The reclamation<\/p>\n
Do we think that the Jakarta administration is really aware of
\nits deteriorating environment?<\/p>\n
If the answer is yes, then what makes the governor adamant to
\npush ahead with the controversial reclamation of the northern
\ncoastal area?<\/p>\n
The Ministry of Resettlement and Regional Infrastructure has
\nrejected the Rp 20 trillion project, arguing it will cause more
\nproblems in dealing with flooding.<\/p>\n
The office of the State Minister of the Environment, the
\ninstitution considered the most credible in environmental
\naffairs, has also rejected the project, which will reclaim 500
\nhectares from the sea and revitalize 2,700 hectares of coastal
\narea. According to the office, the reclamation project would
\nincrease sea levels by up to 12 centimeters. Reclamation could
\nalso spark conflicts as thousands of fishermen in Kamal Muara,
\nMuara Angke, Muara Baru and Kampung Luar Batang could lose their
\njobs. The marine ecosystem would also be damaged by the project
\nwhich will need 330 million cubic meters of sand. In short the
\noffice is seeking ways to have the presidential Instruction on
\nthe reclamation of the city's northern coastal areas and Teluk
\nNaga be revoked.<\/p>\n
Acknowledging those clear reasonable arguments, we can not
\nunderstand why the governor has vowed to continue with the
\nproject.<\/p>\n
Plans for the area have sparked controversy since development
\nplans for Pantai Mutiara in North Jakarta in 1990 when Jakarta
\nwas governed by Wiyogo Atmodarminto.<\/p>\n
Another controversial plan was made by PT Pembangunan Jaya
\nAncol, which would reclaim 400 hectares of the coast in Ancol in
\n1993. The plan was feared to cause serious sedimentation at the
\nTanjung Priok seaport.<\/p>\n
In 1994, then president Soeharto approved the reclamation of
\n1,500 hectares of coastal area for a housing and business center.
\nAll relevant ministries and government institutions did not show
\nany resistance to the plan. The Ministry of Public Works agreed
\nto the plan. Later, people found out the prospective developer
\nwas one of Soeharto's daughters.<\/p>\n
Then governor Surjadi Soedirdja said that developing the
\ncrowded city to the south would be impossible as the southern
\npart of Jakarta was designated as a water catchment area. To the
\neast was also impossible as it would victimize irrigated farm
\nland. \"Waterfront city is the only choice to develop Jakarta and
\nwe will go north to the coastal areas,\" Surjadi said at that
\ntime. But, with adequate environmental awareness, he said that
\nthe reclamation project must not create serious environmental
\ndamage. He wanted thorough and careful studies made first.<\/p>\n
Annual flooding on the toll road leading to the Soekarno-Hatta
\nInternational Airport is believed to be the result of the
\nreclamation of the swampy Kapuk area, also in North Jakarta,
\nseveral years ago.<\/p>\n
Now that regional autonomy is in place, provincial
\nadministrations are entitled to manage their own provinces
\nwithout the interference of the central government.<\/p>\n
Defying environmental warnings from the office of the State
\nMinister of Environment and the Ministry of Resettlement and
\nInfrastructure, Sutiyoso said the plan to reclaim 32-kilometers
\nof coast would go ahead. He argued that reclaiming the northern
\ncoastal area would be the only answer to the steady increase in
\npopulation.<\/p>\n
Sutiyoso said that the Law No. 27\/1999 annuls the central
\ngovernment's right to analyze the environmental damage (Amdal) on
\nthe reclamation project in Jakarta. While, according to the
\nIndonesian Center for Environmental Law (ICEL), Article 11 of the
\nLaw allows the team established by the Office of the State
\nMinistry of the Environment to conduct environmental studies on
\nthe reclamation plan.<\/p>\n
While the two institutions have their own perception of the
\nLaw, we do suggest that all possible environmental, social and
\neconomic damage due to the reclamation be taken into serious
\nconsideration before a decision is made.<\/p>\n
Sloppy planning could lead to an incessant environmental
\ndisaster, to be dealt with by the next generations.<\/p>\n
That's why Sutiyoso's recent statements that reclamation in
\nSingapore and Tokyo had been successful, and thus Jakarta must be
\nable to do the same thing, are irrelevant.<\/p>\n
The lofty and zealous statements are the very evidence that he
\nfails to be objective. Everybody knows that Jakarta is totally
\ndifferent from Singapore and Tokyo. Naturally, Jakarta is
\nvulnerable to flooding, which the government and the city
\nadministration have never been able to control. Flooding has been
\ngetting worse and worse from year to year.<\/p>\n
Could the candid reality make the city administration
\nacknowledge and more aware that Jakarta will not match either
\nSingapore or Tokyo, which - without Sutiyoso's knowledge - must
\nhave prepared everything to deal with the possible impact caused
\nby their reclamation projects?<\/p>\n
Let's be realistic and not make things worse. Jakarta is no
\nSingapore or Tokyo. Jakarta is Jakarta with its myriad problems
\nthe administration has not dealt with properly for decades.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/the-reclamation-1447899208",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}