates that that PT SISstands to obtain up to 15 million cubicmetres of timber from natural forests inits concession.

In June 2008 another Medco Groupsubsidiary PT Medcopapua IndustriLestari was granted a licence to operatea new pulp mill on 2,800 ha in Buepe

village, Kaptel district, Merauke, capableof processing two million tons of pulp a

year. Local media reported that Medcoactually began breaking ground on thefactory land in February 2008, a year

before timber harvesting permits hadbeen received.66The arrival of thecompany has created deep divisions

within the local Marind community, withallegations that the acquisition of the

land for the factory violated indigenouscustoms on land rights.67

Medco is also planning a large jointventure with Korean firm LGInternational (part of the well-knownconsumer electronics giant LG Group)focusing on one million hectares of

timber plantations in Merauke.68

According to management plans The land will be divided into six regions in

which all broad-leaved trees in one ofthe six regions will be completely cutdown, to produce 1.4 million tons of

wood chip and 3.6 million tons of woodpellet a year for energy production.69

One of the largest proposed plantationschemes in the region is the MeraukeIntegrated Food and Energy Estate(MIFEE), part of a central governmentplan to transform the area into a vastagricultural zone. To fulfil this plan thegovernment has sought investmentfrom the Middle East, China andKorea, with the scheme set to cover1.7 million hectares.70

The planned massive expansion ofplantations in Merauke is connected toefforts by the Merauke regencygovernment, led by the ambitious Bupati

Johanes Gluba Gebze to create a newprovince South Papua Province in

the district. As Gebze is in his last termas Bupati of Merauke becoming a governorof a new province offers a chance ofretaining power. Influential individuals

based in Jakarta supporting Gebzes newprovince have been described as an

Kabupaten

Merauke

Mappi

Boven Digul

Mimika

Sarmi

Total (ha)

4,350,789

2,614,050

2,726,932

2,131,049

3,218,524

Conversion Forest (ha)

1,412,988

873,354

809,909

507,327

381,780

% of total as HPK

32.5%

33.4%

29.7%

23.8%

11.8%

Seksi Pemantauan dan Evaluasi Hutan Produksi, August 2009,www.bpphp17.web.id/database/data%200809/A2.htm

Top 5 Conversion Forest Areas Papua Province

S

KPKAM

BELOW:Korindo Groups palm oil mill

in Boven Digul. Locals say

they have benefited little from

the operations.


22/28

20

alliance of military and nationalistfigures working hand-in-glove withlocal politicians.71

The combination of Gebzes politicalaspirations, central government interestsand the potentially huge investment inplantations expansion, has created aclimate of intimidation towards anyone

who opposes the plantations or newprovince. Local sources report thatirregular groups allied to Gebze work inunison with the state security forces tomonitor and intimidate any dissenters in

the region.

Up to 3000 soldiers are stationed acrossthe Merauke and Boven Digul region,

with security posts every five kilometresalong the road between Merauke andMuting and Asiki in Boven Digul to theNortheast.72The military personnel arereported to safeguard the interests of

timber and plantation firms active in thearea. One prime example is the companyKorindo which has a large oil palmplantation and plywood mill. Reportsallege that the firm makes regularpayments to the military73, which isembroiled in disputes with localcommunities over its operations.74

OVERSEAS INVESTORS CASH INAs the new green energy revolution ispromoted as a response to climatechange, executives in the boardroomsof international conglomerates have

been busy finding ways to cash in on theanticipated surge in demand for biofuels.

EIA/Telapak research has identifiedseveral multimillion dollar deals forhuge swathes of Papuas forests involvingfinanciers and corporations from HongKong, Singapore, and offshore taxhavens such as the British Virgin

Islands, seeking to take advantage ofIndonesias generous incentives andreinventing themselves as greenplantations companies. Working with

well-connected local partners under

Indonesias new and generous foreigninvestment law, investors from China,Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, and theMiddle East are scrambling to carve outa piece of the Papua plantations boom.

Such deals are redefining the boundariesof Papuas forests and the lives ofindigenous Papuans.

One example of major overseasinvestment in Papuas oil palm sector is

the complex deal involving Hong Kong-based CCT Resources.

CCT RESOURCES - IMPROVINGTHE FOREST WITH OIL PALM

On 12th August 2008 a companyregistered in the Cayman Islands, CCTResources Holdings Limited (CCT),purchased a 313,500 ha forest concessionin the remote Mimika regency on thesouthern coast of Papua province. Thecompany plans to convert 200,000 ha of

the concession to oil palm.

The deal involved CCT buying theMerdeka Timber Group Ltd. (MTG), foraround US$ 100 million through fundsissued to Merdeka Commodities Limited(MCL) which is registered in the British

Virgin Islands.75

The sum paid, equivalent to merelyUS$ 320 per hectare, seems to be based

on a 2008 valuation report by PyryForest Industry, estimating timberstocks on land held by MCL to be worthapproximately US$ 148 million. Thereport says that the land is largelyforested, much of it virgin, stating that:Almost no land in the Mimikaconcession area has been developed orchanged from its original condition.76

The forest area acquired by CCT is splitinto three concessions known as theEastern, Central and Western Blocks.Pyrys survey revels that much of theland contains shallow to deep peat

deposits, likely storing significant carbonstocks. Total commercial timber stocksin the land purchased by CCT isestimated at just under three millioncubic metres. This figure is based on

the selective logging model of a forestryconcession, not a total clearance for oilpalm. If the conversion to oil palm takesplace as planned the timber revenues

to CCT Resources will far outstripPyrys estimated timber stocks valuationof US$ 150 million, the basis of theacquisition cost.

CCT is a new player in the plantations

and logging sector, and its board claimsit will improve the dense forest with itsvital carbon stocks by felling it. Thecompany states For the good future ofpeople and environment, the MTG Group

E

IA/Telapak

E

IA/Telapak

TOP:Indonesian troops disembark at

Merauke in 2007. 3000 soldiers

are stationed in plantation

expansion areas across Merauke

and Boven Digul.

ABOVE:The plantation expansion plans

of Johannes Gluba Gebze, Bupati

of Merauke (left of image), are

connected to his aspirations for

a new province, an initiative

reportedly supported by an

alliance of military and

nationalist figures.


23/28

21

aims to improve the forest area byreplanting oil palm trees. It is planning

to cash in on expected demand for biofuelderived from oil palm due to thecommitment of most industrializedcountries to reduce green house gasemissions. In fact felling 200,000 ha of

virtually untouched forest, part of whichlies on peat, and replacing it with oilpalm will increase greenhouse gasemissions way beyond any potentialclimate benefits of the biofuel produced(see page 4).

CCT reports and other financial dataindicate that Merdeka Timber Group isalmost entirely controlled by one

businessman, Lai Wing Hung. Lai islisted as a director of Merdeka TimberGroup, and Merdeka Timber Trading,

which are based in Hong Kong.77 Laialso has a controlling share of votes inCCT Resources Holdings. He is said tohave owned forests in Indonesia andLatin America and is politically

well-connected.78

CCT appears to possess usefulconnections in mainland China. Itsadvisory committee includes a delegate

to the 16th National Congress of theCommunist Party of the People'sRepublic of China, and a former directorof the energy office of the powerful StateDevelopment and Reform Commission,and its senior management includes aformer representative of the StateForestry Administration.79

Other figures involved in the deal areSontang Alboin Manurung and RayGutafson Manurung, from Sumatra,

who own a share of PT Merdeka TapareTimber a company majority-owned byMTG that is set to get the licences forestablishing and operating millsprocessing the timber coming out of theconcession areas.80

In July 2009 the head of Mimikasforestry, plantations and horticultureoffice announced that PT MerdekaPlantation Indonesia, another MTG

subsidiary was one of two companies todevelop oil palm plantations in Mimika.He said the Papua Governor Suebu hadalready granted a permit for its plantation,and that despite not yet having receiveda permit to utilise timber cut duringforest clearance, it had already openeda seedling area, and would begin largescale operations in the near future.81

CCT reported that in the first quarter of2009 it had started to harvest treesfrom the forest to build the sawmill andforest road paths, and that sale of

timber products is expected in the second

half of 2009. The company clearlyexpects a big return on its investment,citing the huge demand for timber and

wood products versus scarce supplyand huge business growth potential

because demand for palm oil as analternative source of energy to fossilfuels has been increasing.82

In May 2008, as CCT was preparing itsacquisition of Merdeka Timber Group,

the Papua provincial government andMimika district government were signingcooperation agreements with carbon

traders, exploring ways of preventingdeforestation through capitalising on thecarbon stocks held in the forests.83

One senior Mimika government official,Marthin Giay, expressed support for theidea, saying: The regional government

very much agrees with the campaign topreserve forests in Papua, becausealready much forest in Papua has

been plundered.

Yet other officials were already workingwith the Merdeka Timber Group, soon tobe bought by CCT. The Head of NewMimika District, James Noldy Sumigar

was already working to facilitate PTMerdeka Timbers forest clearanceactivities, so that oil palm could beplanted.84 Furthermore, EIA/Telapakhave discovered that the previous regentof Mimika, Aloysius Rafra, is now acommissioner of PT Merdeka PlantationIndonesia, the subsidiary charged withdeveloping the plantation.85

It appears that the potential profits fromthe logging and oil palm business haveeclipsed efforts to protect the areas

forests. For instance the East Block ofCCTs new concession holds largeamounts of valuable merbau treesequivalent to 15 cubic metres perhectare. At current prices the merbaufrom each hectare would fetch aroundUS$ 7,500, over twenty times the pricepaid per hectare by CCT. When other

timber species are included, such asmatoa, mersawa and nyatoh, each hectareholds an average 129 cubic metres ofmarketable timber. Big profits beckonfor CCT from its planned forest destruction.

BELOW:Millionaires flitting between

the glittering financial centres

of Hong Kong and Singapore,

and tax havens such as the

British Virgin Islands are

reaping the rewards of

Papuas bio-fuel driven

deforestation surge.

E

IA/Telapak


24/28


25/28

23

E

IA/Telapak

E

IA/Telapak

E

IA/Telapak


26/28

24

Papua is experiencing a land grab ofepic proportions. At least five millionhectares of land, much of it forested, is

being targeted by powerful conglomeratesbacked by shadowy overseas investors,often registered in secretive offshore taxhavens. The plantations boom is backed

by all levels of government in the nameof development for the people of Papuaand tackling climate change through useof biofuels.

Investigations carried out by EIA/Telapakreveal that the plantations are manifestlyfailing to provide the promised benefitsfor local communities. Instead the roll-out of plantations is creating a legacy ofconflicts, both within affected communitiesand with the plantation companies,rampant exploitation and bitterness.

The true beneficiaries reside far fromPapua; in the glittering high rise tower

blocks in Jakarta and the boardrooms ofHong Kong and other financial centres.

The planned destruction of millions ofhectares of Papuas forests has direimplications for efforts to tackleclimate change. Any potential benefitsfrom increased cultivation of biofuelfeedstocks are dwarfed by the greenhousegas emissions created from replacingdense forest with monoculture cropssuch as oil palm.

THE GOVERNMENT OF INDONESIA SHOULD:

Halt the award of further plantationlicences in Papua until a transparentand extensive multi-stakeholderreview of the sectors impacts has

taken place

Publish information on all plantationlicences issued in Papua

Ensure full implementation ofspecialautonomy regulations that clarify andformalise land and resource tenure

Establish just and legally bindingcodes of conduct and compensation forplantation companies negotiating landagreements with local communities

Empower the Anti-CorruptionCommission to conduct investigationsinto suspicious plantation licenceawards, especially in Meraukeand Sorong

Investigate cases where plantationoperations have commenced prior tonecessary permits being obtained

Promote the spread of community-based forest management in Papua

Focus development programs onbetter educating, empowering andharnessing Papuas human resources,

before exploiting its natural resources

THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY SHOULD:

Ensure international treaties provideno incentives to convert forests to

biofuels or other plantations, and thatREDD schemes guarantee the rightsof indigenous people

Ensure Papua is prioritised indevelopment assistance to addresspoverty, secure sustainable rurallivelihoods, and reduce carbonemissions from deforestationin Indonesia

Assess the role played by globaldemand for agricultural commoditiesand biofuels such as palm oil indriving deforestation and develop

binding sustainability standards forsuch commodities

COMPANIES SHOULD:

Avoid buying palm oil or otheragricultural commodities fromcompanies operating in Papua until acomprehensive transparent review of

their social and environmental impactshas been undertaken and mitigationmeasures implemented

E

IA/Telapak,

April2009

RECOMMENDATIONSABOVE:Without remedial action, millions

of hectares of Papuas frontier

forests will be converted to

plantations over the next

decade, as above in Sorong.


27/28

1. Papua Provincial Action Plan for REDD in Indonesia,Presented by Barnabus Suebu, Governor of PapuaProvince, at http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/forestry_task_force/documents/belem/Papua_Belem_Presentation.pdf

2. The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate

Change, Annex 7.f, http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/annex7f_land_use.pdf.3. Houghton 2003, cited in Baumert et al. 2005, cited

in Indonesia and Climate Change: Working Paper onCurrent Status & Policies, A Sari et al, World Bank,PEACE & DFID, March 2007.

4. The Economics of Climate Change in Southeast Asia,Asian Development Bank, April 2009.

5. Climate Change Vulnerability for SE Asia,Environment and Economy Programme for SoutheastAsia, 2009.

6. Indonesia and Climate Change: Working Paper onCurrent Status & Policies, A Sari et al, World Bank,PEACE & DFID, March 2007.

7. Towards Sustainable Production and Use ofResources: Assessing Biofuels: United NationsEnvironment Program (UNEP), October 2009.

8. Government Calls for Help with Emission Cuts,Jakarta Post, 27 August 2009.

9. Dewi, S., Khasanah, N., Rahayu, S., Ekadinata A., andvan Noordwijk, M. 2009. Carbon Footprint ofIndonesian Palm Oil Production: a Pilot Study. Bogor,Indonesia. World Agroforestry Centre - ICRAF, SEARegional Office.

10. Papuans Demand No New Forestry or Plantation

Deals until Special Autonomy Regulations ProtectIndigenous Rights and Interests, EIA/Telapak/FokerLSM Papua Press Release, Jakarta, 25th June 2008,available at: http://www.eia-international.org/cgi/news/news.cgi?t=template&a=462)

11. EIA/Telapak, The Thousand Headed Snake, 2007).12. The Last Frontier, Illegal Logging in Papua and

Chinas Massive Timber Theft, EIA/Telapak, 2005.)13. Corruption and forest revenues in Papua, Anti-

Corruption Resource Centre, Bambang Setiono,June 2008. www.U4.no/themes/natural-resources)

14. A Backwards Step, how demand for merbau timber isundermining Indonesias anti-illegal logging policies,EIA/Telapak, 28 August 2008.

15. Export Data from BRIK, 19 January 2009; Productiondata from Forestry Ministry: http://www.dephut.go.id/INFORMASI/PH/BPK/ALAM/Produksi_Mei07.pdf &http://www.dephut.go.id/files/DataRelease_BPK08_0.pdf)

16. A who's who of Indonesian biofuel, Bill Guerin, AsiaTimes, 22 May 2007.

17. The Final Cut: Illegal Logging in Indonesia'sOrangutan Parks, EIA/Telapak, August 1999.

18. EIA Press release, 6 May 2008.19. Minister of Agriculture Regulation No.26/Permentan/

OT.140/2/2007.20. Presidential Instruction No. 5, 2007.21. Indonesia looks to Papua to expand palm oil

plantations: official, AFP, May 21, 2008.22. Mobility and Human Development in Indonesia,

Riwanto Tirtosudarmo, UNDP, June 2009, citing datafrom Central Council of Statistics:http://www.bps.go.id/sector/ipm/table1.shtml

23. Papua Needs Assessment, An Overview of Findingsand Implications for the Programming ofDevelopment Assistance, UNDP, August 2005.

24. Health and human security in West Papua, MedicalJournal of Australia, Rees et al, 20 October 2008.http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/189_11_011208/ree10420_fm.html

25. Tussle for Papua's forests, John McBeth, The StraitsTimes (Singapore), August 21, 2007.

26. Transparency International 2009 Global CorruptionReport, cited in; Most business players pay bribes:Survey, The Jakarta Post, 8th October 2009.

27. Papua Road Map, p17, The Indonesian Institute ofSciences (LIPI), 2008.

28. Papua governments blew Rp 30t on special autonomy:Official, Andi Hajramurni, The Jakarta Post, 9thSeptember 2009.

29. Agriculture and Development in Eastern Indonesia:Agriculture Sector Strategy Review. Ministry ofAgriculture, March 1998: http://www.adb.org/Documents/Reports/Consultant/29316-INO/29316-05-INO-TACR.pdf

30. Declaration of the Governors of Aceh, Papua andPapua Barat on Climate Change, Nusa Dua, Bali,April 26, 2007.

31. From Forests for Death to Forest for Life: The NewPolicy for Sustainable Forest Management in Papua,Barnabas Suebu, Governor of Papua Province,

December 2007.32. Papua to Assess Carbon Stocks, Jakarta Post,14 May 2008.

33. Hanya 10 Perkebunan Mampu Bertahan di Papua,Papua Pos, 26th February 2009.

34. Study Kelayakan Proyek Perkebunan Kelapa SawitPT. Henrison Inti Persada, Papua. By I WayanBudiasa, Jurusan Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian,Fakultas Pertanian, Universitas Udayana, Denpasar,Bali, Indonesia. http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:q02Ehcs4NuAJ:ejournal.unud.ac.id/abstrak/(4)%2520soca-budiasa-kelayakan%2520kelapa%2520sawit(1).pdf+%22henrison+inti+persada%22&hl=en)

35. Trans-National Crime of Illegal Logging, Page 6,Suripto, Member of Commission I, Republic ofIndonesia, presented at EIA/Telapak workshopViolence in The Forest, at Hotel Atlet CenturyJakarta, 18th & 19th September 2006.

36. Minister of Forestry decree No. 409/Menhut-II/2006.37. Letter No., S.681/MENHUT VI/2006, 1st November

2006, from Minister of Forests, M S Kaban, toGreenpeace SEAs forest campaigner.

38. Tears of Mother Mooi, a film by PT Triton, releasedNovember 2007, available at: http://www.eia-

international.org/visual_media/footage/39. Keputusan Director General of the Forest Production

Office of the Ministry of Forestry, SK. 292/VI-BPHA/2007, 28 December 2007.

40. Map of Signed Maps on file with EIA.41. Photograph of Wall Mounted Information Table, at

Pameran Pembangunan Kabupaten Sorong at AIMAS,Pt. Triton, received September 2009.

42. PetroChina Ingatkan Pt Inti Kebun Sejahtera, FajarPapua 9/20/2008 http://www.fpnewssrg.co.cc/2008/09/petrochina-ingatkan-pt-inti-kebun.html,& Perbaiki Jalan, PetroChina dan PT Inti KebunSejahtera Mikin MOU, Fajar Papua 9/20/2008;http://www.fpnewssrg.co.cc/2008/09/perbaiki-

jalan-petrochina-dan-pt-inti.html)43. Indonesia's Medco eyes food crop, biofuel projects

in Papua, 2nd July 2009, Reuters)44. PENYUSUNAN RENCANA DETAIL KAWASAN

AGROPOLITAN KAB. MANOKWARI.45. Kep Gub No: 238,2008 http://apindo.or.id/images/

res/UMP%202009%20Up%20Date%2014%20januari%202009.pdf

46. Plant first, profit later: Palm oil is still attractivealthough its price has tumbled, Muchamad Nafi,Tempo, No. 52/VIII/26 Aug 01 Sept 2008,reproduced in AsiaViews, Edition: 31/V/August/2008http://new.asiaviews.org/?content=53g3gf545h5686h&onbusiness=20080829001329

47. OFFER INFORMATION STATEMENT DATED 29 JUNE2009 (Lodged with the Monetary Authority ofSingapore on 29 June 2009), GOLDEN AGRI-RESOURCES LTD.

48. http://appmnr.app.co.id/env_app-mr_tst/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=62%3Arumor-mill-2&catid=39%3Abiodiversity-and-conservation&Itemid=41&lang=)

49. NGOs plan to sue the police for closing c