The invitation stays open to Walhi and other NGOs who genuinely want to discuss how best business and civil scoiety can work together, especially where the environment is concerned.

Just so that Walhi doesn’t miss out on this blog discussion I’ll create a special tag al for Walhi aline for this posting so that all the world can hear what they have to say in a level playing field.

I agree with Eric that Unspun has hit on a very important topic, i.e. the accountability of the NGOs and given the right circumstances, this would make a most fascinating discussion. And the “right circumstances” would include the willingness of NGOs and their stakeholders to discuss this openly.

And being the fair person you are, Unspun (by journalism practice over the years, I presume), I hope we will benefit from Wahli explanation, if the NGO cares to participate.

Thanks, Eric, for coming in at the right time to throw some light on the points discussed and to give this topic a good closure.

Gosh! This sounds like a good-nite speech! *yawn*

As Achmad and Eric Ness have been mentioning Walhi, I think it is only fair to invite Walhi into this discussion. I have taken the liberty of e-mailing Walhi (info@walhi.or.id) to inform them of this conversation and to ask them to reply to some of the allegations made against it. I’d like to think that Walhi is open and mature enough an organization to conduct such a conversation over the blogosphere. But time will tell.

Here’s the deal: deep down Walhi’s main agenda is not to protect the environment. It’s to attack foreign companies (a bit like me and Daryono).

In their simple mental equation, foreign companies = bad = damage to the environmnent = attack them. Let’s not forget who pays the piper, either. Conferences abroad, scholarships, campaign funding, and all of the goodies of NGO life go to those visible enough to make a bang.

Campaigning to get heavy metals out of the Ciliwung river gets less of a bang than accusing Newmont of spurious things that contradict the science.

Walhi, let’s not forget, has its roots in the New Order. Back then the environment was something you could campaign about, so alot of other activists with other agendas huddle under the Walhi banner.

Finally, let’s not rule out base incompetence. When you can’t get your point across – lie. Foreign multinational companies are far from angelic. But science should be the compass to environmental damage – and solutions, not dogma.

Is that better Unspun ?

You have raised an important policy issue in the context of the Buyat Bay/Newmont controversy—the one that pertains to the role of NGOs. In fact my most recent blog is titled “Buyat Bay and NGO Accountability”.

At the outset I would like to clarify that it would be wrong to draw sweeping conclusions about NGOs based solely on the Buyat Bay issue because the NGO community in Indonesia is a very diverse group. So I am in complete agreement with Bayi’s comments. I also believe that NGOs do fulfill an important public service delivery gap and they are an integral part of every country’s institutional architecture.

Now let me share some thoughts about the issue of NGOs that Unspun wants to discuss in his blog. You all would recall that the Buyat case started with some sensational accusations of mercury and arsenic pollution by some NGOs. But very quickly World Health Organization (WHO), Australia’s CSIRO and several of Indonesian Government’s own reports concluded that Buyat Bay was clean, the people there didn’t have any toxic poisoning and fish are safe to eat. These issues were discussed extensively in the court over the last eighteen months, and it has became clear through the testimonies of regulators, ex-ministers, national and international researchers and the local people that the original accusations of the NGOs were wrong. I have written about these topics in considerable detail on my blog (www.richardness.org).

What is amazing is that some members of WALHI publicly attempted to discredit the report by the WHO. It’s a pretty rare day when an NGO goes against the UN’s World Health Organization or CSIRO. After all these are among the most credible research organizations in the world.

I believe that it was a major strategic mistake when NGOs involved with the Buyat case decided to challenge the findings of the WHO on Buyat Bay. But a more pertinent question is why would WALHI do something outrageous like this? WALHI needs WHO as an ally and a partner in their environmental campaigns and yet they chose to contradict the scientific facts. Now it’s fair to say that WALHI’s credibility has been hurt.

So why did some members of WALHI acted in such a non-strategic and a tactless manner? There could be several explanations but one aspect that is clear is that WALHI’s stance in the Buyat controversy was built on the belief that they are above reproach. However, during the course of my Dad’s trial, WALHI’s assertions about Buyat Bay were subjected to rigorous scrutiny in the presence of the general public. I am not sure if WALHI ever expected to be so closely scrutinized.

All this adds up to create a new reality for NGOs in Indonesia. In the past five years there is a major trend towards NGO accountability, and the traditional belief that NGOs are above accountability and exempted from public oversight is beginning to change. The Buyat case has indeed accelerated the introduction of the concept of NGO accountability in Indonesia because it has become clear that the actions of some of the prominent NGOs led to immense waste of resources, diversion of public discussion from real environmental issues, and imposed economic cost on local communities.

WALHI and their partner NGOs must get ready for greater public scrutiny. This is a global trend and it is going to happen in Indonesia too. Dr. Hari Srinivas, Professor at the Department of Social Engineering at the Tokyo Institute of Technology explains the idea of NGO accountability at his website http://www.gdrc.org/ngo/accountability/quick-intro.html. A paragraph from his introduction would help guide the discussion Unspun has started:

“….. cases of NGO misconduct in advocacy, fund use, management, and governance, have come to light, questioning their very legitimacy and congruency with social values and expectations. Some NGO have also ignored the fact that they are answerable to key stakeholders and the constituency that they work with, for promises of performance”.

Ultimately Unspun I believe you have hit upon an important relationship in this blog. In the time I have been in Indonesia I believe the work that ultimately serves the public the best is when you have Business, NGO’s and Government working together and the only way you achieve that is by open and public dialog.