The reclamation

Do we think that the Jakarta administration is really aware of its deteriorating environment?

If the answer is yes, then what makes the governor adamant to push ahead with the controversial reclamation of the northern coastal area?

The Ministry of Resettlement and Regional Infrastructure has rejected the Rp 20 trillion project, arguing it will cause more problems in dealing with flooding.

The office of the State Minister of the Environment, the institution considered the most credible in environmental affairs, has also rejected the project, which will reclaim 500 hectares from the sea and revitalize 2,700 hectares of coastal area. According to the office, the reclamation project would increase sea levels by up to 12 centimeters. Reclamation could also spark conflicts as thousands of fishermen in Kamal Muara, Muara Angke, Muara Baru and Kampung Luar Batang could lose their jobs. The marine ecosystem would also be damaged by the project which will need 330 million cubic meters of sand. In short the office is seeking ways to have the presidential Instruction on the reclamation of the city's northern coastal areas and Teluk Naga be revoked.

Acknowledging those clear reasonable arguments, we can not understand why the governor has vowed to continue with the project.

Plans for the area have sparked controversy since development plans for Pantai Mutiara in North Jakarta in 1990 when Jakarta was governed by Wiyogo Atmodarminto.

Another controversial plan was made by PT Pembangunan Jaya Ancol, which would reclaim 400 hectares of the coast in Ancol in 1993. The plan was feared to cause serious sedimentation at the Tanjung Priok seaport.

In 1994, then president Soeharto approved the reclamation of 1,500 hectares of coastal area for a housing and business center. All relevant ministries and government institutions did not show any resistance to the plan. The Ministry of Public Works agreed to the plan. Later, people found out the prospective developer was one of Soeharto's daughters.

Then governor Surjadi Soedirdja said that developing the crowded city to the south would be impossible as the southern part of Jakarta was designated as a water catchment area. To the east was also impossible as it would victimize irrigated farm land. "Waterfront city is the only choice to develop Jakarta and we will go north to the coastal areas," Surjadi said at that time. But, with adequate environmental awareness, he said that the reclamation project must not create serious environmental damage. He wanted thorough and careful studies made first.

Annual flooding on the toll road leading to the Soekarno-Hatta International Airport is believed to be the result of the reclamation of the swampy Kapuk area, also in North Jakarta, several years ago.

Now that regional autonomy is in place, provincial administrations are entitled to manage their own provinces without the interference of the central government.

Defying environmental warnings from the office of the State Minister of Environment and the Ministry of Resettlement and Infrastructure, Sutiyoso said the plan to reclaim 32-kilometers of coast would go ahead. He argued that reclaiming the northern coastal area would be the only answer to the steady increase in population.

Sutiyoso said that the Law No. 27/1999 annuls the central government's right to analyze the environmental damage (Amdal) on the reclamation project in Jakarta. While, according to the Indonesian Center for Environmental Law (ICEL), Article 11 of the Law allows the team established by the Office of the State Ministry of the Environment to conduct environmental studies on the reclamation plan.

While the two institutions have their own perception of the Law, we do suggest that all possible environmental, social and economic damage due to the reclamation be taken into serious consideration before a decision is made.

Sloppy planning could lead to an incessant environmental disaster, to be dealt with by the next generations.

That's why Sutiyoso's recent statements that reclamation in Singapore and Tokyo had been successful, and thus Jakarta must be able to do the same thing, are irrelevant.

The lofty and zealous statements are the very evidence that he fails to be objective. Everybody knows that Jakarta is totally different from Singapore and Tokyo. Naturally, Jakarta is vulnerable to flooding, which the government and the city administration have never been able to control. Flooding has been getting worse and worse from year to year.

Could the candid reality make the city administration acknowledge and more aware that Jakarta will not match either Singapore or Tokyo, which - without Sutiyoso's knowledge - must have prepared everything to deal with the possible impact caused by their reclamation projects?

Let's be realistic and not make things worse. Jakarta is no Singapore or Tokyo. Jakarta is Jakarta with its myriad problems the administration has not dealt with properly for decades.