Efforts to Eradicate the Forestry. Legal Mafia in Indonesia. Diah Raharjo. Member
of the Indonesian Working Group on the. Legal Mafia in Forestry ...
Efforts to Eradicate the Forestry Legal Mafia in Indonesia
Diah Raharjo Member of the Indonesian Working Group on the Legal Mafia in Forestry
HOW CONFLICT IS USED TO GET ILLEGAL LOGS TO THE INDUSTRY CUKONG AS BUYER LOGS WITHOUT LEGAL’S DOCUMENT AT DISTRICT LEVEL : The illegal logging team (TPIL) confiscates logs and sends them to AUCTION PROCESS
HPH STOP, CAUSE CONFLICT’S REASONS - Land dispute - Customary Forest - Small Scale concession 100 ha)
AREAL HPH
•INDUSTRY BUYS LOGS FROM CUKONG •INDUSTRY PAYS FOREST PROVISION FUND (PSDH) AND FOREST REHABILITATION TAX (DR)
PEOPLE GO IN TO AREA WITH SUPPORT EQUIPMENT FROM HPH & IHPHH (100 ha)
HPH suspected of provoking conflict to avoid production costs and taxes
CUKONG AS THE WINNER IN AUCTION AND SELL LOGS TO INDUSTRY WITH A TRANSPORT PERMIT (SKSHH)
LOGS WITH LEGAL DOCUMENTS
INDUSTRY
By Diah Raharjo, 2003
Working Group Responsibilities 1. To prepare discussion materials on eradicating the legal mafia that support deforestation and degradation problems. 2. To propose regulations and decision making process (Forestry, Agriculture, Mining, Domestic Affairs, Land Property, Police office, Supreme Justice, and Commission of Eradicating Corruption (KPK)) related to forestry, environment, agriculture, mining and local regulations, including data and information on forest zone, estates and mining areas and including forest status and condition; 3. To draw up a concept note/position paper to “Strategize the Eradication of the Legal Mafia” and so reduce the rate of deforestation and degradation; 4. To prepare a Ministerial Level Meeting to eradicate the legal mafia in the context of reducing the rate of deforestation and degradation.
Urgency • Problems have been accumulating for several decades, and as a result large scale area changes have happened across Indonesia; • Obstacles for forestry development include economic and social aspects that involve land property rights for utilization; • It is indicated that 15.6 m Has of forest has been allocated (by accident?) through “illegal power” (2011). • Sunk cost effect: „underground‟ long time operationalization as a strong reference and justification to avoid “return to the right direction”. It is strongly indicated that positive legal power has failed to be effective.
Forest Zone Statistics Total Forest, conservation & wetlands: ± 136.8 m Has: Conservation Forest ± 25.2 m Has Protected forest ± 30.9 m Has Limited Production Forest ± 25.9 m Has Permanent Production Forest ± 33.9 m Has Convertable Production Forest ± 20.6 m Has Forest area stated on October 2009 as ± 14.2 m Has (10,4 %) Low intensity managed logged forest ± 42.26 m Has (32,1%) 22.5-24.4 m Has dispute (claim) village (19,420 villages in 32 provinces)
Forest Utilization Statistics 400
•
387 362
Unit HPH
351
Juta Ha 322
350 300
270
267
287
324
285
308
304
Estate Forest (HTR) Partnership Pattern, 113.044 Ha involved 51.789 families Planting Movement Program (GERHAN ) involve 1.254 families covering 1.254.264 Has during period of 20032007 Levelling up Community economic’s scale on Conservation area for 425.764 families in 1.333 villages.
•
250 200 150 100 50
41.8 39.2 36.4 28.1 27.8 27.8 27.7 28.8 28.8 26.16 25.77
•
0 1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009 300
The Increasing of HPH/IUPHHK-HA licence issuance
•
•
•
Building community’s business skills in production forest for 1.160 families , in 29 Provinces (58 villages) Community empowerment (PHBM/Joint Forest Management) within the area of IUPHHK-HA that covers 16.015 Families and in IUPHHK-HTI areas involved 30.557 families Social Forestry involves 54 Farmers group covering total 8.614 Has
Unit
Luas (Juta Ha)
247
250
227
200 150 100
130
90
96
98
100
103
105
114
113
50 3.93
4.34
4.44
4.52
4.55
4.63
5.8
5.73
6.19
9.88 10.03
0 1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
The increasing of HTI/IUPHHK-HT licence issuance
What does this mean? 1. Few state forest areas are allocated legitimately both from the perspective of legality and community. Majority of the land status is de facto open access; 2. Imbalanced policy making allocating forest between large scale business and small-scale (community/traditional level); 3. Forest condition changes rapidly once it has been identified following informal procedures. There is still an expectation that the formal procedures will be follow the existing policy. 4. Unplanned forest area changes: the access has reallocated forest function and benefit redistribution. Weaknesses of “forest & land governance”
COMMON PROBLEMS IN CENTRAL KALIMANTAN DATA *
1
Total (Unit) 352 (1)
Areas (Has) 4.649.273,00
143 (1)
2.074.733
64
2,064,740
209
(1)
2.574.540
Violate the TGHK only
118
(1)
±1.285.438
193 -
2,462,653 -
Violate the TGHK and RTRWP
225 (1)
±3.363.835
-
-
Active, violate the TGHK and RTRWP and without IPKH Active, violate the TGHK and RTRWP, without IPKH, and within the area of HP (production forest) and HPT (limited production forest) Granted Governor’s recommendation
54(1),(3)
13 (2)
138.659,26
-
-
95 (2)
2.608.471,00
-
-
67 (3)
814.868
68
Total licence for estates within the Forest Areas Active Inactive yet
2 3 4 5
MoF DATA
Agreement of the Principal of Forest Areas Acquisition Principles Decision Letter to release Forestry area for the other purpose Right of Business Use (HGU)
Total (Unit) 335
Areas (Has) 4.713.707
38(1), (3)
65
(2)
635.960,75
-
783,191 -
*Data Source: (1) Matrix of the forest area use for mining activities in Central Kalimantan Province (Follow up of Menhut letter No. S.95/Menhut-IV/2010 dated 3/02/2010, Central Kalimantan Government letter No. 522/337/EK tgl. 27/03/2010, and Central Kalimantan Kadishut province letter No. 522.1.100/596/Dishut dated. 27 Maret 2010 (2) Report of Harmonization and Integrated team of TGHK and RTRWP Central Kalimantan (3) Licence data of releasing forest area for another purpose issued by Ditjen Baplan MoF.
General Condition of Mining Activities in Central Kalimantan Forest Area * •
Total mining concession licence 615 units a. PKP2B 18 units b. Kontrak Karya 7 units c. Authorized Mining licence 590 units
•
Step of activities a. General investigation b. Exploration c. Feasibility study d. Construction e. Exploitation
• a. b. c. d. e. f.
Covers
: 3.751.619,68 Has
30 Units, covers: 305.431.81 Has 31 Units, covers: 2.812.143,27 Has 7 Units, covers: 119.333,80 Has 10 Units, covers: 142. 309.80 Has 137 Units, covers: 372.400, 80 Hat
Leasing of forest area Permission for the use of forest area s : 1 Units Principal Permission for the use of forest areas leasing : 6 Units Leasing Licence for the use of forest areas: 9 Unit s(31.747,86 Has) Unlicenced yet : 606 unit s( 3.719.871,82 Has) Mining licence in forest areas according to TGHK (National Forest Inventory ) and RTRWP : 497 units Mining licence in the area of protection forest according to TGHK and RTRWP: 14 units (One has been issued IPKH)
* ) Source: the Matrix of Forest Use for Mining activities in Central Kalimantan Province (Follow up of Minister of Forestry Decree No. S.95/Menhut-IV/2010 tgl. 3/02/2010, Central Kalimantan Governor letter No. 522/337/EK tgl. 27/03/2010, and Kadishut of Central Kalimantan Province letter No. 522.1.100/596/Dishut tgl. 27 Maret 2010
Real Cases Typology
Cases
1. Non licence mining use in forest area
606 Cases(3.719.871,82 Has)
Mining in forest according to Forest Land Used Plan (TGHK) and Provincial Spatial Planning (RTRWP) Mining in protection forest area based on TGHK and RTRWP
497 Cases 13 Cases
2. Mining in protection forest with an open pit methodology
Examples,
3. Mining activities within conservation area
Example
4. Overlapping mining licence with other typical business licences
Example
5.
-
Mining activities are executed outside the agreed coverage area (out of licence)
6. Licence issuance does not match with the procedures
Examples: Recommendation without location map)
TYPOLOGY OF VIOLATIONS in Forest 1) Estate is developed without a complete Decision Letter of amendment to take out the forest area for other purposes. 2) Extraction of timber does not use a licence letter (Where potential loss of state‟s finances from the value of tree standing stock). 3) Working on estate business with the areas ≥25 Ha, without completing an forest concession licence (IUP). 4) Provincial Spatial Plan (RTRW) violation. • The use of space does not compliance with RTRW design. • Business permit does not compliance with RTRW design. 5) Procedural of Licence issuance breaks the rules. • IUP grants or Land Used Right (HGU) without preliminary action of taking out forest area in legal procedures. • Issuance of IUP without the determination of location permission. • IUP is issued without initiated with Environment Impact Analysis. • The licence‟s period of operation is over (especially the permit to use the location itself) 6) IUP overlaps with other businesses permits.
Typology of violations in Mining 1.
Mining activities in forest area without a licence to use the forest area. (Financial loss potentiality from the state side through the non existence of forest provision fund (PSDH) and forest rehabilitation tax (DR), standing stock value compensation loss and Tax Income of state loss) 2. Activities of mining in protection and conservation forest area characterized by opening the area of forest cover and overlap with other license of businesses. 3. Activities of mining within the forest area without mining licence and using the temporary “lending and use” licence. 4. Licence procedures violation: a. Mining Licence is only proceeding with the head of district‟s authorization b. Recommendation of the district leader‟s authority (in proceeding the usage leasing) without a complete map. c. The issue of Mining operation letter is characterized by not following the procedure as stipulated in the national regulation
What’s The Mafia “business” on Forestry? 1. Driving the licensing making process of land forest areas and land forest conversion with illegal procedures to legalize deforestation in practices. 2. Manipulating the forest provision fund (PSDH), forest rehabilitation tax (DR), standing stock value compensation and Tax Income of State. 3. Practicing the illegal market through illegal timber documents at each level of administration procedures and offices. 4. Provoking conflict between communities, private and government to avoid production costs and taxes.
RECOMENDATIONS • Minister of Forestry appeals for a moratorium to effect all licences in Central Kalimantan until the final forest area has been determined and the improvement of related regulations. • Minister of Forestry to coordinate legal framework improvements are as follows: – Compilation of permits on the use of land with agrarian regulations and forestry, and strengthening mechanism of sanctions, incentives and disincentives in the process of licencing; – Related with forest area definition by considering the growing problems at field level and multiple assumptions as a result of the effective lack of harmony between regulations; – Develop clear procedures on evaluation of supervision missions and law enforcement by local government to be linked to a mechanism of incentives and disincentives, in line with recommendations by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) in their matrix of findings and advice to improve the Planning System Study and Forest Management in Directorate General of Planology in the Ministry of Forestry. – Integrate good governance principles with transparency principles during the licencing process and completing the land delineation.
• Related to law enforcement, Task Force of Legal Mafia and Ministry of Forestry will work together with Police Department, Justice and Corruption Eradication Commission to: – Stimulating law enforcement where there is clear evidence and infringement cases that have violated the forest area according to TGHK and RTRWP. – Draw up an action plan of systemic improvement in the process of law enforcement of forestry sector. – Develop indicators for sorting out the cases, inventory and tidying up the forest area uses for other purposes in the other cases. – Developing investigation and litigation to reclaim the state‟s loss. • Implementing the Timber Legality Assurance System (IndoTLAS) and VPA as a system in the improvement of Forestry Governance Process with three pillars are transparency, governance and representativeness.
Thank You
