Timeline of Karaha Bodas case<\/p>\n
Before the project<\/p>\n
Oct. 2, 1990: PT Manggala Pratama owned by Tantyo Sudharmono
\nexpresses its interest in participating in the geothermal
\nbusiness.<\/p>\n
June 16, 1993: Pertamina asks PT Manggala about the follow-up to
\nits proposal. PT Manggala responds that it has transferred all
\nresponsibility on geothermal interests to PT Sumarah Dayasakti.<\/p>\n
Sept. 30, 1993: PT Sumarah presents Pertamina with an improved
\nproposal with a copy of a memorandum of understanding (MOU)
\nbetween PT Sumarah and SCOTIA Geothermal.<\/p>\n
March 23,1994: PT Sumarah informs Pertamina that it will partner
\nwith Magma Power Company to develop Karaha.<\/p>\n
Oct. 13 1994: PT Sumarah signs an MOU with Caithness Resources,
\nwhich replaces Magma Power, and forms Java Geothermal Company.<\/p>\n
Oct. 17 1994: PT Sumarah informs Pertamina that it has changed
\nits foreign partner from Magma Power to Caithness.<\/p>\n
Nov. 9 1994: PT Sumarah, Java Geothermal and Duval Corp. sign a
\njoint venture agreement and establish PT Karaha Bodas Company
\n(KBC).<\/p>\n
Later, Caithness Energy sells some of its KBC shares to Florida
\nPower & Light, thus KBC's shareholders are Caithness Energy
\n(40.5%), Florida Power & Light (40.5%), Tomen Corp of Japan (9%)
\nand PT Sumarah (10%).<\/p>\n
Dec. 2 1994: KBC signs a joint operation contract (JOC) with
\nPertamina, and an energy sales contract (ESC) with Pertamina and
\nPLN.<\/p>\n
During the project<\/p>\n
May 1995: KBC starts operation in Indonesia, opening offices,
\nconducting an environmental impact study, building access roads
\nto the location, and conducting surface exploration.<\/p>\n
Nov. 2, 1995 to Aug, 28, 1997: KBC drills 15 core hole wells in
\nKaraha and four in Lake Bodas areas, and six standard wells in
\nKaraha. Of the six wells, only two are considered commercial.<\/p>\n
Sept. 20, 1997: Following a recommendation from the International
\nMonetary Fund (IMF), the Indonesian government issues
\nPresidential Decree (Keppres) No. 39 that postpones the
\nconstruction of a number of infrastructure projects, including
\nKaraha Bodas.<\/p>\n
Oct. 14 1997: Pertamina holds a meeting with KBC and other energy
\ninvestors to get their input following the issuance of Keppres
\n39. Following the meeting, Pertamina and PLN recommends that the
\ngovernment allow geothermal projects to resume operation.<\/p>\n
Nov. 1, 1997: The government issues Keppres No. 47, allowing a
\nnumber of postponed infrastructure projects, including Karaha
\nBodas, to resume construction.<\/p>\n
Jan. 10, 1998: Following pressures from the IMF, the government
\nissues Keppres No. 5 that revokes Keppres No. 47.<\/p>\n
Jan. 13 1998: KBC asks Pertamina to demand that the government
\nallow KBC to continue with the geothermal power plant project.<\/p>\n
Jan, 23, 1998: KBC reports to Pertamina concerning the
\nconsequences of the Keppres.<\/p>\n
Feb. 10, 1998: KBC declares force majeure as a result of a
\ngovernment related event (Keppres).<\/p>\n
March 6, 1998: PLN asks all parties in the Karaha Bodas project,
\nincluding Pertamina and KBC, to abide by the Keppres and stop the
\nproject.<\/p>\n
April 30, 1998: KBC files a case with the Geneva-based UNCITRAL
\ninternational arbitration court against Pertamina, PLN and the
\nIndonesian government, for breach of contracts.<\/p>\n
Legal battle<\/p>\n
June 2, 1998: KBC through its lawyer informs Pertamina that it
\nhas asked UNCITRAL in Geneva to appoint an arbiter for Pertamina,
\nPLN and the Indonesian government, due to lack of response from
\nthe latter.<\/p>\n
Nov. 19, 1998: first hearing in Geneva<\/p>\n
May 31, 1999, second hearing held in Paris, with a main agenda of
\nhearing court decisions concerning procedural matters.<\/p>\n
Dec. 18, 2000: final arbitration award, with the court declaring
\nthat Pertamina in breach of the joint operations contract and
\nenergy sales contract (ESC), and PLN in breach of the ESC. The
\ncourt orders Pertamina and PLN together to pay KBC US$111.1
\nmillion for its expenditure loss, and $150 million for loss of
\nfuture potential profit from the project, with 4 percent interest
\nper annum starting 1 Jan 2001.<\/p>\n
Following the arbitration award, KBC files cases in various
\ncourts around the world, including United States, Canada, Hong
\nKong and Singapore, asking them to confirm the arbitration ruling
\nand confiscate Pertamina's assets in those countries.<\/p>\n
Pertamina and PLN file a case with the Swiss Federal Supreme
\nCourt to annul the arbitration ruling, but to no avail because
\nthey fail to pay proceedings costs on time.<\/p>\n
Dec. 4, 2001: Houston Court issues a summary judgment, confirming
\nthe arbitration ruling.<\/p>\n
Jan. 4, 2002: Pertamina files an appeal with the Fifth Circuit
\nCourt in New Orleans against the Houston Court decision.<\/p>\n
Feb. 22, 2002: KBC brings the execution of Pertamina's assets to
\nbanks in New York.<\/p>\n
March 14, 2002: Pertamina files a case at the Central Jakarta
\nDistrict Court, asking the court to prevent KBC from executing
\nits assets around the world<\/p>\n
April 1, 2002: the Central Jakarta District Court issues a
\nprovisional ruling that asks KBC not to execute Pertamina's
\nassets based on a decision from a U.S. court.<\/p>\n
April 2, 2002: the Houston Court tells Pertamina to file a
\nwithdrawal of the Central Jakarta District Court's provisional
\nruling.<\/p>\n
April 8, 2002: Pertamina asks the Central Jakarta District Court
\nto annul the provisional ruling.<\/p>\n
May 23, 2002: Hong Kong court confirms arbitration ruling.<\/p>\n
May 29, 2002: Singapore court confirms arbitration ruling<\/p>\n
Aug. 27, 2002: The Central Jakarta District Court annuls the
\ninternational arbitration ruling.<\/p>\n
September 2002, KBC files an appeal with the Indonesian Supreme
\nCourt<\/p>\n
March 8, 2004: The Indonesian Supreme Court rules that the
\nCentral Jakarta District Court has no authority to fulfill
\nPertamina's demand to annul the arbitration ruling.<\/p>\n
March 23, 2004: The Fifth Circuit Appeal Court rejects
\nPertamina's appeal against the Houston Court's ruling.<\/p>\n
Oct. 6, 2004: New York Court asks banks to disburse $US29 million
\nof Pertamina's frozen money at New York banks to KBC.<\/p>\n
Oct. 22, 2004: New York Court orders Bank of America to disburse
\nthe remaining US$271 million frozen fund to KBC.<\/p>\n
Nov. 22, 2004: the Indonesian government files an appeal to the
\nU.S. Supreme Court, saying that the money (US$271) belongs to the
\nIndonesian government, not Pertamina.<\/p>\n
from various sources<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/timeline-of-karaha-bodas-case-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }