Pekanbaru – (EoF News) – In responding back the replies from APP on Investigative Report June 2006 and from APRIL on IR May 2006, Eyes on the Forest learns that the two companies did not pay attention much to findings which highlighted on conservation concerns.
In reverse, both APP (Asia Pulp & Paper) and APRIL (Asia Pacific Resources International Limited Holdings) mainly stressed their response on legal analysis over EoF reports which remain debatable, questionable, even lead to misleading.
APP’s statement saying it does not accept any wood fiber that originates within any nationally-recognized conservation forest is contradictory to EoF investigation findings, either in concession of PT Ruas Utama Jaya (Senepis forest block) or in PT Bina Duta Laksana (Kerumutan block).
In PT Ruas Utama Jaya’s concession, EoF found that the concession overlaps with natural forest, protected forest and deep peat soil that all protected by the existing Indonesian laws. Meanwhile in PT Bina Duta Laksana’s, the concession overlaps with natural forest and deep peat soil.
So APP’s argument saying it “does not accept” any wood fiber from conservation forest was proved misleading.
APP claims that RKT (Annual Working Plan) is a legitimate basis to operate for its partner PT Ruas Utama Jaya in Senepis block.
On the other hand, EoF learns that RKT (Annual Working Plan) is not an easy ticket to operate concession definitively if some requirements are not conducted in advance as stipulated by article 14 of Ministry of Forestry’s Decree Number 312/Kpts-II/1999 on Procedure to Granting Selective Logging Concession through Proposal.
The decree stipulates that an approved timber company should undergo a feasibility study and an environment impact analysis (AMDAL) before its proposal approved by the authority. The reporting of feasibility study would take 12 months at the maximum from the minister ordered such a requirement.
EoF learns that there is an obvious gap between Ruas Utama Jaya that leans its legitimacy on RKT and Bina Duta Laksana which already gained the Minister Decree of 207/Menhut-II/2006 dated 8 June 2006.
EoF is calling APP to halt sourcing its timber from conservation forests and from unlawful operations. The company should respect the existing laws in Indonesia.
APRIL said EoF allegations are unjustified, but the coalition of three NGOs said that such response divert main points and concerns of the May 2000 Investigative Report.
It is unfair when APRIL accused EoF findings of outdated information as the finding occurred in May 2006, despite the company got revising license from the Minister of Forestry.
APRIL claimed that “leaving Kampar Peninsular unmanaged is not an option” is misleading and out of context from EoF investigation. The report found that APRIL let concession of PT Rimba Mutiara Permai unplanted with acacia, showing it has no responsibility to protect the granted concession area.
APRIL believed that its role in Kampar Peninsular will end the illegal logging, but EoF chain of custody investigation found that the company conducted illegal logging in concession of CV Harapan Jaya and PT Madukoro.
The company also did not respond on EoF findings regarding to its partners concessions overlap with natural forest, protection area and deep peat soil.
Through a letter to Jikalahari --a reference to respond EoF report—APRIL claimed that “three-meter-rule” only for “sensitive catchments headwaters”, which apparently misleading and against the existing law. EoF also stressed that 1994 Riau Land Use Planning remains existing and not substituted yet by 2001-2015 version as claimed by APRIL.
EoF is calling APRIL to halt sourcing its timber from conservation forests and from unlawful operations. The company should respect the existing laws in Indonesia.
-- -Find APP and APRIL on The Eleventh Hour for Riau's Forests