Debate on reclamation?

Debate on reclamation?

The Jakarta administration's persistence to proceed with the "revitalization" of 2,700 hectares on the northern coast through reclamation deserves our very serious attention.

Serious attention must be paid to the plan that has been opposed by independent and government-owned institutions dealing with environmental affairs, including the Office of the State Minister of the Environment. All parties opposing the plan have argued that the Rp 20 trillion project would cause more problems in dealing with flooding than already exists at present.

Governor Sutiyoso has defied all environmental warnings -- including those coming from the Ministry of Resettlement and Regional Infrastructure -- warning of environmental damage if the plan is carried out. Sutiyoso's defiance, no doubt, stems among other things from the fact that regional autonomy makes it possible for provincial administrations to manage their own provinces without interference from the central government.

It is clear that no one at City Hall has thought about the fact that environmental damage, which could result from the reclamation project, is not only the Jakarta administration's concern. The devastation of the natural environment of the Jakarta area is a national concern -- which is why the former state minister of the environment, Emil Salim, has also suggested that the reclamation plan be canceled. The former minister, who has a reputation of being "clean", said that widening the coastal areas in Jakarta will be certain to worsen the flood problems in Jakarta and further worsen the impact of global warming. He cited experts as saying that global warming could eventually raise sea levels around the globe by up to 60 centimeters by 2070, due to the melting of the polar ice caps. This could cause some coastal lands and islands to be completely submerged.

Emil's warning reflects his deep concern over the controversial plan. But the warning could be somewhat vague for the City Hall officials dealing with the project as Emil cited the "very academic and global environmental outlook."

The most interesting development was Sutiyoso's proposal that a public debate on the reclamation be held.

This proposal sounds courageous, as it could mean that Sutiyoso is planning to reveal a certain accountability for his determination at the forum. Or, Sutiyoso could be merely trying to be more "democratic" by offering a public debate, arguing that the project would be to cater to the needs of an increasing population and development.

If the public debate should conclude that the project must not be given the green light, "then we will comply with the conclusion," Sutiyoso said.

Environmental experts have already warned of the danger caused by the project. Those warnings should have been taken as a responsible and academic prognosis by the city administration.

But if so, what then could be Sutiyoso's intention in proposing a public debate? Is Sutiyoso just trying to buy time before finally deciding that the project deserves to go on? It is very well possible Sutiyoso will go ahead with the project because, as he has said, he has "strong" reasons to do so.

First, the investors, based on a presidential decree issued under the New Order regime, could sue the Jakarta administration if the project, which was approved by then president Soeharto, is annulled. Second, according to Sutiyoso, those involved in the reclamation work were all committed to preserve the environment, thus the project would cause no flooding. Third, the city administration would get at least Rp 12 trillion from the project, as calculated from the sale value of some 30 percent of the total 2,700 hectares of the reclaimed land.

The same old question is, could Sutiyoso guarantee that the project will not worsen the seasonal floods? Is there any guarantee that there will be open public accountability of the major project so as not to encourage corruption?

If the problem is the presidential decree issued by then president Soeharto, the project could be thoroughly reviewed for the reason that it is spiced up with corruption. The Attorney General's Office must be involved in the review. Sutiyoso should not forget that Soeharto approved the reclamation plan in 1994 because the prospective developer was one of his daughters.

If the problem is fear of losing the windfall profit of Rp 12 trillion from the project, then the city administration is clearly belittling the most probable environmental damage that could cost Jakarta's citizenry more than just Rp 12 trillion in losses.

What is most important in this case is that the Jakarta administration listen to reason. Defiance merely for the sake of saving face could lead to incessant environmental disasters that will adversely affect future generations of Jakartans.