Newsgroups: bit.listserv.seasia-l
Date:         Fri, 14 Aug 1992 05:54:24 PDT
From:         "Indonesia Publications/Task Force" <apakabar@IGC.APC.ORG>
Subject:      PNG: New Logging Concession
X-To:         seasia-l@msu.edu

/* Written  1:43 pm  Aug 14, 1992 by peg:afsp in cdp:reg.newguinea */
/* ---------- "$G%dkHunstein Range Logging Approv" ---------- */
Urgent Alert 13 August 1992

Hunstein Range Logging Approved

The April-Salumei logging concession, centred on the Hunstein
Range in the upper Sepik river of Papua New Guinea, was approved
by national parliament on the 26 July - the day before the new
Forest Act came into force.

In a rushed move, the 380 000 hectare April-Salumei Timber Rights
Purchase (TRP) was pushed through parliament along with a number
of other contentious logging areas before the new Forestry Act
came into force.  This allows the operation to proceed under a
number of provisions of the older and less onerous Act (according
to section 137 or 138 of the new Act) and therefore reduces the
responsibility of resource companies to consult with landowners.
According to the Department of Forests, the requisite two-thirds
of signatures were collected from landowners in the TRP providing
the basis for its declaration.

Prior to the start of operations in the Hunstein Range, the
following procedure must now be followed:

1.      Tendering of logging contract.
2.      Award of contract.
3.      Submission of a five year environment plan by contractor
to the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC).
4.      Approval by Board of Directors of the new Forest
Authority.  This comprises representatives of the Departments of
Forests, Environment and Conservation and Lands as well as NGO
reps.

It is important to note that the Hunstein Range has been
identified as a potential World Heritage area for the past three
years by the World Bank Tropical Forest Action Plan.  The DEC has
plans for the declaration of a Wildlife Management area of the
Range and intends to begin work on this next year.  The TRP
directly is in direct conflict with these plans.

According to Port Moresby Forestry Department, their local office
in East Sepik province has very little operation funds and would
therefore be poorly placed to monitor contractual agreements on
environmental protection or landowner returns.

With the change of government, there are rumours that the Wingti
regime will be formulating a new forest inquiry similar to the
Barnett Commission.  This will reportedly be examining the hasty
declaration of a number of forestry concessions prior to the
introduction of the new Forest Act including the April-Salumei.
This cannot be relied on however.

Options for Action

1. Legal Challenge The TRP declaration may be challenged on three
grounds;

a. Improper process of obtaining landowner consent.  It would
appear that many landowners were induced to sign for the TRP
without clearly understanding what they were doing.  Many are
illiterate and in a number of cases were given two Kina payments
to sign.  If this inducement can be proven it would nullify the
TRP.  In addition, it appears that by the old Act, a TRP must have
the signed consent of all landowners to proceed.  The two-thirds
figure that is standard in most forestry operations is merely a
convention that has no basis in law.  It continues simply because
it has not yet been challenged.

Both of these would require a contract action and would demand the
collection of statements from aggrieved landowners and their
presence at a court hearing.  Given the logistic problems this
would entail it could be quite a costly route to take.

b. Improper benefit statement in TRP document According to law,
the TRP document must state the level of timber volume expected
from the
concession and the benefits that would be derived by the
landowners.  If this is not present or is questionable, the TRP
declaration may be challenged in an administrative law action.
This would be considerably less difficult than a contract law
action since it does not require landowner witnesses to be present
at court.

Should we begin on either of these actions, an interim injunction
could be taken out to stop any operations while the case is being
prepared.  This would temporarily halt the TRP.  To undertake a
court case like this though requires money (perhaps K10 000) and a
good lawyer.

2. Representations to New Ministers of Forests and Environment and
Conservation With the new government now in place there may a
possibility of seeking ministerial intervention to halt the TRP.


3. Representation to Australian Government The Australian
government has funded development projects in the Hunstein Range
in the order of K80 000.  These would be jeopardised by the
logging operations - particularly those attempting to support
declaration of conservation areas and conservation related
enterprises.  It may be possible to ask the Australian government
to raise this matter with the government of PNG.

4. Community Awareness Campaign Community awareness in the Sepik
would be useful in turning public opinion against the operations.

5. International Condemnation It is important that international
concern be expressed at this development.  However, given the
recent spate of "greenie bashing" in the PNG media, this would
have to be handled very carefully.

Recommendations

.       Landowner consent be gained to examine TRP documents as
the basis for a legal challenge.
.       A lawyer able to conduct the challenge be found.
.       Funds to pay for the challenge be raised from national and
international supporters.
.       Representations to new forest and environment ministers
and to Australian government be undertaken.
.       Community awareness.

Further Information

Paul Chatterton Otto Soondrawu East Sepik Council of Women PO Box
75  Wewak  ESP  PNG ph +675.862 025  fax +675.862 131