DEPANA NIKINTS

The Prophetic Statement when PNG was born as a Nation

2011-03-11T12:25:00.005+10:00

The Prophecy
By Steven Sukot
(In 1975, when PNG was born, our fathers released a prophetic statement over the life of the nation…now 36 years on, I just want to remind us of this prophecy)

What the Constitutional Planning Committee wrote when the nation was born is actually a prophesy into the life of the nation at its birth. It is a normal practice in Melanesia for the old and wise to speak into the life of a child at birth when dedicating and blessing the child. This is in fact a prophetic statement on the eve of the independence of Papua New Guinea. Every sons and daughters of this land should know and understand this. What the nation is encountering today with the overdrive emphasis on extractive industries especially in the mining, petroleum, oil and gas development might become a curse. The eyes of wisdom saw the future unfold 36 years ago and issued the warning. With the Vision 2050, medium term development strategies and economic policies we pursue as a nation, be warned, that our dreams will become nightmares if we despise this prophecy.
Lest we forget;

We see the darkness of neon lights.
We see the despair and loneliness in the urban cities.
We see the alienation of (the people) that is the result of the
present machine orientated economy.

We see true social security and (the people’s) happiness being
diminished in the name of economic progress.

We caution therefore that large-scale industries should be pursued only after very careful and thorough consideration of the likely consequences upon the social and spiritual fabric of our people…

There is overwhelming evidence to suggest that a significant number of people who live by the fruits of multi-million dollar multi-national corporations live in misery,loneliness and spiritual poverty.

We believe that since we are a rural people, our strength should be essentially in the land and the use of our innate artistic talents.
(Papua New Guinea Constitutional Planning Committee, 1975).

Churches main cause of land issues in Vidar & Basamuk

2010-09-15T11:00:00.003+10:00

Madang province is now embarking on some of the major economic projects in the country. These projects include the Ramu Nickel Mine, Yandera Gold Mine, the Pacific Marine Industrial Zone (PMIZ), Carbon Trade Pilot project at Middle-Ramu, Ramu Oil Palm and a long history of logging activities.

With these major economic project, there is one cross-cutting issue - Landownership and customary landowners. For now I would like to touch on two major projects thriving on lands acquired by religious organizations under a 99 year lease arrangement.

The land area at Vidar which was acquired by the Catholic Church in the 1800's from the locals from Kananam, went through several transactions after the 99 years lease lapsed. The Catholic church gave the land over to the government of PNG (not sure whether some money were exchanged in the transaction), then the government sold it to RD Tuna, and RD Tuna sold about a quarter of that Vidar landmass back to the government who is now embarking on the PMIZ project.

In a similar situation, the Lutheran Church also acquired the land at Basamuk from the locals under a 99 years lease. After the lease lapsed, the land went to the government and now the Ramu Nickel Mine developer CMCC who has set up the production plant site for the nickel.

Customary Landownership issues surrounding these two projects remains an unsolved issue. Both the Catholic and the Lutheran Churches entered the 99 years lease agreements with primitives and illiterate leaders who never went to school and do not understand the consequences of the agreements.

The Lutheran and the Catholic church also brought in people from the hinterlands to work on the plantations at Vidar and Basamuk. Now the 4th and 5th generations are also claiming landownership of the plantations and are challenging the customary landowners in participating as traditional landowners in the two projects.

The land titles commission is yet to deliberate on these landownership issues, but it is very clear the Catholic and the Lutheran churches are very quiet on the issue when in fact they are the main causes of the problems.

Lawyer, Govt clash on mine

2010-08-23T14:21:00.000+10:00

Post Courier
News Monday 23rd August, 2010

Lawyer, Govt clash on mine

MINING Minister John Pundari and landowners’ lawyer Tiffany Nonggorr have clashed over the proposed deep sea tailings placement issue with the Ramu nickel mine in Madang.

The case took a new twist over the weekend when lawyer representing the plaintiffs, Tiffany Nongorr was alleged by a ministerial staffer to have threatened to prolong the court case against the mine for more than two years.

In a statement from Mining Minister John Pundari’s office, it was alleged that Mrs Nongorr called the second secretary to the Minister, Simeon Wai, on his mobile last Friday and said that she had scientific data to help her prolong the court imposed moratorium on construction of the DSTP.

Her remarks were in relation to an article in the Post-Courier on August 20 titled: “Pundari backs Ramu after meeting locals.” The Pundari office statement claimed she had said she had spies at the Mineral Resources Authority who she collaboratedwith to get government information concerning the DSTP and Ramu nickel project.

But Mrs Nongorr yesterday denied any threat to prolong the case and said she told Mr Wai that when the Minister was appointed a couple of weeks ago, he immediately announced he would “fix” the Ramu nickel matter.“The next day I rang his second secretary and said that the plaintiffs wanted to brief him on their issues to assist him fix the matter,” Mrs Nongorr said.

“The second secretary said he would pass the message onto the Minister. They never contacted me again.” Mrs Nongorr said that on Friday the Minister was reported in the paper as saying no-one had come to the Government and showed the consequences of DSTP and the alternatives.

“I rang the second secretary and told him that I was very annoyed that the Minister had issued such a statement, as my clients had offered to brief him and he had ignored them. I said to him that the best way forward was for a negotiated solution in the best interests of the people, the Government and the miner. I said to him that if there was no early settlement then the case could go on for at least a year or more because whoever won the trial, there would likely be an appeal. And if that was the case, no one would benefit.”

Mr Pundari when told by Mr Wai about Mrs Nongorr’s outburst challenged the lawyer to disclose the identities of her “collaborators’’ at MRA or other government agencies.

“As far as I’m concerned, all public servants that are involved in the Ramu project are committed and dedicated to achieving the best outcome for all parties. If there are rogue elements within the Government team, they are doing so for their own interest and not serving the state’s and people’s interest,” he said.
Mrs Nongorr said she has had discussions and meetings with the lawyers for MRA and they believed a negotiated outcome was better for everyone.

Copyright©2009, Post-Courier Online.

QC delivers weather forecast in Court

2010-08-20T16:47:00.004+10:00

The National Court in Madang heard the motions today (19.08.2010) for the Ramu Nickel Mine DSTP matter. The QC representing the MCC argued that, the National Court should allow MCC to construct the DSTP pipeline because the wet season is approaching and will cause further delays on the Ramu Nickel Project that is costing the developer millions. The QC had no credible source of weather forecast or Meteorology reports to show the court. He based his argument on an engineering argument that, the rainy season would affect the construction of the DSTP pipeline.

The Plaintiffs lawyer Ray Williams (who appeared on behalf of Tiffany Nonggorr) questioned the validity of the argument in the absence of any credible weather forecast report. Mr. Williams asked the court “where is the weather forecast from the National Weather Service Bureau that states that it’s going to be a rainy season?” ….“what would you expect, we are in the tropics and it rains now and a sunny day tomorrow….Welcome to PNG, the land of the unexpected” he added. Even the judge consented that, it rains anytime in PNG and with his experience in living in West New Britain, with a big smile, he said,” when the northern part is having a fine day, the southern part rains, so how do you know that it’s going to be a wet season?”.

The whole court room was filled with giggles as the audience could not stop laughing at the QC’s argument on the wet season and some of them had to be told to leave the court room immediately.

I followed the Plaintiffs' lawyer outside and asked him why he said “Welcome to PNG, the land of the unexpected”? He replied that, the argument of the rainy season was not an intelligent argument and therefore did not deserved an intelligent reply.

The decision will be given next Tuesday the 24^th of August 2010.

China on a Mission to Exploit the Pacific Ocean

2010-08-09T09:13:00.001+10:00

Photos

1 of 1

Workmen putting the finishing touches to the Lafayette, Pacific Andes' version of a mothership - a floating fish factory, touted as the world's biggest in its class.

QINGDAO, China: Integrated seafood company Pacific Andes International is positioning itself to ride the next big wave, which it believes will come from the South Pacific Ocean.

Its new flagship factory vessel will go into operation next month, and this is expected to help raise the profit margins at its fishery business to as high as 50 per cent, up from 35 per cent.

Workmen are busy putting the finishing touches to the US$100 million vessel, named the Lafayette.

It is Pacific Andes' latest version of a mothership - a floating fish factory, touted as the world's biggest in its class.

The vessel is set to sail to the South Pacific Ocean at the end of the month, and its target is to catch 300,00 tonnes of fish - the equivalent of twice what Hong Kong consumes in a year.

Designed to stay out at sea all year around, it will be supported by five super-trawlers and seven catcher vessels that will pump the live catch into the Lafayette for processing.

The vessel is able to freeze 1,500 tonnes a day, and the fishes will then forwarded directly to their destination.

Ng Joo Siang, managing director of Pacific Andes International, said: "With our traditional fishing business, we have EBITDA of 35 to 40 per cent, that the margin and our net profit margin is way exceeding 20 per cent.

"So with Lafayette, which is more efficient that other fleet that we have, we believe that with this higher revenue and higher profitability, we should be able to provide good return to our shareholders."

Also helping to boost the Hong Kong-listed company's bottomline is its new processing plant in Qingdao.

The new facility is able to handle 60,000 tonnes of fish fillet annually, and its efficiencies has reduced cost of sales by up to 15 per cent.

Pacific Andes made a name for itself by supplying a then-little known white fish – the Alaskan Pollock. Today, the fish is widely used by fast-food chains such as McDonald's.

The South Pacific venture offers two new lines of growth – Peruvian anchovies and Chilean jack mackerel. The latter will be targeted specifically at the African market.

"We have decided as a company to expand heavily into Africa, we want to have a pan-African distribution concept," said Ng.

"We believe this continent will have great growth potential, greater than even China, so that's an area we're targeting. Eventually, we hope that in five years' time, China and Africa can be equally important to us."

Pacific Andes today holds a 15 per cent share of the total imported Chinese fish market.

Source/Link: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/corporatenews/view/1019076/1/.html

Vanuatu: Chiefs call on Forum leaders to protect custom land.

2010-08-05T10:43:00.002+10:00

Vanuatu Malvatumauri (National Council of Chiefs) has called on Pacific leaders to protect custom land, endorsing a regional declaration on indigenous land tenure in Melanesia.

Thu, 5 Aug 2010

By Nic Maclellan in Port Vila

Vanuatu’s Malvatumauri (National Council of Chiefs) has called on Pacific leaders to protect custom land, endorsing a regional declaration on indigenous land tenure in Melanesia.

Chief Selwyn Garu, Secretary General of the Malvatumauri announced that the council of chiefs had unanimously endorsed the Mele Declaration on Land in Melanesia.

The declaration, prepared at a regional meeting last June, states: “We are opposed to any form of alienation of land from customary landowners, whether by outright sale or through leases which remove landowners’ capacity to effectively control, access and use their land.”

The declaration also calls for the overhaul of land administration in Melanesia and rejects “all policies which require that customary land be registered as a precondition for business or development activities.”

The Malvatumauri, a national body which unites chiefs from 20 island councils and two urban councils, is meeting in Port Vila this week.

Chief Selwyn Garu said: “The declaration was presented before the Council of Chiefs this morning. The members of the Council of Chiefs talked about it and in the end of the discussion we unanimously endorsed it.”

The Mele Declaration was prepared by the Melanesian Indigenous Land Defence Alliance (MILDA), a network of landowner, cultural and community groups concerned with land tenure and development across the Melanesian region.

MILDA was founded at a meeting in Madang, Papua New Guinea in 2009. Their second meeting at Mele village in Vanuatu last June brought together a range of organisations “to strategise a regional response to the persistent pressure for registration and leasing of customary land.”

The Mele Declaration was prepared at the June meeting, which brought together chiefs, church leaders, members of women’s and youth groups and other participants from Vanuatu, Papua New Guinea, Bougainville, Solomon Islands, Fiji and Australia.

Changing land use for tourism

In Melanesian nations like Vanuatu, Fiji and Papua New Guinea, over 90 per cent of land is held by customary land and resource owners.

For Selwyn Garu: “When we talk about land in Melanesia, you can’t separate land from custom. If you lose land, you lose custom. If you lose custom, you lose land.

“Custom defines the use of land, but custom cannot be practiced on alienated land – it can only be practiced on custom land,” he stated. “Land continues to be the main source of employment for the people in the villages. With land, we have all that we need.”

Vanuatu’s Constitution states that “All land in the republic of Vanuatu belongs to the indigenous custom owners and their descendants.” It also states that “only indigenous citizens of the republic of Vanuatu who have acquired their land in accordance with a recognised system of land tenure shall have perpetual ownership of their land.”

In spite of this, many land owners on Vanuatu’s main island of Efate have granted long-term leases to overseas investors for tourist projects and private strata title developments, which have effectively alienated much of the shoreline along the coast.

Landowners must compensate the leaseholder for improvements to the land if they wish to reclaim their land at the end of the lease. For this reason some villagers will find it difficult to reclaim leased land after decades of construction or improvement on land provided under long term leases.

Action by Forum leaders

The chiefs’ decision comes as government leaders from around the region have gathered in Vanuatu for the 41st Pacific Islands Forum.

After endorsement by the Malvatumauri on Wednesday morning, the declaration was launched at the Chiefs’ Nakamal in Port Vila by Chief Selwyn Garu, Joel Simo of MILDA and Ralph Regenvanu, the Member of Parliament for Port Vila.

Regenvanu, one of the co-founders of MILDA, called on Forum leaders to protect land rights as the basis of the Melanesian economy: “We would like this Declaration to inform what the Forum is doing and the decisions that they’ll take in the next few days. We are urging our leaders of government, we are urging international financial institutions (including donor countries) but especially our own leaders to move away from policies that talk about land registration as a prerequisite for gaining credit.”

Regenvanu added: “Over the last couple of years, we’ve managed to get the concept of the ‘traditional economy’ on to the agenda in Vanuatu, in the Melanesian Spearhead Group and in the Forum. But we need to have our leaders seriously taking this concept, this reality on board - the traditional economy continues to be the main source of sustenance for people in much of Melanesia.”

For Chief Selwyn Garu: “I’d like to say that land is a living thing. It gives life. It empowers life and you can’t reduce the value of land the way it is being done nowadays in many parts of Melanesia.”

Refer to Source/Link Below:
http://www.islandsbusiness.com/news/index_dynamic/containerNameToReplace=MiddleMiddle/focusModuleID=130/focusContentID=20440/tableName=mediaRelease/overideSkinName=newsArticle-full.tpl

Melanesian Lands Defence Alliance - Mele Declaration 2010

2010-08-04T16:13:00.002+10:00

The Mele Declaration 2010

The declaration of the 2nd annual meeting of the Melanesian Indigenous Land Defence Alliance, held at Mele Village in Port Vila, Vanuatu, 14-19 June 2010

In response to increasing threats to customary land systems posed by the land reform agendas of international financial institutions, aid agencies, governments and elites within our own countries, the second annual meeting of the Melanesian Indigenous Land Defence Alliance (MILDA) affirms its commitment to indigenous control of customary land systems. Recognising that the threats to customary land are directed against the Melanesian Pacific as a region, our intention is to unite and organize on a regional basis, to defend the continued control of Melanesian communities over their land, sea, water, air and natural resources. We assert that the customary land systems are the basis of life and community in Melanesia.

Established in 2009, MILDA is an alliance of groups and individuals united by a shared vision, a common cause, and a commitment to working together. Our members are fieldworkers and community members, women’s representatives and mothers, fathers and grandfathers. We include church leaders and traditional leaders, academics, regional NGOs and international supporters. We first came together last year in Madang, PNG, and following from that we came together this year in Port Vila, Vanuatu. We came from Papua New Guinea, Bougainville, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Fiji and Australia, and were privileged to have traditional chiefs with us. We came to share experiences, stories and skills, and strategize a regional response to the persistent pressure for registration and leasing of customary land.

Land has always been of the highest value to the lives of our peoples, and so it will be forgenerations to come. In all Melanesian traditions, land is regarded as a non-alienable resource that cannot be parted with. The relationship which we have with our land is special and unique, and cannot be accounted for through Western systems of value.

TheMelanesian definition of land is inclusive. Land extends from the surface of the ground to the centre of the earth. It stretches above us to the limits of the sky. It includes the waters of our rivers, streams and creeks. It includes our oceans. The land has belonged to us – and we to it – since time immemorial. Land is our mother and the source of life for our people. Land secures life, fosters and strengthens relationships that sustain our society. It embodies the link to our past, present and future and therefore sustains everything we do. MILDA members reaffirm the sanctity of land.

The meeting asserted the following:
1. We are opposed to any form of alienation of land from customary landowners, whether by outright sale or through leases which remove landowners’ capacity to effectively control, access and use their land.

2. We believe that the ways in which land is used and distributed should be determined by Melanesian custom, and not Western legal systems.

3. We assert the value of traditional economy, which promotes self-reliance amongst our people and communities, and we are opposed to actions and policies which encourage the dependency of Melanesian peoples on others, including the state.

4. We reject all policies which require that customary land be registered as a precondition for business or development activities, and demand that Melanesian governments cease all pressures for customary land registration, whether voluntary or involuntary.

5. We oppose all foreign programs, bribes and inducements to bring about customary land registration in Melanesia.

6. We call for a total overhauling of the current land administration in Melanesia to weed out corrupt land dealings and fraudulent titling. All customary land taken by these means should be returned to customary owners.

The Melanesian Indigenous Land Defence Alliance resolved that it will meet again nextyear in the Autonomous Region of Bougainville.

Piping Out Southern Highlands Province

2010-07-28T18:00:00.001+10:00

With the LNG project, the Southern Highlands and newly established Hela Province have elevated PNG’s profile in the Liquefied and Natural Gas in the global oil and gas production. The PNG LNG project which is referred to many as the economic “savior” of the country proposes to develop gas fields in the Southern Highlands and Western Province of PNG and transport the gas via pipeline to an LNG facility near Port Moresby for shipment to markets overseas.

Amidst the controversies surrounding the signing of the Benefit Sharing Agreement (BSA) where key landowning clans refuse to sign and the creation of the Hela province after the signing of the BSA now brewing a lot of grievances on ground as seen in the recent incident where the crowd threw stones at the PM and the government officials, another agreement has been signed for Southern Highlands for yet another resource.

Australia in desperate need for cheap and reliable clean water sources is looking at spending $A30 billion to have it piped over 4000 kilometres to their continent. Papua New Guinea and Australian company Might and Power (M&A) Ltd yesterday entered into an agreement for the latter to carry out pre-feasibility and feasibility studies into the PNG-Australia water project. The environment impact study will be part of a K20 million feasibility study that will be undertaken.

The project hopes to one day pipe fresh water from a number of rivers including the Mendi River in the Southern Highlands Province to Australia, where it will be used to feed dry riverine systems and the pipe will also go all the way to Lake Eyre where the lake has dried up and the local residents have resettled elsewhere.
He said the State and Federal governments had the full backing of the project as they saw there was a big need for fresh and cheap water supply to nearly all the eastern states of Australia. Mr Ariel said rivers in Cape York could not be used for the project because there was no gravity and they dry up during the dry seasons while rivers in the Southern Highlands Province had the gravity and the continuous rainfall to keep flowing all year round. “The advantage for the project (in PNG) is the altitude and the rainfall,” Mr Ariel said. “Water in the Highlands is abundant while it is scarce in Australia.”

PNG and Southern Highlands Province is yet to realize the benefits from LNG have gone ahead to exploit its water resources. The oil and gas will be piped out and now the fresh waters will also be piped out. Why should PNG exploit all its natural resources at the same time as if there is no tomorrow? It is not wise to take everything out of the warehouse at the same time without preserving some for the future generation and therefore it is not wise to have both the LNG and the water project coming out of the same province at the same time.

RD Managers Threaten Workers In Their Own Villages

2010-07-28T13:00:00.000+10:00

Filippino Expats AGAIN Bully PNGeans

You would think with a court appearance this Friday (30 July) in which six of their Filippino workers will be facing charges of murdering a Papua New Guinean government inspector on one of their ships, that RD Tuna would be a bit more cautious in their interactions with the local staff.

But that’s NOT how Pete Celso’s Troops are acting and again it appears RD is getting themselves in trouble. For years RD has violated the laws of PNG from environmental abuses, to sanitation problems, to strikes by Filipino staff on their boats (which RD branded as pirates). The company which has a rather poor reputation both within PNG and overseas continues to push locals around as if they owned PNG.

Chief hypocrite Rodrigo Rivera, Chairman and President, who pretends to be a wonderful Christian has once again shown his true colors and that of the pitiful RD group of companies.

Battered and frustrated at the strike by their workers RD managers went to new lows Tuesday night (27 July) as they descended upon Maiwara village and threatened the women to come to work or face turning in their Id Cards, which in essence meant they would be sacked.

Human Resource Manager Romeo Lee, Prouduction Manager, Mr. Nongs, Plant Manager Gerry Juvele and last nights coward Security Manager Paul Vingu displayed typical RD management style, by boarding one of the vehicles which trucks the RD workers in and headed to Maiwara village. The night shift women were NOT going to work in solidarity with their fellow workers who had their ID cards taken from them by RD Security and NOT allowed to come back to work. Nongs and Juvele threatened the women demanding they come to work or lose their jobs. While many of the frightened women did board the truck - a second truck saw the back almost empty. Still there was NO PRODUCTION at the plant last night, as only a handful of women showed up for work. Makes one wonder what the purpose was of harassing the Maiwara women, who instead of working stood around doing nothing. Nice work RD Management Team you have proven you are exactly what everyone says you are.

Union members and angry workers are still upset over RD not paying them the minimum wage. Labor representations have said RD has been in violation of the law. But violating the law is nothing new for Celso and company. RD has begun recruiting new workers and the word is 78 had taken their medicals today. RD workers say they will NOT allow the new workers to proceed to work and that RD best reinstate the now 505 workers suspended. The suspended workers say they have had enough
of RD’s treatment and will do what’s necessary to be treated fairly in their own country.

Landowners from 4 project areas Joined Forces

2010-07-26T17:25:00.000+10:00

Papua New Guinea is on the pinnacle of major resources boom in the country and the government is doing its best to create an investment friendly environment at the same time customary landowner issues are reaching boiling point all around the major resource development and proposed project sites.

Landowner issues ranging from, consultation processes, agreements, landownership, participation, environmental plans and permits, social mapping and spin off businesses are some of the issues are raised from the major resource development projects in PNG.

Landowners from the major project areas in PNG have been fighting in isolation to address their concerns since the first resource development project in the country was developed. However, for the first time in the history of PNG, four (4) major project sites and project impacted areas came together to join forces to address their issues.

In a joint press conference held at the Aku Lodge conference room on the 20th of July 2010, representatives from the Watut River Union (Morobe), the riverine communities union organizing around the impacts on the Watut river system by the Hidden valley mine, Raicoast Anti-DSTP group (Madang) who are opposing the plans for the dumping of the Ramu Nickel mine waste into the Basamuk Bay , representatives from the clans from the LNG project (Hela) who did not signed the benefit sharing agreement, Unitech students from the new Hela province, New Ireland Resource Watch, the people's movement of the New Ireland Province who oppose the deep seabed mining, the Bismarck Solomons Sea Indigenous People's Council (BSSIPC) also opposing deep seabed mining and the Madang People's forum (MPF)collectively want the government to respond to their major concerns respectively, review all these projects and repeal the new environmental act.

The group made a strong call to Somare to step down and NA to be removed from the government, because they claim the current NA/Somare government is not representing the interest of the people and seen to be driven by foreign investors. If there is going to be a change in government, the group made it clear also that, these demands need top be looked into immediately. The press conference was done a day before the adjournment of the parliament to November. However the group was very clear that if the government does not change or if the new government will not look into their demands, then the people will take it upon themselves to clean up the mess.

This group is also calling on all other landowners from other project areas in PNG to come together and work together because, the government is serving foreign interests.

6 RD Tuna Workers Face Murder Charges In Death of PNG Government Official

2010-07-19T10:16:00.000+10:00

(PNG Official sought to protect dolphins)

Six RD Tuna workers - all Filippino - are facing murder charges in the death of National Fisheries Observer, Charlie Lasisi of New Ireland Province.

The incident took place on 29 March of this year on board the RD Tuna vessel FV/Dolores 838 inside the Bismark Seas in Vanimo, along the Indonesian/PNG border.

Police said Mr. Lasisi had been strongly objecting to the fishing of dolphins by
RD Vessels. The catching of dolphins, sharks and other prohibited fish has been one of the many criticisms of RD over years.

The summary of facts said it was between 6pm-7pm when he went missing after he left the ship’s mess hall. It said when he left the room, two Filippino crew members - Ramil Lumactod and June Alon left with him, but returned to report he had “gone missing.” The captain searched the area and ship and could not locate Lasisi or the body.

On 31 March a report was sent to the Managing Director of National Fisheries Authority (NFA) Sylvester Pokajam and the National Maritime Safety Authority who sent officers to investigate on “suspicion of murder”. Also charged with murder in addition to Ramil and June were Bonfacio Gelvoko, Franz Olivia Oyao, Jerwin Famini and Francisco Famini.

The six were remanded at Beon jail in Madang for several days until K500 bail each with TEN CONDITIONS were granted by Justice David Cannings. They were released under the care of the senior Vice President of RD Tuna Canners Limited in Madang. Justice Cannings ordered that RD Canners pay surety of K10,000 because they were all foreigners. Cannings said the amount should ensure they six do not escape because not only would the money be forfeited but it would proven bad for the corporate reputation of RD Tuna if the six did not return. The accused will appear again for mention on 30 July.

Chief Somare Attacked in Tari

2010-07-15T17:35:00.001+10:00

The swearing in of the Hela Transitional Authority in Tari Town turned rowdy as angry landowners threw stones at the officials today (15.07.2010) at around 12:pm

When the Prime Minister took the stage to give his keynote address and officiate the swearing in ceremony,the University students from Hela raised placards with slogans such as "NO LNG" and confronted the PM with their dissatisfaction. When the police and security personals moved in to remove the protesters, that's when the situation went out of control as landowners threw stones at the Chief, the government officials and the police.

It was reported by someone from Tari via mobile phone that, the police fired teargas at the crowd to disperse them. In the tussle between the police and the crowd, it was reported by eye witness that, the PM took his share of stones thrown at him. It is unclear, whether the PM sustained any injuries or not.

There is still a lot of unsettled issues regarding the LNG project and more trouble is expected to erupt.

National News Paper lying to Protect Asian Interests

2010-07-15T09:18:00.000+10:00

There is something going on in PNG. You can feel it. The corrupt government of Michael Somare is being called out at all levels of society - from the political Opposition which you expect, to they grassroots which you don't expect. Young Papua New Guineans are standing up asking questions which need to be asked and in Madang just two weeks ago took to the streets - challenging the PM, the Attorney General and the Police who told them they could not march. The protest march was against the new Environmental Act which came about because of the notorious Chinese STATE OWNED Ramu Nickel Mine which proposes to dump over 100 million tonnes of waste into the local bay. Landowners who has been complaining about this dumping FOR OVER A DECADE are now organized both on the ground and in the court room where they have successfully been able to halt the mine from continuing through a court injunction.

Yet through all this something is beginning to smell - and while this is of no great surprise they need to be called out on it. One of the two PNG dailies - The National - is mis-reporting news and its becoming more and more obvious. As everyone knows the National is owned by the Malaysian owned Rimbunan Hijau, the actual owners of Papua New Guinea who have been having their way in PNG for over 20 years now. For all intent and purposes they ran PNG for years. They are now in competition with, yet cooperating with the Chinese.

Over the years everyone is aware of the bias of the National on logging issues and more recently their playing down the Asian influence in PNG. This comes as no secret to anyone. However in recent weeks it should be pointed out that TWO stories which came from the National and serves the interests of those they support must be challenged.

After the orderly and peaceful protest against the Environmental Laws in Madang - the National CHOSE to report on Page 1 of their newspaper that government authorities were meeting and prepared to arrest the organizers of the protest. The story was NOT picked up by the other daily -the Post Courier. Rumors were flying early that the story was untrue and fabricated by the National. Attempts to verify this story from government sources failed. Two days ago one high ranking government official who asked not to be identified said "it was never going to happen. It was an attempt by the government to frighten other areas of the country so they wouldn't take to the streets like Madang." He went on to say the government collaborated with the National to put out the false story.

Now the National has chosen another lie for purposes only they or perhaps you the reader will understand. Prime Minister Micheal Somare was in Madang recently meeting with one of the Plaintiffs in the Court Case against the Chinese Government owned Ramu Nickel Mine. During that meeting the Chief doing business like he always has and pushed by his Chinese masters offered the plaintiffs a K40 million deal to the plaintiff and his people in exchange for dropping the court case. The National chose to run the story saying and "out of court settlement will probably be reached". Oh really? Yet that same day the plaintiff reported to the other news media that was a lie - and it was being misreported. To the plaintiff we would say it was more than misreported it was RH protecting its interest and those of their Asian cronies.

And did you all notice how the article about RH intimidating the news media (ie: Post Courier) was conveniently NOT reported in the National, yet picked up by all other media. The National in line with the National Alliance and Pangu do not seem to understand what's going on.They don't see it or don't want to believe the change which is in the air. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out. For one thing BE CAREFUL - (more than usual that is) what you read in the National. They have shown VERY CLEARLY ONCE AGAIN - they will say anything to protect their interests - and those interests are not in the interest of the majority of Papua New Guineans. Wake up RH - the old days are over.

Why should the Chinese be Exempted from Liquor Ban in Madang ??

2010-07-07T17:57:00.001+10:00

It is reported that the Madang Provincial Government will put a liquor ban in Madang. However, insider’s information from the Provincial Liquor Licensing office in Madang revealed that the Chinese are going to be exempted from the liquor ban. There is no reasonable reason behind this exemption and it is becoming ridiculously unfair to the other liquor businesses in town.

It has become pretty obvious that the Chinese influence and manipulation has penetrated every structure of authority in Madang. The famous flying fox habitat has turned into a typical Chinese outpost.

This sounds more like the failed prohibition experiment in the USA which led to the rise of the (Italian) mafia. With unfettered Ramu Nico access to booze in Madang, could not the same thing happen here, particularly with the worries expressed in the press about an already existing "Chinese mafia" in PNG? And PNGeans can't be trusted with booze but the Asian foreigners can? This is discrimination against PNGeans.

Now they monopolize the liquor sales in town and guess what, this is where the big money is. Chinese like to stick their nose into the areas where there is a lot of money. Now, is it a coincidence that, the Provincial Government decided to issue a liquor ban, and the Chinese are going to be exempted, or is it a plan that is being implemented to monopolize the business?

What more do we expect-the Chinese mafia is slowly taking over this country and its going to get nasty especially with the NA (New Asian Party) in power.

Dumping System Harmful

2010-07-06T12:30:00.000+10:00

Post Courier
News Monday 05th July, 2010
Dumping system ‘harmful’
By JOSHUA ARLO

The approved permit given to the Ramu Nico (MCC) Management Limited for coral blasting to construct the deep sea tailing placement system (DSTPS) was made without proper assessment of the potential risks to the environment, a court was told on Friday.

This showed that the Government had failed to properly assess the impacts of whether this course of dumping of mine waste is harmful and will interfere with the eco-biological fish and fauna life in the waters at the mine site.
These were some of the arguments put by landowners and landowner groups around the project site who are fighting for a permanent injunction against MCC’s proposed mine dumping plan and its construction.

The landowners also argue that the permit does not authorise the environmental harm that will be caused by dumping the mine waste in the sea, and that so far there have been breaches in some of the conditions of the permit in which MCC has failed to follow to the letter as to no septic tanks constructed for its workers and no proper drainage systems on the project site to remove human waste which is being dumped straight into the sea, untreated.

Tiffany Nonggorr for the landowners argued that if MCC could not follow these simple conditions, how could it monitor the dumping of tonnes of mine waste into the sea. Mrs Nonggorr submitted that DEC also neglected to monitor these simple permit conditions, and the landowners failed to see how it could monitor the mine waste being dumped into the sea. She also argued that there were scientific research reports that showed such proposed tailing dumping would cause harm to the environment and the lifestyle of the local people.

She urged the court to look at the issue of harm being unlawful, not the fact whether the permit approving the dumping was lawful or unlawful. She said there was no evidence of further research on this issue before DEC approved the permit.

MCC argues the permit was approved and there was no serious issue for the matter to linger in court. MCC submitted that the DSTPS was the best option of mine waste dumping after looking at all other dumping systems. MCC told the court that Mrs Nonggorr had “glossed” over the facts, making them “quite laughable” and that there was evidence of further research which showed there will be no harmful risks imposed using this proposed system. MCC stated that acid used in the mining process that will be dumped is “deactivated” and “so it is nonsense that tailings discharged in the sea is harmful”.

While the Supreme Court considers whether or not to permanently extend the interim injunction, the issue raised by the landowners is yet to be heard in a substantive trial before the National Court.

Copyright©2009, Post-Courier Online.

Rumor: K3million offered to Plaintiffs on negoitiation table

2010-06-28T17:52:00.001+10:00

Amidst all the controversies surrounding the Ramu Nickel Mine with the court cases and campaigns against DSTP running parallel to each other, there are already new developments.

There are rumors that, the PNG Government, CMCC and a MRA Lawyer currently negotiating with the Plaintiffs to withdraw the court case to allow the mine to progress. An amount of K3million is said to be offered to the Plaintiffs plus other benefits such as contracts for them to withdraw the court case.

Several Landowners from Raicoast are now lodging at the Madang Lodge while the negotiations are going on.

By the way, is it legal for the defendants to negotiate with the plaintiffs directly, when the matter is in the courts?

PNG's Leading Constitutional Lawyer Calls for PM to Step Aside

2010-06-24T10:20:00.000+10:00

Sir Micheal Somare - the right thing to do is to step aside as Prime Minister _______________________________________________________________

The right thing for Sir Michael Somare to do to promote and uphold good and ethical government, protect the good name of the Office of Prime Minister and set a better example for leadership in PNG, is to step aside as Prime Minister now; and allow investigations to be conducted by relevant law enforcement agencies into serious allegations that he broke a number of laws in the Moti Affair.

The Moti Affair

The Ombudsman Commission submitted to the Parliament its report on the Moti Affair. The Parliament rejected the Report on 10^th March 2010. In the recent sitting of the Parliament, no mention was made of the Report or of the Moti Affair generally. Should PNG just forget about this episode, just like other similar issues in the past, as it if it never happened?

This one should not be forgotten.

The Moti Affair should not be forgotten because it involved allegations of unlawful conduct on the part of the person holding the Office of Prime Minister. The person occupying that Office, Sir Micheal Somare, was accused of beaching PNG’s laws including committing criminal offences. If PNG is ever to tackle serious issues about whether the rule of law exists in the country and issues of governance (mismanagement, corruption, etc.) facing PNG, we must ensure that the matters raised by the Moti Affair are properly investigated. The image of the Office of Prime Minister has been tarnished.

Office of Prime Minister is separate from Sir Michael Somare

The Office of Prime Minister is the top most leadership position in PNG. It belongs to the people of PNG. It does not belong to an individual.

An individual occupying the Office of Prime Minister must be the first to respect the Office. If any wrong doing is alleged against the person occupying the Office, and the allegations made are serious, the person holding the Office must, at the least, step aside as Prime Minister and allow investigations to be conducted. To not to do so is to bring the Office of Prime Minister into disrepute, damage its image and set a bad example of leadership down the line.

The Ombudsman Commission’s report on the Moti Affair highlighted breaches of a number of laws. They are serious in two respects. One, the laws broken are important laws. Two, the Ombudsman Commission report’s findings raise allegations that require further investigation by relevant authorities without being compromised, real or apprehended.

For the appropriate authorities to conduct the investigations without the appearance of influence by Sir Micheal Somare remaining in the Office of Prime Minister, Sir Michael Somare ought to step aside to allow these investigations to be conducted. There is already a perception in the minds of many Papua New Guineans that any investigations will come to nothing because Sir Micheal Somare is the Prime Minister. This is a bad indictment on the rule of law in PNG.

Serious allegations against Sir Michael Somare in the Moti Affair

The single most serious allegation made against Sir Michael Somare is that he gave directions for Julian Moti to be removed from PNG whilst judicial processes were still in play.

In its 2009 Report, the Ombudsman Commission said that, from evidence available to it, in its opinion, Sir Micheal Somare gave the direction for Julian Moti to be removed from PNG to Solomon Islands. Sir Michael Somare has denied giving such a direction.

Whether or not Sir Michael Somare did or did not give the direction must be determined by the appropriate authorities. The Ombudsman Commission has formed the view that Sir Michael Somare gave the direction. Sir Michael Somare says he did not. Sir Michael Somare is not guilty of anything. But, he stands accused by a competent constitutional office – and the accusations are serious. Sir Michael Somare ought not to occupy the Office of Prime Minister until he is cleared.

But the Ombudsman is not the only body that has reached this conclusion. A defence force inquiry in 2007, headed by a senior judge, reportedly made similar findings as the Ombudsman Report. Sir Michael Somare took court action to stop the release and publication of that inquiry report in late 2007.

To protect the good name of the Office of Prime Minister, to establish better standards of ethics in leadership, and to remove any perception in the minds of Papua New Guineans that he will influence investigations by relevant authorities; respecting the people’s Office of Prime Minister, Sir Michael Somare ought to step aside. There is good example of this. Sir Julius Chan stepped aside as Prime Minister to allow an inquiry to be conducted in the Sandline Affair. Here, the situation is more serious, in that, the Ombudsman Commission has already formed the view that Sir Michael Somare gave a direction that led to breaches of a number of laws.

What are the Ombudsman Commission’s findings? On the mid-night to early morning of 10 October 2006, Julian Moti was flown out from Port Moresby to Munda in the Solomon Islands in a PNG Defence Force (PNGDF) aircraft.

· On 30^th September 2006, the District Court had revoked an earlier warrant for Julian Moti to be released and ordered that Mr. Moti be arrested and detained. If Sir Michael Somare gave directions for Julian Moti to be taken out of PNG, as the Ombudsman Commission concluded, this was a direct violation of the orders of the District Court. This is serious because it is contempt of court and brings into conflict the separation of powers – between the judiciary and the executive government.

· The flight from Port Moresby to Munda was not approved by the civil aviation authorities as required by laws applying to aircraft flights. These laws were broken. It was also dangerous. The airfield at Jacksons airport was not lighted, and the PNGDF aircraft flew out at 1:00am in the dark. Breaches of these laws implicate Sir Michael Somare if he gave the direction for Julian Moti’s removal as the Ombudsman Commission concluded.

· Only the National Executive Council has the power to direct the PNGDF to undertake missions such as that involving the flying out of Julian Moti from PNG to Solomon Islands. If Sir Michael Somare gave the direction, as the Ombudsman Commission concluded, this was a breach of laws that apply to the PNGDF.

· Police were also directed by government officials not to arrest and detain Julian Moti as ordered by the Court. This is an interference in the independence of the Royal Papua New Guinea Constabulary and itself a contempt of court.

The breaches of these laws are serious, and they must be properly investigated. And, Sir Michael Somare stands accused in these serious breaches.

Attack on the Ombudsman Commission

Like the office of the Prime Minister, the Ombudsman Commission as an institution belongs to the people of PNG. It is an important office established by the Constitution of PNG.

In statements made in Parliament and published in newspapers, Sir Michael Somare criticised the Ombudsman Commission’s report “stupid and disappointing” and its contents as reflecting “very poorly of the integrity and objectivity of the Ombudsman Commission in the conduct of its duties”.

Already, this criticism of the Ombudsman Commission demonstrates why Sir Michael Somare ought to step aside as Prime Minister and allow those investigations to establish whether or not Sir Michael Somare is guilty of what he has been accused of. The people’s Office of Prime Minister cannot be used, by the person occupying it, to attack an important constitutional office like the Ombudsman Commission that also belongs to the people of PNG. The Ombudsman Commission findings were against Sir Michael Somare as an individual, not the office of Prime Minister.

Other events which have taken place before and since the Ombudsman Commission’s report into the Moti Affair raise serious questions as to whether Sir Michael Somare (as Prime Minister) is unfairly prejudiced against the Ombudsman Commission.

· The Maladina sponsored amendments to the Constitution and the Organic Law on Duties and Responsibilities of Leadership have been controversial. There is suspicion that these important legislative measures, some parts of which will cut down the powers of the Ombudsman Commission, are being handled with prejudice by the Government that Sir Michael Somare leads.

· The Chief Ombudsman, Chronox Manek, was attacked by criminals recently and it has been said that it was an attempt on his life. Neither the Prime Minister nor any other Minister condemned the attack. The perception is reinforced that Sir Michael Somare and his Ministers are prejudiced against the Ombudsman Commission and are unable to do what is required of them as leaders – to speak out against such attacks to protect individuals who work in public institutions which involve risks.

· Sir Michael Somare stopped the publication of the Defence inquiry report headed by Justice Gibbs Salika. Not only did this discredit a senior judge of the third arm of government, the judiciary, but the perception remains that Sir Michael Somare stopped the inquiry to protect himself.

Do the Ombudsman Commission’s conclusions made on Sir Michael Somare in the Moti report have basis?

Anyone who has read the Ombudsman Commission’s report of the Moti Affair will see that the Ombudsman Commission’s conclusion that Sir Micheal Somare gave the direction for Julian Moti to be flown out of PNG came from one person’s evidence – the evidence of the late Joseph Assaigo, then Director-General of Office of Security Coordination and Advisory. Assaigo told the Ombudsman Commission that Sir Michael Somare’s then Chief of Staff Leonard Louma told him (Assaigo) that the Prime Minister wanted Julian Moti to be removed from PNG, and Assaigo and then Chief Secretary Joshua Kalinoe were to do this.

Assaigo’s was the only evidence stating to the effect that Sir Michael Somare gave the direction for Moti to be taken out of PNG. There was no other evidence. Assaigo was a lawyer and a public servant for many years.

However, two critical people did not give evidence to the Ombudsman Commission. They were Leonard Louma and Joshua Kalinoe. The Ombudsman Commission wanted their evidence but, on the specific matter of the removal of Moti from PNG to Solomon Islands, Sir Michael Somare stopped Leonard Louma and Joshua Kalinoe from giving evidence to the Ombudsman Commission. This, Sir Michael Somare did, by using Section 19 of the Organic Law on Ombudsman Commission, which permits a Prime Minister, after consultations with the Ombudsman Commission, to certify that giving information on a subject matter would prejudice the security, defence or international relations of PNG; or giving information would involve disclosure of proceedings, deliberations or decisions of the National Executive Council.

The use of Section 19 by Sir Michael Somare in this way raises more questions. The first is - why did Sir Michael Somare prevent Leonard Louma and Joshua Kalinoe from being questioned by the Ombudsman? Second, by using the power given to the Prime Minster by Section 19, some may say that Sir Michael Somare had something to hide and did so to protect himself. This is another example of why the individual occupying the Office of Prime Minister must be separated from the Office of Prime Minister. Otherwise, the actions of the individual will result in illegitimate exercise of the powers, functions and damage the image of the people’s Office of Prime Minister.

Parliament is neglecting its duty to scrutinise the executive government

On 10 March 2010, the Parliament rejected the Moti Affair report submitted by the Ombudsman Commission. The manner of the presentation of the Report was questioned by certain Members of Parliament (MPs). Would the Report have been tabled if it was given to the Government to table? Chances are that it would not have been allowed because of the complete control and subjugation of the Parliament by the executive.

Members of Parliament completely abrogated their responsibilities as members of the legislature to examine and debate the Report and its findings properly. MPs did a complete disservice to the people of PNG.

Very serious breaches of the country’s laws were alleged. The Prime Minister was accused of breaching these laws by the Ombudsman Commission. Instead of taking these issues seriously and examining the conduct of the executive, the Parliament rejected the Report. What is the role of Parliament if it cannot inquire into questionable actions of the executive? What is the role of MPs? In the recently concluded sitting of the Parliament, nothing was mentioned of this serious issue. It has prompted me to write this.

The Parliament is fast losing its legitimacy. That legitimacy does not come from those elected exercising power given in elections but from the people. If the people perceive that Parliament is not doing what it should be doing (including supervising the executive government), the people have the right to ask that Parliament must disband itself. MPs must not take the people of PNG for granted.

What is my interest in raising these matters?

I raise these issue as a citizen concerned about the state of poor governance in PNG – evidenced by gross mismanagement, corruption, bad ethics and poor standards of leadership, and serious challenges to the rule of law. As a lawyer interested in public policy issues, I feel obliged to do this since most professionals and professional organisations have been silent on important issues of governance in this young country in general and, more specifically, the rule of law in particular. It would be dishonest of me if I did not do this.

The Moti Affair raised serious breaches of the laws of PNG. And the country’s Prime Minister has been implicated in criminal conduct.

No one else can set the tone and standard of leadership than the Prime Minister. The country’s Prime Minister must be seen to uphold the laws of the country.

The perception that there is one set of laws for the poor and weak, and another for the rich and powerful must be corrected. The important principle that everyone is equal before the law must be upheld and be seen to be promoted especially by the top leaders of the country.

I am not a politician. I have never supported any political party. My only interest is simply this - I am concerned about the poor state of the country in terms of governance and the rich and powerful not respecting the rule of law. The standard of ethics, of leadership example, and the values that we the current generation in control of PNG’s affairs are cultivating and setting for the young people, is very poor.

Sir Michael Somare can correct this by doing the right thing now – by stepping aside as Prime Minister and allow the accusations made against him in the Moti Report to be fully investigated by relevant authorities without fear of repercussions on the part of those whose job it is to do so, real or apprehended. The person who gave evidence of Sir Michael Somare giving the unlawful directions, Joseph Assaigo, has passed on. The other persons who can give evidence to relevant authorities are Leonard Louma and Joshua Kalinoe. Sir Michael Somare ought to step aside as Prime Minister, allow these two men to fully cooperate with the law enforcement agencies so that those who broke the law can be properly dealt with. Otherwise, the breaches of these laws will be forgotten, like many others in the past. Where then is the rule of law? Should we pretend that these things never happened? We cannot. Julian Moti was in PNG. Some individuals broke PNG’s laws and removed him clandestinely from the country. They must be dealt with!

The people have the right to demand, as we did during the Sandline crisis against the then Prime Minister Sir Julius Chan, that Sir Michael Somare step aside as Prime Minister.

John Nonggorr

Mt Hagen

Another Desperate Attempt to Prop-up Ramu Nickel

2010-06-10T21:57:00.003+10:00

The people of Raicoast have made history by causing the high level government officials to visit them twice within 4 weeks.

The first was when the deputy prime minister, Madang governor and other government officials who went down to Bongu Village to receive the petition signed by 7000 people of Raicoast opposing DSTP. Today (10th of June 2010)the prime minister Sir Michael Somare, flew to Madang to discuss with the landowners. For the PM and his deputy attend to the same issue within 4 weeks means something.

The PM spoke about how he taught in various districts in Madang during the colonial days as a teacher and that he always wanted the best for Madang and the people of PNG. His talk was basically to draw sympathizers to support the project.
On the other hand, governor Amet appealed to the party that took the injunction to withdraw the court cases and bring the matter to the discussion table and allow the mine to proceed.

This is seen as another desperate attempt to prop-up support for the Ramu Nickel Project. But the people of Raicoast are NOT stupid or ignorant anymore.

Environment (Amendment) Act 2010 ….What it means;

2010-06-10T19:49:00.004+10:00

Environment Act 2000

The original Environmental Act 2000 was an excellent piece of state-of-the-art legislation. It came into force and was law on 1 January 2004. It states it is an Act to give effect to the National Goals and Directive Principles, in particular the 4th goal which deals with Natural Resources and Environment and to regulate the environmental impacts of development activities in order to promote sustainable development of the environment and the economic, social and physical well-being of people by safeguarding the life-supporting capacity of air, water, soil and ecosystems for present and future generations and avoiding, remedying and mitigating any adverse effects of activities on the environment; and to provide for the protection of the environment from environmental harm.

The Environment Act 2000 achieves this by requiring developers such as mining or oil and gas companies to apply for an Environmental Permit if their development is likely to cause environmental harm.

Environmental Permits

The process for an Environmental Permit is lengthy and it is intended to ensure that all stakeholders in development, including landowners, are informed about the activity that the developer proposes to do and its effect on the environment (sections 41 to 73).

So in the case of a proposed large mine, the miner gives notice of the preparatory work for the mine and then the Director (the Secretary of the Department of Environment) gives a notice requiring the miner to undertake an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and such assessment must include environmental and social impacts and details of public review of the Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) and the approval in principle of the Minister for Environment and Conservation for the proposed activity. Before submitting the EIS, the miner must give an Inception Report to the Director which is a plan for the EIA and the Director if happy with the Inception report, approves it and the miner can proceed with compiling the EIS and then gives it to the Director.

When the Director receives the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) he must assess it and he may call conferences or seek advice on it but then he must make the EIS available for public review.

When the Director is satisfied that the EIS describes the social and environmental impacts adequately and steps have been taken to minimize environmental harm, he may accept the EIS.

The Director then refers the EIS to the Environment Council along with his report and the public submissions.

When Council receives the EIS it has to consider the EIS , having regard to many matters including objects of the Environmental Act, any environmental harm, public submissions, best practice for the activity, any international treaties etc . If accepted the Environment Council will then make a recommendation to the Minister that approval in principle for the proposed activity be given and they must give written reasons why.
The Minister may then approve or refuse to approve the activity but he must give written reasons for his decision.

Once that approval has been given, the miner can now lodge an application for an Environmental Permit and will submit it along with the Environmental Impact Assessment.

The Director may then grant the permit if he is satisfied that environmental risk has been minimized, the activity will be carried out in accordance with environmental policies and that the activity does not contravene any international treaty, and he shall have regard to a long list of matters including the objects of the Environment Act, the general duty not to cause environmental harm, any public submission, best practice, public interest etc.

The Director can then grant the permit on conditions.

If a person is unhappy with the Director’s decision to grant the Permit, he may apply for a Review of the decision by the Environmental Council, and if he is unhappy with the decision of the Environment Council, he may appeal to the National Court.

Compensation under Environment Act 2000

A permit holder is liable in respect of entry on the land or occupation of the land by the permit holder, to pay compensation for environmental damage he causes as a result of carrying on the acts approved under the permit. Landowners on areas adjourning the land occupied can also get compensation and that is usually drawn up at the beginning as the harm is predicted by the EIS and the EIA. It is done by agreement, and if the parties fail to agree, the Director can make the determination which is appealable to the national Court.

The Environment (Amendment) Act 2010

The amendments introduced by the Environment (Amendment) Act 2010 effectively reverse the protections under the Environment Act 2000 and protect the developer at the expense of the landowners and the environment.

The amendments provide the Director with the power to issue in his sole unfettered discretion authorizations and 4 different types of certificates, which can
1) authorize the miner to do new environmentally hazardous acts not envisaged in the original Permit,
2) exempt the miner from liability from acts done outside the terms of the permit,
3) certify that the miner has somehow complied with the permit by doing certain actions not set out in the permit
4) certify that otherwise preventable environmental harm is “necessary or inevitable” harm and excuse the miner for liability and
5) Certify that what the miner is doing is the best practice environmental practice for the activity.

The Director doesn’t have to consult with anyone (let alone landowners or provincial governments) consider any reports, treaties, the Environment Act 2000 or anything in his decision.

Worse – each of these decisions is specifically spelt out to not be challengeable or reviewable in a court or tribunal.

But worst of all, the amendments state that these decisions and the activities they allow do not form a cause of action in tort or otherwise, or an offence and are not unlawful.

Why is that bad ?

What is a Tort ?

In legal speak, a tort is a civil wrong, as opposed to a criminal wrong. Instead of the perpetrator going to jail, the perpetrator has to pay compensation or is stopped from doing whatever the wrong is. So if a man hits a woman, she can sue him in the tort of battery and seek compensation. Or is a man constantly jumps over another man’s fence and crosses his land without permission, the owner can sue the man for trespass and get an injunction to stop the man from coming onto his land.

So what is a tort in this sense, in the new amendments ? If an activity was conducted under any of these new authorizations or certificates and it caused environmental harm, the landowners could not go to Court and sue to stop the miner from doing the activity. They wouldn’t have any say on the authorization or certificate, would have been kept in the dark until the activity was being performed and then they would be powerless to stop it – however harmful it may be.

The compensation provisions in S87 cover compensation pursuant to the activities under the Permit on land occupied by the permit holder or adjoining such land, but not these new activities under the authorizations. Landowners' rights to compensation for environmental harm which is caused under these authorizations and certificates has been removed.

Factual example: - if Miner A has been dumping mine tailings into a river no 1 under a Permit but decides to start dumping into river no 2 which is not approved under the Permit, and then after 3 years, the landowners along river no 2, 50km from the mine start complaining that their water is always dirty and the fish have disappeared, Miner A could write to the Director to
a) Authorize the activity of dumping into river no 2 for the last 3 years
b) Grant an exemption certificate that Miner A has not been operating outside the now new permit, and
c) Grant a certificate that the dirty river and the disappeared fish are a “necessary or inevitable consequence” of the activity of dumping,

And the Director could issue the authorization and certificates and the landowners couldn’t appeal it, challenge it and they couldn’t sue in nuisance (tort) for an injunction to stop it or for compensation.

It would leave the landowners completely powerless with a dead river.

What specific sections take away landowners’ rights ?

There are 8 new sections which specifically take away everyone’s rights (including landowners’ rights to seek a review of the director’s decision and to sue in tort to protect their land from future or continuing harm and compensation. They are as follows:-

Section 69A. DIRECTOR MAY AUTHORISE ASSOCIATED ACTS

(3) The Director’s decision to grant an authorization is final and may not be challenged or reviewed in any court or tribunal.

Section 69B. ACTIVITY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CIVIL CAUSE OF ACTION OR AN OFFENCE

If the Director grants an authorization under Section 69A, the holder of the permit for the associated activity is entitled to carry out that act, or work and the carrying out of that act, work or activity does not constitute a civil cause of action, whether in torts or otherwise, or an offence and is not unlawful.

Section 87A. DIRECTOR MAY GRANT AN EXEMPTION CERTIFICATE

(4) The Director’s decision to issue the Exemption Certificate is final and may not be challenged or reviewed in any court or tribunal.

Section 87B. DIRECTOR MAY ISSUE BEST PRACTICE CERTIFICATE

(4) The Director’s decision to issue the Best Practice Certificate is final and may not be challenged or reviewed in any court or tribunal, except at the instigation of any aggrieved holder of an Authorization Instrument.

Section 87C. DIRECTOR MAY ISSUE CERTIFICATE OF NECESSARY CONSEQUENCE

(4) The Director’s decision to issue the Certificate of Necessary Consequence is final and may not be challenged or reviewed by any court or tribunal, except all the instigation of an aggrieved holder of any Authorization Instrument.

(5) The carrying out of a conduct or proposed conduct, or the occurring of consequences, referred to in a Certificate of Necessary Consequence do not constitute wholly or partly a civil cause of action, whether in torts or otherwise, or an offence and are not unlawful.

Section 87D.DIRECTOR MAY ISSUE A CERTFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

(4) The Director’s decision to issue a Certificate of Compliance is final and may not be challenged or reviewed in any court or tribunal, except at the instigation of an aggrieved holder of any Authorization Instrument.

(5) If carrying out of any act, work or activity that is the subject of a Certificate of Compliance does not constitute wholly or partly a civil cause of action, whether in torts or otherwise, or an offence and is not unlawful.

How do these sections take away landowners’ rights?

These Sections clearly bar access to review by the court and take away an INTERESTED party’s right to sue in tort for compensation for environmental harm or for an injunction to prevent such present or future harm, should the Director in his sole unfettered discretion allow the developer to do an activity that causes environmental harm under his new absolute powers.

It affects “interested parties” as a third party with no interest would have no standing to sue in any event, so the claim by Minister for the Environment Benny Allen that the new amendment Act prevents third parties from interfering in projects is utter nonsense.

The amendments prevent INTERESTED parties from exercising their rights to protect their land.

Landowners are clearly such interested parties. Who else would be suing in tort for prevention for environmental harm ?

MPF Taking the Lead

2010-06-10T19:07:00.000+10:00

The Madang People's Forum (MPF) has taken the lead in raising the awareness against the unpopular Environmental Act amendments in Madang. They are expanding the awareness through out all the districts in Madang as a build up to the public stakeholder forum on the 19th of June and the National Protest Day on the 23rd of June 2010.

MPF which is the people's forum in Madang that facilitates and coordinates discussions and action plans on issues affecting landowners, feels that, the changes to the Environmental Act was a direct response to the court challenges and the Bongu petition against the DSTP. Therefore it is taking the lead in raising the awareness in all the districts in Madang.

The 23rd of June will go down in the history books of PNG as the peaceful Madang people will protest against the bill. All ready, the Oro, Morobe, Port Moresby and New Ireland are also preparing for the National Protests which may not fall on the same day as Madang but on days organized by their organizers.

Chinese win in Bougainville

2010-06-08T10:06:00.002+10:00

The ABG elections came into conclusion as the counting of the various seats were completed. The most anticipated result was the counting for the ABG presidency seat. When the counting closed for the presidency seat and the winner of the seat was declared, it was John Momis, the former Bougainville Regional MP. Mr. Momis defeated the incumbent, James Tanis who many saw as the new leadership catalyst of the rich island. However the return of Mr. Momis into the political leadership throws a lot of doubts into the progress of Bougainville.

Mr. Momis after losing in the first ABG presidential elections was posted on a diplomatic post as the ambassador of PNG to China. Prior to the 2010 elections, Momis brought some Chinese investors to the once troubled islands to explore investment opportunities. However, it would be difficult for the Chinese investment plans without Momis in power. Therefore Momis had to contest the elections.

Despite all the good work Tanis did in his short term in office, the results of the poll went against him. Nevertheless, the people of Bougainville should know that, the Chinese won the president seat and must be prepared to face a new era with a new political empire.

This new political development will be a very difficult struggle for the island that came out of almost a decade long bloody crisis. The islands struggle against the mining giant which resulted in the PNG government fighting its own citizens, will now face a force much stronger than the GoPNG.
So after the bloody crisis where many lives were lost and mostly women and children affected, does it worth to see the island slipping down the same old pathway?

The Prime Minister is Lying

2010-06-07T13:11:00.000+10:00

The Prime Minister Sir Michael Somare expressed disappointment that the amendment to the Environment Act has been confused and misinterpreted.

Sir Michael said, “No landowner rights have been curtailed by the introduction of this recent amendment to the Environment Act of 2000.

“Project developers must still comply with PNG’s strict environment regulations before permits can be issued by the Department of Environment.

“This rigorous process of compliance safeguards in the first instance the interest of landowners, their land and the environment.

“Having said this, it would be irresponsible of government not to also protect the interest of project developers that have complied with our environment regulations and therefore been issued permits.

“There is a section in the Environment Act of 2000 that allows companies that have already been issued permits to proceed with their developments even though some Acts were repealed as a result of the amendment of 2000.

“The Bill recently introduced by Parliament merely gives clarity and erases doubts on the application and the saving and transition provisions in the Environment Act of 2000.

“The amendment does not mean we have lowered our standards of environmental protection.

“I urge the media and the public to find out the facts and importantly to read and understand legislation in general before issuing misleading statements that cause unnecessary anxiety,” said Sir Michael.

The Prime Minister is NOT telling the Truth!

1 The Prime Minister is LYING when he says that no landowner rights have been removed.

2 The permitting process is still there BUT the changes have been put in there to protect the companies and the government if they make mistakes - either if the government is negligent in permitting something that causes great harm, they can escape liability - and also the companies - if they initially said they wouldn"t cause harm and then do cause harm - they can get out of liability to the landowners.

3 The Act gives sole and absolute power to the Director of the Environment to approve past, present or future environmental harm - no matter how great or small - and get the developers out of liability.

4 That power and his decision is NOT reviewable or challengeable in a Court of Law and the landowners cannot sue for compensation for the past harm or to to prevent any future harm.

5 The landowners have been stripped of their common law and customary rights to go to Court to seek protection from or compensation from such harm AND THAT IS THE PLAIN FACT.

6 A constitutional reference has been filed by the Rai Coast landowners to challenge the new Act for breaches of human rights and for breaching the national goals and directive principles.

7 It is clear either the Prime Minister has received bad advice and should sack whoever is advising him or is deliberately lying to the people on this issue and we suggest he reads the Act for himself.

Force it out Now or you'll be sorry tomorrow

2010-06-05T14:34:00.001+10:00

The PNG government is running this country with total madness.There is absolute negligence of its purpose, mandate, function and responsibility has seen in the recent amendment to the Environmental Act 2000.

The Amendment basically removed the powers of the people as landowners to sue the state and the companies on environmental damages. This amendment was done in the light of the legal challenge lounged by the people of Raicoast against the Deep Sea Tailings Placement (DSTP). Based on scientific reports stating that the impacts of the tailings would cause a severe impact on the marine ecosystem along the Madang coastlines including Karkar and Bagabag islands, the Raicoast landowners took an injunction in court to stop the consstruction of the DSTP system.

The Raicoast people also petitioned the government against the DSTP. The government and the Chinese miner have been blaming the NGOs for instigating the resistance. However, despite the court proceedings and the petition, the government decided to change the law to legalize its action and remove the powers of landowners to take court action on issues relating to environmental concerns.

The new amendment to the Environmental Act 2000, is a worst legislation and against the spirit of democracy, human rights and the constitution of PNG. With this amendment, the government literally removed democracy.It is becoming obvious that the government has become a "puppet" of CMCC and Exxon Mobil.

Right across the country there is public outcry against this amendment. If that Act is not repealed, the government is simply asking for trouble as there is so much tension and pressure building up and will explode any minute. NOW is the time to force the government to repeal the amendment. Now is the time to challenge this dictatorship. If we fail to force the government to repeal the amendment-Goodbye Democracy. PNG get ready for the worst to come!

Removing the buffer on the eve of the World Environment Day

2010-06-05T13:59:00.004+10:00

The core strength to environmental protection in PNG is the customary land tenure system and the fact that the environmental act before the amendments considered landowners traditional rights and protected it under the law. That has been my view every since I watched a film (forgot the title) in my environmental science class at the university of PNG as a final year student.

That video was about a medical scientist doing research on traditional medicine somewhere in the Amazon forest. The medical scientist spent 10 years of research with an indigenous tribe that lives in that forest area. The research involved traditional and indigenous knowledge of various plants, barks, roots and leaves.

One day the government decided to sell the land to a company who decide to clear fell the forest and build a cattle ranch. Without warning or negotiation with the indigenous tribe who lives in that forest area, the company dispatched heavy machinery clear fell the forest and burn it at the same time. It was the fire that destroyed the indigenous village and the research centre. The forest people lost their homes and everything while the medical research work for 10 years was completely destroyed.

Two things came to my mind as I was watching the film in my class.

1. Firstly, that indigenous forest community did not have their traditional rights protected under the law of their country and therefore their government did whatever it pleased and it was non-negotiable. There was no consultation and there was no free prior informed consent. Therefore, that forest community was forced to evacuate their traditional village without any form of compensation or relocation plans from their government.

2. Secondly, the 10 years of medical research based on traditional and indigenous knowledge of forest people which would have resulted in the cure for various diseases we have today was destroyed in the furnace.

That film inspired me to be a strong advocate of customary land protection in PNG and I have always referred to many times especially in discussions on environmental protection and customary lands.

The fact that the government and the companies in PNG had to go through a lot of hassles to deliberate on landowners’ issues which is in fact an impediment to their progress, but from the landowners’ perspective, it is a ‘buffer’. That buffer provides for the avenue for all negotiations with consent landowners with regard to any project development and that includes issues relating to environment. By removing the traditional land rights of landowners from taking legal action on environmental damage will escalate environmental impacts by project developers.

I feel it is not wise to remove this important buffer by changing the Environmental Act. The government should be representing the interest of its people and not foreign investors. Given the fact that the number one crisis affecting and threatening both the rich and poor nation in the world is directly related to environmental issues now resulting in global warming and climate change. Therefore it is the last thing; we want to see our government going down the track of environmental irresponsibility especially on the eve of June 5 –the World Environment Day.

Raicoast don't need Ramu Nico

2010-06-04T13:53:00.001+10:00

The newly elected Raicoast MP, Mr. Joe Gau defended fervently that, the Ramu Nickel Mine project is needed for the much needed services for his constituency. He claimed that without the mine, it will be practically impossible for him to deliver tangible services to his electorate and blames NGOs and outsiders for sabotaging the progress of the mine.

Mr. Gau, the Raicoast people have been denied for service delivery mainly due to issues surrounding the vacancies of its national MP post due to various reasons. The last thing the people of Raicoast want to hear is their MP confused about who is responsible for service delivery and development in their electorate. Mr. Gau fails to understand that the prime objective of the Chinese Metallurgical Construction Company (CMCC) is to extract the Nickel and make profit and it is NOT their business to serve the people of Raicoast. All service and development deliveries is the responsibility of the government of which Mr. Gau is part of.

First of all, Mr. Gau don't lie to the Raicoast people that, you need the money from the mine to deliver services and development. How will you get the money when in fact the government gave CMCC 10 years tax holiday? Mr. Gau there will not be any tax for the next 10 years, and who knows whether you will still remain in power after the 10 years lapsed.

Secondly, Mr. Gau, the political party and the government which you are a member of cannot lie to the people of Raicoast. What about the K40 million stole by senior a NA MP and minister and banked in a private bank account in Singapore? What about he K780 million stolen by lawyers, accountants, MPs and public servants unveiled by the finance inquiry? These monies should have been used for the delivery of the much needed service and development in Raicoast and other areas in PNG as well.

Thirdly, Mr. Gau, with the experiences of the mining industry in PNG with OK Tedi, Bougainville Copper, Porgera, Missima and Lihir where is the evidence of development and service delivery of these mines? There is absolutely nothing to show and don't lie to the people of Raicoast that the Ramu Nico project will deliver.

Mr Gau, Raicoast does not need the rich wealth to develop, it needs a leadership with the richness in wisdom to lead and you show that you already lack this requirement. And don't tell the people of Raicoast, they need China to develop-Raicoast does not need any CMCC or mining to develop.

Raicoast Leaders Gate Crashed at Governor's Office and Demanded Response to Petition

2010-06-02T15:03:00.002+10:00

The Raicoast leaders gate crashed at the Madang Governor's office yesterday (1st of June 2010) and demanded Governor Amet to give them a feedback since the 21 days of their petition lapsed on the 30th of May 2010.

The petition organizer and anti-DSTP campaigner, George Ireng apologized for gate crashing, however, he said that, the 7000 people from Raicoast who signed the petition are waiting a response and the 21 days has lapsed the previous day and the people are kept in suspense and want to know whats happening.

Madang Governor, Sir Arnold Amet said, he is not moved by the petition and will not be threatened to respond within any time frame, however, he said he honored the petition and will respond in due course.

He promised the landowners to respond in two days to the second demand in the petition which asked for an independent study to verify the impacts. He said he will have to get in touch with the deputy prime minister to make an undertaking to ensure the independent study is carried out.

Mr. Amet also said that he ha been in touch with scientists from Madang and PNG who are qualified to engage them in the desk review of the Mineral Policy Institute (MPI) Report (also referred to as the Lutheran Church Report), the various government reports and the SAMS (Scottish Association of Marine Science) report. Mr. Amet said he is still reading the MPI Report and needs more credible scientific advice before he makes a decision.

The SAMS report is supposed to be the independent study which was commissioned by the government, however, the government has not moved on getting the report finalized and published. The Bongu petition was done in the light of the absence of the SAMS report, however, on the day of the presentation of the petition to the government, Mr. Ireng received a copy of the report which the deputy prime minister, Mr. Puka Temu said was still a draft. Mr, Temu said that he will ensure the final payment of K100, 000 is paid to SAMS within two weeks so that the report can be finalized and released. That has not happened, however the government decided to change the Environmental Act instead two days before the Bongu petition lapsed. .

Mr. Ireng, raised the question about the new amendment to the Environmental Act and what is the governors position. He said it was a direct insult to the people from Raicoast who in good faith followed the right procedures to raise the concern and the government goes to the back of the people and amend the law. Mr. Amet said he is not clear with the new legislative changes and will require time to read and understand it before saying anything. He reminded the landowners that, as the former judge, he doesn't jump quickly into conclusion. That has always been his line of excuses- Is he telling his constituency the truth?

Is Governor Amet telling the truth? Is he not one of the best legal brains in the NA camp and therefore provides legal opinions to the party caucus? Is he really negligent to have no say at all when he is in the government and the amendments highlighted the landowners from Ramu Nickel halting the progress of the project?....Let the people of Madang decide!!!!

States lawyer instructed in court by Ramu Nico.

2010-05-21T17:34:00.000+10:00

The Madang Court Room was packed to capacity today as the Raicoast landowners' lawyer-Tiffany Nonggorr made submissions against the States Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) with reference to the approval of the environmental permit for DSTP being grossly flawed.

At the opening of the session, it was confusing to identify who the state lawyer was. However, it appeared at the end that, the same QC-Brisbane based barrister, Ian Malloy who had been appearing on behalf of the Ramu Nico Ltd appeared today as the states counsel.

In M alloy's defense, he never stated anything to do with the prejudice against the state or the DEC, nevertheless, he was raising issues relating to the prejudice against Ramu Nico when in fact, they (Ramu Nico) was not a party to the case today. Furthermore, there was a Chinese gentlemen, who was sitting right at the back of the QC and was seen to be giving instructions to the states counsel.

Well that brings alot of questions:
1. Who is paying for the states counsel?
2. Who is instructing the states counsel?
3. Who is the state, is it Ramu Nico?

The landowners counsel concluded in her response to the defense that it was an issue of good governance, and the government should be by the people and for the people. Nevertheless state has failed its primary responsibility to serve the people.

MAJOR OIL SPILL THREATENS OCEAN IN BOUGAINVILLE

2010-05-19T13:09:00.000+10:00

Pilferage at old storage tank caused spill
By Gorethy Kenneth

PORT MORESBY, Papua New Guinea (PNG Post-Courier, May 17, 2010) - There is a huge oil spill at Loloho, the former Bougainville copper mine port facility area in Kieta, Central Bougainville.
The lives of many Central Bougainvilleans are at risk from this oil, which was used to run the steam turbine generator and provide electricity for the port facilities - used and left 25 years ago by the Bougainville copper mine. Black oil was contained in two 28 million liter tanks left untouched during the Bougainville war.
One of the tanks was empty from the crisis days while the other tank was still full with 28 million liters of this outdated oil.

The leakage started from steel pipes taken away illegally by experts and individuals from abroad (Cubans, Americans and Asians) collaborating with the locals and illegally transporting the oil out of Loloho for the outside market.

It is now alleged that more than 90,000 tons of oil have been stolen and taken out in vessels - one allegedly sitting in Singapore and the oil still not sold because it is outdated as it was left there some 25 years back.
Locals from Kieta and the surrounding Loloho area told the Post-Courier that people came from all over the globe, setting and signing agreements with local companies and individuals who were illegally buying and selling scrap metal - part of it the original steel contained in the power house at Loloho - also one that connected to the fuel tanks, which eventually disturbed the pipes, causing a huge oil leak since last year.
Paying locals a little money and getting away with huge amounts of money because these pieces of steel were original, when sold outside they will get a lot of money for them and overseas they smelt them again and resell them as second hand steel in PNG, Peter Nabeu, a local told the Post-Courier.

But there is now a New Zealand environmental group working on the site to contain, drain and hopefully burn off the oil, and in time save the lives of the people of Bougainville.
An expert from that environment group Ron Brennan advised they were waiting for a letter of approval from Bougainville Copper Foundation boss Paul Coleman in Port Moresby in order to start burning the oil in Kieta.
Brennan explained that bringing machines alone to clean and carry out the operations would cost them US$30 million but the whole cleanup operation of the mine areas would cost US$90 million, covering Panguna and Loloho.

"We’ve got the approval from the ABG and the locals here in Kieta but we are still waiting for a consent letter from Paul Coleman (BCL) to start our full operation," Mr. Brennan told the Post-Courier last week.
"This oil is very dangerous. Once it spills into the sea, there goes Bougainville for the next 100 years, but we are checking every day for any spill into the sea," he said.

"We are just waiting for the consent letter from Paul Coleman to start our operations," he said.
Papua New Guinea Post-Courier: www.postcourier.com.pg/
Copyright © 2010 PNG Post-Courier. All Rights Reserved

Sam Basil hits Parliament debate -Laws for Rich & Poor

2010-05-17T12:04:00.000+10:00

Debate : Friday 14th May 2010
Venue : National Parliament of Papua New Guinea
By : Hon. Sam Basil Mp

Thankyou Mr. Speaker for allowing me to participate in this debate session.

Many a times, people always ask whether there are two sets of laws when it comes to doing justice to all.

Yet again on today’s paper we see concerns raised again with the heading ‘’ Laws for Rich & Poor’’.
Mr. Sam Kewa of Western Highlands was sentenced to 12 months in prison for stealing a bilum and a K7.80 packet of Lamb Flaps he will pay dearly for his criminal actions his reasons for stealing may all begin from a hungry stomach or to feed his poor family.

Mr. Speaker, many Papua New Guineans mainly small people will continue to submit to the Laws of this land while people of high profiles continues to live their normal lives without fear of the laws of this land thus pushing the scale of corruption into unprecedented records.

Stealing a K100,000.00 some 20 to 25 years ago can easily spark a notion wide march & petition but sadly today a K100 Million can be easily reported as misappropriated or missing by the PAC, Auditor General or some expensive finance enquiries and the nation just watch and mumble over it and forgets the next day.

Most times mainly the politicians and the departmental heads who are entrusted to safe guard the wealth of this nation are the ones who steal from the very vault which they guard, many a times in collaboration with private businesses.

Mr. Speaker, sadly to this day many leaders now have a lot to answer for but seems to be immune to the rule of law while the lower class of people are the only ones answerable to the laws of this land.

The rule of law which is the foundation of a civilized society demands that all persons are equal before the law. The law is the master of the government and the government is its slave, not the reverse. The “law should govern", and those in power should be "servants of the laws. This is central to democracy and PNG has adopted that system through our Constitution.

When it comes to arresting and charging persons suspected of committing a crime, the Police have an unfettered discretion to do that.

Mr Speaker, The Constitution, particularly section 197 (2), empowers the Police to perform their duties without any control or direction from any other person outside of the Police Force insofar as its functions to lay, prosecute or withdraw charges in respect of offences are concerned. The Courts have held that the decision to lay a charge by a policeman or policewoman investigating the crime is an unfettered discretion without direction, interference or orders from any other policeman or officers whether of the same or of a superior rank.

Whether the alleged persons are high or low profile, every body is equal before the law and they all have to be dealt the same way. Justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done. The Police can proceed by way of Summons or by way of warrant of arrest and the Criminal Code Act, the District Courts Act and the Arrest Act all provide for the procedures in respect of different crimes. The Police know what to do but they are not doing it. A person’s innocence is still yet to be proven but that does not stop the police from making arrests or issuing summonses to appear and answer questions relating to charges.

Mr Speaker, One of the factors that is usually a counter to the policy of freedom to prosecute suspected criminals including leaders and politicians is the fear of being sued for malicious prosecution. However, malicious prosecution and defamation suits cannot surface or succeed if the Police do their lawful duty without malice and within the bounds of law. Therefore, if malicious prosecution is the reason for not arresting and charging the accomplices to the crime, then it is an unreasonable and a cover-up excuse. Furthermore, the excuse for malicious prosecution is very shallow because in many other civil suits, the Police department is the worst offender which costs the State in millions of Kina.

Section 7 of the Criminal Code Act provides that every person who aides another person in committing an offence is also the principal Offender and so the same charges should apply to the rest of the accomplices to the crimes that has been committed.

Mr. Speaker, If other ordinary persons named in the crime can easily be picked up from the street and charged, why not the Politicians & Departmental Heads. Their culpability is very high in that they are the leaders and that although the allegations are unproven and remain as mere allegations, the fact that there is evidence that these allegations have arisen tells a story of a worsening level of corruption and the public and the respective law enforcement agencies, particularly the Police cannot ignore those concerns.

The Police continuous inaction and silence and allowing high profile crimes to fade with time without justice being done is nothing but a recipe for disaster. Such is an element that is directly corroding the foundations of democracy which is the rule of law.

Mr. Speaker, The Civil society is fed up of the complete disregard of lawful duties of the Police. One can safely say that bribery and other form of corruption are encroaching and weakening the functions of the Police Force as an independent body:

A number of cases are still pending for investigations and prosecutions involving very senior members of parliament, departmental heads and various business people including the organised Mafia Activities that are operated by Asians, very well known to Police yet nothing is done to it.

Mr. Speaker, the Ombudsman Commission, the public prosecutor and the police force are funded by the tax payers money and must in return execute their rightful duties.
The failure by these law enforcement agencies can only form an opinion by the public of the existing two sets of laws, one for the rich & powerful citizens and one for the majority mainly the poor & the marginalised citizens.

Mr. Speaker, the outgoing Chief Magistrate Mr. John Numapo has made headlines in the print media recently claiming that the Magisterial Service has been Politicised went almost unchallenged.

This claim alone automatically brings into question the independence of our Judiciary System in Papua New Guinea, I am not surprised at all because many political cases are now hanging in the air.

Those who are believed to have broken the laws are still and proudly executing their duties while doing injustice to many others before them who have been penalized severely and are now on the street and in their villages.

Institutions that their existence may be in question are still functioning while the nation awaits their verdict.

One may ask, Has our Judiciary system already compromised?

Mr Speaker, Let us turn the spot light back into your play ground The National Parliamentary Services.

We all understand that greater financial powers of the parliamentary services are vested onto the speaker of this honourable house.

Three years of appealing have gone answered, during this sitting I have been fanning myself because three years now I haven’t have air conditioning in my office while I cannot find lawyers in within parliament to help give advice on the implications of many bills on notice papers.

Mr Speaker, The Prime Minister has taken charge of some questions raised regarding the house matters but hasn’t come back to this floor to tell us his remedies and as we all know money alone cannot fix this house but the rats must be fumigated too unfortunately the fumigation company ran out of active pesticides as the pests have developed resistance.

It is a common knowledge in within parliament that a K2m of parliament funds has been spent annually for two external law firms while we do not have access to in house lawyers.

Mr Speaker, surprisingly on this week’s paper there was a lawyer potential candidate dishing out cash in donations to various groups makes me wonder whether those cash are from some of the parliamentary funds.

I know nobody will answer to all the concerns that I have raised in this debate but as I have always say if the Ombudsman Commission, the Police Force, the Public Prosecutor and other law enforcing agencies cannot do their respective role this nation will decay into corruption and eventually a failed state.

If nobody can apply justice then I commit this debate of mine to God to intervene so God please help Papua New Guinea.

Hon Sam Basil

Warning Bells Sounded - Drought coming

2010-05-12T10:07:00.000+10:00

PNG government urged to prepare for severe drought

Posted at 22:45 on 10 May, 2010 UTC

A leading climate change scientist says it’s essential that Papua New Guinea’s government takes urgent steps to prepare for a severe drought which is expected to affect the country around 2012.
Scientists at PNG’s National Agriculture Research Institute has warned that the country can expect a mega-drought in 2012 which could last for up to 18 months, posing major health risks and food shortages around the country.

The Institute’s principal scientist, Dr John Bailey, says that developing sustainable water supply and adaptable crop production systems is imperative.

“We do have to do something and relatively urgently because it will take time to do all of this. It doesn’t just happen over night or even over months. it’s going to take a year or a few years to get all this sorted out. We will hopefully see an iniative taken in the next two or three months to start off a taskforce of different organisations brought together to sort of address this particular issue.”

Dr John Bailey.

News Content © Radio New Zealand International
PO Box 123, Wellington, New Zealand

Penan score victory as logging road blockades halt timber giant's encroachment on their rainforests

2010-05-11T15:58:00.000+10:00

Defiant forest communities announce they will continue to fight the Samling corporation's activities within the "Penan Peace Park" on Borneo

LONG SABAI, SARAWAK / MALAYSIA. Two logging road blockades erected by Penan communities have caused a Malaysian timber giant, Samling, to withdraw its bulldozers from the Penan's rainforests on the upper reaches of the Akah river in Malaysian Borneo.

The blockades had been erected in March 2010 near the villages of Long Sabai and Ba Kerameu at two strategic locations. The communities had announced that the Penan were willing to fight for the conservation of their last virgin jungle.

According to Penan sources, the blockades have caused the Samling corporation to withdraw its bulldozers from the disputed community lands of Long Sabai and Ba Kerameu. The two communities are part of the Penan Peace Park, a self-administered 163,000 hectare nature reserve launched in November 2009.

However, the Penan are reporting that Samling continues to trespass on their lands in other regions. Two written warnings have been issued against Samling subsidiary Jerinai to stop logging in the Ba Jawi watershed, a high conservation value rainforest near the Indonesian border. Furthermore, the company has recently taken up helicopter logging within within the communal boundaries of Long Ajeng in the Upper Baram region.

Samling is a Hong Kong-listed timber giant with its operational headquarters in Miri, Sarawak. The corporation has a track record of environmentally destructive and illegal logging in a number of countries, including Cambodia, Guyana, Malaysia and Papua New Guinea. Its principal bankers include the Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (ANZ) as well as The Bank of Tokyo - Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd.

-ENDS-

For more information, please contact us:

Bruno Manser Fund, Socinstrasse 37, 4051 Basel / Switzerland

www.bmf.ch, info@bmf.ch

Tel. +41 61 261 94 74

Pictures 1 to 3: Penan blockade near the village of Long Sabai on the Upper reaches of the Akah river in Sarawak, East Malaysia (April 2010). (Copyright: Bruno Manser Fund)

CMCC mobilized Tigabu and his supporters to try to intimidate lawyer

2010-05-08T13:04:00.003+10:00

The Chinese state owned Chinese Metallurgical Construction Company (CMCC) the developer of the Ramu Nickel and Cobalt mining project in the Madang Province of PNG, mobilized David Tigabu (the KBK Landowner Association Chairman) and his supporters to try to intimidate the Lawyer representing the landowners of Raicoast who took the injunction against the Deep Sea Tailings Placement (DSTP) for another hearing yesterday (7th of May 2010).

The mob that gathered outside the Madang court house were drunken males who look more like people who live in settlements in the Bundi settlement in Madang. They had their fleshy looking banner up (obviously sponsored by CMCC) and were rowdy and abusive.

The funny thing was there was no landowner from Raicoast present in that gathering. The DSTP is a Raicoast thing, because it has the high potential to affect the marine ecosystem that support the livelihoods of the coastal communities. The point is DSTP will not affect Krumbukari.It seems that CMCC has also missed the point here by mobilizing a wrong group of people and even worse getting them drunk because they don't have the guts to confront in soberness.

Nevertheless, George Ireng and his Raicoast leaders have made new grounds in their campaign against DSTP because, the governor of Madang, the deputy prime minister, the minister for environment and conservation and the managing director of MRA and MRDC will go to Bongu village to receive the petition from the Raicoast people on the 10th of May 2010. Its the people's power in action!

PACER-Plus to remove food Sovereignty of the Pacific

2010-05-04T10:31:00.001+10:00

Food for Thought and Action: PANG

By Online Editor
5:08 pm GMT+12, 28/04/2010, Fiji

The Pacific Food Summit, 21-23 April, Port Vila, Vanuatu, has brought together leaders from across the Pacific: from governments, industry, NGOs, development agencies, the media and community groups, in recognition that a radical rethink is necessary in order to improve food security for the Pacific. In this article Maureen Penjueli argues that part of the radical rethink requires the region to critically look at the likely implications of a free trade agreement dubbed Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus (PACER-Plus) between the island countries and Australia and New Zealand on food sovereignty.

The assault on traditional farming

For many Pacific Islanders, local food production is not simply essential to good nutrition and health but is essential to our way of life. With Australia and New Zealand pushing for a Pacific trade agreement (PACER-Plus) that will lock in for future generations a system of import reliant food (in)security, to radically rethink food you have to address the issue of PACER-Plus.

The pursuit of trade and investment liberalisation under PACER-Plus will most likely increase the social and economic problems for traditional farmers engaged in agriculture activities across the Pacific and has the potential to exacerbate food-security issues in the Pacific Island Countries. Many Pacific countries have a large and ongoing trade deficit (Vanuatu’s trade deficit for example has consistently stood at around 25% of GDP). Countries that cannot earn the foreign currency they need to pay for imports are especially vulnerable to food security issues in a globalised food marketplace.

Proponents of free trade agreements argue that it is a better use of the world’s resources for Pacific countries to import foods that are produced more efficiently and cheaper than farmers in the Pacific can produce themselves. However, this argument ignores the fact that most Pacific Islanders rely on local food systems and sell local produce as their main source of income. If PACER-Plus is designed as a reciprocal free trade deal, it is likely to promote a greater reliance on food imports and increased competition for local producers from foods produced in Australia and New Zealand. Both bigger neighbours are major agricultural producers and would most likely out-compete Islander producers forcing many to lose their vital income from local markets. This could lead to a situation of the abandonment of lands, acceleration of migration from rural to urban areas, with subsequent pressures on local governments to provide basic services and, in most Least Developed Countries, without real employment opportunities that could provide them with a life with dignity.

Importing greater amounts of food also has implications for the environment, by promoting carbon-intensive, industrial agriculture (including the use of international shipping and air-freight) over localised food production and harvesting systems (which provide sustainable livelihoods and promote local communities).

According to the proponents of free trade, consumers will benefit from lower prices once tariffs (import taxes) are removed. Experience suggests that in many cases exporters and distributors (‘middle men’) tend to increase their prices almost back to the same level after tariffs are removed, and fail to pass on the benefits to consumers . Increases in consumption taxes (to replace lost government revenue) also undermine any benefits since consumers are left to pay the additional tax whilst still paying similar prices for their food.

However, even if the promises of lower prices through free trade did occur, cheaper imports also pose threats. An increase in imports of cheaper foods could undermine local agricultural systems and have negative health outcomes when poor quality foods, like mutton flaps and turkey tails. become cheaper than local foods such as fish.

Pacific countries have among the highest rates of non-communicable diseases (like type 2 diabetes) found anywhere on earth. There is a clear link between the increasing prevalence of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in the Pacific and the radical change in diet that has occurred, with fatty waste meat products becoming readily available at prices that make them cheaper than traditional foods such as fish – and are especially attractive to the urban poor. Fiji, a member of the WTO, has imposed a ban on the import of mutton flaps, claiming there are proven links to obesity. New Zealand threatened retaliation at the WTO, but has backed off doing so - perhaps fearing exposure to accusations that it knowingly dumps unhealthy waste products on the Pacific Islands.

Following Fiji’s example, and in an attempt to improve public health outcomes, Samoa imposed a ban on imports of turkey tail meat (a fatty off-cut imported from the US) in 2007. Samoa had already tried raising tariffs on the import, but this was not seen as enough of a deterrent . Both the raising of import tariffs, and the outright ban on imports, are policy options that are already constrained by WTO rules, but there constraints may apply to all Pacific countries if PACER-Plus is designed as a reciprocal FTA that meets the requirements of the WTO’s Agreement on Agriculture.

Radical rethink: Food Sovereignty

“Food Sovereignty” is the new progressive version of “food security.” Food sovereignty rejects the proposition that food is just another commodity for international agribusiness. Instead, it puts providers and consumers at the centre of decision-making. This people-centred approach is deeply rooted in local production, based on the principal rights of farmers to produce the quantity and quality of food that they need to secure their livelihoods and those of future generations. Here in the Pacific the notion of food sovereignty is tied to our traditional economy.

There is an emerging school of thought in the Pacific that argues that the traditional economy is the source of resilience for countries such as Vanuatu, Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands to the multiple crises that the region is faced with (food, energy and financial crises). Ralph Regenvanu a member of Vanuatu Parliament and Director of the Vanuatu National Cultural Council argues that there are many important benefits that Vanuatu gains from the strength of its traditional economy. A key factor is that everyone has access to land on which to make gardens for food, as well as to meet other basic needs such as shelter and medicine. Mr Rengenvanu argues that the traditional right to use land to make food gardens and access resources means that individuals or families who do not have access to their own customary land (or enough of it) to meet their needs can be given the right to use other families’ land, with “rent” or “use rights” being paid for using the products of the land.

The key point is that policy makers at all levels including those attending the Pacific Food Summit must begin to do more to recognise the reality and the promise of the traditional economy as part of the solution to ensuring food sovereignty for our own people. This would be a radical rethink to the issue and departure from the ongoing unquestioned pursuit of liberalisation under free trade agreements such as PACER-Plus as a solution to addressing this issue.

Maureen Penjueli is the Coordinator for the Pacific Network on Globalisation

SOURCE: PANG/PACNEWS http://www.pina.com.fj/?p=pacnews&m=read&o=9704506114bd7c2b5b8c4d5ec88ba3

Raicoast communities signed petition against Deep Sea Tailings Disposal

2010-04-21T15:43:00.003+10:00

The Raicoast communities (both inland and coastal) met on the 14th of April 2010 and signed a petition to the Governor of the Madang province of Papua New Guinea opposing the governments approval of the deep sea tailings disposal (placement) by the Chinese Ramu Nickel and Cobalt mine. The community forum which was held at the Bongu village convened on same golden day when their lawyer Tiffany Nonggorr was in court receiving the judgment for the injunction that was ruled in the landowners favour. Here is the link to a video posted on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oq8-apBMy28

The deep sea tailings disposal plan if allowed to go ahead will have both the Chinese Ramu Nickel and Cobalt mine and the Marengo's Yandra mine disposing massive amounts of mine waste into the sea of the coast of Raicoast. There is a high probability of negative impacts these waste will have on the marine ecosystem and the livelihoods of the coastal communities.

To support the Raicoast communities, you can also sign a petition online:
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/basamukbay/

Seabed Mining Opposed

2010-04-15T15:43:00.000+10:00

Bismarck seabed mining to meet fierce opposition

Source:

By YEHIURA HRIEHWAZI

PROPOSED seabed mining at PNG’s Solwara 1 project and elsewhere in the Pacific is headed on a collision course with some leading scientists and oceanographers studying the ocean floor.
Nautilus Minerals is pioneering the technology to extract precious minerals from ocean floors in what has been described as the “world’s first” approach and the PNG Government gave the green-light to its environmental impact study (EIS) last September.

“The recent approval of the Solwara 1 project environmental permit is an exciting and significant milestone for the company and represents the culmination of over three years of effort on the part of our Environmental team,” the company announced on its website. The environmental team is led by the environment manager for Nautilus, Dr Samantha Smith.

However, a conservation biologist Prof Rick Steiner, formerly of the University of Alaska, who was called in to examine the company’s original environmental impact assessment study has expressed concern about the impact of the project.

Interviewed by BBC news yesterday, Prof Steiner is concerned about the dumping of thousands of tonnes of rock on the seabed and the danger of spillages of toxic residue and destruction to vent chimneys and unknown species of marine life.

Volcanic vents spew out hot water and precious metals like copper, gold, silver and zinc.
“(At) The site that they mine, they’re going to destroy all these vent chimneys where the sulphide fluids come out.”

He added that it could cause the extinction of species that were not even known to science yet.
“I think that, from an ethical stand point, is unacceptable,” he said.
Nautilus CEO Steven Rogers said he accepted that the mined area would be damaged, but said he was convinced it could recover.

He believes deep-sea mining will be less damaging to the environment than mining on land.
He said: “I think there’s a much greater moral question…. here we have an opportunity to provide those metals with a much, much lower impact on the environment.”
= = = = = = = = = = =

Landowners win case against the Chinese Mine in Madang

2010-04-15T13:58:00.002+10:00

The landowners’ case against the Chinese State owners Mining Company (CMCC) plans for deep sea tailings placements (disposal) was ruled in their favour at the Madnag National Court on Wednesday (15.04.2010).

CMCC got the approval from the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) to discharge 100million tons of tailings annually into the Basamuk Bay, despite the fact that they had a weak scientific backing.

The landowners from Basamuk and neighboring villages challenged the tailings disposal plan in the court of law through their lawyer, Tiffany Nonggorr. The victory on Wednesday means the injunction on the CMCC to pursue that disposal stands, till sometimes in May where it gets to the courts again if the defendants want another go at the courts.

This is a significant win for the landowners because it’s not easy to challenge the foreign state owned company, and the government. It has been said that PNG is the land of the unexpected, however, we do expect two possible turn out in the whole case. The Chinese mining company and the PNG government may push for a change of judge if they decide to get back to court or short cut the process by getting the parliament to change the law to make it legal for them to dump into the sea. Both options are corrupt and will tamper with the spirit of true justice.

Meanwhile, Greg Anderson, Executive Director of the PNG Chamber of Mines and Petroleum (PNGCMP) expressed concern over the Ramu project legal battle (The National, Monday April 12 2010). Mr. Anderson said that, “the whole mining and petroleum industry is monitoring this case closely and the outcome of the hearing is critical to the future investment environment of the country”. This is a very cheap shot at the country. The simple fact is CMCC and the government of PNG have to prove to the satisfaction of the court of justice that the disposal will not have a significant impact on the Basamuk marine eco-system.

How much money was spent by CMCC is not the issue here, because the Basamuk and Raicoast, coastal areas communities depend on the sea for their livelihoods. And if Mr. Anderson claims that Ramu nickel mining company is to be a world class mine, than it has to be proven by its high degree of compliance, and that means, no political satisfaction, but the hard scientific evidence. In fact the landowners are challenging the CMCC and the government with hard scientific evidence.

Deep Seabed Mining is Madness

2010-04-14T16:32:00.006+10:00

Nautilus Minerals was granted the approval for its environmental plan to mine the ocean floor in the New Guinea Islands of Papua New Guinea. Even though, all the stakeholder consultations by Nautilus and Mineral Resources Authority of PNG was severely opposed by the people of Madang, East New Britain, New Ireland and Manus, the government went on to grant the approval.

The people from Madang, East New Britain, New Ireland and Manus objected deep seabed mining because of the following reasons;

• The potentials for undersea mining was realized around mid 1960. Countries like Franch, Germany and the United States sent out research vessels in search of nodule deposits. Initial estimates of deep sea mining viability turned out to be much exaggerated. This overestimate, coupled with depressed metal prices, led to the near abandonment of nodule mining by 1982. From the 1960s to the 1984 an estimated US $650 million had been spent on the venture, with little to no return, however, it was not pursued. Nautilus is now prospecting in the Pacific and especially in PNG to develop the first deep seabed mining in the world. No doubt, this is will be a large-scale industrial experiment. In an experiment, anything can go wrong. Who is going to be responsible for unlikely consequences of this industrial experiment? How do the department of environment and conservation and the government of PNG know that nothing will go wrong and thus approved the Nautilus’ environmental plan? Did they bother to find out, why France, Germany and the US decided not to pursue deep seabed mining ?

• The area Nautilus is prospecting is a geological hotspot, including the Pacific Ring of fire with active volcanic vents. Is this not a concern for the country for mining activities happening in this sensitive geological zone?

• The government and Nautilus claim, that, coastal communities in PNG do not own the sea as it is with the land and therefore have no right to oppose the deep seabed mining project. However, how about the right coastal communities have over the marine territorial boundaries, for fishing and customary practices (e.g. the shark callers of New Ireland)? We also know that the sea is unstable and is in continuous motion due to oceanic currents and tides, thus, how does it justifies to say that communities have no right to object the project if they are potentially going to be affected by the deep seabed mining activities, such as pollution and geological activities due to the mining activities tampering with the active geological areas on the ocean floor?

• PNG already has the highest number of inland mines in the region and the government continues to issue more exploration licenses, so why do we need to reap the ocean floor? Now with the LNG project and the country is set to experience an economic boom, why allowing deep seabed mining? The way the PNG government is handling mineral resource development is total madness with no concerns whatsoever for the people, the ecosystem and the future generation. Is this a wise trend?

• The government does not the capacity to carryout surveillance and monitoring so what is the guarantee that it will monitor Nautilus’ activities? How will Nautilus account honestly for the amount of mineral it mines? How will environmental and geological monitoring be undertaken when Nautilus will basically operate a mobile mining on a floating infrastructure and can relocate if things go wrong in a certain location of the ocean?

The government of PNG is out there to make money, whether scientific data permits or not, or whether the people concerns are valid of not.

Read the story below:

The National, 15 April 2010

Check this website for additional information:
http://www.news.pushpi.com/tag/professor-rick-steiner
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_sea_mining

World Bank Intruding Households in Usino Bundi District in Madang-PNG

2010-04-12T10:39:00.001+10:00

The World Bank is conducting a survey for the Usino Bundi area in Madang Province. Usino Bundi is one of the districts in PNG chosen for this household survey. 160 households will be sampled in this survey. The details of the purpose of the survey is not known, however based on the feedback from someone who was interviewed said they asked him questions like; Do you have mattresses for sleeping, do you have a Coleman Lamp (not small hurricane lamps), do you have a gun etc. That sounds like a socio-economic survey for some poverty eradication programs.

What is the point by intruding people’s privacy about the sleeping gears and household utensils?

First of all it is culturally unacceptable in a Melanesian setting to discuss the details of one’s household features to others and strangers.
Secondly, World Bank did not include in their questionnaires questions like, do you have a cocoa fementary, or how many standing cocoa tree do you have, or do you raise pigs and fouls etc. The point is that, people many not have mattress or Coleman lamps, but have cocoa fementaries, have cocoa trees, and raise pigs and fouls. These are important economic features that cannot be overlooked or left out in any surveys by any institutions doing such surveys.

The World Bank is again not sensitive in dealing with questions that maybe offending to a Melanesian (even if it straight forward to a westerner). And the fact the survey does not reflect some of the key economic features highlighted above would again provide a false data which will result in a faulty analysis and misleading recommendation and therefore whatever programs they dispatched will be misleading.

Lest we forget, what does World Bank got to show in its interactions in countries in Africa and other parts of the world? Its seems some of these places were better of before the interventions of the World Bank. In fact, World Bank is owned and controlled by the Worlds Leading Capitalists, where social services is not found in their equation, however, they have an "Unquenchable lust" for Profits.

Borneo natives win class action suit against Malaysian oil palm giant

2010-04-10T11:28:00.000+10:00

BRUNO MANSER FUND, BASEL / SWITZERLAND

1 April 2010

Borneo natives win class action suit against Malaysian oil palm giant

Controversial IOI group loses 12-year legal battle as Sarawak court declares its land leases "null and void"

MIRI, SARAWAK / MALAYSIA. More than twelve years after going to court, the Kayan native community of Long Teran Kanan on the Tinjar river in the Malaysian part of Borneo have won an important legal battle against the Sarawak state government and IOI Pelita, a subsidiary of the controversial Malaysian oil palm producer IOI.

In a judgement delivered earlier this week, the Miri High Court declared the land leases used by IOI "null and void" as they had been issued by the Sarawak state government in an illegal and unconstitutional way. According to the Borneo Resources Institute Malaysia (BRIMAS), the court granted Long Teran Kanan headman Lah Anyie and his community compensation for the damage done by IOI to their land. The case had been handled by Miri-based lawyer Harrison Ngau.

Last December, a BBC News investigation had uncovered that vast tracts of former rainforest were being bulldozed in the disputed IOI operations area and had found "a scene of absolute devastation: a vast scar on the landscape". Local landowners had complained that their paddy fields and fruit trees had been destroyed by the company.

Court decision discredits Roundtable for Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO)

The Court decision also discredits the so-called Roundtable for Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) which, according to IOI, had found in a probe that the company "had acted responsibly for the management of land in Sarawak". IOI, a palm oil producer serving markets in 65 countries, is a leading RSPO member. Last month, a Friends of the Earths report presented evidence that IOI was responsible for large-scale illegal and unsustainable activities in the Indonesian part of Borneo.

The Bruno Manser Fund welcomes the Miri High Court decision and expects IOI to stop its jungle clearance activities and move out of the disputed lands in the Tinjar region with immediate effect.

Source: BRIMAS Media Release, 31 March 2010

Aiding Failure in the Pacific

2010-04-06T16:23:00.002+10:00

The assistance from donor agencies such as AusAid, NZAid, World Bank and ADB in the Pacific Regions should be scrutinized carefully. In the name of "development" they pump in a lot of money for development programs in the region through the various island governments. They also engage consultants who develop various policies, concept papers, framework and structures for the deliveries of development activities as per the aid monies. However there is nothing much to show in reality in local communities apart from the glossy cover reports they produce with graphs and statistics that satisfy themselves. These assistances have created a cancer of dependency and countries have undermined their potentials to find their own solutions. It is evident that western or foreign solutions do not bring positive outcomes to indigenous communities.

We must question why, all the Aid pumped to countries in Africa is far from bring about real solutions. In fact poverty and problems have escalated to a higher degree, the wars, starvation, health issues, riots and the list goes on.

The various governments in the region have been receiving a lot of aid money for the development programs for various reforms, structural adjustments and governance and in fact there is little to show.

Are these donor agencies playing a strategic role in destabilizing opportunities for self-reliance in the region?
Are these donors playing an undercover role by funding development programs that are geared to fail pacific states?
Are these donors are capitalist who are in fact wolves in sheep skin?
Are these donors part of an intelligence network that promotes re-colonization?

These questions need to be asked. I do not think they are the "good Samaritan" at all. We have to be suspicious when they come in with their programs and do not jump up and down and think they are genuine.

The finance they provide for development programs are like the "bait" on the fishing line. Once you swallow the bait, you swallow the hook as well. They replicate all the fail program and projects around the world and are bring war instead of peace, disaster instead of solutions.

These Aid agencies are financing strategies, policies, structures and plans to fail Pacific states and re-colonization. Indigenous people seem to be on the losing end in most of these donor driver development programs. Pacific countries have to assess all the assistance critically before accepting it.

There are many possibilities of internal solutions to our problems than that is brought in by foreigner consultants and the bondage aid supplied by these financial donors. Look at the experience in Cuba, how they made it through the period of blockade put up by the USA. Cuba was able to develop solutions from within in challenging the once world super power, people can do it!

Waging War in the Pacific

2010-03-22T08:43:00.005+10:00

All over the world, the indigenous struggle is about land. Whether it is Dalai Lama and the Tibetans, the Kanakis in New Caledonia, the Australian Aborigines or the West Papuans, all these struggle is around indigenous struggle against the capitalist world who control governments to facilitate policies that supports their greed.

The Melanesian struggle to maintain customary ownership and control of land is very phenomenal. To the Melanesian, land is the center of life. It has a holistic value, and not just economics. The Western perspective of land is economical because they see everything centered around money. Unfortunately, money floats around in the hands of a few capitalists who see the world cycling around them. No wonder there are a lot of money out there but there is so much, starvation and hunger, shortage of medicines and poverty.

This brings the question, is there an alternative to this failing system? Yes - the indigenous systems like the Melanesian system have been working for thousands of years and have proven over time to sustain indigenous communities. Indigenous systems see life in a complete circle and everything is attached and connected. The western model is a total failure, yet it is very popular and those who live off this system drive a propaganda globally as the only way forward.

Land is central to the Melanesian as it sustains and produce life. People in Melanesian who do not have a constant income get all their livelihoods from their land. Land is the biggest employer because over 85% of the population in countries like Vanuatu and PNG dwell on their land.

The Australian Government through its funding agency, AusAid is financing land development programs in the Pacific - Making Land Work. The Australian Government claims to have no interest in land development in the Pacific, yet it is pumping millions of dollars of Australian tax payers money into the Pacific lands program. Australia is also in the engine room of the Pacific Trade Agreements such as PACER Plus, and it is an interesting coincidence that it is pumping millions into land development programs and claims to have no agenda.

The land development programs in the Pacific is to access more customary land for development purposes through customary land registration processes.This process supports policies of customary land conversion in the Pacific and therefore a dangerous process. It is dangerous process because it facilitates policies that will make people landless, lose their security and fragment the communal structure and clan system that is fundamental to Melanesian survival. It is dangerous because it will cause more problems than solutions and millions will be affected in the benefit of few corrupt elites and those on the top of the ranks of the capitalist strata.

The consequences of the Pacific land development program will be devastating. The governments and the financier of these Policies in the Pacific are waging war on indigenous people of the pacific. This must be seen as a war because it will result in escalation of poverty, destruction of social structures, cultural and traditional values.This must be seen as a war because it will affects millions of life at the expanse of a few corrupt elites and multi-national corporation. Policies like these that will create more problems than solutions should be regarded and categorized as weapons of war.

Forest Criminals in Turubu

2010-03-14T08:13:00.000+10:00

This is whats happening to the people in Turubu East Sepik province PNG.

The Malaysian logging company in pretence of Oil palm development are bulldozing through the local clans land without their consent.

There are serious abuses and threats involved as heard in the community.. Sadly the national and the provincial authorities aren't doing anything to control those invaders.

Shame on them.. How long is this going to continue, sense needs to be driven through those nut heads....

Comment and share with others, the local LO association wishes for more publicity on this issue and hold those crooks responsible.

Wina Kayonga

Our Environment is Connected to our Life

2010-03-13T17:49:00.001+10:00

As I watched the "Uprooted" a documentary about the communities affected by the Ramu Nickel Mine in the Madang Province of Papua New Guinea, Michael Kasuk's statement about the connection of the environment and people caught my attention. This is a community leader from Ramu very articulate in making the connection the government and many educated Papua New Guineans cannot.

"We are concerned about our environment - our bush, land and river is connected to our life" says Mr. Kasuk. Unfortunately, the Government of PNG does not see these important connections when deliberating on major development projects like mining, logging and industrial agriculture. It's main focus is on economic development without much consideration on the social and ecological aspects.

The communities within major project development areas have little to show in terms of social improvements and ecological sustainability. The rate of environmental destruction is as if we are leaving tomorrow for another planet. There is no sense of responsibility.

There is a lot of experiences both in PNG and around the world for the Government to learn from and make wise decisions. However, the trend now is easy access for foreign multinational companies to exploit our resources without any social and ecological responsibility or accountability.

Clan forced to live on Sacred Mountain

2010-03-05T18:47:00.003+10:00

The developer of the Ramu Nickel -Cobalt Mine, Chinese Metallurgical Construction Company (CMCC, desperate to kick start full operation has been slowed down by resistance from the Mauri Clan whose village is located on the site for initial mining of the Nickel. The Vianivi village had 14 houses, which the CMCC with the assistance from the police forced the villagers to move out. 2 out of the 14 houses are still standing and the owners refused to leave pending issues surrounding compensation agreements.

The Vianivi villagers were told to move to another clans land to relocate temporarily to another neighboring clans land boundary pending the construction of the actual relocation site. However, the neighboring clans opposed the Vianivi temporary relocation on their clan boundaries.

This in fact has forced the Vianivi villagers to enter into their once forbidden place where their ancestors worship their snake god on the snake mountain. The snake mountain has been cleared and built makeshift houses at this temporary location. The Vianivi villagers had to made a feast and offering to the snake god to seek permission. They had to kill pigs and offered food cooked in the traditional way called “mumu”.

The Vianivi villagers are sorry to disrupt their sacred mountain; however they have no other choice because they cannot move to other clans land. The old people are still mourning the tragedy of their sacred snake mountain.

Land is Precious

2010-03-05T10:47:00.004+10:00

Land is the most important asset today. Land is worth more than any other mineral resources in the world, because, everything is centered on it. Melanesians got it right from the beginning! Papua New Guineans from the highlands to the coasts understood the value of Land long before western civilization, they fought battles to protect and gain control of land for hunting, making gardens, and spiritual cultivation. They had low population compared to today, however, despite their smaller population; they managed to maintain control over vast landmasses and forests. 
When the white-men set foot on the island of New Guinea, they initially thought, that the huge masses of land areas and forests belonged to no one. But that was not the case; they had to encounter fierce warriors apart from the rugged terrains and tropical diseases. The whites were able to succeed on 3 factors;
  Skin Color and Race - When the natives      saw the whites, they thought, they (White-men) were ghosts or spirits.      Because of a culture deeply rooted in spiritual believes, the resistance      subsided because of the white-men's color.
Use of Christian Religion - Western      civilization's success can never be possible without the use of Christianity.      Missionaries were agents of colonization in PNG, as they influenced  and converted the      natives.
Use of modern weapons - Guns, bullets, swords,      daggers etc put the white-men ahead of the natives' spears, bows and      arrows.  
 The first traits of land grab in PNG were initiated by missionaries through the exchange of salt, tobacco and axes. That was how the Catholic and the Lutheran Churches took over native lands and started plantations. There were also signed agreements between the primitives and the whites for leases in the early colonial and missionary era that displaced the natives today. A Classic example is the lands belonging to the natives Kananam's taken over by the Catholic Church for the establishment of their Mission's headquarters (Alexishaffen) and plantations (Vidar). When the 99 year lease lapsed, the land went to the government and to the RD Tuna Ltd (a Filipino fishing company). Further transactions took place which  put  the land in  the hands of the project developers of the Pacific Marine Industrial Zone (PMIZ). The Kananams and Rempi's are displaced and thrown out of the best lands. There are many situations like this in the other parts of PNG.
The land grab is intensifying because of shortage arable land for food plantations and agric-industries thirsts for new lands for expansion. 
In October 2008, GRAIN released a report on the new trend in landgrabbing spurred on by the food and financial crises. A large number of governments and corporations are out scouring the globe right now in search of productive farmland to buy or to lease for offshore food production. For governments, like those of the Gulf States or China, such "farming abroad" schemes are meant to provide for their own country's food security, over a longterm period. Corporations, on the other hand, are looking for shorter term payoffs after the recent meltdown of financial markets. In all cases, control over land is being handed over to foreign investors who will produce food for export. Most of this new landgrabbing is taking place in Africa and Asia, but also in fertile regions of Eastern Europe and Latin America. (http://www.grain.org/landgrab/)
This is a dangerous trend – the ruthless capitalists are ruling the world in the name of economic development and profits. Capitalists see measure everything against the dollar, to them, money is their primary focus. The Melanesians view land as the centre of life – like a mother to her baby. 
Melanesian saw the value of land even before formal land valuation was introduced in Papua New Guinea. In fact, the valuation of land in the Melanesian perspective is holistic – it touches into the essence of one’s life and existence, believes, traditions, wealth, security, identity and spiritual.  
It would have been a biggest liability for PNG, if the control and ownership of all the land in PNG was in the hands of the government because, we have almost 75% illiteracy and 85% survive on subsistence living. The Customary Land Tenure System in PNG is directly or indirectly minimizing problems such as starvation, food riots, coups, assassinations, terrorism, civil wars and extreme levels of poverty.  

VANUATU LANDOWNERS PROTEST DEVELOPMENT

2010-02-24T11:34:00.001+10:00

Efate projects offer little benefit to residentsBy Royson Willie

PORT VILA, Vanuatu (Vanuatu Daily Post, Feb. 18, 2010) - The English saying "don’t judge a book by its cover" summarises the frustration of a man from Havannah Harbour in North Efate who told Daily Post yesterday that the colorful development in the area does not reflect the real living condition of the indigenous people there.
From Havannah Harbour in North Efate.
Timothy Kalangis who is one of the grandsons of Chief Tivate Kalangis of Utaune, or what is commonly known as Samoa Point, said news about more developments taking place in the area is of concern because currently, as custom owners they are not benefiting from the development in the area. He made this comment in the wake of reports that the government is planning on developing a mini-township in the area as well as a port-of-entry. Mr. Kalangis said his family, through chief Kalangis, was recently successful in its Land Tribunal Case that was declared about two years ago and is concerned about the rate of development taking place in the area. He said initially it was another family that allowed development to take place at Havannah mainland.

Kalangis said at first the people were included in the early stage of development but as time progressed, he said now it is only people who come in from Port Vila to work at North Efate while they have been left out. "One of the social problems that have arisen as a result of this is young women getting pregnant with the child of those who come in to work in the construction sector then leaving them behind. "Development is a good thing but it must not make us poor. "Currently it seems this is already the case for us in Havannah because there is too much development taking up more space on the land and coastal areas which restrict movements of the people, with the resources becoming scarce. "We depend on agriculture and marine resources to sustain our living but we do not benefit at all from the current leases in the area.

The English saying "don’t judge a book by its cover" summarizes the frustration of Kalangis. "If the government is making so much noise about these developments it must consult us because I believe what is currently happening at Havannah directly contradicts the Land Summit Resolutions of 2006. "Because there is a danger that we ni-Vanuatu may become strangers on our own land.
"The government and Shefa Province must play their part in safeguarding the interest of landowners and all ni-Vanuatu. "By this I mean there must be a win-win situation where the developer is happy and the landowners or people in the area are happy because if only one group is happy then it is a win-lose situation which is not healthy for development. "I am one of those who is very concerned about the future of our children and I don’t want to put the future of our children at risk. "This is my first time to come to the media to raise my concern because I could no longer bear the frustration about the development that are taking place at Havannah," Kalangis said. The man who is a former member of the Vanuatu police force said he had to raise his concern because he felt he has an obligation traditionally to safeguard the future of the Havannah ni-Vanuatu children.

"The development at Havannah does not reflect the living of the indigenous people there as the reality is we are poor with difficulties to pay for school fees and other necessities in life such as a proper water supply system." Meanwhile, Kalangis said he agrees with a recent writer in the Daily Post letters column, Mr. Trevor Hannam, that there is no space for any resort at the proposed site because currently it is a residential subdivision, not commercial. "I have seen the plans for the this proposed development and I couldn’t agree more with Mr. Hannam, which is why I said the 2006 National Land Summit resolutions must be revisited." The father of three departed yesterday for New Zealand under the RSE scheme to work for the school fees of his three children of which two are in secondary school and one in kindergarten.
Vanuatu Daily Post. http://www.dailypost.vu/ <http://www.dailypost.vu/>

Major Development Projects Affecting Ramu River

2010-02-22T18:08:00.005+10:00

On Saturday the 20th of February 2010, I took a trip to Sepu village at Usino located on the bank of the Ramu River below the Ramu Nickel-Cobalt Mine. The Sepu village had 3 houses washed downstream as a result of the flooding which is continuing because of the continuing wet period.

Ward Councilor Peter Kema from Sepu village, said the magnitude of the flooding is severer than the previous floods, something they have never seen and experienced before. The flood has destroyed the food gardens and the river communities are experiencing a chronic shortage of food.

Sepu village is one of the many villages of the riverine communities along the 4th largest river in PNG which is currently under so much stress from sedimentation buildup.

The Ramu River runs through the Ramu Valley and is located between the Finister and Bismarck Ranges and feeds from tributaries from the two ranges. The natural forces of nature and human activities along the Ramu River and the two ranges are contributing to the impacts on the Ramu River System.

However, there are a number of major development activities around the head-streams of the Ramu River and along the Ramu Valley which cannot be isolated from the ongoing stress of the Ramu River System and its compounding impacts on the livelihoods of the Ramu River communities.

Appropriate scientific research and baseline data of the Ramu River System needs to be undertaken over a sufficient period of time to established adequate facts. However, the number of developments upstream involved a significant forest clearance, thus aggravating intensive runoffs and erosion. Forest cover plays an important role in stopping runoffs and erosion.

The New Britain Palm Oil (NBPOL) recently took over the Ramu Sugar Ltd under a new commercial arrangement of expanding its oil palm business. Forest clearance along the Ramu valley at Dumpu last year, the Kainantu Gold Open Cut Mine in the Eastern Highlands Province (on the Bismarck Range),the river is a major tributary of the Ramu, the Ramu Nickel and Cobalt Mine (major clearance in the construction phase)and the Yandera Mine (Major clearance in the construction phase)all involved major involved forest clearance. Along the Middle-Ramu area, there is ongoing logging activities along the main tributaries of the Ramu.

These developments cannot be excused from impacting the Ramu River System, in terms of the recent floods and the sedimentation buildup. Once these mines go in to full scale operations, than the impacts will be added on to the current impacts. The bottom line is that, lives of people and their livelihoods are at stake.

The livelihoods of the Ramu River communities have not been taken into consideration by the government and the project developers. Over 250,000 people live and depend on the Ramu River System from the Upper Ramu to the Middle-Ramu right down to Bogia(Lower-Ramu). Therefore the potential diabolic consequences can not be undermined by the project developer and the Government of PNG.

Communities at the Lower part of the Ramu have formed a Group called, Ramu River Conservation and Management Authority (RRCMA). RRCMA main objective is to save the Ramu River from the potential destruction from the Ramu Nickel Mine and other major development projects upstream. RRCMA has been raising awareness along the Ramu River from Marangis to Sepu and show no intention of giving up even when the government is not supporting them. RRCMA was successful in get a monitoring station set-up in one of the villages along the Ramu River and have filed a case against the Ramu Nickel Mine (Chinese Meteorological Construction Company-CMCC) and the Mining Resource Authority (MRA) the government body that manages the mining industry (whose legality is also in question because it is controlled by the industry).

The RRCMA gets it! They do not want to end up like the Fly River, Strictland River and the Angabanga River communities who are affected by Ok Tedi, Porgera and Tolukama mining.

Landowners closed down Jant logging operations in Transgogol

2010-02-18T18:21:00.004+10:00

The famous Gogol Naru Logging project in the Madang province of Papua New Guinea has been closed down by landowners from Transgogol. Jant was formerly owned by a Japanese company and was later sold to a Vietnamese company.

The Jant operations was clouded with many issues relating to environmental and labor concerns.The landowners from Transgogol staged several protests, blockades and petitioned the company and the PNG Forest Authority to look into issues relating to agreements and labor over the years.

The labor issues raised by locals include, physical labor involved in loading and unloading timber and moving timber (logs) to pick-up spots. No machinery were used. There are reports of medical complications such as enlarged testicles, blood cloth, chronic back problems etc. Even the wage is very low and does not compensate for such brutal labor.

About week ago, the Transgogol landowners literally walked into the Jant camp and shut down the operations by forcing the loggers out. The many years of brutal forest raping has suddenly come to a standstill and the land is now in the hands of the landowners after being spectators for many decades.

Child Labour used for PMIZ Fencing in Madang-PNG

2010-02-17T17:16:00.003+10:00

The proposed Pacific Marine Industrial Zone (PMIZ) project in Madang province of Papua New Guinea which boasts to see ten (10) more new canneries has kick-started pre-construction activities. Initial clearance and construction of fencing started in January 2010.

The locals are lured by sub-contracts of K9000 per 300 meter fencing for each community groups.The locals are sweating their guts out for these lousy sub-contracts. No major contracts has been awarded to the locals, so again, another false promises of so called "spin-offs" for locals.

The most shocking thing is that, male school children are engaged to construct the fencing and have not been attending classes. Are there no laws for child-labour in PNG? These children are supposed to be in the classroom instead of working as adults under conditions unsuitable for their age.

The use or engagement of child labour for the PMIZ fencing brings on two assumptions.

1. It is most likely that these children are working to pay for their school fees as this is a major problem at this time of the years for many PNG families. Why does the government of PNG boasts about mega-investment projects amounting to over billions of dollars and it can't afford to provide free education for its people?

If Thailand, with a population of over 67 million, whose major income is generated by only one crop which is rice can provide free education for its citizens, why can't PNG with the vast reserves of oil and gas, forest, fisheries and mineral resources and just over 6 million population? It leaves no room for any other answers than "CORRUPTION".

2. Or, this might be a classical case of "Child Abuse" as those who got the contracts for the fencing are using children so they do not have to pay them much. Something which is common in the Asian countries. Why do we let it happen in PNG?

In any case, it is crystal clear that the PNG government is on a desperate mission to exploit all the riches and people of PNG.

Development Perspective: Corporate or Western vs Melanesian

2010-02-08T17:06:00.002+10:00

The Corporate Perspective:

“Development” is the catchphrase over used by promoters and advocates of Customary Land Reform in Papua New Guinea. The government and major donor agencies see Customary Land Tenure System to be a major default for development and economic progress. They see that access to Customary Lands is an important factor in economic development in Pacific island countries and a major consideration for investors. Financial institutions are also unlikely to lend money on custom lands; therefore it locks the economic potential and opportunity for these lands to be developed.

Our Melanesian Perspective:

We see development in terms of physical, spiritual and mental empowerment of people and our concern is the development of the whole person as we want people to grow. Too much control prevents people from advancing and therefore we want to provide space for people to discover themselves, improvise, and develop ideas that suit their needs and situation and the environment they live in. An empowered people or community has the holistic potential to cause them to progress by making informed decisions and be the master of their own destiny. We hope to see our people rise to become truly self reliant. Personal transformation is what our people need and we believe it is more sustainable than material development.

These cannot be valued in monetary and the western economic standards. These are the essence of life to us Melanesians and we highly esteem these values. Why commercializing our only link to our values. When you see the dollar, it blinds you to see the Melanesian view of land.

We are not stupid to understand that there are major problems faced by the developed world which they can not solve with all the money they have. They boast to have low poverty levels, yet, there are millions on the streets who are home less and have nothing to eat. This is the situation with the United States today with the struggling US$. Because of our land tenure situation, we do not see these problems. For example, families without any form of income generation or formal employment who earn less than a US$1 dollar a day still have plenty of organic food to eat and share with others, a simple hut to sleep in, with access of water from streams, creeks and rivers to cook and wash, and there is laughter and dancing and high moral standards.

We are not stupid to know that, the developed countries have no intent to help us get to the same standards as them. They are here because of our rich threshold of natural resources. Nevertheless, even if they have some good intentions, we fully understand that we are a different group of people with different beliefs, cultures and values. Therefore what the white men proposes is from his context, believe, culture and value. We can never be like the whites and do not think it is wise to copy or live a life of pretence and self denial. The Africans never got it right and we can never dream to get it right without the people maintaining control of the land. It will be a tragedy and chaotic for Melanesian to be landless and forced to live in an individualistic society without any spiritual and cultural connections. Once our land is gone, we’ll be defeated foreigners in our own land and also present to our dear children a future of alcoholics, drug addicts and prostitutes. It is our greatest fear to end up like Africa.

Thus, there is no better conclusion than this:

We see the darkness of neon lights. We see the
despair and loneliness in the urban cities. We see
the alienation of (the people) that is the result of the
present machine orientated economy. We see true
social security and (the people’s) happiness being
diminished in the name of economic progress. We
caution therefore that large-scale industries should
be pursued only after very careful and thorough
consideration of the likely consequences upon the
social and spiritual fabric of our people…There is
overwhelming evidence to suggest that a significant
number of people who live by the fruits of multi-million
dollar multi-national corporations live in misery,
loneliness and spiritual poverty. We believe that
since we are a rural people, our strength should
be essentially in the land and the use of our innate
artistic talents. (Papua New Guinea Constitutional
Planning Committee, 1975

A leaked draft EU document shows that the Commission would like to rename palm oil plantations as “forest”

2010-02-08T11:29:00.001+10:00

Stop the EU Commission from forcing biodiesel from palm oil on EU countries.
EU Commission: this is not a forest, it’s a plantation

The Commission would like to rename palm oil plantations as “forest” in order that biodiesel from palm oil plantations can still meet EU biofuels sustainability criteria.

Palm oil expansion is a major cause of tropical rainforest destruction and biodiesel from palm oil can easily cause more greenhouse gas emissions that the fossil fuel it is meant to replace.

Help stop the Commission from classifying biodiesel from palm oil as “sustainable” and ask them to ensure that unsustainable palm oil does not count towards our renewable energy obligations. (Start: 05.02.2010)

Source: http://www.rainforest-rescue.org/

European Union's push for oil palm is a major threat to forests and indigenous lands. That means if they move ahead with their plans, more forests will be destroyed and more indigenous lands will be lost to the industry.

Ramu Mine Under Valued

2010-02-03T16:49:00.000+10:00

Ramu mine worth billions

The value of Ramu Ni-Co project quoted in The National newspaper is misleading. It also holds the largest Sino-Australian nickel and cobalt project worth $US1.7 billion (K4.6 billion)” from the article entitled “PNG on a verge of a Boom”.

For brevity, Ramu laterite deposit contains 1.44 million tons of nickel and 0.143 million tons of cobalt within a reserve of 143mt at 1.01 per cent Ni and 0.1 per cent Co. At today’s buoyant prices of $US9/lb for nickel and $US20/lb for cobalt, the in-situ value of contained nickel and cobalt in the Ramu project stands at about $US28 billion and $US6 billion.
So the actual value of Ramu nickel cobalt project is $US34 billion or K92 billion at today’s prices. This excludes exploration dollars already spent on the project. This mine will produce in excess of 31,000 tonnes of Ni and 3300 tons Co annually for a period of 20 years (with the potential for up to 30 years). The worth of metals produced annually may exceed $US750 million subject to fluctuating metal prices and production capacity. This is somewhat equivalent to well over K2 billion per annum at today’s exchange rate and metal price.

Sadly, 85 per cent of the ownership of the Ramu mineral resource was sold to MCC, the Chinese state owned enterprise for a mere 5 per cent ($US1.7 billion) of the total value of this mega resource. So the $US1.7 billion is the construction and initial operating costs.So how much is left for PNG or Papua New Guineans? Barely 10 per cent (because HPL is a public listed company) in the bones as usual through the following entities: -
* 8.56 per cent Highlands Pacific Limited
* 3.94 per cent MRDC
* 2.5per cent landowners

To set the record straight, the present value of Ramu mine is worth about $US34 billion (K92 billion) and not $US1.7 billion (K4.6 billion) at today’s price but unfortunately very little if not none will be reflected in long-term tangible development of Papua New Guinea. Indeed it is another example of broad daylight rape and exploitation of Papua New Guinea. PNG government and its entities must act radically and swiftly in changing the current trends in order to maximise realisation of the natural resources for Papua New Guinea. Sadly, PNG government is continuously selling multi-billion-dollar resources cheaply, for next to peanuts because it seems to lack comprehension and in-depth analytical skills compounded by greed and ignorance.

Kaul Gena, Ph.D
Senior lecturer
Western Australian School of Mines

The U.S. Food Crisis: 1 in 5 Went Hungry Last Year. Now What?

2010-02-03T14:11:00.000+10:00

Sometime in the fall last year, I was at my local supermarket in San Francisco’s Mission District, picking through some melons when I heard the unmistakable sound of a body hit the floor behind me — hard. I turned to find a woman being handcuffed and led into an employees-only area, as she pleaded with the security guard: “I lost my job and need to feed my children.” It was nothing short of heartbreaking.

Later, as I waited to pay for my groceries at the register, I watched another woman set off an alarm as she ran out of the supermarket with bananas and baby food in her arms. She made it — and presumably was able to feed her child that night.

I thought of that desperate day again when I read an extensive report released today on the state of food hardship in America (pdf) by the Food Research and Action Center (FRAC). In it comes the striking news that one in five Americans went hungry at some point in 2009.

Food hardship was measured as those who responded affirmatively to the question, “Have there been times in the past twelve months when you did not have enough money to buy food that you or your family needed?” By the end of last year, the national food hardship rate was 18.5 percent. For households with children, the rate was much higher, at 24.1 percent.

For the general population, food hardship, which is the most basic indicator of general socio-economic hardship, was higher in 2008 than in 2009, but let’s not pat ourselves on the back just yet — one in eight Americans are on food stamps today. Indeed, it appears that thanks to social programs like SNAP, food hardship did not continue to skyrocket throughout last year. With the recession, eligibility for food stamps was eased and benefits were increased. (Thank you, welfare state!)

Most of the report’s stats are dismal — and I could continue enumerating them to paint a more detailed picture of our hunger crisis, but I would rather hone in on the data that might hold some real political capital. You can speak about national hunger rates but hawking national data doesn’t hold reluctant or deluded politicians accountable — America is a large, amorphous entity for which everyone ought but often no one feels responsible or moved to act.

That’s why I am especially excited by the fact that the FRAC report gives us a highly localized look at hunger in America — and breaks it down by congressional district:

Of the 436 Congressional Districts (including the District of Columbia), 311 had a food hardship rate of 15 percent or higher. In 139 of them the rate was 20 percent or higher. Practically every Congressional District in the country had more than a tenth of respondents reporting food hardship.

Districts with the worst rates can be found in a whole range of states — California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Michigan, Texas, Mississippi, New York — but, on the aggregate, hunger is most widespread in the South. These are districts represented in Washington, for the most part, by right-wingers and Democrats-only-in-name generally opposed to the expansion of welfare programs, even in the face of a massive recession.

This report could not have come at a better time. Just this morning came news that the Senate is planning a $80 billion job-creation bill that will cut Americans’ extended unemployment benefits (the House bill would not do this). This is the kind of boneheaded move that is predicated on the infallibility of the welfare-state-is-bad and/or anything-but-debt theses, and not in reality.

The battle worth fighting in 2010 is one that steers the government back to caring for the interests of regular Americans — and away from the corporations and financial institutions that have benefited most from governmental attention in this recession. There will be a lot of debate — and one-sided fear-mongering — about the expansion of low-income social assistance and unemployment programs, ranging from food stamps to COBRA; there will be a lot of talk about rising debt and budget-freezing, too.

But reports like FRAC show that as bad as hunger is today, it would be far worse without the social programs currently in place. President Obama has set a goal of eliminating child hunger by 2015. Pressuring Congress with the facts on hunger in their own districts is a good place to start working toward that goal, which while lofty, considering our current state, is completely achievable, especially in a country as wealthy — and bountiful — as ours.

(Source: http://www.frac.org/pdf/food_hardship_report_2010.pdf)

Now with our Customary Land Tenure System in Papua New Guinea. We do not see this a major problem. A family who earn less than a US dollar a day in the rural communities still have surplus of organic food and water from rivers, streams, and creeks. Adding to that, they have a house (a simple traditional hut) but they do not have to worry about all the bills.

The people who are starving in USA do not have land like the Papua New Guineans. Given the economic crisis, and companies are down sizing their labour force as cost cutting measures, how will the millions of parents cater for food and water for their families?

With the PNG government push for Land Reforms and encouraging Customary landowners to register their lands for economic development is a "death trap". Becarefull Papua New Guinea, DO NOT BE FOOLED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We are SOLD very CHEAP!!!!!

2010-02-01T15:23:00.004+10:00

A leading Papua New Guinea geologist says the Ramu Nickel mine has been massively undervalued and is another example of the “broad daylight rape” and exploitation of Papua New Guinea’s resources.

He claims the US$34 billion mine has been sold to the Chinese for just 5% of its true value.

“Sadly, the [PNG] government is continuously under selling multi-billion-dollar resources because it lacks analytical skills” says geologist Jerry Barry in a story by Mohammad Bashir in today’s Post Courier newspaper. This lack of knowledge and skills is further compounded by greed and ignorance says Barry

Mr Garry estimates the Ramu Nickel mine is worth $US34 billion and not $US1.7 billion as is commonly reported.

(Source: Postcourier, 29 Jan 10, Ramu mine ‘worth K92b’By MOHAMMAD BASHIR)

The LNG project which is gaining momentum and refered to many as the "economic saviour" of PNG is valued around US$16 Billion. How do we know that this is the true value. With the Geologist report on the Ramu Nickel and Cobalt Mine, these draws a major concern in the natural resource sector.

The Chinese State Owned Company - Chinese Meterlugical Construction Company (CMCC) owns 85 percent of the mine. Unfortunately I do not have the figures of the shares of the LNG project, but am sure it will be similliar. What do we get from all these mineral resource development going on? Its a shame for the government to allow this to happen in this country. This is CORRUPTION!!

The Somare Government has proved to be the worst salesmen of the PNG rich heritage. The National Alliance Salemen are selling our rich wealth cheaply, and who knows, how much they are making for their commissions.

While minerals and other naturals are getting scares across the globe, it would mean in simple economics that, when the demand is high and the supply is low, the prices go up. But we are seeing the total opposite in this country. We are SOLD very CHEAP!!!

Alien Invasion

2009-12-17T11:19:00.009+10:00

The influx of Asians into PNG has been increasing steadily for the last two years. It is very difficult and often a lengthy process to get work or entry permits, visas and residency in other countries, even in Asian countries. But that is not the case in PNG especially with Asians.

The Somare Government made it very difficult for Papua New Guineas to get or renew their Passports. There are a lot of hassles one has to go through before obtaining one and in most cases, a document called “Certificate of Identity” is issued, instead of a real Passport. The Department dealing with the issuing of passports and entry permits is clouded with corruption as government officials are seen to proceed with processes on time if one uses the “master key”- bribe. There are agents who deal with passports, visas and permits, however, the charges are way to the roof.

Furthermore, there are number of applications for permanent residency by expats who have committed their lives in service to this country in private, public or the religious sector, but have been backlogged over the years. But that is not the case with Asians, they seem to have no problems obtaining PNG Passports, Entry Permits, etc.

The Alien Invasion into Madang has been very phenomenal. For every single flight from Port Moresby into Madang, they (Asians) occupy 70 percent of the seats daily. No one knows whether they are coming in as workers for the Ramu Nickel Mine or the RD Tuna Cannery, or the Logging Companies or the Propose Pacific Marine Industrial Park or just aliens looking for a peaceful place to settle. You don’t need a statistician to qualify the alien invasion. WE ARE BEING INVADED BY ALIENS and the sad thing is that, the Somare Government is seen to be facilitating that BY NOT DOING ANYTHING ABOUT IT. If the Government has a different criterion for incoming Asians, we demand to know.

Those who are staying in Port Moresby can visit the Jacksons International Airport and for those who are staying in Madang can visit the Madang airport and judge for yourselves who are the human species that dominates the incoming flights.

This is not a racist propaganda, but this invasion is uncalled for. The entry permits has to be standardized and no special preferences should be given to a certain human species. It is simply biology that any invasive species that is not carefully monitored and controlled could potentially dominate and overpower the common species and take over.

Christmas Gift from "Santa Claus" Somare

2009-11-25T12:19:00.004+10:00

Oh oh oh oh! It’s Christmas! Monday 23 of November 2009, Somare Government’s extravagant purchase of the Falcon 900 X aircraft cost US$40 million (K112 million) landed at the Jackson’s International Airport. Despite many opposition, the government went ahead and bought this expensive jet.

An early Christmas Gift from the public purse, this jet will service a very few privileged who sit at the top of the pyramid at the expanse of the almost 7 million people of Papua New Guinea.

The Somare Government saw itself fit to deploy such an expensive expenditure in the height of the worst state of health, education and infrastructure conditions in the country since independence.

Hospitals, clinics and aid posts in rural areas have no medicine, schools have no proper classrooms, broken desks no learning materials, poor living conditions for teachers etc. Roads and bridges, the bloodline for the movement of goods and services into rural communities have deteriorated into unimaginable standards. Yet the Somare Government saw it so wise to purchase this fancy aircraft.

No doubt, it is very clear that, Papua New Guineans, your health and your children’s health, and your children education is not important as far as the Somare Government is concerned. It does not even care about the basic infrastructures crucial for servicing rural communities. This government is "Robbing the Poor & Serving the Rich". Is this the kind of government the people of PNG deserve?

Now it is more convenient for Somare and his boys to do business deals and agreements in the skies.

Copy of Mekere’s speech at EFF's 10th Anniversary Dinner

2009-11-22T16:19:00.002+10:00

LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION
Parliament House, Waigani, National Capital District
PAPUA NEW GUINEA
Ph 3277 631 Fax 3277 632

Corruption, Civil Society and Good Governance
10th Anniversary Dinner – Eco-Forestry Forum
19th November 2009, Crowne Plaza, Port Moresby

Thank you Ken, Board Members, Thomas, Effrey and members of the Eco-Forestry Forum for inviting me to speak at your 10th anniversary dinner. It is an honour and a privilege.

I am disappointed that my co-guest speaker, Tos Barnett could not be here. Apart from my missing out on catching up with an old friend, reminiscing about the satisfaction and fun we had working to put in place good systems and structures of government in the early days of Independence, we will all miss the story Tos might have told us tonight. The Forestry Inquiry that he chaired uncovered the first big cases of corruption in PNG.

The Inquiry report documented what Tos described as “widespread malfeasance” - pervasive bribery and corruption; large-scale transfer pricing resulting in the loss of millions of dollars of export income, government revenue and royalties; non-compliance with regulations; extensive violation of landholders’ rights; and serious environmental destruction. The industry was, in Barnett’s words, “out of control”.

Let’s for a moment reflect on the pre-Barnett Inquiry era of the 1970s and 80s, and then what followed.

Before the exposures of the Barnett Inquiry, we had seen some questionable land deals, some petty embezzlement, the famous public service Diary affair, and misuse by some ministers of sectoral funds, soon known by all as “slush funds”.

But in those days, the total amount in a slush fund was at most one hundred thousand kina, for the whole country. Now, each Member of Parliament is in control of millions of kina every year. In those days, we did not have procurement and payment officers of government departments and companies fixing their own deals on each item procured or paid for. We did not have political parties controlling Supply and Tender Boards. We had proper contractual processes and checks and balances that largely worked, and protected the integrity and transparency of the system.

We did not have trust accounts with billions of kina stashed away, and Ministers roaming the countryside manually writing cheques and dishing them out as if the funds were their private savings. We did not have government agencies like IPBC hoarding and spending revenue that belongs to the state, to the people of Papua New Guinea. We had an Ombudsman Commission that took action; and Police Commissioners and Public Prosecutors who did their work without fear or favour.

The Barnett Forestry Inquiry reported 20 years ago. To me it is a landmark, a dividing point in the history of our country. Because while at the time it had major repercussions, we did not seem to learn from, or implement, its excellent recommendations. It resulted in the dismissal of one MP, and the resignation of the Deputy Prime Minister, which itself led to the dismissal of the Governor General. Some administrative reforms were put in place, but the very clear and detailed evidence set out in the Report was not taken up by prosecuting authorities, nor did the structure of the industry change. Those described by Tos as “robber barons” were soon at work again.

How PNG has changed in the 20 years since the Barnett Report. What was then a total scandal seems monkey compared with what is going on today. Corruption now pervades all sectors of government. In turn it has spread to the private sector; it affects every one of us in our daily lives. A friend, a very big businessman who grew up here and knows the country inside out, recently made the comment to me that it is very difficult to do honest business in PNG these days. And sadly, he is right.

In 1999, when my government came to power, there was so much to do. The country was virtually bankrupt and the kina on the verge of inconvertibility. Decision-making had been high-jacked by people outside Government. My focus of attention had to be on re-establishing an orderly process of decision-making based on process and professional advice, on stabilising the economy and government finances, on reforming the financial sector, and laying the foundation for both sustainable economic growth and for major reform of the public sector. In short, it was a period of reconstruction and rehabilitation for development.

In the three short years I had, there simply was not enough time to undertake all the reform necessary in different sectoral areas. For forestry, all I could do was to impose a moratorium on all new licences, increase taxes on timber exports (especially on logs), extend the SGS monitoring and checking of exports – and appoint the Eco-Forestry Forum to the National Forestry Authority Board. Discussions were advanced with the World Bank to fund a comprehensive review of the structure of the industry, an audit of all existing licences, a review of the fiscal regime for forestry and, most importantly, a stock-take of the remaining forest resource so that a Plan for a sustainable industry could be laid. Interim studies were completed, but not yet translated into law.

One of my greatest regrets in not being returned to power in 2002 was that I did not have the opportunity to undertake these more complex reviews and reforms.

Instead, the first thing the Somare Government did was to ingratiate itself to the forestry companies by reducing export tax. The moratorium on new licences was lifted. Section 59 of the Forestry Act, which provided for consultation with landowners on matters relating timber permits was repealed in 2005, and the Eco-Forestry Forum was removed from the Board to make way for a ministerial appointee. The Somare Government has conducted no audit of existing leases, to determine whether licence holders have fulfilled conditions of licences or not. There has been no analysis of ownership of forestry leases, to determine the real structure and ownership of the industry. No plan for sustainable exploitation has been developed. No action has been taken against lack of compliance with lease conditions, against violation of labour and immigration laws, abuse of human rights, or environmental damage. No monitoring of reforestation is taking place; indeed hardly any reforestation is taking place at all.

What Barnett detailed 20 years ago is not only relevant today – the situation is a hundred times worse. The control of the industry by one company is even more concentrated; the connections between timber companies and those in power have intensified; transfer pricing is still rampant; the majority of timber resource owners do not benefit from the industry; the environmental damage from uncontrolled logging has magnified.

Tos Barnett described the political accomplices of the timber barons 20 years ago as “corrupt, gullible and unthinking politicians”. I am not sure that today they could still be described as such. Corrupt yes, but not so gullible, and not so unthinking. Corruption has become, as I predicted in 1994, systemic and systematic. It is deliberate.

Removing export tax on logs is a deliberate act by the Government. Syphoning off timber revenue to Singapore bank accounts is a deliberate act. Corruption in forestry and throughout Government is systemic and systematic.

Every day we see it: politicians walking around with bagfuls of cash; their conspicuous spending on cars, houses, travel, gambling, women and drinking. We have a Prime Minister buying a private jet to spin around the world to sell more carbon credits; a Prime Minister negotiating to buy a satellite from India costing billions of kina; Ministers selling state assets cheaply, like the state’s shares in Oil Search; while children are not at school, aid posts are closed, health centres have no medicine, and roads have potholes like craters. It is all before our eyes. Who is taking action?

One shining light in this sad story of neglect and corruption is you, the Eco-Forestry Forum. You have shown through word and deed the importance of civil society in the quest for good governance. You actively engage in policy discussion, on forestry, environmental issues, on emissions reduction, carbon trading and on human rights. You campaign against illegal logging, and campaign for sustainable eco-forestry development. You involve landowners and rural communities in your work. You have taken the Government and companies to court, culminating in the landmark victories over Kamula Doso and East Awin. You have filed a constitutional reference challenging the validity of the Timber Permits Validation Act 2007 – another deliberate act by the Somare Government in support of questionable forestry activities.

You have a major role to play right now to protect forest resource owners from being seduced by the carbon credit cowboys who are carrying around their permits signed by the Prime Minister and his colleagues in the Kitchen Cabinet. What a paradox. On the one hand the Prime Minister, outriggered by his American and Italian logs, champions the REDD cause, while allowing uncontrolled exploitation of our forests by timber companies. On the one hand, we champion REDD and wish to trade our carbon credits, but we have no legislation or policy in place. In the face of chaos, we are vulnerable to sharks as well as cowboys.

To counter this and other misdeeds we need many more organisations to join you and speak out, engage in debate, draw out alternatives and options, protest about what we know to be wrong, and demand appropriate action by Government. Business people, workers, church representatives, media representatives, academics, students, professionals, community leaders all need to stop taking a passive role and play their part as responsible citizens. It is only when the people hold a government accountable, that it will be accountable.

Accountability requires commitment from the top, the leaders, and pressure from the people. NGOs, working together, drawing strength from each other, can make a difference for the silent majority to be heard.

I congratulate you on all that the Eco-Forestry Forum has achieved in its first ten years, and encourage you to keep up your fight. I assure you of my support.

Thank you.

Mekere Morauta KCMG MP
Leader of the Opposition and Member for Moresby North-West

Shits & Ass Holes

2009-11-19T16:11:00.001+10:00

What is the Grand Chief trying to hide?

2009-11-18T15:16:00.007+10:00

The Government plans to disband the parliamentary bipartisan committee investigating the anti-Asian rioting in May. It claims that the bi-partisan committee chaired by MP Jamie Maxton Graham has lost credibility.

The panel is seeking to establish what triggered the May 2009 protests and looting of shops owned and operated by Chinese in the Highlands and Port Moresby.

We know that the Government initially tried to shelve the issue by not funding the committee, however the Prime Minister was pressured to make funds available. Now we learnt that the committee would be disbanded by parliament.

Why are we NOT surprised Grand Chief! It was Somare’s government’s intention all along to hide the truth about the anti-Asian riots. We know that Somare and his government are in bed with the Asian and they will do anything to ensure that this love affair is not disrupted.

Well the fact of the matter is that, MP Jamie Maxton Graham and the bi-partisan committee have uncovered some serious issues relating to the anti-Asian riots that may bring to light things that Somare and his government do not want the people of PNG to know.

It is a shame for the government to question the credibility of the bi-partisan committee who has done a commendable job to bring to light the causes of the anti-Asian riots. What is the Grand Chief trying to hide?

Somare turning PNG into a Casino

2009-11-05T16:24:00.001+10:00

The Somare led Government has turned Papua New Guinea into a Casino. With the natural resources boom in PNG, we see more mining licences being granted, new areas turned into oil palm plantations, loggers penetrating new forests frontiers, commercial fishing and now the Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) and Pacific Marine Industrial Zone (PMIZ) projects.

The PNG government is signing all kinds of deals in a very short period of time as if the whole world will end tomorrow. The way these deals are done is like a casino, and it is very clear the Somare led government and his NA ruling party are gambling the future heritage of this country.

Do we need to mine all the mountains, and the sea floor, log all our forest, fish all our tuna, and drain out all our oil and gas to be developed? Have we not learnt from our African brothers that once had all the riches but are now plaque with HIV and Aids, riots, civil wars, corruption and starvation? Do we really think we will become like the first worlds? Have we not learnt from the Bougainville crisis? Have we not learnt form the pollution of the Fly River by Ok Tedi mine? Have we not learnt from the experiences of RD Tuna cannery in Madang? Have we not learnt from the RH logging operations in the Western and Gulf province? Have we not learnt from the Oil Palm problems in West New Britain?

Make no mistakes, the deals the government is signing is selling the rich heritage of this country cheap. For instance, the Ramu Nickel Project in Madang. The Chinese state owned Company, Chinese Metallurgical Construction Company (CMCC) owns 85% of the shares; Highlands Pacific owns 8% the rest of the 7% is shared between the government, MRA, individuals and landowners. And on top of that, they (CMCC) are given tax holiday up to ten years.

No country in the world allows a foreign company to own over 50 percent of mining shares, it is only happening in PNG. For such deals as these who stands to benefit? Definitely not the country and not the people nor the landowners. Would it mean that those who are facilitating these deals and signing agreements are stupid? Or would mean that there are significant commissions for those who facilitate these stupid deals and sign the agreements?

The government claims that landowners would benefit from spin-off business and possible employment opportunities. This is just a cheap cover up, to divert people’s attention from the real issues of equitable benefit sharing. In fact many landowner company are still struggling to get contracts and employment opportunities are only low paid wages. Is this what we deserve?

Palm Oil will Never be Sustainable

2009-11-05T11:07:00.001+10:00

02.11.2009
RSPO is Greenwashing
For copies in Spanish, Indonesian or Italian, please email unsustainablepalmoil@gmail.com
2-11-2009

Open Letter to RSPO and WWF

Palm oil monoculture will never be

http://www.regenwald.org/international/englisch/news.php

"CORRUPTION" - Masterminded

2009-11-04T12:47:00.002+10:00

Many people talk about corruption and it is a major issue for many developing countries in world. Corruption is responsible for many run down government services, cheap selling of natural resources, ineffective public service, shortage of medicine, shortage of essential school supplies, policemen on payroll of companies and the list goes on.

Often, the focus is on the problems associated with corruption and the parties involved. However, this may not be the only face of corruption, there is another face to it that plays strategically and tactically behind the seen.

I read a Book about Nelson Mandela and the struggle for Blacks to have equal voting rights as the white minority. That book opened by eyes to see the dimensions of the masterminds behind the suppression of the blacks struggle. While the African National Congress (ANC) and their leader, Nelson Mandela were involved in International lobby to force the white government to allow the blacks to have voting rights, England was pumping money into the Zulu Party to oppose the moves by ANC. Huge amounts of money were also pumped into underground killings and riots which were published in International media to discredit the ANC and lie to the world that the blacks were not ready to vote or have the country in their own hands. This was uncovered by the Truth Commission who did an inquiry into all the riots and killing in South Africa prior to blacks being granted equal voting rights as the white minority.

I believe, the various riots and crisis in Africa are manufactured by masterminds of the governments of the first worlds who do not want to see these countries have good strong stable governments who can control the vast natural resources. The political instability and in fighting in the African countries makes it easier and cheap for their resources to be exploited.

To put things into perspective, for those our us, who have not fought for our independence, our colonial masters made sure they put strategic controls in place before granting us independence. We do not have civil wars in Papua New Guinea, accept for the 9 years Bougainville crisis, however, we are rated amongst the most corrupt countries in the world. Sir Mekere once said that "Corruption has been institutionalized". The Transparency International is yet to raise issues of corruption despite of many happening in the country.

Donor agencies such as AusAid are continuing to fund land development programs despite the fact that the Department for Lands and Physical Planning is clouded with corruption with missing files, re-zoning public parks, most prime commercial lands in urban centres and cities go to Asian businesses. Interestingly the donor agencies, including AusAid, ADB, EU etc are not raising any concern about corruption in PNG. They simply brush it aside as an internal matter. Don't you care that the money you are donating is going to the dogs? For AusAid funds, don't you care that it is the Australian Tax payers money thrown into the hands of thieves?

Well if they do not care than, it sounds like the situation when ANC was struggling to get the blacks the voting rights. So someone is masterminding corruption in PNG. The corrupt the government of PNG is, the easier to control and manipulate. I believe Australia is benefiting for the corruption in PNG, because if we have a strong, vibrant non-corrupt government, with the resources we have, we can be more powerful than them and we can donate to them. Who says No?

Green Revolution - The Capitalist Propaganda

2009-10-29T15:36:00.001+10:00

The World Wide Agriculture Movement called the Green Revolution which took off in a big way in 1960's was the result of the research that began in 1944, when the Rockefeller Foundation and the Mexican government established a plant-breeding station north-western Mexico.

The success in Mexico led to the establishment of another plant-breeding center in the Philippines which is known today as the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI).

That trend reduced the diversity of grain crops especially Rice and Wheat. IRRI took control of the traditional varieties of rice from the Asian countries, as a result, the local farming communities lost control of the seeds which are now kept in a giant genetic seed bank. The rice seeds released by IRRI, despite being labeled as the high yielding varieties are susceptible to pest and diseases and requires heavy use of pesticides and fertilizers. Also these seeds cannot be kept for replanting as they will not produce well, thus the farmers are required to purchase new seeds every time.

This is how the capitalist world have introduced the globalized food system through reducing the diversity of seeds and traditional varieties which are tolerant to climate change and pest and diseases, so they make huge profits from hybrids, high yielding varieties and genetically modified seeds and the agro-chemicals. The seed companies such as Mosanto are big players in the globalized food system.

All over Asia, the peasants are rising and mobilizing to deglobalize the food system to harness the diversification of seeds which are in the hands of the farmers and NOT IRRI or Mosanto.

The Green Revolution is a Capitalist Propaganda for a Globalized Food System control by the minority. 2010 April 4 will be IRRI's 50 years of capitalist globalized seed bank. The farmers in the Asia-Pacific region are raising one voice - SHUT DOWN IRRI, Deglobalised the food system, Hand back the seeds to the farmers. It is a crime to take seeds away from the people and make profits out of their poverty.

Gone off the Course

2009-10-06T14:01:00.001+10:00

(Reflecting on PNG 34th Independence Anniversary)

When the children of this land sang the National Anthem and lift the black gold and red flag on September 16, 2009, there was a sense of emptiness in the song. The lyrics sounded foreign as it does not reflect the spirit of the people of this country. Rundown education and medical facilities, high school fees, high cost of living, poor infrastructures, corruption and the list goes on.

Papua New Guinea’s National Constitution developed before the independence in 1975 was based on five key pillars set by the Constitutional Planning Committee quoted below:

“We hereby proclaim the following aims as our National Goals and Direct all persons and bodies, corporate and unincorporated, to be guided by these our declared directives in pursuing and achieving our aims:

1. Integral Human Development:
We declare our first goal to be for every person to be dynamically involved in the process of freeing himself or herself from every form of domination or oppression so that each man and women will have the opportunity to develop as a whole person in relationship with others.

2. Equality and Participation:
We declare our second goal to be for all citizens to have an equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from the development from our country.

3. National Sovereignty and Self Reliance:
We declare our third goal to be for Papua New Guineans to be politically and economically independent, and our economy basically self reliant.

4. Natural Resources and Environment:
We declare our fourth goal to be for Papua New Guinea’s natural resources and environment to be conserved and used for the collective benefit of us all, and be replenished for the benefit of our future generations.

5. Papua New Guinea Ways:
We declare our fifth goal to be to achieve development primarily through the use of Papua New Guinea forms of social, political and economic organisation.”

The PNG Constitutional Planning Committee in 1975 also had a vision for PNG quoted below:

“We see the darkness of the neon lights. We see the despair and loneliness in the urban cities. We see the alienation of people that is the result of the machine oriented economy. We see the true social security and the people’s happiness being diminished in the name of economic progress. We caution therefore that large scale industries should be pursued only after very careful and thorough consideration of the likely consequences upon the social and spiritual fabric of our people. There is overwhelming evidence to suggest that a significant number of people who live by the fruits of multi-million dollar multi-national corporations live in misery, loneliness and spiritual poverty. We believe that since we are a rural based people, our strength should be essentially in the land and the use of our innate artistic talents” (PNG Constitution Planning Committee 1975)

The Constitution Planning Committee set the development path for PNG and its people in 1975 through the national goals and directives and its vision.

Quoted below are 3 of the quotes of 3 famous PNG and Melanesian Leaders:

“All of us in Bougainville, PNG and Melanesia; and everybody in the Pacific need our land. Our lives depend on our land and our resources which are our wealth. What do we (160,000 Bougainvilleans) need the biggest copper mine in the world for?”
Francis Ona

“Do we really want to become a country of big cities? In all the 700 languages of our country we have never needed words for air pollution, for slum or for unemployment. Do we wish to build the kind of country that needs these words?”
Michael T Somare (1973)

“The concept of land ownership goes beyond human existence, for while a person is a transient creature, land is permanent, irredeemable and non-disposable. Land is the link between the earth and the sky, the sea and the clouds, the past and the future. Because land is eternal, it is owned in a sacred trust for the succeeding generations.”
Bernard Narokobi

Reflecting on the 34th Independence Anniversary of this beautiful country (PNG), it is very clear the country has gone off the tangent. The leadership that had the bright and sharp eyes during the preparation stages of independence in the early 1970’s have gone blind and lost vision. In a very short period of a little of 30 years, the country has been ripped off big time by multinational corporations and few corrupt elites of this country. The future of this country looks bleak.

Addressing Climate Change in the Global Village

2009-09-30T11:50:00.008+10:00

Climate Change is generally referring to the global climatic condition which is now affected and unstable due to an increasing level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere resulting in Global Warming and triggering extreme and unstable weather patterns. Burning of "fossil fuels" such as coal, oil and gas which contains carbon is a major sponsor of climate change. Burning them releases carbon dioxide gas. Since the early 1800s, when people began burning large amounts of coal and oil, the amount of carbon dioxide in the earth's atmosphere has increased by nearly 30%, and average global temperature appears to have risen between 1° and 2°F.
An important role of Carbon dioxide gas is trapping solar heat in the atmosphere, partly in the same way as glass traps solar heat in a sunroom or a greenhouse. For this reason, carbon dioxide is often called a "greenhouse gas." As more carbon dioxide is added to the atmosphere, solar heat has more trouble getting out. The result is that, everything else stayed unchanged, the average temperature of the atmosphere has increased.
These have further aggravated, sea levels rising, natural disasters, crops diseases and pestilences and food security concerns are few examples. These are huge challenges impacting global politics, economics, industries, science, technology, and social patterns and cross cutting across the developed, industrial and the underdeveloped countries.

There is scientific consensus that Global Warming and Climate Change are global phenomenon; however the mitigations remain a challenge because it is not a pure scientific issue, but a scientific issue resulting from main streams factors such as political, economical and social decisions and human behavioural patterns and thus consequently having a major effect on these factors. To address Global Warming and Climate Change would require a total overhauling from all these factors which is adding the complex icing on the already complex scientific problem. This remains a huge challenge for the global community.

The developed countries, especially the Europeans are driving global campaigns on approaches to mitigate Global Warming and Climate Change while on the other end China and India are hungry for more raw materials for their huge and growing industries. The developing countries especially those who are vested with reserves of raw materials like Papua New Guinea are sandwiched in the middle of this two worlds whether to continue in exporting raw materials or stop. For instance the PNG’s timber exports is now challenged to stop logging and engage in a new and fast developing industry – Carbon Trade through what is called “Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD)” a mechanism devised for rainforest countries through the Rainforest Alliance which the PNG government is leading.

Carbon Trade is about buying and selling carbon credits. The emitter pays for the credits created by another through reduction schemes and systems. There are many talks and discussions around carbon trade and its benefits in PNG, however not much attention is given on Global Warming and Climate Change – the underlying issue. For instance the Government established the office of Climate Change, Carbon Trade and Sustainable Development. This newly established office advertised 67 new positions, of which 64 were designated for carbon trade and only 3 positions for climate change. In essence it means that the major function of this office will be focused on carbon trade which is in fact a market based climate change mitigation mechanism, in simple terms, focus is on where “money” is. Market based mechanisms refers to taxes, levies, penalties and payments for emissions produced.

Now this brings on another question – will market based mechanisms effective enough to mitigate climate change?
Yes market based mechanisms can contribute to that effect but can not be successful alone if other approaches such as industries cutting down emissions and changing social behaviours of the people are not seriously considered. These are more moral and ethical issues. Nevertheless, it is a general practice for industries and business to include all their production costs on their products mark up and the consumers ended up paying for the all costs in prices of goods and services. There will be a sharp increase in the cost of goods and services and place like PNG will feel the heat of rising costs.

One important fact people must know is that, the current status of the global climate is a result of impacts over time and it will not be an over night experience for mitigation results to take effect. That means the effects of climate change and global warming such as extreme weather patterns will continue until the equilibrium is reached. How prepared are we as a country to handle climate change induced disasters such as in the Oro floods, Land slides in Simbu and the sinking Carteret Islands remains a huge challenge.

A friend recently attended a faith based conference on Climate Change in Nashville U.S.A hosted by the Climate Change guru and former U.S vice president, Al Gore. This friend of mine described the conference to be scientific and technical. However, the experts recommendations include, clean energy, alternative source of transport, organic food sources etc. My friend told the conference participants and experts that 90 percent of Papua New Guineans do not own cars and therefore use public transport or walk, the Bougainvillians are already using coconut oil to run vehicles and more than 80 percent of our population depend on their land for survival thus eat organic food. This shocked many of those participants and climate experts who gave him a look as if he was an alien from a different planet.

While facing the tide of the new industries developing from economizing environmental services and the efforts to mitigate Climate Change and Global Warming, we need to;
Understand what the underlying issue is.
Analyse how it is affecting or will affect us.
Analyse what opportunities that are evolving as a result of the issue and how best we can benefit from the opportunities without compromising the efforts to address the issue
Understand that the West does not have all the answers in the world, in fact their model of development and economic growth have contributed to the global climatic catastrophe.
Understand that moral and ethical issues have an important role in Climate Change and Global Warming mitigation and not only market based mechanisms.
Climate Change has clearly defined the world as a “Global Village” in its cross cutting effects, therefore with the huge challenges facing the global village, the model communities need to take the lead in showing the way

Reafforestation escalating in the Highlands of PNG

2009-09-30T10:19:00.001+10:00

50 years ago, the highlands villages were enclosed by pristine forests. Today most of these areas are covered by grasslands (kunai). There are many contributing factors to that, but the most evident is the high population growth experienced in the highlands in the last 50 years.

Quite recently, there has been an escalation in Reafforestation in the highlands region. Communities and individual families are embarking on major reafforestation drive and huge amounts of grasslands have been reafforested. Consequently, tree seedlings are becoming an emerging enterprise as not many people are keen to do nurseries. Two years ago, a casuarinas seedling was selling for 50 toea in Mt. Hagen, now it has gone up to K2.00.

Whilst admiring the initiatives taken by the highlanders, what is the motivating factor? Why a sudden shift of the mindset? It seems that, the promises of carbon trade have settled in well in the highlands region – Money speaks.

I do not want to discredit the whole exercise as I also believe in reforestation and reafforestation exercises because of the many benefits, however my concern is, will money truly come to the highlands as promised by the carbon trade maniacs? PNG does not have a policy framework for carbon trade, and the global community is yet to decide whether or not to include the REDD initiatives for carbon trading.

On the global perspective, by now people should understand that money is not the solution to the global climate crisis; it is the moral values that count most. Simple things like respecting your neighbour, caring for others, taking just enough, changing your lifestyle, and putting the people and the planet before profits matters if anybody is serious at all.