Richard Ness : Blog : WALHI Loses Civil Case Against Newmont

WALHI Loses Civil Case Against Newmont - 18 Dec 2007
by Eric

In yet another decisive court ruling handed down by the South Jakarta District Court, the judges have vindicated my Dad and Newmont of any wrong doing. This verdict resonates perfectly with the ruling in the criminal case by the Manado High Court, thereby reaffirming once again that Buyat Bay is clean.

While the latest verdict brings one more chapter of the Buyat Bay hoax to an end, it should mark the beginning of serious soul-searching for WALHI. Most importantly, it raises questions about Chalid Mohammed and his leadership of WALHI.

By now it is commonly known that Newmont followed all the regulations and there are irrefutable scientific facts that show that Buyat Bay is clean. Prominent evidence that supported these conclusions included Government of Indonesia’s own reports and testimonies as well as the findings of researchers from the World Health Organization, CSIRO-Australia and other academicians from Indonesia’s universities.

So it was not very surprising when Judge I Ketut Manika stated in court, "The plaintiff could not prove its accusations that there was environmental pollution caused by PT Newmont Minahasa Raya in Buyat Bay”.

It has now taken several years for the public to finally realize that WALHI had used lies and pseudo-science to engineer its campaign against my Dad. In fact, the origin of WALHI’s campaign can be traced back to 1995. At that time it accused Newmont of causing pollution in Buyat Bay when in fact the mine had not even started its operations and the tailings pipe didn’t exist then. WALHI intensified its campaign in 2001 through sensationalism and fear mongering by accusing Newmont of causing mercury poisoning. Once the accusation of mercury poisoning/Minamata disease was dismissed by professional researchers, WALHI changed its tactics and switched to the accusation of arsenic poisoning. As if this was not enough, WALHI switched gears once again and claimed that Newmont didn’t have permits. Given this history of WALHI’s campaign strategy, it was not a surprise that earlier this year when Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s foreign correspondent Geoff Thompson interviewed Mr. Makarim, the former Minister of Environment, he eloquently framed up what was happening here:

Geoff Thompson: For former Environment Minister Nabiel Makarim the reality is obvious, Newmont has been targeted.

Nabiel Makarim: Targeting means, I bring a case against you, case A, when it fails; I go to the second case. If it fails and I go to the third case and it is endless …this is not law enforcement.

AFP also reported this little gem with regards to WALHI’s move to file this particular lawsuit:

“The judge Tuesday said that Walhi had gone "beyond its authority" in filing the latest charges. He added that under a 1997 law on the environment, campaigners could only file suits if an environmental crime had been committed, and the dismissal of the earlier case had shown none had.” - AFP

The only question left now is how many times do we have hear “not guilty” before WALHI would come out of its state of denial to face the true conditions in Buyat Bay and how it is not polluted.

It may be high time for WALHI now to refocus its efforts to address the true environmental issues facing Indonesia such as rampant deforestation and the massive mud flow of Lapindo. If they have lost their focus as to who the real polluters are, all they need to do is read the published list of the top 100 polluters in the local papers.

The Buyat controversy has taken away precious three and half years out of my family’s life, but we still feel that justice delayed is still justice.

Happy Holidays and best wishes for the New Year to all.