- Date filed
- 29 July 2015
- Keywords
- Countries of harm
Allegations
With the support of Greenpeace Indonesia and Friends of the Earth Japan, 23 community leaders united in Paguyuban UKPWR, on behalf of community members in Batang, Indonesia, filed complaints at the Japanese NCP against ITOCHU Corporation and Electric Power Development Co., Ltd. (‘J-Power’) for alleged harms committed by Bhimasena Power Indonesia (BPI), the joint-venture they established to construct and operate a coal-fired power plant in Batang.
Community members resist giving up their land for the construction of the project and fear the project’s impact on their income and livelihoods, agricultural land, and fishing grounds. Residents have already experienced intimidation and violence and faced, among other things, wrongful and arbitrary arrests and unfair trials.
The complainants allege that the companies have not carried out comprehensive human rights and environmental due diligence, nor engaged in meaningful consultation with all affected communities to identify the full scope and severity of potential human rights, social, and environmental impacts.
The complainants ask the NCP to help ensure that the plant’s construction process does not involve any further manipulation, coercion, intimidation, or violence towards the local community, and to help farmers and community members receive appropriate rehabilitation or remediation for the damages and negative impacts experienced. They request for the NCP to conduct an independent assessment of the case through fact-finding. The complainants hope the NCP process will lead to disclosure of important information on health and safety risks.
Relevant OECD Guidelines
- Chapter I
- Chapter I Paragraph 2
- Chapter II
- Chapter II Paragraph A10
- Chapter II Paragraph A11
- Chapter II Paragraph A14
- Chapter IV
- Chapter IV Paragraph 1
- Chapter IV Paragraph 2
- Chapter IV Paragraph 5
- Chapter IV Paragraph 6
- Chapter VI
- Chapter VI Paragraph 2 a
- Chapter VI Paragraph 2 b
- Chapter VI Paragraph 3
Outcome
On 10 September 2015, the Japanese NCP officially accepted the complaint.
On 28 June 2016, the Japanese NCP accepted the majority of the allegations raised in the complaint in its initial assessment. Aspects of the complaint concerning interpretation or enforcement of Indonesia’s laws were rejected. (The NCP does not publish its initial assessment for complaints it accepts for further examination.)
The long duration between the complaint being filed (July 2015), the NCP’s official acceptance of the complaint (September 2015), and the NCP’s initial assessment (June 2016) was a significant issue for the complainants. At the time the complaint was filed, the conflicts between the community (especially the landowners) and BPI needed to be resolved as soon as possible, but according to the complainants their land access was completely and forcibly shut down in March 2016 before the NCP’s conclusion of its initial assessment. This severely limited the effectiveness of the complaint, which in part sought to stop the land acquisition.
Between June 2016 and 2023, the companies refused to respond to the NCP’s offer of good offices on the basis that BPI was proceeding with its operations while communicating with the local community. During this period, the complainants did not oppose the companies’ refusals to respond, and both parties informed the NCP of developments in Indonesia.
On 19 September 2023, the Japanese NCP notified the companies that it considered them unwilling to engage in the NCP process and if no progress was made in the following two months, the NCP would terminate the complaint process and issue its final statement.
On 21 November 2023, the companies formally declined the NCP’s offer of good offices on the basis that BPI engaged with local community members through various activities and wished to continue doing so without the NCP’s involvement. On 13 February 2024, the NCP published its final statement concluding the complaint. The NCP recommended “that the Enterprises Involved continue to ensure the observance of the Guidelines and to engage with the Complainants and other members of the community, and residents, including through BPI’s initiatives.”
The complainants note that the NCP’s role is more than just to offer its good offices (mediation) for dialogue. The NCP should also proactively review companies’ compliance with the OECD Guidelines and make clear recommendations on the implementation of the Guidelines by companies.
More details
- Defendant
- Company in violation
- Other companies involved
- Complainants
- Affected people
- Date rejected / concluded
- 13 February 2024