Bad law blamed for forest damage
Muninggar Sri Saraswati and Musthofid, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta
Indonesia has been overzealous in proving its self-proclaimed tag as a country that is based on law. One indicator is the 500 or so overlapping and conflicting pieces of legislation within the forestry sector.
Ironically, this has been partly responsible for the destruction of the country's forests, rather than protecting them.
"Each institution issues and enforces its own regulations. In the forestry sector, for example, related institutions tend to arbitrarily produce their own licenses for forest exploitation, at the expense of the forest," Harry Alexander of the Natural Resources Law Institute (IHSA), told The Jakarta Post here on Tuesday.
The issuance of individual licenses, coupled with a lack of coordination among institutions, is, to a large extent, attributable to collusion among officials.
"A policy is issued exclusively to gratify the needs of a certain individual or group, to serve a short-term interest," Harry added.
Forest management is a sector that has suffered from the glut in legislation. Forest management in Indonesia is governed by a host of law and regulations issued by the Ministry of Forestry, the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources, the National Agrarian Agency (BPN) and regional administrations.
All of that legislation is supposedly based on Article 33(3) of the 1945 Constitution, which stipulates that "the earth, water and the natural resources are for the state to use to the benefit of the people."
The result has been overlapping and conflicting laws. In 1960, for example, the state issued Agrarian Basic Law No. 5/1960, which regulated land, water and space. The law was expected to provide a basis for several operational laws and regulations on the three issues.
The Agrarian Basic Law granted the agrarian ministry, now BPN, the authority to regulate surface land, everything below the surface and the space above it. However, the New Order regime under former president Soeharto issued Forestry Basic Law No. 5/1967, which gave the Ministry of Forestry the authority to regulate forestry affairs, including the issuance of forest concession rights. The 1967 forestry law, which overlapped and conflicted with the 1960 agrarian law, was replaced by Law No. 41/1999 on forestry.
Also in 1967, the state issued Mining Basic Law No. 11/1967, which granted the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources the authority to regulate mining affairs. The law also contradicted the agrarian law.
Given the above conditions, it is an understatement to say there is confusion over who is actually responsible for forest management. Worse still, each institution claims to be the most responsible and legitimate, according to Harry.
"It's confusing because there are three basic laws regulating the same issue. The New Order regime exploited the forests and mines, making these sectors its two major money machines via the conflicting laws," Harry said.
The enforcement of a 1985 regulation jointly issued by the forestry ministry and the mining ministry, which allowed mining in protected forest basins, for example, violated Law No. 5/1990 on forest conservation. The 1990 law bans mining and farming activities in protected areas.
The most recent controversial legislation was the issuance of Government Regulation No. 34/2002 on forest management, which supersedes Regional Autonomy Law No. 22/1999 and revokes the rights of local administrations to manage their forests.
Given the huge impact of the conflicting laws and regulations on Indonesia's forests, Harry called for synchronization of the legislation.
"All that legislation is meaningless when confronted by the problem of rampant forest destruction," Harry said, adding that the House of Representatives (DPR) should take the initiative to settle the matter.
Herry Purnomo, a scientist working at the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), drew attention to the shortcomings in forestry law and regulations. He was particularly concerned about the fate of local and indigenous people who had been sidelined by the regulations.
"The legislation does not guarantee that the people at the operational sites can make the best of the projects for their welfare. They are generally being sidelined," Herry said.
Harry concurred, saying: "Failure to address the preservation of the forest endangers and jeopardizes the indigenous people's lives. What will happen to local and indigenous people today and in future should the forest vanish?"
Togu Manurung of Forest Watch Indonesia (FWI) urged a revision of the legislation and better coordination of related institutions.
"Straighten out the institutions," Togu said. "That's the prerequisite to sustainable forest management."
Indonesia has lost more than 75 percent of its forests over the past few decades, leaving only 60 million hectares today. For the past five years, some 43 million hectares of Indonesia's forests, or the equivalent of more than half of Borneo has been damaged.
The World Bank predicts that if the current rapid pace of deforestation continues, Indonesia could lose Sumatra's forests in 2005, with Kalimantan to follow five years later.
Legislations related to forest management
Agrarian Basic Law No. 5/1960:
* Agrarian Ministry (now the National Agrarian Agency), on behalf of the state, has the authority to manage and regulate the exploitation of land, water and air.
* Land refers to its surface, underground and underwater in Indonesian jurisdiction.
Forestry Law No. 41/1999:
* Forestry ministry, on behalf of the state, has the authority to manage and regulate the exploitation of forests, including the issuance of forest concessions in the country.
Mining Basic Law No. 5/1967:
* Energy and Mining ministry, on behalf of the state, has the authority to manage and regulate the mining activities in the country, including those on all islands, underwater and on continental shelf.
Regional Autonomy Law No. 22/1999:
* Regional administrations have the authority to manage natural resources, as well as to preserve resources in their territories.