Complaint Against Marubeni and JERA Regarding the Cirebon Coal-fired
Power Plant Project in Indonesia
Date: May 23, 2017
To:
Members of the Japanese National Contact Point (NCP):• OECD Division, Economic Affairs Bureau, Ministry of Foreign Affairs;• International Affairs Division, the Office of the Minister, Ministry of Health, Labour, andWelfare;• Trade and Investment Facilitation Division, Trade and Economic Cooperation Bureau,
Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry

1. Information on complainant(1) Name of the complainant and/or name of the representative of the complainants- Friends of the Earth Japan
Kanna Mitsuta, Executive Director
Hozue Hatae, Development Finance and Environment Team- Wahana Lingkungan Hidup Indonesia (WALHI: Friends of the Earth Indonesia)
Nur Hidayati, Executive Director
Dwi Sawung, Urban and Energy Campaigner(2) Contact address- Friends of the Earth Japan
2nd Fl. 1-21-9 Komone, Itabashi-ku, Tokyo 173-0037 Japan- Wahana Lingkungan Hidup Indonesia (WALHI: Friends of the Earth Indonesia)
Jl. Tegalparang Utara No 14, Mampang, Jakarta Selatan, Indonesia(3) Telephone, fax number and e-mail address- Friends of the Earth Japan
TEL: +81 3-6909-5983
FAX: +81 3-6909-5986 E-mail: hatae@foejapan.org- Wahana Lingkungan Hidup Indonesia (WALHI: Friends of the Earth Indonesia)
TEL: +62 21-79193363
E-mail: sawung@walhi.or.id(4) If you are submitting a complaint on behalf of others, explain your interest in this case and reason
for submitting the complaint.
Friends of the Earth Japan and WALHI, two non-governmental organizations (NGOs) namely based1

in Japan and in Indonesia, note that we are submitting this complaint on behalf of the local
community coalition, Rapel (Rakyat Penyelamat Lingkungan: People Environment Safer) Cirebon,
which consists of community members from Villages Kanci Kulon, Kanci, Buntet, Waruduwur,
Citemu, Bandengan, Mundu, and Luwung, Districts Astanajapura and Mundu, Regency Cirebon,
Province West Java. Rapel Cirebon, was established in 2007 and has continued to raise theirconcerns about the adverse impacts of the Cirebon Coal-fired Power Plant Project - Unit 1, for which
Marubeni Corporation (Marubeni) has invested in PT. Cirebon Electric Power (CEP), and also Unit2, for which Marubeni and JERA Co., (JERA) Inc. have invested in PT. Cirebon Energi Prasarana(CEPR). Rapel Cirebon’s and our concerns related to the Project are the loss and damage of
livelihood, environmental destruction, health damage, terror and intimidation, and social conflict.
We as two NGOs have been supporting Rapel Cirebon to address the problems related to the Cirebon
Coal-fired Power Plant Project, such as raising their concerns to the Japanese stakeholders (including
Japanese government agencies and companies) as well as the legal court case in Indonesia. For thiscomplaint to the Japanese NCP, it is required to write and provide the information in Japanese or
English, while the community of Rapel Cirebon cannot understand either language. In addition, it ishighly concerned that a certain risk of human rights violations against the community, such as
harassment and intimidation in various forms, would be increased, if they become the directcomplainant against the project activities of the companies. Thus, our organizations are proceedingwith this complaint to the Japanese NCP on behalf of the community.

2. Information on the multinational enterprise involved(1) Name of the enterpriseCompany-1: Marubeni Corporation (Marubeni)Company-2: JERA Co., Inc. (JERA)(2) Location of the enterprise (country and address)
Company-1: Marubeni(Tokyo Head Office)Tokyo Nihombashi Tower, 7-1, Nihonbashi 2-chome, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 103-6060, Japan
Company-2: JERA
(Tokyo Headquarters)
Tokyo Nihonbashi Tower 14th floor, 2-7-1 Nihonbashi, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, Japan(3) Contact information (Contact person, telephone and/or fax number, e-mail address, as detailed as
possible)
Company-1: Marubeni2(Tokyo Head Office) Tel: +81 (3) 3282-2111
Company-2: JERA
(Tokyo Headquarters) Tel: +81 (3) 3272 4631
(4) Reasons why the complainant considers the enterprise as a multinational enterpriseCompany-1: Marubeni
Marubeni is engaging in the handling of products and provision of services in a broad range ofsectors. The Company's activities also extend to power projects and infrastructure, plants andindustrial machinery, finance, logistics and information industry, and real estate development andconstruction. Additionally, Marubeni conducts business investment, development and management
on a global level. Marubeni has 131 branches and offices in 68 countries and regions, consisting of
12 domestic branches and offices, 57 overseas branches and offices and 30 overseas corporate
subsidiaries with 62 offices. Marubeni’s domestic and overseas offices can be found at
http://www.marubeni.com/company/network/index.html .
In the Cirebon Coal-fired Power Plant Project - Unit 2, Marubeni, together with JERA, Indika
Energy, Samtan and Korea Midland Power, established a joint venture corporation called PT Cirebon
Energi Prasarana (CEPR), holding 35% of its shares. CEPR will construct and operate a 1,000 MW
coal power plant in this project.
Company-2: JERA
By combining the strengths of the Tokyo Electric Power Group (TEPCO) and the Chubu ElectricPower Group (Chubu), JERA aims at fulfilling the public interest of providing internationallycompetitive energy to Japan while ensuring a strong position on the increasingly competitive
international energy market. JERA was established on April 30, 2015, after TEPCO and Chubu
concluded a joint-venture agreement on forming a joint venture to implement a comprehensive
alliance covering the entire supply chain from upstream fuel investment and fuel procurement
through power, and agree the road map for the joint venture’s formation on February 9, 2015. JERA
succeeded to parent companies’ existing fuel transportation and fuel trading businesses on October 1,
2015, and also succeeded to parent companies’ existing fuel and overseas power businesses including
upstream assets; sales and purchase agreements; and overseas power generation and energy
infrastructure businesses on July 1, 2016. JERA has its subsidiaries and business domains abroad in
Singapore, Thailand, Australia, and the USA, and has invested in the projects abroad, including inAustralia, the USA, Canada, Mexico, East Timor, Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnum, the Philippines,
Taiwan, India, Qatar, the UAE, and Oman, the details of which can be found athttps://www.jera.co.jp/english/business/projects/ .
In the Cirebon Coal-fired Power Plant Project - Unit 2, Chubu, together with Marubeni, Indika
Energy, Samtan and Korea Midland Power, established a joint venture corporation called PT Cirebon
Energi Prasarana (CEPR), holding 10% of its shares, and JERA succeeded this project from Chubu
3

in July 2016. CEPR will construct and operate a 1,000 MW coal power plant in this project.

3 Detailed description of complaint(1) Detailed description of issues which the complainant deems the enterprise’s non-adherence to the
Guidelines
Outline of the project:
The Cirebon Coal-fired Power Plant Project - Unit 2 with a capacity of 1,000 megawatt is estimatedto require an investment of USD 2.1 billion and is expected to be operational in 2021. Marubeni(35%), Indika Energy (25%), Samtan (20%), Korea Midland Power (10%) and JERA (10%) haveinvested in this Cirebon expansion project, and have established PT Cirebon Energi Prasarana(CEPR). CEPR entered into a 25-year power purchase agreement (PPA) with the Indonesian state
power utility Perusahaan Listrik Negara (PLN) in October 2015. Japan Bank for International
Cooperation (JBIC) and the Export-Import Bank of Korea made a loan agreement with CEPR on
April 18th, 2017 although the details of co-financing for the project have remained to be announced
officially.
The Cirebon Coal-fired Power Plant Project - Unit 1 with a capacity of 660 megawatt commenced
the construction work in 2007 and started its commercial operation in July 2012. The project has cost
USD 850 million. The Cirebon project - Unit 1 has been developed by a consortium PT. Cirebon
Electric Power (CEP) consisting of: Marubeni (32.5%), Korea Midland Power (27.5%), Samtan(20%), and Indika Energy (20%). PT. CEP signed a 30-year PPA with PLN in August 2007. JBIC,
The Export-Import Bank of Korea, and private banks made a loan agreement with CEP in March2010 with co-financing USD 595 million.
Substantial damage which the local community has actually experienced due to the Unit 1 Project
and will experience due to the Unit 2 Project:
Small-scale fishermen surrounding the project site, most of whom don’t use a boat, traditionally walkin the shallow seawater along the coastal area and catch various types of fish, such as Blanak,
Bandeng, Puro, Kedukang, and Sembilang, with fishnet. While the families could sell what they
catch as their income source, they could also keep some fish for their own daily meals. Thus, thecoastal area, where the Cirebon Coal-fired Power Plant Project is currently located, has been very
important for small-scale fishermen and used to be the very productive fishing ground indeed.
They, however, have been severely suffered from less livelihood and income opportunity due to theadverse impact by the Cirebon Coal-fired Power Plant Project - Unit 1. One thing is the jetty locatedin Kanci Kulon village, Astanajapura, around which their fishing activity has been disturbed due tothe limitation of access. The other thing is the waste water from the project site, including4contaminated liquid and thermal discharge, which we believe have caused the sharp drop of fish. As
a result, in order to find fish, have they tried to reach further coastal area from the Pangarengan
Stream (Sungai Pangarengan) at the east side to the Kalijaga Stream (Sungai Kalijaga) at the westside, which used to be from the Enar Stream (Sungai Enar) at the east side to the Bandengan Stream(Sungai Bandengan) at the west side before the operation of the Unit 1 Project. (Please also see themap in Annex 1.)
Despite the wider fishing area where they have been trying to find fish after the Unit 1 Project, theirfish catchment amount has been still decreased by more than half, comparing the one before thebeginning or the Unit 1 Project in 2007, according to the testimonies of some fishermen in Kanci
Kulon village when we discussed with them in August 2015 about their fish catchment amount per
day with fishing net. Though spending long time to find fish after the Unit 1 Project, they can’t findmuch and are just exhausted.
This is how the Unit 1 Project has destroyed their enriched coastal environment and has deprived
them of their sustainable livelihood and income opportunities. The families who have less livelihood
have had no choice rather than relying for their livelihood on not-stable daily-wage works, such as
construction labor. Most of the families have never received compensation or remedy from PT. CEP.
Even though some families were provided fishnets and two fishermen were provided two boats, it is
not an effective solution because the amount of fish remains less than before the project.
If the Cirebon Coal-fired Power Plant Project - Unit 2 is pushed through, further substantial damageon the small-scale fishermen will be caused and their life will become more difficult. It is because
another jetty will be constructed exactly in their small-scale fishing area again (Please also see themap in Annex 1) and will certainly disturb their fishing activity. Likewise, they are strongly
concerned based on their experience from the Unit 1 Project that the waste water from the Unit 2
Project would more deteriorate the marine ecosystem and would cause more reduction of fish they
could catch. Then, where could they go fishing and sustain the life of their family? With the Unit 2
Project, those small-scale fishermen will surely suffer from further less livelihood and income
opportunity.
Even though PT. CEPR, like PT. CEP, provides some programs under its Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR), we believe that those are not effective to restore their small-scale fishermen’s
livelihood and not the right answer. Though they have never heard about any livelihood restoration
plan related to the Unit 2 Project, so far.
Administrative court case filed by the small-scale fishermen and the regional court verdict torevoke the environmental permit for the Unit 2 Project:
5

As for the Unit 2 project, the small-scale fishermen from Kanci Kulon Village filed an environmental
administrative lawsuit in December 2016, aiming at preventing any further adverse impacts on
marine ecosystem and thus on fish they could catch by the revoke of the environmental permit for
the Unit 2 Project. They pointed out the illegality of the environmental permit which West Java
provincial government issued and the possibility of the project’s illegalities against various
environmental related regulations, including the followings;(1) Regional Regulation No. 17 of 2011 on Cirebon Regency Spatial Planning year 2011-2031;(2) Government Regulation No. 27 of 2012 on the Environmental Permit;(3) Law No. 26 of 2007 on Spatial Plan;
Most importantly, in the recent verdict dated April 19, 2017, Bandung Administrative Court (PTUN)
admitted that the Unit 2 Project to be built in two districts, namely Astanajapura and Mundu, doesn’tcomply with Regional Regulation No. 17 of 2011 on Cirebon Regency Spatial Planning year
2011-2031, which allocates only Astanajapura for the development of power plant. Thus, the court
requires West Java provincial government to revoke the environmental permit.
Aside from the said point in the verdict, we can still point out that Government Regulation No. 27 of2012 on the Environmental Permit stipulates that the AMDAL (Environmental Impact Assessment inIndonesian language) document cannot be assessed in case the business plan doesn’t comply with thespatial plan.
Further, Law No. 26 of 2007 on Spatial Plan stipulates criminal sanctions: that is, anyone who does
not comply with the designated spatial plan shall be subject to imprisonment of three (3) years and afine of not more than Rp 500,000,000.00 (five hundred million rupiahs). In case of the officials who
issued the location permits, the imprisonment could be five (5) years and a fine at the same amount.
(Note 1: PT. CEPR has started the land clearing work for the Unit 2 Project, and has been alreadyworking in Mundu as well as in Astanajapura. This fact implicates that PT. CEPR has currently
committed a crime against Law No. 26 of 2007 on Spatial Plan.)(Note 2: The location permit for the Unit 2 Project covers three (3) districts, namely Astanajapura,
Mundu, and Pangenan, which doesn’t comply with the Cirebon Regency Spatial Planning, either.)
Despite of the above-mentioned conditions related to the illegality of the Unit 2 Project, West Java
provincial government supported by PT. CEPR has already lodged an appeal on April 21, 2017.
Thus, the environmental permit is currently still valid till the high court or the Supreme Court
concludes a verdict on this lawsuit.
It is highly concerned that PT. CEPR would still continue the land clearing work and then would start6the main construction work to build the Unit 2 power plant even before the final court decision, andthus that the small-scale fishermen surrounding the project site would be suffering from moredifficult life with less livelihood and income opportunities.

(2) Descriptions on how the issues described above are in breach of the Guidelines (please specify
relevant articles and chapters)(for example: A material used in the production process of Enterprise A is hazardous and may cause
an adverse impact to the residents and the environment, therefore Enterprise A breaches article 4 of
VI. Environment)
1. Failure to obey domestic laws in breach of article 2 of I. Concepts and Principles (Obeying
domestic laws is the first obligation of enterprises.)
As described in the above section, Bandung Administrative Court (PTUN) admitted that the Unit 2
Project to be built in two districts, namely Astanajapura and Mundu, doesn’t comply with Regional
Regulation No. 17 of 2011 on Cirebon Regency Spatial Planning year 2011-2031, which allocates
only Astanajapura for the development of power plant. While the final court decision is remained tobe concluded by the high court or the Supreme Court, PT. CEPR and its shareholders Marubeni and
JERA must ensure the compliance of the Unit 2 Project with the said regulation by the final court
decision, before they continue any more land clearing work and push through any construction work
related to the Unit 2 Project.
In addition, Marubeni and JERA must recognize the following facts;(1) The AMDAL document for the Unit 2 Project was developed against Government Regulation No.
27 of 2012, which stipulates that the AMDAL document cannot be assessed in case the business plan
doesn’t comply with the spatial plan;(2) PT. CEPR has been already working in District Mundu as well as in Astanajapura, which
implicates that PT. CEPR has already committed a crime stipulated in Law No. 26 of 2007 on SpatialPlan.
2. Failure to refrain from seeking or accepting exemptions (To be able to push through the
project activity without revising the Cirebon Regency Spatial Planning) in breach of article 5 of
II. General Policies (Refrain from seeking or accepting exemptions not contemplated in thestatutory or regulatory framework related to human rights, environmental, health, safety, labour,
taxation, financial incentives, or other issues.)
According to PT CEPR’s press release dated April 21st, 2017 (where the company name was shownas Cirebon Power) attached as Annex 2, the company clearly and fully supports West Java provincial
7

government to lodge an appeal to the high court, and also indicates its acceptance of the following
exemptions;(1) Since the beginning, Cirebon regency government has committed to include Mundu district as the
allocated locations for the development of power plant in the Cirebon Regency Spatial Planning.
However, the Spatial Planning hasn’t yet been revised till today.
PT. CEPR and its shareholders Marubeni and JERA must refrain from accepting such government
offer, or must not regard such government offer as an exemption from the revision of the Spatial
Planning, while having already pushed through the AMDAL process and any project activity,
including the land clearing and construction work;(2) National Body of Spatial Planning Coordination (BKPRN), West Java provincial government,
and Cirebon regency government agreed that the AMDAL proposal for the Unit 2 Project could
proceed (and then the AMDAL proposal followed by the environmental permit was approved byWest Java provincial government) even before the revision of the Spatial Planning, which actually
violates Government Regulation No. 27 of 2012, which stipulates that the AMDAL document cannot
be assessed in case the business plan doesn’t comply with the spatial plan.
PT. CEPR clearly stated in the press release that such agreement was the result of the company’s
coordination with BKPRN, West Java provincial government, Regional Body of Spatial Planning
Coordination (BKPRD), and Cirebon Regional Body of Development Planning (BAPPEDA) about
the Spatial Planning revision, referring to Presidential Regulation No. 4 Year 2016 about
Acceleration of Power Plant Infrastructure Development.
PT. CEPR and its shareholders Marubeni and JERA must refrain from seeking such exemption ormust avoid making efforts to secure such exemption from the revision of the Spatial Planning, while
having proceeded with the AMDAL process.
Marubeni and JERA must ensure that PT. CEPR refrains from seeking or accepting theabove-mentioned exemptions and that PT. CEPR doesn’t support West Java provincial government tolodge an appeal to the high court, admitting such exemptions.

(3) Background of the issues raised (such as past and present circumstances of the issues andreason(s) why the complainant decided to submit a complaint to the Japanese NCP)
Past circumstances on the issues:
Rapel Cirebon, or the community members, made several protest actions against the Cirebon
Coal-fired Power Plant Project - Unit 1 and demanded that the local Cirebon government halt theplant construction during the construction phase. Even though they conveyed their opposition to PT.
CEP more than 30 times through demonstrations and media statements, there was no response from8the company. As a result, their efforts to voice the opposition against the Unit 1 project didn’t bear
fruit then, and the Unit 1 plant started its commercial operation in 2012.
After a few years since the operation of the Unit 1 plant started, the community members have foundthat their life hardship is still not addressed appropriately and have also become more concerned
about our health condition, especially their children’s, due to continuous fly ash and coal dust fall in
their community. As the community already had experience no response from PT. CEP to theirstatement, they have tried to tell their concerns to Marubeni, one of the investors in PT. CEP and PT.
CEPR, through us or NGOs, Wahana Lingkungan Hidup Indonesia (WALHI) and Friends of the
Earth Japan. WALHI and Friends of the Earth Japan had a meeting with Marubeni on May 18, 2016
in Tokyo and explained the community’s concerns and problems which they have alreadyexperienced from the Unit 1 Project and will experience from the Unit 2 Project in the near future.
But Marubeni showed the different view or recognition from ours on the facts we have raised about
the Unit 1 and the Unit 2 projects.
Present circumstances on the issues:
On December 6, 2016, Rapel Cirebon, represented by 6 small-scale fishermen in this case andassisted by the Advocacy Team for Climate Justice, including WALHI, filed a case to theadministrative court (PTUN) in Bandung, demanding the revoke of the environmental permit for PT.
CEPR to develop the Unit 2 power plant, which was issued by West Java provincial government.
Though the PTUN in Bandung admitted in its verdict dated April 19, 2017 that the Unit 2 Project
didn’t comply with the local regulation on spatial planning and required West Java provincial
government to revoke the environmental permit, the provincial government supported by PT. CEPR
has lodged an appeal to the High Court in Jakarta on April 21, 2017.
Why the complainant decided to submit a complaint to the Japanese NCP:
Due to the appeal by West Java provincial government supported by PT. CEPR, the environmental
permit is currently still valid till the High Court or the Supreme Court concludes a verdict on thislawsuit. Thus, It is highly concerned that PT. CEPR would still continue the land clearing work andthen would start the main construction work to build the Unit 2 power plant even before the final
court decision, and thus that the small-scale fishermen surrounding the project site would be
suffering from more difficult life with less livelihood and income opportunities.

(4) Expected outcomes complainant wishes to achieve through the NCP procedure (requests to theenterprise involved)(for example: Through the NCP procedure, we (the complainants) want to have meetings withEnterprise A and request them to adopt cost-effective measures to prevent or minimize damages
9caused by the material used for production.)
To ensure that substantial damages and problems related to the Unit 2 Project are prevented among
our community in the long-term as well as in the short-term, through the NCP procedure, we would
like to request that Marubeni and JERA adhere to article 11 or 12 of II. General Policies of theOECD Guidelines and make sure that the followings;(1) PT. CEPR doesn’t continue and push through any project activity related to the Unit 2 Project,including its land clearing work and its construction work at the project site, till the final court
decision makes sure the compliance of the Unit 2 Project with the above-mentioned laws andregulations;(2) PT. CEPR refrains from seeking or accepting the above-mentioned exemptions and that PT.
CEPR doesn’t support West Java provincial government to lodge an appeal to the high court or theSupreme Court, admitting such exemptions;(3) PT. CEPR even encourages West Java provincial government to withdraw its appeal to the highcourt or the Supreme Court, and makes efforts to comply with the Indonesian laws and regulations.

4. Attachments of relevant documents supporting the complaints, where applicable. (If the original
documents are written in languages other than Japanese and English, translation in Japanese or
English should be attached.)(1) Text of relevant laws and regulations of the country where the issues occurred
Please refer to Annex 3 (Case petition summary No. 124/G/2016/PTUN.BDG prepared by WALHI)
and Annex 4 (Explanation on the court case prepared by one of the lawyers in charge of theadministrative court case. The Japanese translation is prepared by Friends of the Earth Japan) as wellas the descriptions in the above sections.

(2) If the specific instance is also dealt with by other domestic or international proceedings,
documents on the identity of the country or organization conducting the parallel procedure, the issues
raised, the status of the procedure and its future prospects.
Please refer to Annex 4 as well as the descriptions in the above sections.

10