Tracing the roots of human rights violations

Merana di Tengah Kelimpahan (Sufferings amidst Affluence); By Dianto Bachriadi; Institute for Advocacy and Community Studies (ELSAM), Jakarta, 1998; xxiv + 268 pp

YOGYAKARTA (JP): Large-scale mining firms have often been in the spotlight for alleged human rights violations, regardless of whether these violations are committed by the firms concerned or other parties in the country where mining activities are carried out.

This likelihood stems from the two features inherent in large- scale mining businesses. First, these undertakings are closely linked with the exploitation of natural wealth in huge quantities. Such activities will always be related to the determination of the rights over the resources of this wealth.

Second, to ensure that its activities run smoothly, a large- scale modern mining company needs stability in the political, economic and security sectors in its host country.

The first feature relates with efforts to win over natural resources and the wealth they contain, while the second is concerned with how to safeguard the capital invested for the entire activity to win over the resources.

It is in this context of keeping control over natural resources that the state is very likely to get involved in a number of human rights violations. This is because during the process of winning over these resources relevant political and legal forces, or elements of power, will have a say in determining the claim over the rights on the resources being fought for.

In other words, certain economic interests have "bought" a number of claims and their justification so that they have been wrested from the interests of people's welfare. The people's welfare actually should be prioritized by the ruling government as required by the mandate it acquires in the political power it holds.

The book, which is a case study of PT Freeport Indonesia in Irian Jaya and PT Kelian Equatorial Mining (PT KEM) in East Kalimantan, reveals details of human rights violations, which the writer links to these international companies.

Dianto Bachriadi writes that these violations encompass civil, political rights as well as economic, social and cultural rights.

The outcome of the study reveals that the profits reaped by multinational corporations in their operations in Indonesia have incurred a terribly huge human cost.

Dianto is an anthropologist from the Bandung-based Padjadjaran University who is now active in a non-governmental organization, Konsorsium Pembaruan Agraria (Consortium for Agrarian Reform).

What the book reveals has further shaken the foundation of a theoretical view which, for close to five decades, has dominated human rights discourses. The view in question is one that gives place to the state as the main agent assuming the responsibility to guarantee and protect human rights, the so-called state obligations.

The theoretical foundation of this view, which explains why human rights advocacy conducted by human rights activists is usually centered on the state, has now been questioned in connection with the presence of parties in the international arena such as multinational/transnational corporations (MNCs/TNCs), international financial institutions (International Monetary Fund, the World Bank) and world institutions like the World Trade Organization and the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum.

These new agents must be considered as parties which may be required to perform their legal responsibility in guaranteeing and protecting human rights, especially now that world economic and political power seems to be shifting from the state to these new agents.

There are at least four factors with which one may argue for considering MNC/TNC agents assuming the responsibility to guarantee and protect human rights, as set forth in various conventions and covenants.

According to the writer these four interlinked factors are: (i) the economic power of an MNC; (ii) the international nature of an MNC; (iii) the impact exerted by the operation of an MNC and (iv) a limited capacity on the part of developing countries in regulating the conduct of an MNC.

Therefore, it is now time to review the opinion which has been dominant all these years about the concept of liability in human rights violations. It seems that this liability cannot be exclusively shouldered by the state. The international law on human rights includes these parties as responsible for such violations.

The results of this study are obviously not meant to give a bad image of the business world or to arouse anti-MNC/TNC sentiments. Rather, it is aimed at encouraging businesspeople, the government, legislators and other community members to formulate corporate responsibility. This responsibility is not confined only to environmental damage, labor and social affairs, but also covers responsibility for human rights violations.

The study shows that it is now time for MNCs/TNCs dealing in mining to make a sort of human rights impact assessment so that they may minimize the likelihood of human rights violations.

-- Eni Nur Husniyati

The reviewer is an alumni of the Sunan Kalijaga State Islamic Institute in Yogyakarta.