Freeport Mine in Papua
The dispute between the Indonesian government and PT Freeport Indonesia (Freeport) has begun to subside. The government's request to convert Freeport's contract of work into a special mining business permit (IUPK), along with the divestment of 51% shares, was initially opposed, although the US company later agreed. What are the views of customary land owners in Papua?
Ronny Nakiaya, from the Kamoro Tribe and also Secretary of the Independent Indigenous Community (MAI), said that so far the status change process has not involved the local community.
“"The negotiation process hasn't involved us. The grassroots community hasn't been involved. There's never been a process of sitting down with us to discuss Freeport's future," he said last weekend.
Also read: The Freeport dispute isn't just about money. What about the environment and the Papuan people?
He suspected that a compromise might have occurred among local elites. Any negotiation process should involve the community.
“"Let the community decide what their future will be like. The community owns the area and directly experiences the impacts of the Freeport mine," he said.
According to Ronny, the Amungme and Kamoro tribes, owners of the customary land where Freeport operates in Papua, have firmly demanded that the government shut down the Freeport mine. So far, they have been victims of both Freeport and the government.
During Freeport's operations, he said, many of the rights of the Amungme and Kamoro indigenous peoples have been violated, including their rights to a healthy environment, customary land rights, civil rights, and more.
“"Freeport seized customary land without any negotiation with the Amungme and Kamoro communities. Freeport also caused conflicts between elite interests. The community was often pitted against each other," he said.
The community has lost its livelihood. Where they once farmed and gathered, the land is now polluted by waste. "Violence continues," he said.
In fact, the Amungme and Kamoro people require Freeport's permission to enter their territory, despite the fact that it is clearly their ancestral land.
Likewise, when discussing Freeport's contribution, he said, they haven't felt it. Since operations began in 1967, he continued, there has been no significant contribution since the 1969 Pepera (Pepera).
Natural resources (SDA), said Ronny, are being depleted, leaving environmental damage, making the surrounding community miserable.
“"We received nothing from the mining operations. It wasn't until the 1996 rebellion, which resulted in numerous casualties, that Freeport provided funds for the 1% (National Human Development and Culture) program. Even then, it was unclear, as the community didn't directly benefit. They claimed Freeport had provided access to health and education, but we never received any. The 1% funds were also unclear."”
In fact, after the 1% funding was introduced, new elites emerged who had never had direct contact with indigenous communities. Furthermore, inter-tribal conflicts frequently occurred.
He also asked the government to close Freeport's mining operations and conduct a thorough audit.
Ronny acknowledged that these demands would inevitably have knock-on effects, such as mass layoffs. He said companies must be responsible for paying workers severance pay and working with the government to restore the environment.
“"Freeport and the government must take responsibility for repairing the damage. Freeport's operational area and the environment are damaged. Leaking embankments, thousands of hectares of barren land polluted by waste. This must be restored. Compensation for the environmental damage must be provided."”
Some time ago, Mimika Regent Eltinus Omaleng had requested Freeport 20% shares so that there would be justice for the Amungme and Komoro people.
Nicolaus Kanuggok, a Kamoro youth, expressed a different view. Nico shares Ronny's view: he wants Freeport to close.
Even if after the audit there are further discussions about Freeport's future, he said, they should be left to the community directly.
“"Our aspirations are clear: close and audit first. We're not asking for any percentage of shares. Close first, and then audit. We want to know how much it's contributing to the community. After that, the community will decide. The government is merely a facilitator."”
He asked that the community be involved in all agreements and that there be a legal umbrella so that there is strength.
Adolfina Kuum, a prominent Amungme indigenous woman, rejected any compromise between the Indonesian and United States governments regarding Freeport.
“"So far, we, the customary rights holders, have never been involved by the government or Freeport. We should have been."”
The Institute for the Study and Advocacy of Human Rights (Elsam) also urged the Indonesian government to involve the Papuan people in negotiations with Freeport. Negotiations must focus on a comprehensive solution for environmental restoration and human rights violations resulting from Freeport's operations, not just addressing government regulatory obligations.
Ari Yurino, a human rights advocate at Elsam, said the Indonesian government must prepare livelihood sources for the Timika community after the mineral and coal resources in the Freeport operational area run out, in the next 10 or 50 years.
One of the land masses that occurs due to sedimentation tailing in Timika waters. Photo: Yoga Pribadi
The utilization of all of Papua's natural resources should be for the welfare and improvement of the community's quality of life. "It's ironic, considering that since the awarding of Freeport's first contract of work, indigenous communities have never been involved," he said.
Since the start of official mining (1967), the Amungme and Kamoro tribes have successively lost 100,000 hectares of customary land.
From 1983 to 1985, another 7,000 hectares of land were lost to establish Timika City. Another 25,000 hectares were lost to establish Kuala Kencana, which was inaugurated by Suharto in 1997.
The Amungme tribe, he said, lost one million hectares of land to immigrants from outside Papua in the name of the transmigration program.
Following the ratification of Freeport's 1991 contract of work, the Indonesian government declared its agreement to grant land concessions for Freeport's mining purposes covering an area of 2.6 million hectares.
“This has resulted in impoverishment for the Amungme and Kamoro people.”
Freeport's operations, he said, also sacrificed a number of rivers that became land for dumping toxic waste such as mercury and cyanide, namely the Aghawagon, Otomona, Ajkwa, Minajerwi and Aimone Rivers.
The Ajkwa River in Mimika has been a tailings disposal site since 1998. River water pollution has made it difficult for the Amungme and Kamoro people to access clean water.
He said that these practices of customary land grabbing and environmental pollution were not unknown to the Indonesian government. Freeport attempted to cover up various human rights violations and environmental damage during the New Order era.
For example, in 1995, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) stated that Freeport polluted rivers in Papua with tailings containing acid and toxins.
Divestment drains the budget?
The Indonesian government has been urged to exercise caution and prudence in divesting shares in foreign mining companies in Indonesia. The divestment policy, which requires the government to own up to 511 TP3T (three trillion Rupiah) of shares, is considered to risk draining the state budget (ABPN) and even negatively impacting the future investment climate.
“"This policy threatens future investment. The majority of Indonesian investment is foreign," said Emanuel Bria, a researcher at the Natural Resource Governance Institute, recently during a discussion in Yogyakarta.
This mining share divestment regulation requires foreign companies to relinquish some of their share ownership to the government.
“"Indonesian conglomerates often exploit divestment of company shares, often using funds derived from foreign loans," he said.
According to Bria, the planned divestment of 51% Freeport shares requires significant funding. Half of Freeport's total shares is equivalent to 40% of healthcare funding. "Imagine if all the hospitals in Kalimantan, NTT, and Sumatra were funded. Furthermore, the government would use the state budget to fund the funds."“
Josaphat Rizal Primana, Director of Energy, Mineral and Mining Resources, Bappenas, said that the policies of the administration of President Joko Widodo and Jusuf Kalla are very proactive.
The divestment policy, he said, is mandated by the Mineral and Coal Mining Law. However, Rizal disagrees with Freeport being managed by a state-owned enterprise, as state-owned enterprises have not yet generated maximum profits. He said the prerequisite for divestment is that state-owned and regionally-owned enterprises (BUMDs) are efficient and transparent. "Many state-owned enterprises are losing money, while only a few are profitable for the state."“
Mukhlis, Tax Manager of PT Freeport Indonesia, added that Freeport has been operating since 1973. Revenue to the country has reached US$16.6 billion from 1992 to the present. The company employs 12,184 people, involving approximately 351,000 Papuans. Funds to the community total US$1.46 billion.
As a multinational mining company, he said, Freeport needs legal guarantees from the government to continue to develop.
Ermy Ardhyanti from Article 33 said that natural resource businesses have strategic value, but the impact of mining on the environment and the resulting ecological disasters are never included in the calculation of state losses.
In its research on mining royalties, Article 33 found that the mining industry's fiscal schemes fail to consider environmental damage and the loss of livelihoods.
Royalties are also small. For PKP2B permit holders, the figure is around 13.51 TP3T, and for mining business permit holders, the figure is 101 TP3T. "The local government receives a share of the profits, but it has obligations to mitigate disasters and damage in the mining area, which exceed the revenue," he said.
He said Article 33 would add a formula to the damage cost indicator. "The royalties for that country are undervalued."“
Environmental damage and mining disasters are never counted. Mining in Indonesia 90% open pit, the impact of damage is high. Guarantee funds and post-mining guarantees are ineffective and inadequate.
According to the latest KPK data, approximately 80-901 mining companies' TP3T (Reserve Areas) did not provide reclamation guarantee funds. "That wasn't a major consideration when issuing permits," he said.
http://www.mongabay.co.id/2017/04/05/masyarakat-amungme-dan-kamoro-sikapi-soal-freeport/
