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.