Blog

DSTP decision not about justice!

What a sad day for Papua New Guinea, July 26, 2011!

For money we have been forced to bow so low to allow for mining companies to breach our laws and degrade our very beautiful environments that make up this country.

For money we boast world class mines that take and take and take and leave nothing behind. For money, we bow to promises that leave us stricken with economic poverty. For money, we beg for others to come and develop our country for us.

The decision to allow MCC to dump mine wastes in the Basamuk Bay is deemed one of the most unthinkable decisions by landowners. They say, “this is not a decision about justice, it is about money.” 

Through this same court an injunction was granted in March 2010 and held for more than 16 months. This, the companies, MCC and Highlands Pacific claim has caused loss of revenue for Papua New Guinea.

In our dream to economic prosperity, Papua New Guinea government boasts of world class mines, and bends its own laws so that companies can come onshore and make business. MCC is not the first mining company to come to Papua New Guinea. There are many lessons but it seems “we have not learnt or we refuse to learn from them.”

For instance, the Bouganville mine was forced to stop with a 10-year bloody war that left 16,000 people, many of whom women and children dead. The Ok Tedi mine operates out of one of Papua New Guinea’s poorest provinces and has not managed to place it in the top list of economically prosperous province. The Porgera mine is marked with endless struggles with landowners and Tolukuma continuously denies environmental impacts in the area.

Simberi, which uses the DSTP recently had leakages in its tanks but denies environmental impacts.

The judge in making the decision held that the this DSTP case in Madang was a borderline case. He said the plaintiffs have marshalled a compelling body of scientific evidence that the Director of Environment has approved operation of a very risky activity that could have catastrophic consequences for the plaintiffs and the coastal people of Madang Province. 

Both the Departments of Environment and Conservation and Mining have welcomed the decision, however, Madang people say they will appeal it.

It is a decision that Papua New Guineans, especially those who will be directly affected, have to live with. It is a decision that will impact on our children’s future when the minerals have run dry and the company has left with the money.