He also criticised the resettlement and compensation plan for the many poor people living illegally along the river. In the first stage of the cleanup, the government is making a distinction between legal and illegal tenants, only offering land compensation to those who can prove ownership.
Dadang Sudadrja and other critics say this is contrary to the ADB’s own resettlement policy, which states that compensation should not be based on a tenant’s legal status.
The ADB’s Summary of the Handbook on Resettlement: A Guide to Good Practice says that a key element of good practice is to ‘compensate all affected persons, including those without title to land, for all their losses at replacement rates.’
But Chris Morris, the ADB senior water resources engineer responsible for the Citarum program, says the focus will be on livelihood restoration.
‘The principal of the ADB and the government resettlement policy and plan is that their livelihoods will be restored or bettered to the pre-project condition,’ he said. ‘So a compensation amount needs to be tailored to the individual loss of habitat and or income.’
When asked about this issue, Citarum River Bureau Director Mudjiaji said it was hard to discern which illegal tenants are genuinely poor. ‘Not all of the illegal dwellers are poor people, no’, he said. ‘Everybody thinks those who are illegal are poor. No. They have also another house. They’re traders, most of them are traders.’
While Mudjiaji insisted these tenants will still have access to some resettlement assistance, he also questioned why illegal tenants should have the same rights as those who’ve followed the law.
‘Can we tolerate people who break the law? That’s the problem.The ADB said illegal and legal people (should receive the) same treatment. How come? They’ve become the presidents – because I’m illegal I have compensation the same with the people, the good citizens.’
Mudjiaji also played down concerns about the lack of an anti-corruption mechanism built into the plan: ‘The conditions have already changed in Indonesia, we have the anti-corruption committee. Now it has become better and better. Everybody’s changed.’
The West Tarum Canal, which will be targeted as part of the first stage, feeds water into Jakarta. Around 80 percent of the capital’s water comes from the Citarum, and ensuring its quality has become a huge concern.
But this program has also come under fire. Nadia Hadad from the Bank Information Centre, an NGO that monitors ADB projects, is one of those who has questioned the logic of it.
‘The dirtiest area is in the upstream area,’ she said. ‘We don’t understand why they started the project in the downstream area instead of rehabilitating the upstream area first. Maybe it’s a political thing because it’s connected to Jakarta and it’s in the interests of the people in Jakarta.’
The government says the upstream is already being worked on in other programs, and that this area will be targeted in future stages of the ICWRMIP.
Speaking with locals in both Bekasi and Cangkuang, no-one seemed to know about the cleanup plan, or the controversy surrounding it. What they did know is that the river looks dirty, provides less fish and floods more often than before.
As we peered into the murky water peppered with colourful plastic, the secretary of the Cangkuang village council Nana shook his head as he spoke.
‘It was really nice here before the floods.The water of the Citarum used to be very clear. Back then you could toss a coin in and watch it hit the bottom, but not anymore.’
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
