City water campany sued in class-action lawsuit
City water campany sued in class-action lawsuit
Zakki Hakim, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta
The Jakarta Tap Water Consumers' Community (Komparta) demanded on
Tuesday that the private partners of city-run tap water company
PD PAM Jaya pay Rp 1 billion (US$117,647) in damages for their
failure to provide proper services to their customers.
The claim against PT Thames PAM Jaya (TPJ) and PT PAM
Lyonnaise Jaya (Palyja) was submitted as part of a class action
filed by Komparta in the Central Jakarta District Court. Komparta
says it represents water consumers in all of Jakarta's five
municipalities.
TPJ's and Palyja's defense lawyers, respectively from the Amir
Syamsuddin & Partners and Luhut Pangaribuan & Partners law
offices, requested a week to study the claim before responding to
it.
Presiding Judge Andriani Nurdin adjourned the case until Sept.
10.
Komparta's lawyer Amstrong Sembiring told The Jakarta Post
that the lawsuit was being brought on behalf of some 800
residents in five municipalities who were dissatisfied with TPJ's
and Palyja's services.
Amstrong said that most of the complaints concerned water
quality and pressure. For example, the water was turbid and
smelled of chlorine, while most of the time water pressure was
abysmal.
"Since the foreign partners took over the operation five years
ago, there have been no improvements in the service," he said.
Amstrong emphasized that the material damages were not the
main objective. What Komparta really wanted was that the
administration be forced to reconsider its partnership
arrangements with the foreign companies.
If the first case went in favor of the plaintiffs, then
Komparta would file another suit demanding that the partnership
deals be reconsidered, he said.
Currently, Komparta has also filed a lawsuit demanding that
the administration and the city council be ordered to cancel the
40 percent increase in water charges that was imposed on April 1.
Amstrong said that if the courts ruled in favor of Komparta in
these two actions, the rulings would serve as precedents that
could be relied upon by residents in suing other public service
institutions providing such essentials as electricity, liquid
petroleum gas and telephone services, as well as toll road and
parking lot operators.