Without Suharto to help out, an Australian gold mining company in Kalimantan is having trouble with the local community
Jeff Atkinson
The story of the Australian-owned Indo Muro
mine in Central Kalimantan illustrates what can happen when a mining
company operates under the auspices of a corrupt and oppressive
government and passively accepts the standards of that government. In
this case this meant not negotiating with landowners over access, not
paying proper compensation for land and other property acquired by the
mine, and allowing the police to clear out small-scale miners who had
been working the area before them.
Long before the company ever appeared in
the Indo Muro area, local Dayak people knew of and were working
gold-bearing deposits there. Small scale mining, with a pan in the
river or using hand-dug shafts and tunnels, had become a major activity
and a useful economic fallback for poor communities when agriculture
was not paying well. It had also attracted large numbers of outsiders.
Mining settlements had grown up at the deposits, which eventually took
on the aspect of small towns.
While some of the mining techniques used by
these small-scale miners were benign, others were environmentally
damaging. Some used mercury to extract the gold. Because it was cheap,
they preferred to throw it into the river after use rather than try and
recover it. Some small enterprises, financed by outsiders, used pumps
and high pressure water hoses to wash away river banks etc to get at
the gold, while others used pumps to dredge river beds for gold-bearing
sands.
But on the positive side, this activity
provided villagers in this remote and neglected area with a level of
economic security that they had never known before.
Australian
In 1985, the Indonesian-registered company
PT Indo Muro Kencana (PT-IMK) was given a contract of work by the
Indonesian government to explore and mine in an area of 480 square
kilometres, covering the main deposits. In 1992 an Australian company,
Ashton Mining Ltd, acquired 90 percent ownership of PT-IMK. The
following year, Ashton Mining Ltd was reorganised, and their gold
operations handed over to a newly formed company, Aurora Gold Ltd,
based in Perth, in which Ashton retained a 30 percent share. Aurora
Gold Ltd now owns 100 percent of PT-IMK and is the operator of the
mine. Gold production began in December 1994.
To clear the way for PT-IMK, the Indonesian
government in the late 1980s declared all the small-scale mining within
the lease area 'illegal' and told people in the settlements they had to
leave. Most refused to go, and when persuasion failed, the army and
police were sent in. First they frightened people off, then they came
in with bulldozers and simply knocked everything down - houses, shops,
mosques - smashed all the mining machinery and filled in the mine
shafts. What was left was then burnt, leaving nothing but rubble. These
forced closures continued from 1987 till 1993.
'The company burnt down my house, along
with my household goods, and even my clothes. It was all destroyed in
front of my eyes. I cried. It was really terrible. So much was burnt. I
lost a lot of my possessions. All burnt. They didn't give me a new
house.'
(A woman, who now sells vegetables door to door in nearby Puruk Cahu, recalling what happened in 1989).
These evictions did not however mean the
end of small-scale mining. There were still some deposits outside the
PT-IMK lease area worth working, and people returned to those within
the lease whenever they could, risking arrest or worse at the hands of
the Mobile Brigade. In a 1996 document, the company estimated that
there were 1,002 'illegal miners' in its lease area, and said it
intended to:
'Impress upon the Department of Mining and
Energy and the police (Mobile Brigade) the need to take steps to
restore security and orderShow that
the local government and the company have rights and powers which must
be maintained. If steps are not taken against illegal miners it will be
considered as a sign of weakness and the problem will get worse.'
As well as the mining areas, land which had
been used for growing rice, rubber, fruit and other crops was also
appropriated by the mine. People who lost land and crops were given
compensation, but the rate was set by government and was very low.
Measurement of the land to be compensated for was carried out by a
local government team, and owners had little or no input into the
process. Many felt ignored and cheated. Some who protested felt the
full force of police intimidation. The result was considerable anger,
frustration and anxiety.
'We are small people, we have nothing to
live from except planting our fields, plantations and panning for gold.
That's all. Since Indo Muro came, they have appropriated our fields. We
are not allowed by them to mine for gold. So what will be our fate if
it goes on like this?' (Interview, Beringin, January 1998).
In the years that followed, the company
appeared unwilling or unable to deal adequately with these problems,
and unwilling to talk with any group other than official ones. In
August 1999 the Australian owners, Aurora Gold Limited, issued what
they called a 'statement of regret':
'The company (Aurora Gold Ltd) recognises
that prior to acquiring its 90% ownership of PT Indo Muro Kencana in
1993 there were certain actions undertaken by previous owners and
government security agencies that disadvantaged the local community in
the contract of work area. While the company had no control over, or
responsibility for, any such actions by former owners and government
security agencies, it deeply regrets such incidents and the trauma that
may have been caused to the community.'
On the question of compensation it was
resolute. It would offer 150 jobs at the mine to local people, and try
and improve community assistance programs, but would make no
restitution for past injustices against small-scale miners because they
were, it said, illegal squatters:
'PT-IMK rejects all claims for diggings,
shafts, pits, rock crushing-milling buildings, stamp mills and
associated activities and equipment declared illegal by the Government
of the Republic of Indonesia.'
After Suharto
Residual resentment over unresolved claims
and abuses by the police, together with the company's close
identification with the Suharto government and its security apparatus,
did it no good when that regime finally fell in 1998. Taking advantage
of the looser political situation, large numbers of people, locals and
outsiders, some of them backed by local officials, swarmed into the
mining areas. The company described what happened in its 1999 annual
report:
'The whole of 1999 was marked by increasing
incursions by illegal miners into operating pits. At times mining
operations had to cease as hundreds of illegal miners entered the pits
to steal freshly blasted high-grade ore. In late June a group with land
rights claims closed the Bantian-Batu Tembak (BBT) mining complex.
Negotiations with this group proved difficult and in mid July, before
the BBT complex could be reopened, another group which claimed
outstanding land compensation from pre-Aurora activities also closed
off access to the Permata-Hulubai (PBH) complex.
The loss of BBT and PBH left the Kerikil
complex as the only pits providing ore to the processing plant,
supplemented by low-grade stockpile material. In late September however
a roadblock on the Kerikil haul road by unrepresentative protestors,
agitated by a local non-government organisation, stopped company access
to the Kerikil pits.'
By this time the community was becoming
divided between those who wanted the mine to continue, including
company employees, and those who wanted the company out and a return to
the former situation. By early 2000, the replacement of some local
officials meant that PT-IMK was able to obtain enough official support
to have the police sent in to clear out the pits. The company was able
to resume operations, although periodic illegal mining continues in
some pits as well as occupations by land rights and compensation
claimants. Meanwhile, the clearing operations have now added another
set of grievances against the company.
Things might have been different for both
the company and local people if PT-IMK had from the beginning been
willing to respect the fundamental social and economic rights of those
impacted by its operations. These include the right of indigenous
landowners to determine what happens to their land; the right of those
who lose the sources of their income to compensation that enables them
to replace them; and the right of people to be free of violence and
harassment by the police. Expressing regret is all very well, but
restitution of those rights is also required.
Jeff Atkinson (jeffa@caa.org.au)
is Mining Ombudsman with the non-government organisation Community Aid
Abroad (Oxfam Australia, based in Melbourne, Australia). He previously
wrote on mining in Indonesia in 'Inside Indonesia' no.47,
July-September 1996.
|