Project issue not addressed

The Prime Minister’s visit to Madang to hear grievances from the landowners regarding development of the Ramu nickel project in my view didn’t achieve its purpose.
Most of the issues of concern were not discussed and it seemed that he avoided the mess he and his Government created. The landowners wanted to hear and question him about the amendments to the Environment Act 2000 among other things; however this was not adequately discussed. It was the other way around. He came not to hear… but to tell the people why the project should go ahead and the litany of the so-called benefits it would bring. Much of the time was taken up by the PM telling the audience what it was like during his days travelling around Madang as a teacher. Just a waste of time and taxpayers’ money. All these should have been done way before a mining permit was issued. Why telling us what we already know?

Joxes Madang

Post Courier, June 16 2010

Prime Minister of Papua New Guinea in Madang

The Prime Minister (PM) of Papua New Guinea (PNG) met with the landowners affected by the Ramu Nickel Mine (RNM) in Madang yesterday at the provincial headquarters.

The PM maintained his position that the RNM should still go ahead despite landowners of Raicoast paying the price. He simply does not cares if the lives of the people of Raicoast are going to be severely affected when the Ramu Mine dumps 100 million tones of tailings per annum into the sea at Astrolabe Bay. This is injustice and a total slap on the face of the people of Raicoast who petitioned the government in early May.

The Governor of Madang’s main message was the current court injunction by the people of Raicoast against the government of PNG and Ramu Nico Management (MCC) prevents the company to proceed with its operation. In response, the PM and the Governor of Madang were blasted by Sama Mellambo, the 5^th Plaintiff of the current court case. Mr. Mellambo strongly stated that the people of Raicoast were NOT AGAINST the operations of MCC; they SIMPLY DO NOT WANT the company to dump its waste directly into their waters. There were 4 options of waste disposal systems that the government and MCC looked at in the initial stages of the project and Deep Sea Tailings Placement (DSTP) was one of them. Three of these options were land based. They chose DSTP as it was cheaper to construct, easy to construct as well as decommission when the project ends. Sama concluded by saying that while most people at Krumbukare where the RNM will do its extraction are eager for the company to begin full operation, his people on the coast will end up dealing with the mine’s waste.

On behalf of people of Raicoast, the Ward Councilor of Bongu Village raised his concern that his people gave a petition signed by 7,500 people to the government in early May. The government did not respond to this petition though it was given 21 days. Instead the government went behind their backs and amended the Environment Act 2000 to simply get around the current injunction by the landowners against dumping of waste by MCC to the sea and blasting of their reefs.

The government is desperate and its back is against the wall. It is running out of ideas on how to deal with the issue on hand that is why the PM had to meet with landowners on the ground.

Regardless of the PM’s intervention, the people of Raicoast stand firm in their position of NO DUMPING OF MINE WASTE INTO THEIR WATERS!

The Prime Minister - The Ramu Nickel’s Salesman

The Prime Minister arrived this morning from Port Moresby. He is in Madang Province and is meeting with the landowners including ward councilors mainly from the Raicoast area and Krumbukare of Madang Province. The Prime Minister is coming down so low to meet with the people.
According to the Post Courier of yesterday, the PM stated on media that the Ramu Nickel Mine must go ahead despite resistance from the people of Raicoast. The Prime Minister is now like a Salesman for Ramu Nickel Mine. In doing this, he is no longer the Prime Minister but working for the Ramu Nickel Mine in ensuring no one stands in the way of the company.
What does it show and tell us if the Prime Minister has to come to the province and deal with provincial issues which the governor is supposed to deal with? Is the Governor in competent? Is the Ramu Nickel Mine dictating what the Prime Minister should do?
It seems that the Prime Minister is out of his mind. He keeps hammering home that the people of Raicoast are the ones delaying or stopping the operations of this project. He is so ill informed that he cannot even hear the message from the people of Raicoast where they are saying, they are not stopping the operations of the mine however they simply don’t want MCC to dump waste in the sea. If there are land-based alternatives to dump waste then use them. Dumping of waste into the Raicoast people is simply a NO, NO!

New Act challenged in court

THE Government’s new law to prevent landowners complaining about environment damage from major resource projects is being challenged in court.
Lawyers landowners who began a legal suit against the Ramu nickel project filed documents in the Supreme Court last Thursday to contest the constitutionality of the environment law amendments rushed through Parliament in the last gasp of the sitting on May 28.
Controversial figure Noel Anjo was reported arrested by police in Goroka yesterday at a public forum on the law change. Debate has been raging publicly since the Parliament action.
Tiffany Nonggorr, lawyer for landowners, says the amendment Act breaches four sections of the National Constitution and is unconstitutional.
Referring to Prime Minister Sir Michael Somare’s statement in the Post-Courier yesterday, she said: “It is clear the Prime Minister has received bad advice on the effects of the Environment (Amendment) Act 2010 and we suggest he reads the new Act for himself.’’
She said the changes, to become law at the next sitting of Parliament, would give absolute power to the Environment Director to approve past, present or future environmental harm and free developers of liability.
That power and the director’s decision were not “reviewable or challengeable’’ in a court of law and the landowners would not be able to sue for compensation for environmental harm or to stop any future harm.
Ms Nonggorr said: “The landowners do not even have to be told about the decision and there is no opportunity for them to be heard on the decision before the Director makes it.’’
She said the landowners had been stripped of their common law and customary rights to go to court to seek protection or to get compensation from environmental harm that was allowed by the Director.
Ms Nonggorr said the reference was filed in the court registry last Thursday by the Rai Coast Landowner (plaintiffs in the Ramu nickel tailings injunction case) and served on the Attorney General on the same day.
Two top legal advisers to the Government said in the Post-Courier the day before the reference was filed that the amendments did not deprive landowners of their rights to sue for damages in court.
“Those rights remain,’’ Attorney General Lawrence Kalinoe said. But the permit holders’ rights must also be protected, he said. He was supported by Solicitor General Neville Devete.


By Noel Pascoe
Post Courier
Tuesday 8 June, 2010

PNG govt accused of selling out to foreign companies

Updated June 4, 2010 15:53:18

A Papua New Guinea lawyer says the Somare government has sold out to foreign mining companies by passing controversial environmental legislation. Recent amendments to PNG's Environment Act mean approvals granted by the Environment Department cannot be challenged in court. The Environment Minister Benny Allen says the changes are in the national interest and will protect resource projects from legal challenges. The changes followed complaints from the mining industry after landowners won a temporary injunction preventing a Chinese-owned Ramu nickel mine from dumping waste into the sea off Madang. Tiffany Nongorr, the landowners' lawyer says the amendments have effectively removed a person's right to sue for environmental damage.

Presenter: PNG correspondent, Liam Fox
Speaker: Tiffany Nongorr, PNG landowners lawyer
• Listen:
• Windows Media
NONGORR: It is the most draconian piece of legislation with regards to human rights, particularly indigenous human rights that I have ever seen. It is ostensibly removed from the remote landowners, their English common law rights that they have had for about 100 years to protect their land from environmental harm and also to prevent it from any continuing environmental harm, it also removes their rights to sue for any environmental harm. Now what does that actually mean? So, for example, if Inter Oil did what BP has done in the gulf in the United States, had a big oil disaster because an accident happened, something happened that should not have happened whilst they were doing what they were authorised to do under a permit, then if all the coastline around the plant, 400 kilometres was destroyed by oil leaks, the landowners could not sue for compensation.

FOX: And what do you think is the government's motivation for this?

NONGORR: The government's motivation certainly is not the protection of its people or acting in the interest of landowners. Maybe it is to try and save face that the government knows, the Department of Environment and Conservation does not have the capacity to assess any of these environmental plans put up by miners or oil and gas companies and that these permits are given out without proper due process being followed. The government has signed contracts and says that its reputation is on the line. The problem is that it has now made its reputation worse and the reputation of Papua New Guinea worse, whilst the rest of the world or the rest of the Western democratic world have spent the last 50 years trying to undo the damage to indigenous peoples land rights. This government has managed to do what the white colonial rule did not do. The white colonial rule here didn't destroy any customary land rights, but now this government just has.

FOX: Bernie Allen says that the Department of Environment and Conservation does have the capacity to police the conditions of permits and to ensure that environmental damage is not done. What do you think about that claim?

NONGORR: Well, that particular claim is complete and utter rubbish. There are numerous breaches in many different projects now, none of which are picked up by the Department of Environment and Conservation and indeed even in the Ramu nickel matter. The Department of Environment and Conservation stated they did not have the capacity to assess the deep sea tailing scheme and got an Australian consultant to have a look at it.

FOX: How do you think if you can say this will affect your case?

NONGORR: Unfortunately all I can say at this stage is that whether or not this new piece of legislation affects the current case will be a matter for the court to decide.

FOX: As far as you're aware, is there an sort of consultation with people before these amendments were brought in?

NONGORR: Frankly, there was completely no consultation with any of the Rai Coast landowners. The Minister for Mines, Puka Temu, the Minister for Environment and Conservation, Benny Allen, came and accepted a petition on the 10th May at the village of Bongu on the Rai Coast did not mention a word about the fact that there was going to be legislation passed to completely remove the right of landowners to protect their land. Quite the contrary, they said the petition would be looked at and a response would be given. There certainly is in my role as a lawyer, there certainly has not been any consultation within the legal profession as to these far reaching amendments. As a lay person, I have seen nothing in the newspapers talking of these amendments and as far as I can see, there was no debate in parliament and it was a complete surprise to the Opposition. So it seems that the stripping of legal rights, both common law and customary from hundreds-of-thousands of Papua New Guinean landowners has been done in a rush with no consultation and it seems pretty much to save face of the current government. The government has portrayed its own people for the interests of foreign miners, there is no doubt about it.

Liam Fox
Pacific Beat
ABC

LAND Is Our HOPE

LAND, to a Melanesian and to a Papua New Guinean is, L..I..F..E. This is the equation; period!
You talk about land - you touch peoples’ hearts; you even think about land - you connect with peoples’ inner being and when you use peoples’ land - you endanger people’s life support system. You play with fire if you mess around with land in Papua New Guinea. You will pay DEARLY if you do that!
Land is passed on from generations to generations. Thousands and thousands of years, people have held on to their land. Land is NEATLY INTERWOVEN with peoples’ culture. You cannot separate the two. Land is SPECIAL; it is peoples’ LIFELINE; it is also peoples’ IDENTITY AND SENSE OF BELONGING. This is the BOND that Papua New Guineans that have passed away, including those that are still alive today as well as those unborn once had, have and will still have with their land. This is their guarantee to survival. Some of the connections that the people have with their land are NOT easily NOTICEABLE by an untrained foreign eye.
Outside agencies such as the World Bank and others have always and are still keeping their eyes and interests on the peoples’ land. Time and again, they have attempted to free up peoples’ customary land for development but encountered heavy resistance from the people. These were the attempts by outsiders, BUT LOOK! Who is now trying to do the same thing? It’s the people’s elected government of the day under the leadership of National Alliance (NA) currently led by Somare who always claims to be the father of the nation. Seriously, is he really the father of the nations? Ooooh gossh!!!!
It is our own government who is now taking peoples’ power and rights over their land and given them to multinational corporations. This took place last week. It was down in a rush. These are the very rights and powers guaranteed by the constitution that were stripped last week in the recent changes to the Environment Act 2000. This is a slap on the peoples’ face.
Now what kind of government do we have that suddenly forgets those that gave her the recognition and mandate to govern this country? What kind of government do we have that strips rights and powers away from its people and hands them over on a golden plate to foreign multinational corporations? Do we expect this from a leader that claims to be the father of the nations?
We cannot point fingers at outsiders now. It is our own people that are taking advantage of us. Multinational corporations now have the power to control development on our land. Why can’t the government simply assist our people to develop their resources at their own terms? We have all the natural resources; we just need to develop our human resources so we can develop our own resources. What’s so hard about it?
Papua New Guinea is one of those very few countries where people still hold customary rights to their land. When are we going to learn from other developed countries? Are those people in developed countries much more happy and satisfied with life? Where in the world do you see most people sleeping on the streets? Where do you see most people dispossessed and alienated from their land? Where do you see most peoples’ relationships in despair and loneliness? Where do you see most people that work their guts out and become slaves in factories so they can have food on the table? Is this the kind of life we want? Is this where we want Papua New Guineans to end up in?
I appeal to all Papua New Guineans to be on the streets now. Now that our leaders have changed the Environment Act at all costs, we need to make them revoke the recent changes. There is no time to waste. Put pressure on your leaders, in the next parliament session they have to undo what they have done! Enough is enough; we don’t want to be like countries in Africa that have lost their land. We don’t want to be like the indigenous people of Australia and New Zealand that have also lost their land and find it very difficult to get it back. Remember once the egg is broken, you will NEVER EVER shape it back to its original form, no matter how hard you try.

Amendment in the 2000 Environment Act

The government of Papua New Guinea made amendments to the current Environment Act on 27 May 2010. The people need to put immediate pressure on the Speaker of Parliament not to certify this amendment. If we don’t the end result will be:

1. The government has taken away landowners traditional rights over their land.

2. The government has taken away landowners legal rights over their land.

3. The government has said to Chinese and Exxon Mobil come to Papua New Guinea (PNG), do what BP has done in the Gulf of Mexico, and we will protect you from any legal liability whatsoever.

4. It is unconstitutional, undemocratic, an abuse of human rights and it is all because the Chinese and the Americans have captured the government and Somare and his Ministers are behaving like puppets.

5. It will apply to all new projects anywhere in PNG.


The people of PNG must ACT NOW! and tell the government NO! This is NOT acceptable.

Who is in control?

The government of Papua New Guinea made amendment to the Environmental Act on May 27 2010. We citizens of this country can no longer sit back and watch what is happening before our eyes. The changes in this Act basically means the government has taken away peoples’ traditional, constitutional and legal rights over land away from them. Landowners will no longer be in a position to interfere with operations of multinational corporations such has logging, mining, commercial fishing and so forth. They will not have the power to prevent any possible environment damages by these large scale developers before actual operations begin. They are also prevented from taking legal actions against operations of these companies.

This is a very sad story for our people. Do we continue to let this happen to our people? What does this really mean for our people? Most of these people do not know about this amendment. Are they still principle landowners? This is now very critical question to ask as the amendment classifies them as third party. Is this in-line with the people’s traditional landowning systems? Is this another breach to peoples’ constitutional right to freedom of speech? Is this now the start of what we expect more from our government in future?

In the first place, why do we even have the government? Has the role of the government shifted over time? Who is it serving, is it the people of this country or foreign multinational corporations? If it is serving the interests of foreigners then why do we need to have one? The recent amendment shows clearly that the power of the landowners have been stripped and given to multinational corporations. If this is the situation then who is controlling this country? Is it our people or outsiders?

I thought the days of being colonized, administered and controlled by outsiders was over many years ago but the current trends in the country totally proves me wrong. Are we going to continue to let this happen to our people?