Tue, 01 Feb 2005

Social movement improves paper firm's green awareness

With his dissertation Gerakan Sosial Baru di Toba Samosir: Studi Kasus Gerakan Perlawanan Rakyat Terhadap Indorayon (New Social Movement in Toba Samosir: A study case on people's opposition movement against Indorayon) last month, Victor Silaen obtained his doctorate from the University of Indonesia. In a discussion with The Jakarta Post staff on Friday, including Adianto P. Simamora, Silaen talked about the people's struggle against pulp and rayon producer PT Indorayon, which is located in Porsea, North Sumatra.

Question: What is the main focus of your dissertation?

Answer: I studied a social movement in Toba Samosir, North Sumatra, in this case people's opposition to the giant Indorayon company from 1983 to 2000. The company was set up in 1983 but in 1999 its operations were temporary halted following public pressure. After a Cabinet meeting, Vice President Megawati Soekarnoputri decided to reopen Indorayon, but this time it was only allowed to produce pulp, and not rayon.

Why have you described the opposition to Indorayon as a new social movement?

Theoretically, there are two kinds of social movements; the old and the new. Old social movements are primarily concerned with issues relating to economic justice. These movements are heavily reliant on the power of mass action, that frequently hold protests against high-level groups. Members of these kinds of organizations are mostly farmers or laborers.

Meanwhile, new social movements struggle for broader issues, such as human rights, or about cultural, social or environmental issues. These movements depend more on networking than mass movements. Members of these groups include businessmen, well- educated people and prominent community figures.

In Indorayon's case, the new social movement has been struggling for the closure or the removal of Indorayon from Porsea. The movement uses their powerful links extending from Porsea, Pematang Siantar, Medan to Jakarta, and even overseas to countries such as Germany, England and Belgium, in order to achieve their objectives. They don't stage many rallies but these groups continue fighting for the closure of Indorayon.

Though they failed to achieve their ultimate objective (the closure of Indorayon), the movement has made a great impact in terms of the changes that the company has had to make. Indorayon has changed its paradigms to be a environment-friendly company producing only pulp products. The company has also applied more sophisticated technologies to minimize pollution. The company's management has also employed increasingly more local residents that contributes some Rp 500 million (US$ 55,000) annually for community development in that area. Currently, about 90 percent of employees working in Indorayon are local residents.

How do you see the impact of Indorayon's presence on the economic condition of local residents?

If we learn from the past, before the reopening of Indorayon, the presence of the company caused relatively big losses to local residents. For example, many people suffered from diseases, fish were being killed, and the production of paddy continued to decline. Farmers' income dropped sharply due to direct pollution because 90 percent of local residents still depend largely on natural resources to make a living.

Regarding the changes that were made by Indorayon due to the new social movement, do you know of similar cases in other companies in Indonesia?

Unfortunately, I have yet to see similar cases in other companies in Indonesia. Indorayon case is very different; the new social movement demanding the closing of Indorayon has been struggling for about 20 years. The opposition comes not only from local residents but also from other communities within and outside Indonesia. As a result, the management of the company, the government and the legislative, whether they liked it or not, were forced to listen to the people's voice.

But why seemingly there is much less opposition now?

First, we must look back on the tragedy of 2002 when then minister of manpower and transmigration, Jacob Nuwawea, gave permission to reopen Indorayon. There were repressive measures taken by the government and security officials who arrested some people including a Protestant reverend and his wife, and who were sent to jail. This incident might have discouraged people from further opposition.

Second, Indorayon currently has been hiring more and more local residents. The company is no longer as arrogant as they were in the past.

I think these two factors were very significant in reducing opposition to Indorayon. Today, opposition is only on a small scale.

Do you think that changes at the national political level have also influenced changes made by Indorayon?

Yes, the fall of president Soeharto in 1998 had encouraged local residents to be more open in expressing their aspirations for the closure of Indorayon.

Meanwhile, Indorayon's management felt that they couldn't rely any more on the power of the government. That's why months after Soeharto era closed, President B.J. Habibie ordered Indorayon to temporary close. So national political conditions contributed much to the reformation in Indorayon.

In your opinion, why doesn't Riau Pulp, which belongs to the same company, receive the same kind of opposition as in Toba Pulp?

This is totally different. The opposition to Indorayon was very complex. For example, if one Batak, especially a well-known figure, wants to fight for something, then he can very easily gather about him many other Batak people to support his ambition. That's what happened in Indorayon. The Batak people have unique cultural tradition of Dalihan Natolu. This brings together many people. We can't find this same tradition in places like Riau Pulp or Buyat Bay in North Sulawesi.

What do you think to be the biggest contribution of this Batak movement?

I think that the executive, judicial and legislative institutions of Indonesia, and also investors, can no longer be arrogant in responding to public demand. They also have to keep on thinking and responding to public opposition.