People Monitor by Jaringan Pemantau Independen Kehutanan

Prologue Prof. Dr. Ahmad Maryudi

PEOPLE MONITOR

The Dynamics of SVLK Monitoring by Indigenous People/Local Communities in Indonesia Muhammad Ichwan Agus Budi Purwanto Deden Pramudiana Zainur Rohman Munif Rodaim

Preface Dr. Ir. Agus Justianto, M.Sc. Director General of Sustainable Forest Management of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry of Republic Indonesia

PEOPLE MONITOR

The Dynamics of SVLK Monitoring by Indigenous People/Local Communities in Indonesia

PEOPLE MONITOR: The Dynamics of SVLK Monitoring by Indigenous People/Local Communities in Indonesia Prologue: Prof. Dr. Ahmad Maryudi Gadjah Mada University, Indonesia Preface: Dr. Ir. Agus Justianto, MSc. Director General of Sustainable Forest Management of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry of Republic Indonesia Authors: Muhammad Ichwan, Agus Budi Purwanto, Deden Pramudiana, Zainur Rohman, Munif Rodaim Contributors: Wancino & Kaharingan Institute Team (Central Kalimantan); Adlun Fiqri, Jamal Bobero, Julfikar A Sangaji, Iksan Muhammad (North Maluku); Jaqualine, Isak Chlumbless, Piter Masakoda, Yosephina Yarangga (West Papua); Nurul Astutik, Hermawan, M. Nur Wahid, Agus Sholeh (East Java) First printing, September 2021 Published by: PPLH Mangkubumi in collaboration with JPIK and supported by FAO-EU FLEGT Programme Address: Perum Permata Kota D-10 Kelurahan Bago, Tulungagung, East Java. www.pplh-mangkubumi.or.id pplhmangkubumijatim@gmail.com Disclaimer: This info book was produced with the support of FAO-EU FLEGT Programme. The Programme is funded by the Swedish International Cooperation Agency, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office of the United Kingdom and the European Union. The views expressed herein can in no way be taken to reflect the official opinion of FAO, the Swedish International Cooperation Agency, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office of the United Kingdom or the European Union.

ISBN : 978-602-72073-6-3

Table of Contents

Table of Contents Glossary List of Figures List of Tables Introduction from MoEF Introduction from FAO-EU FLEGT Programme Introduction from PPLH Mangkubumi Prologue

v vi viii x xi xiii xv xix

Chapter 1-Position Deforestation & Certification SVLK Monitoring People Monitor

1 3 6 8 11

BAB 2-SVLK The Growth of SVLK Policy in Indonesia The Export Provision of Forestry Products The Application of SVLK to Business Actors Independent Monitors The Challenges of SVLK Implementation in the Future

17 19 25 29 32 34

Chapter 3-People Monitor Disturbed Living Space Illegal Logging Under Pretext of the Company Timber Legality and Indigenous People Rights Downstream Industries and Sonokeling Phenomenon V-Legal Trading Practices Allegation

37 41 47 59 75 89

Chapter 4-Analysis Introduction The Community Interest Study Technical Review of SVLK Violations Conclusion

99 99 101 105 129

CHAPTER 5-Conclusion Conclusion Recommendation

133 133 141

Reference

145

Glossary APIKS APL CV DKP EMKL EoF EU EUTR FAO FLEGT FPIC FSC Gakkum GANNIS PHPL HPHD IPK IPKR IUI IUIPHHK IUPHHK-HTHR IUPHHK-HTR IUPHKm JPIK K3 KAHM KAN LEI LHC LHK LHP LS

Aliansi Pemantau Independen Kehutanan Sumatera (Sumatera’s Alliance of Independent Forestry Monitors) Areal Penggunaan Lain (Area for other purposes) Persekutuan Komanditer (Limited Partnership) Deklarasi Kesesuaian Pemasok (Supplier Conformity Declaration) Ekspedisi Muatan kapal Laut (Ship Cargo Expedition) Eyes of Forest European Union European Union Timber Regulation Food and Agriculture Organization Forest Law Enforcement, Governance, and Trade (FLEGT) Free Prior Informed Consent Forest Steward Council Penegakan Hukum (Law Enforcement) Tenaga Teknis Pengelolaan Hutan Produksi Lestari (Technical Personnel of Sustainable Production Forest Management) Hak Pengelolaan Hutan Desa (Management Rights of Village Forest) Izin Pemanfaatan Kayu (Timber Utilization Permit) Izin Industri Pengolahan Kayu Rakyat (Community Timber Processing Industry Permit) Izin Usaha Industri (Industrial Business License) Izin Usaha Industri Primer Hasil Hutan Kayu (Primary Industrial Wood Forestry Product Business License) Izin Usaha Pemanfaatan Hasil Hutan Hutan Tanaman Hutan Rakyat (Business License of Forest Product Utilization of Private Forest Plantations) Izin Usaha Pemanfaatan Hasil Hutan Kayu-Hutan Tanaman Rakyat (Business License of the Utilization of Timber Forest Product-Community Plantation Forest) Izin Usaha Pemanfaatan Hutan Kemasyarakatan (Business License of Community Forestry utilization) Jaringan Pemantau Independen Kehutanan (Independent Forest Monitoring Network) Keselamatan dan Kesehatan Kerja (Occupational Health and Safety) Koalisi Anti Mafia Hutan (Anti-Forest Mafia Coalition) Komite Akreditasi Nasional (National Accreditation Committee) Lembaga Ekolabel Indonesia (Indonesia Ecolabelling Institute) Laporan Hasil Cruising (Cruising Result Report) Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan (Forestry and Environment) Laporan Hasil Produksi (Production Report) Lembaga Sertifikasi (Certification Body)

LSM LVLK ORNOP PBPH PBPHH PERDIRJEN PERMEN PERMENDAG PHAT PHPL PI PP PPLH Mangkubumi PSDH DR PT S-LK S-PHPL SIPUHH SIUP SKSHH SVLK TDI TORA TPK-RT TPT-KB UD UU VPA WALHI WAS-GANISPHPL

Lembaga Swadaya Masyarakat (Non-governmental Organization) Lembaga Verifikasi Legalitas Kayu (Timber Legality Verification Body) Organisasi Non Pemerintah (Non-governmental Organization) Perizinan Berusaha Pengelolaan Hutan (Forest Management Business License) Perizinan Berusaha Pengelolaan Hasil Hutan (Business License of Forest Product Management) Peraturan Direktorat Jenderal (Regulation of Directorate General) Peraturan Menteri (the Minister Regulation) Peraturan Menteri Perdagangan (The Regulation of the Minister of Trade) Pemilik Hak Atas Tanah (The Owner of Land Rights) Pengelolaan Hutan Produksi Lestari (Sustainable Production Forest Management) Pemantau Independen (Independent Monitor) Peraturan Pemerintah (the Government Regulation) Pusat Pendidikan Lingkungan Hidup Mangkubumi (the Center of Environmental Education of Mangkubumi) Provisi Sumber Daya Hutan Dana Reboisasi (Provision of Forest Resources Reforestation Fund) Perseroan Terbatas (Limited Company) Sertifikat Legalitas Kayu (Timber Legality Certificate) Sertifikat Pengelolaan Hutan Produksi Lestari (Sustainable Production Forest Management Certificate) Sistem Informasi Penatausahaan Hasil Hutan (Forest Product Administration Infromation System) Surat Izin Usaha Perdagangan (Trade Business License) Surat Keterangan Sahnya Hasil Hutan (Legal Certificate of Forest Product) Sistem Verifikasi Legalitas Kayu (Timber Legality Verification System) Tanda Daftar Industri (Company Registration Certificate) Tanah Obyek Reforma Agraria (Land for Agrarian Reform Object) Tempat Penampungan Kayu Rakyat Terdaftar (Registered Community Timber Shelter) Tempat Penampungan Terdaftar Kayu Bulat (Log Registered Shelter) Unit Dagang (Trading Unit) Undang Undang (Act) Voluntary Partnership Agreements Wahana Lingkungan Hidup Indonesia (Friend of Earth Indonesia) Pengawas Tenaga Teknis Pengelolaan Hutan Produksi Lestari (Technical Supervisor for Sustainable Production Forest Management)

vii

List of Picture Picture 1. Picture 2. Picture 3. Picture 4. Picture 5. Picture 6. Picture 7. Picture 8. Picture 9. Picture 10. Picture 11. Picture 12. Picture 13. Picture 14. Picture 15. Picture 16. Picture 17. Picture 18. Picture 19. Picture 20. Picture 21. Picture 22. Picture 23.

Element and Scheme of SVLK Challenge on Carrying Out Monitoring Suspected Illegal Logging practices of UD Kawus Masauh Central Kalimantan Suspected Timber from Illegal Logging Labeled by PHAT Eko Mojra Suspected Timber from Illegal Logging Practices by UD Karya Abadi Central Kalimantan Suspected Timber from Illegal Logging labeled/barcode by PT GSA which is sent to UD Karya Abadi Central Kalimantan Hundreds of logs from various types are collected in the logpond of Tonidora Farmer Group Fritu village, Central Halmahera (3 Des 2020) Alleged Map in logging location outside IPK area of Tonidora Farmer Group Timber Circulation Chain from IPK of Tonidora Farmer Group Timber Circulation which is alleged illegal in CV Sula Baru Coordinate Point in the Logging Location of CV Sula Baru (Dec 2020) Timber Circulation of PT. Mahakarya Hutan Indonesia Pile of logs and Sawn Timber in kilometer 1 and 2 of PT MHI Timber Circulation of IUIPHHK of UD Ketapang Wood Trade Location in the City of Ternate sourced from UD Ketapang Alleged location of former illegal logging in Agetajawe Lolobata National Park Timber Trade Chain CV Alco Timber Irian Unit Moswaren West Papua Pile of Merbau logs affixed to the barcode PT Bina Blantak Utama at the PT Uniraya Timber factory site Timber Trade Chain of CV Uniraya Timber West Papua Trade Chain of PT KCK West Papua Log shelter and sawmill of PT Kharisma Candra Kencana Map of illegal logging locations outside the PT RKA concession area, in allegedly committed by PT RKA through PT KPM PT Rimba Kayu Arthamas Timber Circulation Chain

31 32 44 44 46 46 50 51 51 53 54 56 56 58 58 58 64 68 68 71 71 73 74

Picture 24. Picture 25. Picture 26. Picture 27. Picture 28. Picture 29. Picture 30. Picture 31. Picture 32. Picture 33. Picture 34. Picture 35. Picture 36. Picture 37.

Merbau Logs Without V-Legal Barcode (Left) and Wood Merbau Month at CV STC Warehouse Loading the merbau processed wood from Papua at CV STI and STC’s log and processed log warehouse (right)) PT Surabaya Trading & Co. timber supply chain Timber Delivery Documents from UD Zahra Pratama to PT Dwi Rimba Agung Transiting Merbau Timber by KM Asia Ship to PT Dwi Rimba Agung Pile of Timber in PT Dwi Rimba Agung Factory Flow of Illegal Logging from Forests Supplied by UD Zahra to PT DRA The Flow of Sonokeling Circulation in KPH Jember TPK Perhutani Ambulu (BKPH Ambulu) and Puger Kulon (BKPH Wuluhan) Illegal Sonokeling Timber Circulation Perhutani KPH South Banyuwangi, East Java V-Legal Flow of the sale and purchase of V-Legal documents Photo of CV Mekar Jaya’s Office with Nameplates of 3 Other Companies Location of CV Geulis Art and PT Minako Marine Logistik Offer of PT Satria Mulia Agrotama to Prospective Clients of V-Legal Buyers

77 79 79 82 82 83 83 85 86 88 91 95 96 96

List of Table Table 1. Table 2. Table 3. Table 4. Table 5.

SVLK Regulations Changes The Regulation Changes of Forestry Products Export Provision The Transformation of SVLK Monitoring Analysis of SVLK Monitoring by Indigenous People/Local Communities in Five Provinces List of SVLK Deviations at Upstream, Downstream, and Exporters

21 25 104 107 136

Introduction

Directorate General of Sustainable Forest Management The Ministry of Forestry and Environment

imber Legality Verification System or SVLK is a preventive set

of equipment which developed by Indonesian Government to support illegal logging eradication, all at once to increase the trade of sustainable and legal forestry products. The system which is developed by involving multistakholders in Indonesia has been implemented for more than a decade. In the framework of FLEGT VPA agreement between European Union, SVLK is also accepted as a timber legality verification instrument which is exported to European Union, and SVLK certificate is equal to FLEGT license. Along with several times of SVLK policy improvement, the system is valued has been successful restored global market trust in Indonesian timber industry products. SVLK, as a forestry product legality assurance system, has been able to support the growth in legal certified timber products. So that the Indonesia export from forestry sector shows a rising trend since the system is implemented. Since 2013, SVLK has been successful on increasing the number of the legal certified timber industry export by 91.7 % in within time around 6 years in 2019. SVLK implementation also gives benefit to the increase of market access and the product competitiveness in international market, helps on reducing deforestation and forest degradation, and supports forest governance improvement, and gives assurance for trading partner of proof and traceability of raw materials from sustainable and legal sources. Following the issuance of the Job Creation Act, SVLK has been refined through the strengthening

on the sustainability aspect, besides increasing the ease of SVLK implementation for small and medium entreprises. In order to guarantee SVLK credibility, the existence and the work of Independent Monitor in monitoring the system and the implementation of SVLK is very important. As it is shown in a book written by PPLH and JPIK, SVLK implementation in site level needs a continuous monitoring. The monitoring result, intensively involves indigenous people and local community in five provinces in Indonesia as it is described in this book, is very important for the future SVLK improvement. We are from the Ministry of Forestry and Environment very appreciate the work of the Independent Monitors, included the existence of this book as the form of an effort to maintain the system credibility and SVLK implementation in Indonesia. The last, We would like to highlight that SVLK development and implementation is a commitment and struggle of all stakeholders so that we have to continue the homework that is not only in the country, but also in global level. We hope the support of all stakeholders to keep fighting in order that SVLK implementation and FLEGT VPA Agreement keep continuing and give the greatest benefit for Indonesian state and nation. Jakarta, September 2021

Dr. Ir. Agus Justianto, M.Sc Directorate General Sustainable Forest Management Ministry of Environment and Forestry

xii

Foreword from the FAO-EU FLEGT Programme

ndependent Forest Monitoring (IFM) is an integral part of Indonesia’s Timber Legality Assurance System (SVLK). Monitoring groups from Indonesia’s Civil Society have worked closely with the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF) to identify illegal practices by operators, support enforcement actions and continuously improve the design of the SVLK control mechanisms. IFM has contributed to the growing international recognition of the SVLK and helps maintain its integrity. It provides an avenue for Civil Society to play a formal role in forest governance. IFM organisations in Indonesia are empowered and well versed in SVLK requirements. Monitoring results have been used to improve legality compliance, assess the reliability of audits carried out by Conformity Assessment Bodies (CAB) or as evidence in court cases. Experiences in Indonesia have informed and inspired the development of IFM in the region and beyond. Since 2017, the FAO-EU FLEGT Programme has supported six Indonesian organisations to extend the reach of IFM across the country. Some 550 independent monitors, including members of forest dependent communities and marginalized groups, were trained and were able to apply their improved understanding of legal requirements and new investigative and reporting skills during numerous field missions. Pusat Pendidikan Lingkungan Hidup (PPLH) Mangkubumi, one of IFM organizations supported by the programme, has been

carrying out independent monitoring of SVLK implementation since 2011 and has been actively involved in SVLK development processes. FAO had the privilege to assist them through the project entitled “Improve forest governance through monitoring of SVLK by indigenous/ local communities in four provinces in Indonesia”. This book documents the integrated monitoring work conducted by PPLH Mangkubumi in partnership with indigenous and local communities in West Papua, Central Kalimantan, North Maluku, East Java. It illustrates how monitoring activities were improved by selecting critical areas and segments of the timber supply chain and by involving indigenous/ local communities. Chapter III – “People Monitor” (Rakyat Memantau), describes the great work done by the monitors on the ground. It presents evidence-based findings and offers clear recommendations to relevant authorities on how to follow up on irregularities. Monitoring results confirm how forest communities know their area best and are able to monitor for longer period of time in remote areas. Local communities have a genuine and legitimate interest to report or complain about illegalities impacting their forests and livelihoods. It confirms that indigenous and local community-based monitoring is effective in strengthening SVLK implementation and combating illegal logging, including during lockdowns caused by the COVID-19 pandemic PPLH Mangkubumi also shares findings from investigations in Central Java on the ‘trading” of V-legal documents for export. Findings should provide valuable inputs into the on-going SVLK standard and guideline consultation and development process currently being led by MOEF. On behalf of the FAO-EU FLEGT Programme, I would like to thank PPLH Mangkubumi, all the monitors from indigenous and local communities, JPIK, MoEF, KAN, CABs, and all those involved in the smooth implementation of the project. We hope this book will inspire similar initiatives and by doing so, contribute to the continuous improvement of the SVLK. Bruno Cammaert Forestry Officer FAO-EU FLEGT Programme Coordinator for Asia and the Pacific xiv

Introduction from PPLH Mangkubumi

ow, SVLK policy is regulated through the Ministry of Forestry and Environment Regulation Number 8 of 2021 (Permen LHK 8/2021) concerning Forest Governance and Forest Management Plan Preparation, and Forest Usage in Protected Forest and Production Forest. Permen LHK is a derivative policy from Government Regulation No.23 of 2021 concerning Forestry Management and the Act No.11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation. In Permen LHK 8/2021, there are some terminologies, included Timber Legality Verification System become Sustainable and Legality Verification and System (SVLK). In this Ministry Regulation, SVLK is defined as a system to ensure the credibility of guaranteeing the legality legality of forest products, forest products traceability, and/ or the sustainability of forest management. Since 2002, the Indonesian Government has started to roll out an initiative to tackel illegal logging and to promote legal timber through Timber Legality Verification System. SVLK aims to assure timber and timber products come from sustainable and legal sources. Formally, Indonesian Government through the Ministry of Forestry and Environment has determined that SVLK implementation is a mandatory based on the Ministry of Forestry and Environment Regulation No. P.38/Menhut-II/2009. Since that time until now, SVLK policy on its way to change for seven times. In maintaining accountability and credibility of SVLK implementation, it needs to conduct monitoring by Independent Monitors. SVLK monitoring is carried out to all process of accreditation, audit, and the issuance of Timber Legality certificate,

the issuance of V-Legal, and complain handling. SVLK monitoring is carried out objectively, integrity, and accountable. Permen LHK 8/2021, states that the implementation of SVLK is monitored by Independent Monitors. Moreover, the SVLK monitoring is self-financed by the Independent Monitors, eventhough the Government can facilitate Independent Monitors in obtaining funding sources in the implementation of monitoring and encourage self-sustaining development in accordance with the provision of legislations. In the monitoring of SVLK implementation, as intended in paragrapgh 1 Permen LHK 8/2021, Independent Monitors get security guarantee in accordance with the provision of legislations. The Center of Environmental Education (PPLH) Mangkubumi is an organization which works in environment, that is independent and non-profit organization and not affiliated with political parties. PPLH Mangkubumi is a civil society group forum which consists of non-governmental organizations, nature lover group, and nongovernmental groups that was founded in Tulungagung District East Java Province on 8 August 2006 as the reaction and the concern to the decreasing of environmental carrying capacity towards natural resources management: forest, water, river, and other sources of life, as the impact of paradigm and development process which are impartial to sustainability and ignore the environment. In 2010, PPLH Mangkubumi joined as a member of JPIK (Independent Forest Monitoring Network) and actively carrying out monitoring work and investigation of illegal logging practices and monitoring the implementation of SVLK. The report entitled “the People Monitors: the Dynamics of SVLK Monitoring by Indigenous People/Local Communities in Indonesia” is prepared and published based on the monitoring activities which carried out by PPLH Mangkubumi in West Papua, Central Kalimantan, North Maluku, East Java, and Central Java for 15 months from June 2020 until August 2021. This publication aims to share experiences, views, and learning of the dynamics of SVLK monitoring by indigenous people/local communities and to identify aspects and other things that still needs to be improved. PPLH Mangkubumi expresses gratitude to JPIK and all indigenous people/local communities in 5 provinces who have been involved and contributed in the activity of SVLK monitoring. xvi

We would like to thank you to all authors of this book, especially to Prof. Dr. Ahmad Maryudi, Professor of Forestry Faculty Gadjah Mada University (UGM) who took the time to give comments and to write the prologue of this book. We also would like to thank you to Dr. Ir. Agus Justianto, M.Sc Director General of Sustainable Forest Management of MoEF and Bruno Cammaert from Forestry Officer FAO-EU FLEGT Programme for giving the introduction to this book. Moreover, we would like to say thank you very much especially to FAO-EU FLEGT Programme (a programme of world food and agriculture organization) for the support to PPLH Mangkubumi for 15 months so that this book can be published. We hope that this book can give a significant contribution for the development of Indonesian forestry, and can be used as a reference for FLEGT/VPA implementation and for further implemenation of SVLK. Muhammad Ichwan, M.Ag Executive Director PPLH Mangkubumi

xvii

Prologue Monitor and Maintain Legality

arious political jargon mentions that the community is an integral part of democracy, and their participation is often used as one measure of the growth process of democratization. It is often swallowed raw, without examining who is meant by “community” and the more crucial thing is how can they participate, and is there an adequate vital channel provided to participate. That matter is peeled off by Russel Dalton in one of his books entitled “The participation gap: Social status and political inequality”. Someone said that the contemporary democracy system in many countries is in state of suffering, and the community participation is only a fairytale and myths. A good democracy system provides an ecosystem to grow political awareness and the active role of civil society. Since 1990’s decade, there has arisen awareness of the importance of participation to encourage democratization process and the improvement of a good governance system. One of the triggers is the World Bank report concerning governance crisis in sub-Sahara Afrika , with the spread of corruption culture and nepotism, and inappropriate and ineffective policies. Reformation trend of institutions and governance continues to roll, encouraging non-governmental entity role through various non bureaucratic mechanisms. The overview of “overloaded country”, where the government institutions are perceived very inefficient and bearing high budget burden, is getting more momentum. Even, the analyst said the importance of “the retreat of the state” or “hollowing out of the state”.

In the context of natural resources management, this democratization roll is described in civic environmentalism discourse, which popular since Rio de Janeiro conference . The democratization of natural resources management must encourage the participation of stakeholder and grass root community, and “bottom up” approach as an alternative for “top down” technocratic intervention model. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) consistently serves periodically data on the rate of forest cover loss in the world. In other hand, various policy instruments are not yet effective on encouraging more responsible, fair, and sustainable forest management. Since entering new millennium, emerges incrementalism/ experimentalism perspective, which believes that sustainable forest management is not easy to be realized, regardless many jargons and sophisticated concepts. This perspective encourages the importance of alternative policy model experiment, by finding solutions to the most crucial root of problems, which later can be the foundation and the starting point for sustainable forest management. Illegal logging and illegal timber trade are seen as one of the most complicated problems, connected with chaotic institutions and governance, corruption, collusion, and nepotism cultures. The improvement of institution and governance system is considered able to unravel complicated problems of forest governance, and as the foundation and stepping stone to a sustainable forest management. In the beginning, this thought gives rise various cynical views concerning incomprehensive forest governance strategy. There are also those who view that legality policy is only “forestry fad” , which analogous to just “fashion trend” and not encourage a substantive change, towards responsible, fair, and sustainable forest management. However, the fact that illegal logging issue happens in many countries encourages policy innovation which focuses on law enforcement and timber trade. Departing from the agreement of Asian and European countries Ministries in Bali in 2001 to cooperate illegal logging handling, in 2003 European Union launched Forest Law Enforcement, Governance & Trade (FLEGT) initiative. Through FLEGT initiative, UE invited timber exporting countries to sign a Voluntary Partnership Agreement/ VPA to achieve the goal of legal timber trade assurance between the two sides. This bilateral agreement covers the implementation of Timber xx

Legality Assurance System license scheme in the partner’s countries and FLEGT license issuance system for timber exported to UE. This agreement is expected will generate mutual benefit for both parties. For UE, this agreement will assure the timber products which enter their market are from legal sources. Whereas for the partner countries, this agreement will encourage the improvement of national forestry governance. Indonesia is the leading country in this FLEGT action plan, in order to erase “place of illegal timber’ stigma, which is allegedly to have spread in international timber market. After going through a quite long negotiation process, Indonesia and UE signed VPA in Brussel on 30 September 2013, which also has been ratified through Presidential Decree 21/2014. The signing and ratification of VPA is inseparable from the implementation of Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) in Indonesia since 2009. The design of SVLK itself took very long time, started in 2002 until it was formally launched. Even after, many refinements and improvement continue to be made. In the beginning of the process, it took more than a year for only to define “legal” term. This long process involved various stakeholder: government, entrepreneur, industry (middle, small and micro), civil society, forest farmer, academics. A thing needs to remember, in the beginning of SVLK policy formulation is a period of reformation euphoria to encourage the democratization of forest resources governance. In term of diversity, it can be said “all stakeholders” are involved in the process. The principle of inclusivity is illustrated there. The process also becomes antithesis towards long history of public voices indifference on forestry policy process. This certainly needs to be appreciated, despite the various shortcomings. SVLK is also already recognized as a solid system, it is proven by a recognition and authorization to Indonesia to issue FLEGT License, which can be used as a visa for Indonesian timber products to EU market without due diligence. With SVLK, now the Indonesia timber products can enter European Union market. And some other countries start to show similar attention. One of the superiorities and uniqueness of SVLK is the role of Independent Monitors to actively ensure the credibility, legitimacy, and transparency in the implementation of the system, by monitoring the company/industry compliance, verification agency, license authority towards related xxi

regulation. Only in Indonesia, Independent Monitors are placed formally in a system design. The formalization of Independent Monitors in legality system definitely gives legitimation towards the monitors activity in the field. There are some minuses related to the role of Independent Monitors in the field, such as the low of openness of information, the monitors security, and funding and the monitoring sustainability. However, it doesn’t deny the hard work, hard work in realizing SVLK. Until now, there are 4 Independent Monitoring organizations that have officially registered: Independent Forest Monitoring Network (JPIK), Alliance for Sumateran Forestry Independent Monitoring (APIKS), Eyes on the Forest (EoF), dan Anti-Forest Mafia Coalition (KAMH). Monitors who are protected by those networks are increasing from time to time, but it is still far from sufficient to ensure “obey the principles” from all companies and industries in Indonesia, and the verification process which carried out by verification body. The public participation and registered non monitors become very crucial and vital in order that Independent Monitors can give impact as expected. In fact, SVLK has regulated that Independent Monitors is an inclusive process, gives a chance for all Indonesia citizen to participate. This covers either individual, such as local community in the forest concession, and non-governmental organization which legally registered related to forestry in Indonesia. However, there are administrative and technical requirements which limit the participation from wider community. The fact, Independent Monitors is only able to be carried out by the Independent Monitors, which is on contrary with “all Indonesian citizen” clause. As shown in this book, the participation of from wider community becomes crucial and can’t be delayed, for the effectiveness of wider monitoring activity. The participation of wider community in Independent Monitors is an effort to maintain and grow SVLK in order to make a real contribution in encouraging the improvement of a better governance in forestry sector. Now SVLK like walking alone without friends. The improvement of forestry organization and governance is impossible to be charged only to SVLK. There are many policy initiatives, such as emission reduction from deforestation and degradation (REDD+), xxii

Social Forestry, and agrarian reform which is actually also for the development of organization system to regulate a power relation. SVLK has laid a solid foundation that has to be completed and synergized with other policies holistically, as a building unit majestic “forest governance”. Ahmad Maryudi Profesor in Gadjah Mada University

xxiii

CHAPTER I

Position

here is a joke about a grain of corn and chicken. Somehow, there is a person who feels that he is a grain of corn. When he meets a chicken, he is always shivering afraid from the cold. He is afraid of being pecked by the chicken. The doctor advises to do therapy for several weeks, and finally the patient realizes that he is a human, not a grain. When he leaves the doctor’s room, he turns back in again, trembling with fear. He reports that there is chicken ahead, and he is afraid that the chicken will eat him. “My brother” the Doctor said, “You know very well you are not a grain of corn, but you are a human.” Of course, I know that,” the patient answers“, but does the chicken know it? We want to put that joke on what happens in timber legality regulation in Indonesia. Of course the chicken will know that that person is not a grain. As well as the academics and civil society activist who struggle indigenous people know that community is the nearest party either knowledge or daily visions of natural resources in Indoensia. However, the natural resources management so far still uses academics knowledge approach. After “New Order” government in Indoenesia, the involvement slogan of indigenous people/local communities mainstreaming in natural resources management in Indonesia came up until now. But unfortunately, the slogan is still above interest, knowledge, and policy system which is opposite. In other government policy, such as Agrarian Reform and Social Forestry policy, there is an increase number of acknowledgement

People Monitor

from the government of indigenous people/local communities and the forest area which managed by them. As an illustration, the permit proportion of forest management which is originally for indigenous people/local communities only 4 % in 2014, now it has increased until 14 – 15 % through Social Forestry and Agrarian Reform policy. But, in timber legality regulation policy, the mainstreaming role of indigenous people/local communities especially in monitoring is still far from the dream. In the government regulation, it is said that Independent Monitors is civil society either individual or institution or legal entity in Indonesia. In the practice, what is civil society is not able to be reached by indigenous people/local communities because of various administrative, such as identity and capacity matters. So, in the situation, monitoring is only can be reached by urban middle class civil society who has the access of all the administrative requirements. Whereas, the timber legality arrangement is not only about a forestry and timber enterprise unit obeys the exist regulations, but also about how the enterprise unit produces, use workforce, and give impact in many fields in indigenouse people/ local communities in the surrounding. Basically, the way to produce timber is not different with the way on producing timber enterprises and forestry itself. The question is how is the role of indigenous people/local in timber legality arrangement? In this introduction, we would like to tell about how is the monitoring of timber legality which is carried out by indigenous people/local communities is a future discourse for the sustainability of timber legality in Indonesia. We start with how the political and ecology context of the environment and forestry damage comes up with the idea of legal and sustainable timber trade in global scale through certification; the response of the arrangement in Indonesia in the form of Sustainable and Legality Verification System (SVLK); the assurance of the credibility of SVLK arangement in Indonesia through monitoring; rethink the foundation of the interest and knowledge; and the overview of chapter arrangement in this book.

Position

Deforestation & Certification What do we know about desert in middle east now is certainly different if we live 9,000 years ago. At that time, the forest was still thick, there were thousands of lakes, fertile farm, and ancient elephant and hippopotamus that can’t live in dry environment. It’s all the past, now it has changed to desert. Initially, it is because of human production activities which use nature for agriculture production and subsistence activity. Hereafter, the forest exploitation politics of ancient middle east civilization used it for infrastructure construction. Furthermore, climate crises which also has a role on changing wet climate into dry. We learn from this story about how human, politics, and climate have roles in the change of landscape, one of them is forest damage. Then, how is the current forest destruction? Based on the data from Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), in the last 30 years, our earth lost very vast of forest; 178 million ha or equivalent to the land area of Indonesia if it is subtracted by Sumbawa island area. There are various causes. In 1990-2000, the main cause of deforestation is because a massive forest exploitation and reckless, regardless of regeneration ability of the trees and forest. In global scale in 2000 until now, 40 % of deforestation cause is the large scale of plantation and agriculture. The other cause is subsistence agriculture, the population growth, urban expansion, infrastructure, and mining. Currently, our earth is still covered by 30 % of forest or about 4.06 million ha where 0.5 ha of the forest bears 1 person’s live. So, how about Indonesia? If we calculate with the same way since 30 years ago, the highest deforestation occurred in period 1996 – 2000, that is 3.5 million ha/year. Then, in period 2002 – 2014, decreased between 600,000 until 400,000 ha. Finally, the lowest point of deforestation rate was in 2020 in the amount of 115,000 ha. Before we calculate the forest destruction in 1990, we will ask you to be back off a little to look how the story of forest exploitation history from after World War II until 1980’s. FAO report which was published in 1966 showed that timber consumption rate from tropical forest increased significantly in two stages, that is 1950–1965; then 3

People Monitor

those years until 1990’s. In the first stage, the increase of global timber consumption is followed by forest destruction that is needed to rebuilt countries that have been financially exhausted because of World War II. Meanwhile, in the next period, the forest destruction happened because of the growth of development regime in the third world. As the illustration, FAO estimated, every year between 19811990, the world was losing tropical forest in the amount of 16.7 million ha. This number is three times of the forest loss number in the last 30 years. In the 1980’s period, we were facing very massive forest destruction. And also in those years, there were important moments about the new way to overcome this destruction, such as timber boycott from tropical forest until forest certification which what people call as labelization. In an interesting article concerning forestry certification, Klooster divides the growth of the attempt to overcome the damage in 4 phases of civil society movement and certain parties, from 1980’s until now: First, Boycott timber from tropical forest and direct-action targets big timber trader and logging company. Second, environment organizations joined with timber trader to develop environment certification as the alternative of boycott and also unsatisfied expression of national and international government in forest management. Third, non-governmental organization coalition, inter-government organizations aggressively promote certification by giving pressure to the traders to ask certified forest products from their supplier, and by giving incentive to the forest manager to certify their forests. Fourth, which is now still on going, the certification promotors try to increase environment effect through a program in order to make it more accessible and to give benefit for the forest manager. From all the stages, Klooster concluded that certification with this non-governmental approach or voluntary scheme has run and well documented, but instead of reducing forest damage, the profit of this certification is still dominated by big companies which have applied it, than small scale forest manager in south world which tries to enter this scheme, with a great cost, and reverse feedback. From certification with non-governmental and voluntary approach, new approach tries to be applied through timber 4

Position

legality (and the verification) with governmental and mandatory approach. There are 2 main causes the shift from sustainable scheme (voluntary) to legality (mandatory): First, the slow progress of certification until 2005 where it is only 10 % certified forest in the world, it is presumed because the certification standard is too heavy for growth countries. Therefore, it needs to be thought the solution of the cause (bottleneck) which one of them is legality issue. Second, the desire of state institution to be able to take back the power in institution and governance of forest and timber, because in voluntary certification, the power is in the market, not in the state. The difference is clearly visible, where forest certification is a market scheme which is encouraged by environment awareness from non-governmental organizations, that is emphasized to the timber sellers and buyers, and it is enforced to all over the world with the same standard. These two certification bodies can be called Forest Steward Council (FSC) and Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC). In Indonesia, there was also arisen the similar body, that is Indonesia Ecolabelling Institute (LEI) in 1990’s. A series of standard is being diplayed which culminates in the mention that forest is managed sustainably and the timber is produced from a sustainable management and production. While timber legality approach wants to present a legal timber product which means in the harvesting, transport, and the processing are using legal way. State-based approach is the country of destination and the origin country, as a critique of sustainable forest certification has not answered the problems on corruption and the acknowledgement of indigenous people/local communities rights of natural resources. As well as the critism of this certification in the country of destination country, that is giving profit to the big companies in the capacity to meet green market. Then, comes the initiative from destination country (consumers), such as USA with Lacey Act 2008, Europe with EU Timber Regulation 2013 (First time in 2005), and Japan with Clean Wood Act 2016. The origin countries or the producers also welcomed it by setting a standard and criteria about what is legal and make a deal towards certain mechanism in the consumer countries, included Indonesia. 5

People Monitor

SVLK Since 2009, Indonesia has implemented a policy concerning timber legality in the harvesting, the circulation, and the trade for more than a decade. The objective of this policy is to achieve a sustainable production forest management, good governance implementation, and illegal logging eradication and also the trade. The policy is in the form of the Ministerial Regulation of Forestry and Environment (LHK) which well-known as SVLK or Timber Legality Verification System mandatorily has to be applied by timber and forestry entrepreneur. Within that one decade this regulation has been revised 7 times by the Government. The last revision is the issuance of Permen LHK 8/2021 contains 911 pages and covers many forestry issues, included SVLK. In the Permen, the abbreviation of SVLK has changed from Timber Legality Verification System into Sustainable and Legal Verification System. This Indonesian initiative is the response of Forest Law Enforcement, Governance, and Trade (FLEGT) or law enforcement, governance, forestry field trade, that is European Union’s policy which was announced in 2003. This policy is about certain legality requirements for timber and timber products which enter Europe countries. The timber origin countries which want to agree this policy for the product is able to enter Europe, must obey Voluntary Partnership Agreements (VPA). Indonesia has started to negotiate VPA with European Union since 2007, and signed the agrement in 2013. Based on the agreement, in 2016, Indonesia became the first country in the world which received FLEGT license. With FLEGT license, the Indonesian timber products are assured to be able to pass through green-lane to enter import market in European Union countries member because has met European Union Timber Regulation (EUTR). Other fourteen tropical timber producers countries are now deloping national system to assure the legality under FLEGT mechanism. As part of this mechanism, exporter countries must apply stages to prevent illegal logging. Back to back, in 2009, the Indonesian government has issued a regulation about SVLK which is revised several times until now. Before 2009, long process is begun to talk about this regulation. Many 6

Position

stakeholders are participated: government, timber entrepreneur, NGO, competent institutions on preparing the standard, academics, business association, and community. The process is also supported by world donor agencies. In every regulation about SVLK since 2009 until the latest, Independent Monitors and monitoring activity are always inseparable part. Permen LHK 8/2021 contains 5 chapters concerning Independent Monitors. Chapter 244 paragraph 2 mentions ‘Monitoring is carried out towards public services in SVLK field as a form of accountability, credibility, and integrity’. So, beside multistakeholders process, to accountability, credibility, and integrity from this legality verification, so it needs a monitoring, since from formalization, standarization, audit, and labelling stages. According to Setyowati and McDermott (2016), those 4 key stages have created unique synthesis between the state authority and market demand to name which timber and timber production that is declared legal and which timber that does not meet the standard, audit which carries out by timber legality verification bodies, and the issuance of V-legal. According to Setyowati dan McDermott, the problem is about the local community rights and about corruption which still needs to be reformed. WALHI (Friend of Eart Indonesia) used to say that the cause of illegal logging is corruption. Therefore, how far the implementation of SVLK depends on how far the monitoring conducted and able to improve SVLK itself.

People Monitor

Monitoring In a Webinar in 13 July 2020, was held by Chatham House, a think tank institution with international reputation based in London. The minister of Environment and Forestry was invited to share experiences on Indonesian effort in increasing forestry governance quality. In the Webinar, the Minister said:”lesson learned that can be taken by the countries in the world from the development of SVLK is the importance of long term commitment of multistakeholder from cross-sectors on supporting SVLK”. One of the multistakeholder that is mentioned by the Minister is “Independent Monitors Consortium” which is expected to conduct monitoring independently towards policy and SVLK implementation. Concerning the monitoring of forest and SVLK in Indonesia, in this introduction part, I will quote a lot an academics thesis written by a senior activist in SVLK monitoring named Zainuri Hasyim. Independent monitoring of forest was begun since 1990’s on a global level. The main foundation of this idea is the need for an explanation and statement independently (impartial) on the suitability that is arranged and material that occurs. An independence is useful for giving which statement process that truly meets the requirements or those which don’t. In 2005, has been well-known a term called ‘independent forest monitors’ which is defined by Global Witness as: “…. The use of independent third party that is in accordance with the agreement with the government authority, gives an assessment of legal compliance, and observation and guidance concerning official forestry law enforcement syste”.

Independent Monitors and SVLK regulations before the existence of Job Creation Act have been defined clearly and details, even until Perdirjen (Directorate General Regulation). However, after the existence of Job Creation Act and followed by the issuance of Government Regulation on Forestry and Permen LHK 8/2021, where there are many mergers concerning forestry, included SVLK, so the description and arrangement of SVLK are being summarized, included concerning monitoring which is only described in 5 articles. It is interesting when we see article 22 paragraph 1: ‘SVLK activity 8

Position

can be held monitoring by Independent Monitors’. Does the word ‘can’ imply that can be carried out and included it could be not do? Or, the word “can” means the monitoring is not a quite important matter so that it uses ‘can’ instead of uses ‘must’? This is quite worrying, as if denying what becomes the commitment in the next paragraph which places Independent Monitors as a ‘goalkeeper’ from accountability, credibility, and integrity of this timber legality system. In Indonesia, for strengthening the monitoring movement, the forestry Independent Monitors affiliates in some alliances. In 2020 in Jakarta, a year after SVLK is regulated in the Minister of Forestry Regulation, 29 non-governmental organizations and network from Aceh until Papua established Independent Forest Monitoring Network (Jaringan Pemantau Independen Kehutanan or JPIK). This network in 2017 consisted of 88 institutions and 528 individuals with 24 vocal points who the role is to monitor the implementation of SVLK. Based on personal communication with the dynamist of JPIK, in 2021 JPIK consist of 64 institutions and 525 individuals with 24 vocal points which spread over 26 provinces. There is also the institutional structure, that is 5 honorary councils and 1 National Dynamist. Several JPIK’s monitorings which have a wide impact, including: (1) Logging and illegal timber trade cases disclosure, revocation of accreditation permit of certification agency, expose forestry criminal practice and forest encroachment; (2) Sytem improvement through information access test, Independent Monitors security, strengthening SVLK standard, data and information access, and the funding sustainability, and regulation improvement; (3) capacity building of Independent Monitors through training that has reached more than 750 people from various circles, such as local community indigenous people, students, journalists, and environmentalists. Beside JPIK, there are also 2 non-governmental organization networks which focus on forest and environment monitoring, they are Sumatera’s Alliance of Independent Forestry Monitors (APIKS), Eyes of Forest (EoF), and Anti-Forest Mafia Coalition (KAHM). APIKS is almost the same with JPIK, that was established after the existence of SVLK regulation in 2009. However on its way, APIKS 9

People Monitor

expands their network for not only on SVLK issue, but also forestry issue in general and specifically boils down to the acceleration of the achievement of Good Forestry Governance in Sumatera. While EoF is a non-governmental organization based in West Kalimantan and Riau which focuses on data information provision either spatial or numeric for forest monitoring advocacy. Then KAMH is a coalition in national level which consists of various non-governmental organizations especially organizations which based in Jakarta and its surrounding. KAMH focuses on the effort of forestry mafia in concession forest and large scale plantation. From the 4 networks/ coalitions of forestry Independent Monitors, they often collaborate and work together in crucial issues and in national level. Beside hundreds of companies that have been monitored, in 2016 this collaboration was succeeded in compiling a training module on SVLK Monitoring for Community. From the study conducted by Hasyim (2017), we could learn from SVLK Independent Monitoring which has been carried out all this time and has an objective in the improvement of forestry governance with 4 main measuring tools, they are inclusivity, transparency, and continuity. Then, what are the problem according to Hasyim? 1. Inclusivity: there are some things which become the weakness of SVLK in relation to Independent Monitors, that is the rules for Independent Monitors and administrative requirements in monitoring. The low number of SVLK monitoring which carried out by Independent Monitors if it is compared with certification number makes an assumption that the performance of Independent Monitors is less active because the activeness measurement is based on the number of monitoring and it culminates in the complaint reporting as the procedure in SVLK. 2. Transparency: the weakness in SVLK in the relation to Independent Monitors is the practice towards data and information access. While in the interactivity aspect, Independent Monitors still face challenges, they are the interaction with other stakeholder in SVLK, the capacity of the 10

Position

Monitors, and the understanding about the requirements and authority in submitting a complaint report; 3. Continuity: less funding and small number of the monitors, and the limited scope of monitoring in forest SVLK are not able to be targeted to other fields, such as the monitoring of palm oil certification. From those three problems, Hasyim (2017) provides advice on the 5 domains, they are: monitoring report simplification so that the community can report it; the certainty of follow up from the government and other authorities of the monitoring report; information openness assurance from the government and other authority; interaction improvement between certification bodies and unit management, and the Government provides and facilitates monitoring fund from various sources.

People Monitor From many problems and advices from Hasyim (2017), we try to combine it with the Minister of Forestry and Environment’s statement we have said before. We would like to highlight a keyword in the SVLK success which is said by the Minister of Forestry and Environment, that is ‘long term commitment’. In our opinion, a commitment moreover a long term commitment is close related to the interest of those stakeholders. So, the interest basis is equal with the commitment. As said by Ian Scoones, a rural expert, ‘interest politics has a central role in shaping structural conditions that is determined our lives’. Let’s look at the surface concerning interest politics in various SVLK actors. The Government as the regulator and the state’s representative has an interest to provide institution, organization, policies for a better forestry governance; certification body has an interest to get certification clients from forest or timber industries, timber processing industries, and exporter from Indonesia; sellers and buyers of legal certified timber has a business interest; and environmentalist has a nature conservation. Environmentalists 11

People Monitor

are generally in non-governmental organizations that carry out Independent Monitoring. Then, the question is, what is the interest of indigenous people/local communities surrounding the concession forest and surrounding woodworking industries on the implementation of SVLK? If we use livelihood perspective, forest and environment are complex living spaces for indigenous people/ local communities. Complex means there is a relation between economy, ecology, and culture and forest and environment. On these various interest of the actors, we would like to say that a long term commitment is not only about how big the commitment and how long the commitment is, but how big the interest of each stakeholder can support the amount and the duration of the commitment. After the material basis of commitment becomes important in the monitoring, other element needs to be our concern is about which knowledge will be used for implementing SVLK all at once for maintaining the credibility of the system with monitoring? Whose knowledge is decided to be important and whose knowledge is marginalized to become not important? In the way to verify timber legality, involving how to measure, calculate, assess, validate, and evaluate a reality. All of those are stated in government regulations and the technical guidance. As said by Hasyim (2017) above, a reporting mechanism still becomes a specter for the Monitors because the Monitors capacity is prosecuted as a certain standard that has been regulated. So, knowledge which is used also determines what kind of reality that fits or reasonable in the knowledge, that leads to a reality according to whom is the important and not important. If we lopk back to the interest politics, the community has a lasting interest towards the sustainability of their living space included forest. There is a big possibility that the knowledge about forest which is owned by the community is different with the knowledge in the system and operationalization of SVLK. Spring in a concession is legally owned by concession, but the spring is disappeared. This is an illegal act according the community knowledge. By naked eye, the community sees a logging and they think that it is not sustainable, but the company works based on their annual workplan, so how can the community 12

Position

submits a complain about the current monitoring and reporting mechanism all this time? What happened with what is considered to happen are two different things. What happened is interpreted according to interest and knowledge to be disseminated later until achieves the formation of a fact which is actually an ‘assumption that happened’. We truly see in front of our eyes the decrease of forest area surrounding our house or parents house, and our grandmother house. We also watch in YouTube and social media, many natural disasters occurred in certain places and it doesn’t occur in other place. In other side, we also read numeric data concerning how many forest has been lost, how much carbon emission which is produced, ideas, and technocracy in solving those problems. Anthropologists see that these natural changes are caused by human intervention which change the nature or rather destroy the nature. Politics ecology perspective is more specific said it is because humans are the one who do politics so that the nature changes. Moreover, as a reflection, Covid-19 Pandemic which hits the world is also because the natural change that is caused by the human extraction of nature. Then, what is the difference and what is considered to happen are our reminder to be more careful towards diversity, towards happened and considered to happen. In his book entitled Grundrisse, Karl Marx (1972) said “the concrete one is the combination of many determining factors so that becomes unity in diversity”. On seeing the forest lost, illegal logging, and technocracy solve problems included timber legality labelization, we would like to check with critical glasses. One of the critism is by carrying out continuous monitoring of the problem and the solution taken, and use a historic politics ecology approach to find out diversity and find out the link between the global and the local. Through those awareness, we would like to invite the readers to discuss by using this book. In order to look back at how monitoring which carried out by indigenous people/local communities of the SVLK implementation could contribute of various monitoring problems all this time. We intend to present the experiences of 13

People Monitor

indigenous people/local communities in Central Kalimantan, North Maluku, West Papua, East Java, and Semarang Central Java on carrying out monitoring from upstream to downstream. This monitoring was carried out in 2020 and coordinated by PPLH Mangkubumi and supported by FAO-EU FLEGT Programme. We will start the story of this book by discussing about the Dynamics of Policy, Implementation, and Monitoring of SVLK from Independent Monitors Point of View which will be presented in Chapter Two. While in Chapter Three, we will tell about how indigenous people/ local communities in 5 provinces carry out monitoring and the results achieved. In Chapter 4, we would like to describe the field findings as the result of monitoring and the analysis. In this chapter, we describe the positive and negative sides of SVLK implementation in site level; and lesson learned which can be taken from those experiences. Then, in the end of this book, we try to summarize important conclusions and input for the monitoring sustainability in the future and for SVLK in general. For further, let’s take a look how the dynamics of the policy, implementation, and the monitoring of SVLK all this time.

People Monitor

CHAPTER II

SVLK

ong ago, illegal logging occurred in many tropical forest

countries, included Indonesia. Illegal logging in Indonesia causes forest destruction and various environment problems included losses in the field of ecology, socio-economics, and even politics. It is marked with forest damage reaches more than 2 million ha per year with the values of loss in socio-economic and ecology in the form of climate change, landslide, flood, the damage of forest habitat/nature in the amount of IDR 530 trillion. In Indonesia, illegal logging becomes the Government concern, especially since 1990’s. beside because the timber scale which is illegally logged is far beyond the sustainable timber supply. Illegal logging is also associated with other issues, such as the loss of biodiversity and corruptive forest management practices. The rampant of illegal logging and illegal timber trade which cause a massive forest destruction gives impact to the decrease of the competitiveness of Indonesian forestry timber products in the eyes of consumers and also gives bad impact to forestry governance in Indonesia. One of the reasons why those happen because the weakness of law enforcement in forestry sector. Moreover, there is a doubt from the consumers on the ambiguity of assurance and product legality so that create bad image for Indonesia. To fight against illegal logging which is never ending and to break the forestry criminals network that is untouchable, so it needs special concern by realizing the improvement of a better forestry

People Monitor

governance and the trade. Another thing is the need for information openness, stakeholder participation, and improve law enforcement. So, in 2001 was held the First Regional Ministerial Conference Concerning Law Enforcement and Forest Law Enforcement Governance (FLEG) for East Asia and Pacific region in Bali. Then, in 2002 signed MoU or bilateral agreement between Indonesia and the UK to improve forest management and law enforcement to fight against illegal logging and illegal timber products in international trade. After the agreement and initiative from multistakeholder through participation process of multistakeholder, since 2003 European Union adopted the agreement and added one aspect concerning trade became an action plan or European Union Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade action plan (EU FLEGT action plan). Since then, appeared initiatives to overcome illegal logging and promote legal timber through Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK). Various discussions were held to assure that timber and timber products come from legal sources and it is expected to an effort to encourage all timber products in Indonesia to be produced from sustainable forest management. Series by series of discussions related to the process to the finalization of SVLK keep going, followed with the negotiation of Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade - Voluntary Partnership Agreement (FLEGT-VPA). In 2008, multi-stakeholder group under the auspices of National Forestry Council proposed timber legality standard to the Government in order to be adopted as mandatory rules. In 2009, the Indonesian government enforced SVLK by issuing Permenhut 38/2009 concerning performance assessment of Sustainable Production Forest Management and Timber Legality Verification for permit holders and community forest. Then, the regulation started to be implemented in 2010. The regulations of SVLK implementation are kept updated, such the issuance of Permen LHK 21/2020 concerning Performance Assessment of Sustainable Production Forest Management and Timber Legality Verification to the license holder, management rights, private forest or legality holder of the utilization of Timber Forest Products. 18

SVLK

All the dynamics of SVLK policy changes are inseparable from multistakeholder role, included civil society that incorporated as Independent Monitors. Independent Monitors always become part of SVLK scheme from the beginning of the preparation and the improvement of SVLK. Independent Forest Monitoring Network (JPIK) which is the biggest independent monitors network in Indonesia considers it is important to involve indigenous people/ local community in the monitoring of SVLK implementation because they could give input for the improvement of SVLK system, included the credibility.

The Growth of SVLK Policy in Indonesia Since Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) was implemented in 2009 through Permenhut 38/2009. In 2011 – 2016, SVLK regulations have undergone several refinements with the issuance of Permenhut 68/2011, Permenhut 45/2012, Permenhut 42/2013, Permenhut 43/2014, Permen LHK 95/2014, PemenLHK 30/2016. Those various changes indicate SVLK as one of instruments which prioritizing good forest governance through timber legality assurance, from harvesting, the transport, processing, and marketing. Moreover, SVLK is developed through a long process by involving NGO/civil society group included indigenous people, entrepreneur, academics, government representative, and multistakeholders that concern to forest sustainability which aims to overcome illegal logging. Therefore, the improvement of SVLK system is very important for a better forestry governance. When Permen LHK 30/2016 has run for a long time, there is still a lot input from stakeholders included Independent Monitors. In 2020, SVLK regulations was revised to be Permen LHK 21/2020 concerning the Performance Assessment of Sustainable Production Forest Management and Timber Legality Verification to permit holder, Private Forest, or Legality holder of Timber Forest Products Utilization. Technical Guidance Rules is regulated in Directorate General Decree PHPL 62/2020.

People Monitor

Less than a year the regulations run, Indonesian government legalized Act No.11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation (hereinafter referred to as UUCK) which requires to change all regulations in Indonesia, included SVLK regulations. A New regulation is suddenly born to replace the previous one, that is Permen LHK 8/2021 concerning Forest Governance and the Preparation of Forest Management Plan, and Forest Utilization in Protected Forest and Production Forest. However, when this writing is made, the regulation which is legalized in 2021, the regulation is not yet fully implemented because it still is adjusting from the previous regulations. Moreover, the technical guidance regulation is till in preparation stage.

SVLK

Tabel 1. SVLK Regulation Changes Year

Ministerial Regulation Number

Ministerial Regulation Title

2009

Permenhut No. P.38/MenhutII/2009

Standard and Guidelines of Performance Assessment of Sustainable Production Forest Management and Timber Legality Verification to Permit Holder or to Private Forest

The Change Point

This regulation took effect on 1 September 2009 and revoked the Minister Regulation and Decree concerning Sustainable Production Natural Forest Management and Performance Assessment Procedures of Plantation Forest Utilization. In this regulation contains Independent Monitors who are from NGO or civil society in forestry field.

2011

Permenhut P.68/MenhutII/2011

The change to Permenhut P.38/MenhutII/2009

Change the provisions for SPHPL holder in IUPHHKHA/HT/RE/management rights holder that was previously valid for 3 years, it is changed into 5 years.

2012

Permenhut P.45/MenhutII/2012

The second change of the Minister of Forestry P.38/MenhutII/2009

In this regulation, Timber Legality Certification (S-LK) in Private Forest is valid for 10 years since it is issued and a surveillance will be carried out for at least 24 months.

People Monitor

Year

Ministerial Regulation Number

Ministerial Regulation Title

2013

Permenhut P.42/MenhutII/2013

The third change of Forestry Minister Regulation P.38/MenhutII/2009

It is a mandatory for forest owner to get S-LK and can apply in group.

2014

Permenhut P.43/MenhutII/2014

Performance Assessment of Sustainable Production Forest Management and Timber Legality Verification in permit holder or in Private Forest.

The implementation of nonproducers ETPIK and must use raw materials and/products which have had S-PHPL or S-LK or Supplier Declaration of Conformity (DKP).

2014

Permenhut P.95/MenhutII/2014

The change of Permenhut P.43/MenhutII/2014

In this regulation, the importer must issue Import Declaration which is enclosed by due diligence for each timber and/or timber product to be imported.

2016

Permen LHK P.30/MenLHK /Setjen/PHPL. 3/2016

Performance Assessment of Sustainable Production Forest Management and Timber Legality Verification to permit holder, management rights, or in Private Forest.

The Change Point

In this regulation, nonproducers ETPIK is changed to be Company Registration Certificate (TDP), that is a company which transport their forestry industry products between countries. Transport Notes or SKAU applies as DKP.

SVLK

Year

Ministerial Regulation Number

Ministerial Regulation Title

The Change Point

2020

PermenLHK P.21/Menlhk/ Setjen/Kum.1/ 10/2020

Concerning Performance Assessment of Sustainable Production Forest Management and Timber Legality Verification to Permit Holder, Management Rights, Private Forest, or Legality Holder of Timber Forest Product Utilization.

Auction timber and timber products whose the raw materials come from auction timber can’t be issued V-Legal document. Registered shelter processed timber (TPTKO) is declared no longer valid. The addition related to Raw Materials Legality Verification (VLBB) In this regulation, related to exporter, non-producers exporter and TDP are changed into Export of Forestry industry Products. The definition of Independent Monitors is changed into: civil society either individual or Indonesian Legal Entity Institutions. The removal of VLBB.

People Monitor

Year

Ministerial Regulation Number

Ministerial Regulation Title

2021

Permen LHK No. 8 of 2021

Concerning Forest Management and Forest Management Plan Arrangement and Forest Utilization in Protected Forest and Production Forest.

The Change Point

This regulation is the derivative of the issuance of Act No. 11/2020 concerning Job Creation. The permission type in upstream level or IUIPHHK or forest utilization is changed into Forest Utilization Business Permit (PBPH). Permit type in downstream level such as IUIPHHK/IUI or wood forest products management is changed into Business Permit of Forest Products Management.

Not only covers timber but also non-timber Forest Products (HHBK).

Certificate validity period for cultivated timber is longer.

SVLK is included in the requirements of domestic goods and services procurement.

Facilitate SMEs in the form of certification financing assistance, surveillance, and VLegal document.

SVLK

The Export Provisions of Forestry Products Along with the change of SVLK regulation, the export provision regulations also change for several times. Starting from the regulation of Minister of Trade (Permendag) 20/M-DAG/PER/5/2008 which has been applied before SVLK regulation exists which then is changed with Permendag 64/M-DAG/PER/10/2012 concerning the Export Provision of Forestry Industry Product in 2012. The last change is Permendag No. 93 of 2020 concerning the Change of the Minister of Trade Regulation No.74 of 2020 concerning Export Provisions of Forestry Industry Product. Tabel 2. The Regulation Changes of Forestry Products Export Provision Year

Number of the Minister Regulation

The Title of the Minister Regulation

2012

Permendag 64/MDAG/Per/10/2 012

The Export Term of Forestry Product

The Point of Change

2013

Permendag 81/MDAG/Per/12/2 013

The change of Permendag Number 64/M-

This regulation obliges Processed Timber Product or exported furniture meet the legality standard. The export of forestry industry product is only able to be carried out by forestry industry company which has received acknowledgement as ETPIK and Trading company in export field which has received recognition as non-producers ETPIK.

The schedule to complete the V-Legal document for forestry industry product.

People Monitor

Year

Number of the Minister Regulation

The Title of the Minister Regulation

The Point of Change

DAG/Per/10/20 12 Permendag 97/MDAG/Per/12/2 014

Export Provision Forestry Industry Product

2015

Permendag 66/MDAG/Per/8/20 15

The change of Permendag Number 97/MDAG/Per/12/20 14

2015

Permendag 89/MDAG/Per/10/2 015

Export Term of Forestry Industry Product

2014

For SMEs which have not had S-LK can export after receive recognition as ETPIK by using Export Declaration for replacing V-Legal document. The recommendation of Directorate General of Agroforestry Industry, which states that the evidence of Due Diligence of the laboratorium of non-timber paper and pulp materials is no longer applied. -

2016

Permendag 25/MDAG/Per/4/20 16

The change of Permendag 89/MDAG/Per/10/20 15

The export of forestry industry products is only able to be carried out by industry company that has TDI, IUI, TDP, and trading company which has SIUP and TDP. The Provision of obligation to get ETPIK recognition is no longer applied.

Mandatory legality license for all forestry products export included furniture and handycraft.

SVLK

Year

Number of the Minister Regulation

The Title of the Minister Regulation

2016

Permendag 84/MDAG/Per/12/2 016

Concerning Export Provision Forestry Industry Product

2017

Permendag 12/MDAG/PER/2/2 017

The change of the Trade Minister Regulation Number 84/MDAG/PER/12/20 16

There are several forestry industry products which are only able to be exported after they are verified.

2017

Permendag 38/MDAG/Per/6/20 17

The second change of the Minister of Trade Regulation Number 84/M DAG/Per/12/20 16 concerning the Export Provision of Forestry Industry Product

The removal of the Provition of some forestry industry products which is able to exported after it is being verified.

2020

Permendag Number 15 of 2020

Concerning the Export Provision of Forestry Industry Products

The Point of Change

Mandatory legality license for all forestry product export.

Wood export is no longer a mandatory to use SVLK or V-Legal This regulation was revoked and back to Permendag 84/MDAG/Per/12/2016.

People Monitor

Year

Number of the Minister Regulation

The Title of the Minister Regulation

2020

Permendag 74 of 2020

Export Provision Forestry Industry Products

Permendag 93 of 2020

The change of permendag 74 of 2020 concerning export term of forestry industry products.

2020

The Point of Change

Mandatory legality license for all forestry products export.

Mandatory Legality License for all forestry product export.

The change of export term regulation of forestry product has been protested by many parties in 2000. This regulation changed from Permendag 84/2016 into Permendag 15/2020 brang a lot of criticism from Independent Monitors side and academics. It is because in Permendag 15/2020, wood export is no longer a mandatory to use SVLK or V-Legal document. Many parties consider this is a setback because it is worried about happening illegal timber circulation to be exported. Moreover, the regulation is considered to damage Indonesian timber reputation from business aspect. However, by many critism from many parties, the the regulation of export provision of forestry industry product is back to Permendag 84/2016 and it has been changed and now uses Permendag 74/2020 jo Permendag 93/2020. V-Legal document becomes a mandatory requirement for exporter which will export forestry products. This document is a license of timber products export, which issued by Timber Legality Verification Body (LVLK), for exporter which has had Timber Legality Certificate (SLK). V-Legal document aims to assure that the timber materials which used to make the timber products are from legal source. When V-Legal document is removed from export provision regulation, it will definitely hurt multistakeholder’s initiative which has been built for along time. 28

SVLK

The Application of SVLK to Forestry Business Actors Before UUCK exists, forest product utilization is based on Law No. 41 of 1999 concerning Forestry. In every forest product utilization activity, it must comply with applicable regulations. So that it is expected forest sustainability, state income, forest product utilization can be achieved optimally. Forest product administration activity (PUHH) provides legal certainty to all parties which do business in forestry sector through recording, documentation, the reporting of activity plan, logging, transport, and the processing in industries. Forest product administration implementation is regulated in PermenLHK 66/2019 concerning Timber Forest Product Administration from Natural Forest and PermenLHK 67/2019 concerning Timber Forest Product Administration from Plantation Forest to Production Forest. On both regulations, PUHH is carried out by self-assessment which is completely electronic through Forest Product Administration Information System (SIPUHH). For permit holder which does not carry out Timber Forest Product Administration, they will be subjected to administrative sanction in accordance with the provisions of legislation. The reporting which is recorded in SIPUHH will be carry out in real time. However, there are still weaknesses in this system. First, it is only logs from natural forest will be recorded by SIPUHH Second, not fully integrated with Industrial Raw Materials Fulfillment Plan Information System (SIRPBBI). Third, the monitoring is ineffective because only certain parties can access the data and information in SIPUHH. In other hand, on the setting of SVLK, permit holder must have Sustainable Production Forest Management Certificate (S-PHPL). Whereas, the permit holder who has not had S-PHPL must have Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK). However, although SVLK is said to a system which assures the legality of timber products, there are still problems in some S-PHPL and S-LK holders, that is logging outside RKT. Furthermore, problems related to social aspect have not fully received special attention. SVLK has been implemented for almost 11 years, an instrument aims to eradicate illegal logging and illegal timber circulation. As the first country to hold FLEGT License, Indonesia deserves to be appreciated, when the negotiation reached an agreement to start the implementation 29

People Monitor

of FLEGT VPA since 15 November 2016. Moreover, in 2017 according to the Minister of Forestry and Environment which stated that since SVLK has been applied in Indonesia in 2009, the competitiveness of furnitures and crafts continues to increase, especially in European Union market. However, the Indonesian Government and the exist elements in SVLK scheme must keep increasing the implementation performance. It is because there are home works that unresolved yet, such as openness and the access to the data for Independent Monitors, sustainable funding access, assessment credibility by auditor, and complaint handling and law enforcement which gives a deterrent effect. In other hand, there are still gaps in SVLK implementation which are used by certain people as business actors to get benefit by taking advantage and breaking the rules. .

SVLK Box 1 Case The monitoring in UD Karya Abadi and PT Gaung Satyagraha Agrindo UD Karya Abadi as primary industry actor has a supplier named GSA, a concession holder of IUPHHK-HA. In the practice, UDKarya Abadi carried out illegal logging outside PT GSA area by still using timber document of PTGSA. Beside cooperates with PTGSA as the supplier, UDKarya Abadi also has 9 other timber suppliers. They are companies in other natural forest concessions. UDKarya Abadi organized and moved the workers to do illegal logging in the concession of PTGSA, but outside RTK, they are PTHutan Mulya concession, HKm Baraoi Bersatu cooperation, state forest in Batu Tukan village, TBG Tanggui, and Telok village. According to the information from the community surrounding the concession, the illegal logging carried out by UDKarya Abadi has been going on since 2005. UDKarya Abadi uses trucks and trailers around 100 unit and excavator and bulldosser around 30 unit. The timber which has been logged illegally is about 1,000 m3 with the types of timber are Benuas and Karuing. PTGSA provides place to accommodate the timber. All the illegal timber is labelled in the name of logs from PTGSA to then be sawed in UDKarya Abadi. After that, the processed timber is sent by UDKarya Abadi to Surabaya through two lanes, they are Sampit and Banjarmasin ports. Information got by the monitor, the processed timber is sent to UDOngko and UDCahaya Baru in Surabaya, East Java.

Illegal logging timber which is labeled/barcode by PT. GSA To be sent to UD. Karya Abadi

People Monitor

Independent Monitors Monitoring activity by Independent Monitors is inseparable element in SVLK scheme. Monitoring is carried out as a form of supervision towards public services in forestry field, to maintain accountability, credibility, and integrity in SVLK system. The intended monitoring is Monitoring in LP/VI accreditation, assessment and issuance of S-PHPL, S-LK, DKP, complaint handling, due diligence, V-Legal document, and/or V-Legal logo affixing. Monitoring activity is carried out by Independent Monitors, that is civil society either individual or Indonesian legal entity. Independent Monitoring is carried out towards all stages in the assessment of PHPL and VLK, that is since there is an announcement assessment schedule until the issuance of V-Legal document.

Picture 1. Element and Scheme of SVLK

The fact that the number of the monitors joined in JPIK and other network is not comparable to the number of timber industry in Indonesia which the total is 3.172 industries (which were indicated in 2020), that number does not include forest areas that are mandatory certified through the SVLK which the area is

Position

>25 million ha. This indicates that monitoring work is not an easy work, but JPIK and the community network keep trying to carry out monitoring activities from upstream to downstream in order that the monitoring activity can run maximally. Challenges and Constraints faced by Independent Monitors are; a) The limitation of the Monitors number; b) The security/safety because Independent Monitors in the field still often get threats verbally and non-verbally; c) The funding to Independent Monitors is still minimum; d) Information access. Independent Monitors can’t get full access to information data, one of them is SIPUHH online; e) Covid-19 Pandemic. This is a new challenge for Independent Monitors. So, it needs a monitoring method development in this activity limitation

Picture 2. Challenge on Carrying Out Monitoring

People Monitor

In 2020, PPLH Mangkubumi with the support from FAOEU FLEGT Programme gave training and assistance to indigenous people/local communities in Province of Central Kalimantan, North Maluku, West Papua, East Java, and Semarang Central Java; to carry out monitoring in 32 unit management, among others are 14 export oriented industries in Semarang Central Java, and 4 unit management in Province of Central Kalimantan, North Maluku, West Papua, and West Java. The monitoring activity is carried out based on upstream and downstream monitoring by indigenous people/local communities with the assistance of JPIK and PPLH Mangkubumi. Monitoring by indigenous people/local communities is very effective and efficient because the Monitors live nearby the monitoring location and the monitoring duration is also in along time.

The Challenges in the Implementation of SVLK in the Future Eventhough SVLK has been a mandatory in trading and timber circulation in Indonesia, but SVLK still faces many challenges and dynamics as written before. With the issuance of Omnibus Law of Job Creation which then legalized to be Act UU No. 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation (UUCK) obliges the change of regulations related to SVLK by adjusting the provision in UUCK. Although UUCK is critized, there are demonstrations until it is fulminated by various element of society such as students, academics, NGOs, in fact UUCK is still legalized with all the processes of formation that is considered defective. Like it or not, that’s what happened now, SVLK regulations also must change to adjust with UUCK. There are points to be in the spotlight in UUCK, that is the looser permit in protected forest for corporations. The utilization of protected forest in the form of a utilization business permit and the collection of non-timber forest products permits. Initially, it is only given to individual and cooperative with legal basis Article 27 paragraph (1) and (3) of Forestry Act. However, UUCK broadens the subject that can use protected forest by adding state-owned enterprises, localowned enterprises, or private sector. Compared to individual and

SVLK

cooperative, enterprises certainly has bigger capacity to utilize forest accompanied by the same risk of destructions. In line with the legalization of UUCK, now it has been determined Food Estate program as one of National Strategic Program. The determination of Food Estate Program is worried will have bad impact towards forest areas, especially protected forests, where the project converts protected forest as food estate land. Surely this becomes the challenges of SVLK and on the contrary to the objective of SVLK, that is to realize good forest governance. However, in UUCK policy and its derivatives, that is food estate will give bad impact towards forest governance in Indonesia. By considering those challenges, especially the risk of forest governance which has direct impact to indigenous people/local communities, the monitoring in the future should be directed to indigenous people/local communities as the main party. In 2020, we have tried to carry out it in 5 provinces in Indonesia that we will tell it in the next chapter.

CHAPTER III

People Monitor

hen we were child, we must remember about one of scenes in many cartoon, there was a figure who walked or ran, even when the figure was in the edge of cliffs, the figure will keep running. The figure thought as if there was still a foothold. The figure ignored the fact that there wasn’t ground under the figure feet. Then, the figure will only fall when the figure looks down and look at the cliff in shock. This scene remember us to always look down, look at the fulcrum from our steps in order to not fall down. In the beginning of this book, we propose two base of materials in the monitoring of SVLK, they are interest and knowledge which are considered important and applied. If the paradox occurs between the current monitoring effort which still includes many policy recommendations, but we said that deforestation decreases because of a credible SVLK, then why we aren’t back to the material base of interest and knowledge that can support the continuity and the more widespread SVLK monitoring. We submit monitoring by indigenous people/local communities with interest and knowledge material base that they have. We hope the government doesn’t use a premise that one can’t trust people: “people must be loved, protected, treated, controlled …. But can’t be trusted.” We have actually been feeling for a long time that there isn’t ground to step on and we are surprised after look down, then fall down. Now is the time for us to realize this. We hope this monitoring story of indigenous people/local communities in five provinces in Indonesia can give ideas and new policy in the future of SVLK monitoring.

People Monitor

The story of SVLK monitoring in this book is the result of the project implementation supported by FAO-EU FLEGT Programme. The SVLK monitoring by indigenous people/local communities in five provinces is carried out with a series of activity process. At the early stage, started with inception meeting with multistakeholder related to SVLK. After got input, we arranged training curriculum, conducted a selection of participant candidates, and held the training for the monitor candidate from indigenous people/local communities. After monitoring is carried out, we discussed the result findings in our monitoring with multistakeholder in SVLK in an FGD. From the FGD, we arrange this lesson lerned book. Stage 1 Preparation

Stage2 Capacity Building

Stage 3 Monitoring

Stage 4 The Book Writing

• Inception meeting • Monitoring guidance

• Monitor Selection Guidance • Monitor selection process • Training Module • Monitor Training

• • • •

• The book writing • Closing Workshop • Press Conference

Monitoring plan Desk Study Field Monitoring Complaint report • Monitoring report Multistakeholder FGD

Stage 1 Preparation. In this stage, we held socialization to multistakeholder which covers Central Government, Local Government, Law Enforcer, LVLK (Timber Verification Legality Body), timber business permit holder, indigenous people/local communities, independent monitor network, donor agency, and mass media. In the socialization, all parties agreed on the importance 38

People Monitor

of SVLK’s stakeholders synergy of monitoring that will be carried out so that there is an urge to increase forestry industries compliance on implementing SVLK correctly and consistent. After the activity, we arranged the monitoring guidance, especially for indigenous people/ local communities. Stage 2 Capacity Building. On determine who is being independent monitor in this program and attending the monitoring training, we held an opened selection for indigenous people/local communities who live surrounding or in the forest area and wood processing industries at the location of this monitoring program. There are 4 requirements for the candidates, they are: (1) Aged between 17-55 years old; (2) has knowledge and experiences in forestry/ timber/SVLK/monitoring/advocacy fields; (3) Has experiences on making activity report; and (4) Able to attend the training and carry out monitoring to the 2 timber industries/business unit. After going through administrative selection by considering gender equality quota and online interview, we decided 16 individual of indigenous people/local communities to attend the training and then carry out monitoring. Training Module which has been arranged by PPLH Mangkubumi and JPIK was used as the main material in organizing the training which was held in Yogyakarta in September 2020. In the monitor training, we developed curriculum and syllabus with 30 lesson hours by using lecture system, discussion, independent work, and case study. There are 11 training materials among others are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Introduction to training & pre test Forest governance Certification in forestry field Timber Legality Verification System Timber Management SVLK monitoring by indigenous people/local Analysis of case study Documentation, data & information, and monitoring strategy. 9. Gender mainstreaming 10. Monitoring plan and network communication system 11. Closing & post test.

People Monitor

Stage 3 Monitoring. There are four processes in this stage, they are planning, desk study, field monitoring, and stakeholder FGD. First, the monitors plan the object, strategy, materials & tools, and monitoring timeline. Second, do desk study to get initial information and alleged violation of SVLK and forestry regulations. Afterwards, the monitors carry out monitoring in the field whether in concession company, timber processing industries, and exporters. Method used is various either openly or in disguise. The next stage is writing monitoring report as the complain material report to certification agency or law enforcer. Fourth, from the findings in the monitoring, we invite SVLK stakeholders on an FGD to discuss the actions to close the gap of SVLK violations. The result of FGD becomes additional materials for the improvement of monitoring report. Stage 4 The Book Writing. Popular become a book entitled “People Monitor: the Dynamics of SVLK Monitoring by indigenous People/Local Communities in Indonesia.’’ The aim of publishing this book is in order that the ideas of indigenous people/local communities monitor can be widely disseminated to the community. Then, in the end of this project, we held closing workshop which inviting stakeholders of SVLK and held press conference in the end of the event. From those four important stages of monitoring, we will convey the core of SVLK monitoring in five provinces of the project location in the next part.

People Monitor

Disturbed Living Space SVLK Monitoring in Central Kalimantan “SVLK monitoring prevents forest encroachment in customary area and villages road is no longer damaged because of wooden hauling trucks that often pass, avoided from big flood, and the indigenous people still can hunt and concocting medicine.” Wancino, a monitor from Dayak Ngaju Katingan indigenous people (20 January 2021).

Historically, Dayak Ngaju indigenous people is closely related to various livelihood practices, such as subsistence-based shifting cultivation, forest products collection, fishing and hunting, and the pattern of the residence is in longhouse following the large river and the nuclear family house which is located along small river (sei). From the description of Pak Wancino above shows that forest is not only important for Ngaju indigenous people in Katingan, but also shows that how that interest is pursued, one of which is by conducting forest monitoring through the existing tools, that is SVLK monitoring. What Pak Wancino confirmed is Ngaju indigenous people can carry out physical mobility smoothly without passing damage roads; avoided from big flood; and the sustainability protein access through hunting and using natural medicine from the forest. The direct impact from deforestation can be learned from flood case a year ago and this year. For example, in mid of 2020, there were 5 sub-districts in Katingan district which were hit by big flood. In Sanaman sub-district, where Pak Wancino lives, there are more than 1,000 households affected by flood. From 14 villages in this sub-district, 10 of them were directly affected by last year’s and this year flood. According to Pak Wancino, big flood often occurs in the last 5 years in his area. Some of those matters show that how vulnerable indigenous people are, receiving the impact of landscape change because of forest logging. Therefore, Ngaju indigenous people with various interested parties try to find out the causes through the monitoring of the alleged of illegal logging in Katingan area, Central Kalimantan. The monitoring of Ngaju indigenous people of the alleged of illegal logging in Katingan focused to two business unit of sawmill, they are UD Kawus Masauh and UD Karya Abadi; and two permit 41

People Monitor

holder of forest exploitation or HPH (a term in the past), they are PT Rianda Inti Lestari and PT Gaung Satyagraha Agrindo. From those four business unit, there is a relation and business network, even until the exporters in Surabaya East Java. From those four business unit, all have had timber legality certificates for sawing industries (Business Permit of Timber Forest Product Industries/IUIPHHK) and Sustainable Production Management Certificate (PHPL) for HPH holder (Business Permit of Natural Forest Timber Forest Product Utilization/IUPHHKHA). Succinctly, the result of the monitoring shows that the timber from the forest is alleged has been logged outside the permit area and or logged inside the permit area, but outside the logging plan. The timber is then processed in sawmill industries and deformed and being claimed from certain HPH holder forest area. In forest management perspective, those actions are suspected violating the regulations in SVLK rules. Even so in timber legality perspective in sawmill industries. Two crucial points have been passed illegally, that is sent to downstream sector, that is a company in Surabaya, East Java and Banjarmasin, South Kalimantan which then go to export or the final user in the country. Here we tell the monitoring result of Ngaju indigenous people in two stories. First Story UD Kawus Masauh (hereinafter referred to as Kawus) is a forestry industry in timber sawmill field with the permit form is IUIPHHK (Business Permit of Timber Forest Product of Primary Industry) which has had timber legality certificate from LVLK PT Borneo Wanajaya Indonesia with production capacity of ≤6.000 M³/Year. The certificate is valid from 23 November 2019 until 22 November 2025. The location of Kawus Primary Industry is in Tumbang Kaman, Sanaman Mantikei sub-district, Katingan district. Further, PT Rinanda Inti Lestari (hereinafer referred to as Rinanda) is a permit holder of Natural Forest-Timber Forest Product Utilization (IUIPHHKHA) from the Minister of Forestry and Environment since 15 March 2021 in the area of 30.160 ha, located in Katingan district. Rinanda is also a permit holder of PHPL scheme certificate from LVLK PT Global Resource since 2018 Number O19/5-PHPL/GRS/ XI/2018. . 42

People Monitor

The owner of land rights (PHAT) of Erko Mojra, that is a community group or individual where their land produces natural forest timber which growth naturally. In the timber circulation, from PHAT must be reported through SIPUHH online of the Ministry of Forestry and Environment. Kawus is allegedly received timber from illegal logging. The modus is Kawus cooperates with some companies and community groups, in this case is Erco Mojra, as the timber supplier which is registered in SIPUHH Online. In the practice, Kawus cooperates with to make fake transport document on behalf of Erco Mojra. In the other hand, the timber with fake transport document is presumed not to have come from Erco Mojra forest area, but from illegal logging result in Community Forestry area (HKm) of Baraoi Bersatu Cooperative, from Rinanda concession area, and from other forest state area. Kawus is presumed paid some money to the head of Rinanda to put its employees, heavy equipment, and truck into Rinanda concession area. Kawus employees are suspected of logging in three areas, they are in Rinanda’s concession but outside RKT; in HKm area; and in other state forest area. All the timber is claimed by Kawus as timber that is from PHAT Erko Mojra area with fake documents. The log timber is transported by Kawus employees to the sawmill location. Then, the processed timber is sent to UD Ongko and UD Cahaya Baru in Surabaya East Java and to Banjarmasin South Kalimantan. Based on these, East Java Independent Monitors track to those two business unit in Surabaya. East Java Indpendent Monitors have found the location of UD Ongko and have confirmed to Forestry Office of East Java that those two business unit are not recorded as S-LK holder. From some of those findings and the ecological impact experienced by the community, several years ago, Dayak Ngaju indigenous people and Kaharingan Institute reported illegal logging which is allegedly committed by Kawus to the police. In November 2020, along with PPLH Mangkubumi and National JPIK, the community reported the alleged illegal logging to Law Enforcement Officers so that in December 2020 was made an arrest 43

People Monitor

and detention to the owner of Kawus all at once UD Karya Abadi. Meanwhile, the Timber Legality Certificate of Kawus was frozen by PT Global Resource Sertifikasi (L-VLK). So, in the freezing period, Kawus is not allowed to use V-Legal logo and timber legality certificate in their timber trading activities. In June 2021, PPLH Mangkubumi reported Rinanda to Directorate of Law Enforcement (Gakkum) of the Ministry of Forestry and Environment. But, due to the increasing of Covid-19 Pandemic in Indonesia, the follow up from Gakkum has not been carried out.

Picture 3. Suspected illegal logging practices of UD Kawus Masauh Central Kalimantan

Picture 4. Suspected Timber from Illegal Logging labelled by PHAT Erko Mojra

People Monitor

Second Story UD Karya Abadi (hereinafter referred to as Karya Abadi) is a primary industry or IUIPHHK holder with the capacity of ≤6.000 M³/Year, where the owner is the same with UD Kawus Masauh, that is initials RF alias IS. Karya Abadi is certified LK from LVLK Sucofindo Number 00623, valid from 21 May 2015 until 20 May 2018, and it was revoked in 2016. Meanwhile, PT Gaung Satyagraha Agrindo (hereinafter referred to as Gaung) received IUPHHK-HA permit and the area is 49.490 ha since 2001. Gaung also has had PHPL certificate from PT Rensa Global Trust (LVLK) which ended on 26 June 2021. Karya Abadi as primary industry actor has timber supplier, that is Gaung, IUPHHK-HA concession holder. In the practice, Karya Abadi is suspected of illegal logging outside Gaung area, but uses timber document from Gaung. In addition to having wood with Gaung, Karya Abadi also has a timber supplier cooperation with other natural forest concession companies. Karya Abadi is allegedly organized and mobilized workforce to do illegal logging in Gaung concession, but outside RKT; in PT Hutan Mulya concession; in HKm of Baraoi Bersatu Cooperative; and in state forest in Batu Tukan village, TBG Tanggui, and Telok village. Unlucky, Ngaju indigenous people finds out that this practice has been going on for more than 10 years ago. Karya Abadi is allegedly deployed truck and tronton around 100 unit and excavator and bulldozer around 30 unit. Estimated timber which is allegedly illegally felled is about 1.000 m3 and the types are Benuas and Karuing. Gaung provides places to accommodate illegal logging result surrounding the concession. All timber from illegal logging result from those forests is allegedly labeled on behalf logs from Gaung for later being sawed by Karya Abadi. After that, the processed timber is sent by Karya Abadi to Surabaya through two lanes, they are Sampir and Banjarmasin ports. In formation from the monitor, the processed timber is allegedly sent to UD Ongko and UD Cahaya Baru in Surabaya East Java. On 20 February 2016, Central Kalimantan JPIK has filed a complain to LVLK Sucofindo about illegal timber receipt by Karya 45

People Monitor

Abadi. On 25 August 2016, S-LK Karya Abadi was revoked. In November 2020, along with PPLH Mangkubumi and National JPIK National, the community reported the alleged illegal logging to Law Enforcement Officers. In December 2020 was made an arrest and detention to the owner of Karya Abadi all at once Kawus Masauh. In February 2021, PPLH Mangkubumi reported Gaung to LVLK PT Rensa Global Trust, and now S-LK of Gaung has been revoked.

Picture 5. Suspected Timber from Illegal Logging by UD Karya Abadi Central Kalimantan

Picture 6. Suspected Timber from Illegal Logging labeled/barcode by PT GSA which is sent to UD Karya Abadi Central Kalimantan

People Monitor

Illegal Logging under Pretext of the Community SVLK Monitoring in North Maluku “Business license has expired, timber legality certificate also has expired, but still logging in the forest.” Adlun Fikri, a monitor from Central Halmahera, North Maluku (December 2020).

North Maluku is a central of biodiversity in Indonesia. According to the data from World Bank, this region has 26 species of endemic birds, eleven endemic mammals, nine endemic amphibian and reptiles, and more than 100 species of endemic land snail. More that 70 % of these endemic animals depends on forest. So, the sustainability of various bio diversities is closely related to how the living space in the forest is preserved. The increasing of deforestation in Indonesia gives impact to forest and biodiversity, one of the example is the change of the designation of an area from previously forest to plantation. In transition phase, there is land clearing activity by massive logging and the timber is ‘utilized’ to be processed and traded so that the timber as a forestry product is also applied timber legality in the form of SVLK. The largest and most intact forest coverage in North Maluku are Aketajawe and Lolobata National Park in Halmahera. Besides having a shady and natural trees, these National Parks are important areas in the protection of endemic birds. There are at least 24 from 26 species of Indonesian endemic birds are in these areas. And the most important thing, there are eight bird species and some of which are threatened or vulnerable to extinction. Legal disciplinary measures for timber and forestry business actors through SVLK related to all of these. These National Parks, like it or not is a source of wood. And with all limitations it allows the timber is being exploited from these National Park areas. So, SVLK’s concern doesn’t only focus on tracing the origin of the timber, but also how is the impact of the biodiversity from the original forest? Moreover, forest that is legally not allowed to utilize the timber. Even, a friend said that we are not allowed to pull grass in national park area. If any animal or plant dies, let it decomposes naturally.

People Monitor

In the next story, we will share the experiences of SVLK monitoring in Halmahera that is carried out by the community related and concerning forest land which is transitioning to plantations area through a timber utilization permit. Moreover, we also will talk about how the sawmill industries process timber that is suspected to have come from forest conservation area. We found that SVLK helps to see not on which the subject is doing illegal logging, but how does the subject do logging on which forest object. The monitoring of suspected illegal logging which is carried out by indigenous people in Halmahera focuses on two business unit of timber utilization, they are Tonidora farmer group and CV Sula Baru, and two business unit of sawmill business, they are PT Mahakarya Hutan Indonesia and UD Ketapang. The stories of the monitoring result of Halmahera indigenous people North Maluku consist of 4 stories. First Story: Tonidora Farmer Group In this part, we would like to tell about a farmer group which received timber utilization permit that is suspected of logging when the permit has expired and carried out the logging not in the permit area. The farmer group name is Tonidora. Tonidora is permit holder of Timber Utilization (IPK) in Other Land Uses (APL) in Fritu village, North Weda sub-district, Central Halmahera district, North Maluku, based on the Decree of the Head of Forestry Service of North Maluku province Number: 522.1/ Kpts/26/2019 on 8 February 2019 which is valid for a year. The area of IPK is 1,000 ha. Tonidora has started to log since December 2018 until now. This group received Timber Legality Certificate (S- LK) since May 2019, but it was frozen on 30 January 2020. Based on the information of LVLK PT Equality in December 2020, Tonidora has submitted S-LK again. However, because they have not fulfilled all the requirements, PT Equality as the verification body has not carried out an assessment.

People Monitor

Tonidora is suspected of illegal logging outside IPK area and collected the timber in timber shelter (TPK) in the forest. The location of logging outside the IPK area is in the state forest. Based on the survey in April 2019, from the coordinate which we got, Tonidora has crossed about 0.7 kilometers to the state forest area with production forest status which is convertible (HPK). Meanwhile, the monitoring result in November until December 2020, the logging location as far as 2.2 kilometers outside IPK-APL area of Tonidora. Based on our observations in January 2021, the timber from illegal logging until this report made is still in Forest TPK of Tonidora. The monitor from the community suspected that the illegal logging timber will be sold or will be circulated to the sawmill industries after the submission process of SVLK to PT Equality has been successful. Based on our communication with PT Equality, they have not carried out an assessment because there are still any requirements that have not been met. In the previous period, specifically in the end of 2008, Tonidora has brought many heavy equipments from such contractor in log pond location or log shelter in Sarono hamlet, Fritu village. The logging contractors used by Tonidora are PT Putra Djaya Makmur and PT Sazad Abadi Perkasa. Felled wood around 6,000 m3 is sent to some companies in Surabaya and Gresik East Java, through the port of Tanjung Perak Surabaya. In order to support the logging activity, Tonidora and the contractors do road opening to the logging location. In the mid of February 2019, a number of indigenous people from Fritu and Sagea villages protested the company after they knew that their plantations with nutmeg plant are evicted for road opening activity and logging activity. Until now, the community hasn’t received compensation yet. Furthermore, a number of indigenous people and traditional figures in Fritu also concerned about their names and their signatures which are taken in the document of farmer group establishment in 2017. Arkipus Kore, a public figure of Fritu, claimed to have reported the falsification case to Halmahera Police office on 5 February 2019, but there is not any responses.

People Monitor

Based on the information from Arkipus Kore, one of public figures in Fritu village, IPK Tonidora has ended in February 2020, then they are given other extension by Forestry Office of Halmahera province for transporting the rest of the felled wood until August 2020. However, this permit renewal is not yet found by the monitor. Moreover, the logging contractor which is temporarily operating by using IPK-APL is no longer under someone with the initials UL. Based on information of some communities, UL is an old actor in timber business in Halmahera. He is a logging contractor for some APK in Halmahera, one of them is PT Mohtra Agung Persada, Dote village East Weda sub-district as far as 2.2 kilometers from Tonidora IPK area. An independent monitor on 14 January 2021 reported a suspected illegal logging by Tonidora to Gakkum the Ministry of Forestry and Environment. On 24 March 2021, Gakkum has responded the report and the monitor is still waiting the follow-up from Gakkum until now.

Picture 7. Hundreds of log of various types are collected in the log pond of Tonidora farmer group in Fritu village, Central Halmahera (3 Dec 2020)

People Monitor

Picture 8. Alleged map in logging location outside IPK area of Tonidora farmer group (Survey 8 Desc 2020)

Picture 9. Timber Circulation Chain from IPK of Tonidora farmer group

People Monitor

Second Story: CV Sula Baru CV Sula Baru (hereinafter referred to as Sula Baru) is a permit holder of timber utilization (IPK) of Other Land Uses (APL) on the land of 4 farmer groups in Auponhia village. The IPK area is 1,000 ha. The IPK land contains Red Meranti wood, White Meranti wood, Matoa wood, and Palapi wood. Those woods are felled down by Sula Baru and sent to some companies in Surabaya. Meanwhile, the 1,000 ha land is planned to plant Cloves and Nutmeg by the farmer groups. Sula Baru is S-LK holder from LVLK PT Lambodja Certification. However, on 27 January 2021, the certificate of Sula Baru was declared frozen by the LVLK because did not respond to their surveillance notice. The freezing information is obtained by the monitor after PPLH Mangkubumi sent a letter to LVLK PT Lambodja to ask information related to the timber circulation of Sula Baru. Based on the information from the community of Auponhia village through the head of the farmer group, Sula Baru is suspected of logging outside IPK concession in APL by intruding into the production forest which is claimed by the community Auponhia village as communal land in the form of village forest. In the investigation of a monitor in the field, it is found processed timber in the form of boards and blocks in IPK concession area. The monitor got information that the timber is allegedly belong to a military member which is being commercialized in Sanana island. In the implementation of K3, the monitors found that the workers Of Sula Baru do not use safety equipment which it doesn’t fit with the norm in SVLK assessment. As long as Sula Baru operates, it is recorded that there have been twice work accidents. Furthermore, there is an allegation of land grabbing by Sula Baru by logging in public land that is owned by Auponhia village. The land status is production forest. The permit of IPK is valid for a year which means that on 30 December 2020 is the last day of IPK permit owned by Sula Baru. Based on the monitoring in the field on 30 December 2020, Sula Baru was still transporting the timber from logging location to TPn (the shelter) of Sula Baru.

People Monitor

Based on the monitoring in the field and an analysis towards the related law and regulations, so it can be concluded that there is a disobedience of IPK permit holder of Sula Baru in the management of Sustainable Production Forest (PHPL) and the rights of local indigenous people according to the principles FPIC (Free, Prior and Informed Consent). On the result of the monitoring investigation which found illegal logging case by Sula Baru outside concession area, so it has been sent a complain letter to LVLK Lambodja Sertifikasi with the substance recommends LVLK to immediately conduct a special audit to explore the origin of the timber produced by Sula Baru. LVLK has frozen S-LK of Sula Baru and the IPK permit has been revoked.

Picture 10. Timber Circulation which is alleged illegal in CV. Sula Baru

People Monitor

Picture 11. Coordinate point in the logging location of CV Sula Baru (Dec 2020)

Third Story: PT Mahakarya Hutan Indonesia PT Mahakarya Hutan Indonesia (hereinafter referred to as MHI) is a sawmill company or IUIPHHK holder located in Teluk Miahing, Kakaraino village, East Halmahera District, North Maluku. MHI or previously named Mahakarya Agra Pesona is two permits holder company, they are IUIPHHK (primary industry) the capacity of 5.900 m3/year and the details are sawn timber of 5.000 m3/year and wood chips of 900 m3/year and IUPHHK-HA (concession permit) which the area is around 36.860 Ha. It is located in East Halmahera district and the the permit validity period is 45 years starting from 10 March 2017. The two permits owned by MHI have been verified the timber legality by LVLK PT Borneo Wanajaya Indonesia where is the validity period is 25 July 2020 until 24 July 2021. This monitoring is focused on log timber processing industry (IUIPHHK) owned by MHI. Based on the information from the local community, MHI does not only process log timber in the industry location, but there is also sawing activity and wood sales in the area of kilometers 1 and 2. It is suspected that the processed timber is from kilometers 1 and without timber document in the form of SKSHHK and travel document. Moreover, directly the volume of the processed timber is not recorded in the productions result so that the production record is smaller than the logging. Because of this, the country is harmed because the Government doesn’t receive fees and standing replacement value.

People Monitor

According to the Field Manager of MHI, initials P, the company has made 2 sales of sawn timber. They sell it to UD Boyolali in Ternate city. The time of the sales is unknown. From the worker’s confession in the sawmill industry, since he worked in the beginning of February 2020 until the operational is temporarily stopped by the company in August 2020, there is not any timber comes out for sales activity. Related to employment and K3 (it is found a discrepancy between the field condition and what it is written in the S-LK document audit and the suspiciousness of other violation indications: (1). There are no evacuation route signs; (2). There are no warning banners of work safety, such as advices on the use of personal protective equipment (APD) for the workers is not complete and not all the workers use APD. Based on the findings of the field monitoring above, we conduct some analyses as follows: First, the monitor found processed timber pile in the logpond of PT MHI’s concession area, where a logpond should be used for hoarding logs. While the processed timber should be in the primary industri of PT MHI. On the findings, the monitor is still investigating until now. As the follow-up, until this report made, the monitor has compiled a complain letter to LVLK PT Borneo Wanajaya Indonesia. Second, as the company of two timber forest product utilization business permits holder (IUPHHKHA & IUIPHHK), PT Mahakarya Agra Pesona or PT Mahakarya Hutan Indonesia takes advantage of this opportunity by producing sawn timber outside the industry area (kilometers 1 & 2). The production timber in kilometers 1 & 2 is allegedly not included in the production record. Therefore, the volume of logs supplied to the processing industry is estimated more than recorded in the transfer/sales report of PT Mahakarya Agra Pesona/PT MHI. Moreover, the company is suspected of cheating in the number of logs supply, the production record, and the sales. Critical note from PPLH Mangkubumi all at

People Monitor

once as the future lesson learned, the monitoring will not be effective if carries out monitoring in two point of timber transfer or only in the two parties transacting. In the two point or the two parties, it will not reflect the practice of legal timber administration as required in SVLK. Based on the monitoring experiences of PPLH Mangkubumi, the critical point from timber administration is outside that two point or those parties, either the previous point or the next point. At those critical points, illegal logging practice or illegal trading might be found. PPLH Mangkubumi with the monitors have compiled a complain report to certification body named PT Borneo Wanajaya Indonesia.

Picture 12. Timber Circulation of PT Mahakarya Hutan Indonesia

Picture 13. Pile of logs and Sawn Timber in kilometer 1 and 2 of PT MHI 56

People Monitor

Fourth Story: UD Ketapang UD Ketapang is an IUIPHHK holder or a primary industry with the capacity of 5,000 m3/year, located in Woda village Woda sub-district, the City of Tidore Kepulauan, North Maluku. This UD is owned by initials MU with the investigation value of IDR < 500 million. PT Mutuagung Lestari (MAL) as the certification body has carried out the audit of SVLK and then issued Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK) to the UD Ketapang No: LVLK-oo3/MUTU/LK-656 and the certificate is valid from 04 November 2019 until 03 November 2025. However, in December 2020, S-LK of UD Ketapang has been revoked by LVLK PT MAL because they do not response the notification letter for a surveillance. The monitor got the revocation information when this report is being compiled. The information from the community of Woda village, that occurs illegal logging in Aketajawe Lolobata National Park and the timber is supposed to be shipped to UD Ketapang in early of 2020. Based on the investigation result of the Independent Monitor, it has been found the tree stumps of Red Jabon (Anthocephalus macrophyllus) or in local is called Teak (Tectona grandis). Then, the monitor carried out investigation by disguising as the timber buyer. The monitor used a cover-story as a timber buyer in UD Ketapang. The monitor got information from the owner of UD Ketapang that the timber with certain size has been sent to wood trader in the city of Ternate. The monitor continued the investigation to the city of Ternate which is connected as the timber buyer of Red Jabon from UD Ketapang. It has been confirmed that the wood trader in Ternate bought wood from UD Ketapang. The initial conclusion from this monitoring in November 2020, that illegal logging has been taken place in Aketajawe Lolobata National Park area with the timber type is Red Jabon and Teak which is accommodated by UD Ketapang. PPLH Mangkubumi has made a communication with Law Enforcement Officers on suspicion of illegal logging in Aketajawe Lolobata National Park with the evidence of findings of tree stumps and the information from the local community. Law Enforecement Officials are having difficulty finding evidence because the case has occurred long time ago and it is not happening anymore now. 57

People Monitor

Picture 14. Timber Circulation of IUIPHHK of UD Ketapang

Picture 15. Wood Trade Location in the city of Kota Ternate sourced from from UD Ketapang

Picture 16. Alleged location of former illegal logging in Agetajawe Lolobata National Park

People Monitor

Timber Legality and Indigenous People Rights SVLK Monitoring in West Papua “Indigenous people community has lost their land and natural resources as the impact of granting permits over the forest without knowing by the community. This monitoring will support the community to prove that the SVLK implementation by the permit holder uses a lot of illegal methods for the timber management so that the management rights can be returned to the community.” PIETER, an Independent Monitor from Moskona indigenous people of Teluk Bintuni West Papua (19 January 2021)

Illegal logging is logs harvesting which is in contrary to the law and formal rules. What is called legal in formal regulations is often considered not legal according to indigenous people. Vise versa, what becomes the daily living practices are sometimes considered illegal by the Government. In Papua, where the practice of a massive illegal logging of tropical forest is rampant for timber interest and the change of land use, gives direct impact to the local indigenous people’s survival. There are also different perspectives on what is legal and illegal between the government, business actors, and indigenous people. What is Mr. Pieter said is an example of a case how does the legal definition of timber relate to legal definition of land. Legal according to whom and for what benefit? That’s the question. Some of these things have actually been accommodated in regulations on timber legality. But still not considered enough because of the complex regulations in the implementation in the field. In addition, the legal definition in the sense of traceability of origin timber or chain of custody is not ignored in transactions of the seller and the buyer, as long as the timber documents have been completed. So, since the 2000’s, the idea emerged to entrust the traceability of wood-to-wood DNA testing (deoxyribonucleic acid). This test is scientifically and authentically able to speak about the true origin of wood, beyond document legality. However, this process requires technology, costs, time and human competence to do it. To go beyond document legality and traceability with DNA wood, why don’t we rely on knowledge of indigenous people/local communities who have a direct interest in forest sustainability? In this case, the

People Monitor

Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) monitoring carried out by indigenous people/local community in West Papua which we will tell about is a form of effort to dispel the forest destruction. We would tell the monitoring carried out by indigenous people/ local communities in West Papua in four forestry business units, namely CV Alco Timber Irian, PT Uniraya Timber, PT Kharisma Chandra Kencana, and PT Rimba Kayu Arthamas. Except Lastly, the forestry business unit is a sawmill industry or primary industry business license holder of Timber Forest Product Processing or often abbreviated as Timber Forest Products Primary Industry Business License (IUIPHHK). Meanwhile, PT Rimba Kayu Arthamas is a concession timber company or the holder of Forest Timber Product Utilization Business Permits of Natural Forest or often abbreviated as IUPHHK-HA. In general, the four business units have obtained Legality Certificate (LK) and Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL), but we found indications of problems traceability of the timber and suspected illegal logging. Let’s discuss these companies one by one.

People Monitor

CV Alco Timber Irian CV Alco Timber Irian (hereinafter referred as Alco Timber) which located in Kampung Bumi Ajo, Moswaren District, South Sorong, West Papua Province. This CV is part of Alco Timber Group. The status of the permission that is in that location is Forest Timber Product Processing Primary Industry Business License (IUIPHHK) with Decree Number (SK): 570/1127/DTSI/XI/2017 which published on November 28, 2017 by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry. Alco Timber has a production capacity of under 6,000 M3 per year. In the process of using wood, Alco Timber has obtained Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK) by Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) of PT PCU Indonesia in August 2018. The owner of this company is HBS aka Ming Ho who also the owner of the Alco Timber Group. But in 2019, This company has had its S-LK revoked. Even though the S-LK has been revoked. Alco Timber is suspected still receiving supplies of timber raw materials. In the report on the Plan for Fulfillment of Industrial Raw Materials (RPBBI) in 2019, Alco Timber Unit Moswaren got raw materials resources for wood from Timber Utilization Permit (IPK) of CV Alco Timber for 733.47 M3, and also got raw materials from CV Sorong Timber Irian for 1,994.20 M3. Monitors got the information in East Java from the communities who work at Alco Timber, that Alco Timber sends processed timber to PT Surabaya Trading & Co in East Java. After doing some related desk researches, it was discovered that Alco Timber has a bad record in making use of wood. This was proven by the arrest of the owner of Alco Timber Group HBS aka Ming Ho conducted by Law enforcement (Gakkum) of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry in 2019. The arrest process is the result of the development of the case for the capture of Merbau wood evidence by Law enforcement (Gakkum) of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry in 2018. Evidence secured are 81 containers containing 1,680 m3 of illegal Merbau wood species sent by IUIPHHK CV Alco Timber Irian and CV Sorong Timber Irian. The two companies are part of the Alco Timber Group. 61

People Monitor

After undergoing trial, Ming Ho was sentenced to imprisonment for 5 years and a fine of IDR 2.5 billions. The punishment lower than the prosecutor’s request, which was originally 9 years in prison and a fine of IDR. 20 billions. The Sorong District Court declared Ming Ho is guilty for committing a crime by knowingly accepting forest products known to have originated from illegal and deliberate logging distribute timber from illegal logging through the waters (Decision No. 134/Pid.Sus/LH/2019/PN Son). He is considered guilty of having violates Article 95 Paragraph (1) letter a and Article 86 Paragraph (1) letter a Law Number 18 of 2013 concerning Prevention and Eradication of Forest Destruction (UU P3H). July 2020, Ming Ho made an appeal to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court decided that the defendant on behalf of Ming Ho was sentenced 2 years imprisonment and a fine of IDR 2.5 billion. Furthermore, the Supreme Court also ordered wooden evidence returned to the defendant. Taking into account the history of the owner of the Alco Timber Group who has been found guilty of distributing illegal timber, then the monitor carried out monitoring on one of the companies that joined in the group, namely IUIPHHK CV Alco Timber Irian Moswaren unit. From field monitoring, facts have been found as follows: First, IUIPHHK CV Alco Timber Irian Unit Moswaren does not record timber production from log timber to processed wood in any sawing activities or in other words, there is no Log Mutation Report (LMKB). Second, does not record the production report of the processed wood. So it is suspected that CV Alco Timber Irian Unit Moswaren did not prepare a Report on Mutation of Processed Timber Forest Products. Third, indicated to produce processed wood which is exceeding the required capacity allowed. This is as conveyed by CV workers of Alco Timber Irian Unit Moswaren that if the conditions are good every a day there are 10-12 trucks of Merbau logs come into the industrial sawmill. If on average one truck loads 5 m3 of logs, then every day the average CV Alco Timber Irian Moswaren unit accommodates 50 m3 round wood. So, in one month the average CV of Alco Timber Irian The Moswaren unit accommodates 1,250 m3 of merbau logs. In one year finally, CV Alco Timber Irian Unit Moswaren average can accommodate 15,000 62

People Monitor

m3 per month of merbau logs. And this is not in accordance with the permit capacity of CV Alco Timber Irian Unit Moswaren, that is 1,500 M3 per year. Fourth, it is suspected that CV Alco Timber Irian Moswaren Unit buys wood belonging to the community through CV Muktisari, either in the form of processed wood or logs without a Wood Supplier Cooperation Agreement at a very cheap price. The owner of CV Muktisari is the Chief Hamlet of Bumi Ajo. Based on the results of the field monitoring, it can be concluded that: First, although their Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK) has been revoked, the company should still make a Mutation Report Timber (LMK) and reported it to the Provincial Forestry Service. This matter in accordance with Ministerial regulation of Environmental and Forestry (PermenLHK) No 1/2019 concerning Primary Industrial Permits Forest products. Forestry policy change process from official assessment to self-assessment in recording LMK that can give a negative impact to the implementation of timber administration if the intensive guidance from the local Forestry Service is not available. Second, CV Alco Timber Irian Moswaren unit produces wood beyond capacity permit occurs due to lack of supervision and guidance from local Forestry Service. In Ministerial regulation of Environmental and Forestry (PermenLHK) P.1 of 2019, If the primary industry expands its business without a permit, the Provincial Forestry Services provides administrative sanctions ranging from warning to revocation of the business license. In fact, CV Alco Timber Irian unit Moswaren did not receive any sanctions. Third, CV Alco Timber Irian Unit Moswaren as the primary industry (IUIPHHK) should not accept processed wood. Fourth, CV Alco Timber Irian does not make a cooperation contract with CV Muktisari. On the other hand, in PermenLHK P.1 of 2019 is stated that the primary industry is required to submit monthly reports of fulfillment and use/processing of raw materials and production to the Provincial Forestry Service. Other than that, CV Alco Timber Irian is also obliged to have a work contract with its suppliers. Fifth, in a broader context, we conclude that the Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) assessment is carried out partially to certain management units without considering the company group, that is a gap for wood laundering. This is indicated by the case of defendant Ming Ho as the owner of the Alco Timber 63

People Monitor

Group who proven guilty in the case of illegal logging, but one of the company’s belonging to the group, namely CV Alco Timber Irian District. As a follow-up to the monitoring results, independent monitors of West Papua will report violations carried out by CV Alco Timber Irian Moswaren Unit to Provincial Forestry Service so that sanctions are able to be applied in administrative matters as regulated in Ministerial regulation of Environmental and Forestry (PermenLHK) no. 1/2019. Meanwhile, the Center of Environmental Education (PPLH) of Mangkubumi will send a letter to Ministry of Environment and Forestry in particular the Directorate of Contributions and Revenue Distribution Forest about: (1). Increasing supervision of the Ministry of Environmental and Forestry (LHK) concerning the circulation of timber recorded in the Forest Product Administration Information System (SIPUHH) Online system; (2). Requesting information about the 2019 and 2020’s wood mutation data belongs to the Alco Timber Group. .

Picture 17.Timber Trade Chain of CV Alco Timber Irian Unit Moswaren West Papua

People Monitor

PT Uniraya Timber PT Uniraya Timber is one of the primary industrial companies in Indonesia in the field of timber forest product management domiciled in Katimin Village, Sorong Regency, West Papua Province. This company has operated since 2000 with the legality of Timber Forest Product Processing Primary Industry Business License (IUIPHHK) with Decree Number (SK) Number SK.17/MenhutII/2009 from the Ministry Forestry. In 2019, the company won the SK IUIPHHK Number SK.918/Menlhk/Setjen/HPL.0/10/2019 from Ministry of Environment and Forestry with capacity production of 20,000 m3 per year. PT Uniraya Timber since 2015 has bagged Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK) from PT BRIK Quality Services Certification Agency. In 2016, the company did recertification due to permit expansion. In 2019, PT Uniraya Timber is recertified by the certification body which is the same as the S-LK No. BRIK-VLK-0152. In August 2020, it was carried out the first surveillance and declared to meet. So, at that time this report was prepared, PT Uniraya’s Timber S-LK is active. For the information, this company has been involved in illegal cases logging in 2005 as reported by liputan6.com. Integrated Team for Sustainable Forest Operations II consisting of the National Police, Police Center the National Military, and the Ministry of Forestry and Immigration, arrested two suspects illegal loggers in the Wasensan Archipelago Village, Seget District, Sorong. In a village that is three hours by sea from city of Sorong, there is a logpond or wood stockpile owned by PT Uni Raya Timber. At that place, officers confiscated about 3,000 m3 merbau wood that has no legal documents. They also arrested dozens of units of heavy equipment used to transport the wood. Meanwhile, one of the company partners that receive the wood they produce is PT Haswin Hijau Perkasa in Gresik district, East Java. According to Mas Slamet, who is an employee of PT Haswin who was placed at PT Uniraya Timber. PT Haswin is the partner of PT Uniraya Timber in terms of capital, equipment and workers. The number of workers at PT Uniraya Timber is 100 people consist of 65

People Monitor

8 local Papuan workers from the village of Katimin and 92 workers from Surabaya who are directly under control of PT Haswin. SL also said that PT Uniraya Timber only receives wood and then sends it to PT Haswin in Gresik. However, information on the cooperation between PT Uniraya Timber with PT Haswin Hijau Perkasa, in this period of monitoring, there has not been found the documents as the cooperation evidence between the two companies. The monitors are guided only on the 2019 RPBBI document. In the RPBBI document of PT Haswin, no mentioning the name of PT Uniraya Timber as the raw material supplier. From the results of the search for PT Uniraya Timber’s RPBBI documents, in 2019, this company received a supply of merbau wood type from PT Bina Blantak Utama in Sarmi Regency, Province of Papua, and PT Diadyani Timber in Mimika district, Province of Papua and PT Teluk Bintuni Mina Agro Karya (TBMAK) in Teluk Bintuni Regency, West Papua Province. That matter corroborated by the results of monitoring searches, that there is a pile of merbau logs type attached with PT Bina Balantak Utama barcode at the PT Uniraya factory site Timber. Based on the findings from the observations field and company employee interviews, there are indications that PT Uniraya Timber in running its business as a primary industry is not guided by the RPBBI itself, but is suspected producing according to orders from investors or wood recipients, namely PT Haswin Green Mighty. In addition, the monitors also found other findings. From the confession of the people in Katimin village, usually the timber that entered the PT Uniraya Timber factory site is without V-Legal barcode. In fact, a pile of logs that located at the factory location of PT Uniraya Timber is barcode installed. There is an indication that the new V-Legal barcode is installed after the wood is located at the factory site. This could be the mode to do wood document laundering by PT Uniraya Timber. In terms of wood utilization, PT Uniraya Timber as the primary industry that has obtained Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK), they should record the processed wood mutation report (LMKO) when perform sawmill activities. From the confession of interview in the 66

People Monitor

field, it is explained that in principle this company works according to the Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) standard where there must be a record of the processed wood tally sheet. The informant said that PT Uniraya Timber records production reports processed wood products, and also reports on processed wood mutations. However, the employee can’t show or provide the document to the monitor with various reasons. In the aspect of fulfilling criteria 4.1 in the SVLK regarding occupational safety and health, PT Uniraya Timber does not run the rules. This is proven by the findings in the field where the employees of PT Uniraya Timber work without personal protective equipment such as gloves, masks, etc. According to an employee, PT Uniraya Timber provides equipment personal protective equipment that should be worn when employees work. But, because the company doesn’t obligate it, the employees don’t wear it. However, in the results of the 2020 surveillance, PT Uniraya Timber is declared to meet the safety and health aspect. It means, there is a discrepancy between surveillance results in August 2020 with monitoring results in November 2020. The results of this monitoring are the starting point for engagement active of indigenous peoples in monitoring the Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK). To Follow up the findings above, indigenous people will carry out more in-depth monitoring of PT Uniraya Timber and will follow up by sending a letter of complaint to the PT BRIK Quality Services Certification Agency for the findings the monitoring.

People Monitor

Picture 18. Pile of Merbau logs affixed to the barcode PT Bina Blantak Utama at the PT Uniraya Timber factory site

Picture 19. Timber Trade Chain of CV Uniraya Timber West Papua

People Monitor

PT Kharisma Chandra Kencana PT Kharisma Candra Kencana (PT KCK) is a company of Timber Forest Product Management Industry Business License (IUIPHHK) holder with Permit Number 183 of 2008. This company carries out its industrial activities in Km 09 Kampung Wesiri District Manimeri, Teluk Bintuni Regency, West Papua. PT KCK is only processing raw materials for merbau wood, the raw materials come from several areas in Papua, namely Teluk Regency Bintuni, Teluk Wondama Regency, Kaimana Regency & Nabire Regency, Papua Province. PT KCK obtained S-LK since May 4, 2017 with PT Mutuagung Lestari (PT MAL) certification body with number Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK) No. LVLK-003/Quality/LK-466. February to March 2018, PT KCK allegedly received illegal timber from PT Nurkhasanah Karunia Abadi (PT NKA) . Then on May 4, 2018, PT MAL freezed PT KCK’s Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK) with Cessation Letter number 1550.31/EXT-MUTU/V/2018 with reasons until such time determined that PT KCK did not confirm its willingness to the first Surveillance activity was carried out. In the cessation period, PT KCK then stated that they would fulfill their obligations as S-LK holders to carry out 1st surveillance. Then on July 9-14, 2018, PT MAL conducted the 1st surveillance of PT KCK and S-LK has been declared active again. Likewise with the 2nd surveillance in June 2019 and 3rd surveillance in March 2020, PT KCK was declared to meet and still have the right to use the S-LK. In addition, PT KCK in 2018 and 2019 allegedly received NonPolice Line (NPL) wood from PT Rimba Kayu Arthamas (RKA) through transportation services of PT Kaimana Papua Mandiri (KPM). Based on the Decree of the Minister of Environment and Forestry No. 350 of 2018 that NPL wood cannot be used. So that, when there is a practice the use of fallen wood/NPL is an illegal crime logging. Meanwhile, to ensure the compliance of PT KCK to the provisions of the SVLK, an independent monitor of The Moskona Indigenous Peoples of Bintuni Bay carried out monitoring in NovemberDecember 2020 by visiting primary industry location (IUIPHHK) PT KCK and performed an interview with one of the employees. The monitors found a few things as follows: 69

People Monitor

First, the monitors found processed wood at the PT KCK site which is suspected not to be wood produced by PT KCK. Based on the results of an interview with one of the employees of PT KCK in November 2020, the processed wood allegedly belonged to a wayward official that is a former Commander of the Kasuari Military Command with the initials JOW. The wood was obtained from one of local communities in Bintuni and deposited in the PT KCK which will then be sent to Yogyakarta via Surabaya for the construction of a hotel owned by JOW. Second, based on November 2020 interview with one of the employees of PT KCK initials H, PT KCK received processed wood from one of the people from SP4 Awaba Village with the initials M. The wood planned to be sent to Yogyakarta but first accommodated to one of the companies in Gresik. The wood is sent to Yogyakarta by the company in Gresik for the construction of a hotel. Third, in previous years, PT KCK was also suspected of received logs that had been supplied with NPL wood from PT PT Rimba Arthamas Wood (RKA) around 2018 to 2019. To follow up these findings, independent monitors of indigenous people through Arrow Papua NGO reported the alleged receipt of illegal timber to the regional Law Enforcement (Gakkum) of Maluku Papua region of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry. The letter was sent on February 5, 2021.

People Monitor

Picture 20. Trade Chain of PT KCK West Papua

Picture 21. Log shelter and sawmill of PT Kharisma Candra Kencana

People Monitor

PT Rimba Kayu Arthamas PT Rimba Kayu Arthamas is a company of Management of Natural Timber Forest Products (IUPHHK-HA) business license holder with permission no. SK.16/1/IUPHHK-HA/PMDN/2016. This company has been known by the people of Bintuni as a company “Arthamas” for a long time and has been operated around the 1990s in the region of Sebyar customs, Moskona and Sough tribes. The concession area is 130,400 hectares which covers the area of Tuhiba District, Tembuni, Arandai, Masyeta, Merdey and Biscoop. Based on the Audit results, PT RKA has obtained Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK) from PT Garda Mutu Prima with GMP/2020/20031 Certificate Number valid from July 28, 2020 until July 27, 2023. In November 2020, independent monitors from the “Moskona” indigenous people was carried out a monitoring of Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) implementation at the location/ concession of PT RKA and obtained findings and the information as follows: 1. Logging outside the PT RKA concession. Based on result of the implementation of Timber Legality Verification by PT Garda Prima Quality towards PT RKA shows that PT RKA uses a legal forest area in accordance with the area permission. However, based on the results of the field visits, logging activity was found outside the PT RKA permit area and entered the territory of indigenous peoples of Meyado village. The logging was allegedly carried out by PT RKA through PT Kaimana Papua Mandiri (PT KPM) as the contractor. 2. At a meeting between the community and PT KPM, the community asked a payment of timber compensation to PT KPM. The meeting took place on August 23, 2020 in Meyado village which was facilitated by the West Papuan People’s Assembly. In the meeting, The Manager of PT KPM admitted that there is a partnership with PT RKA to collect the remaining NPL felled wood Sustainable Forest Operations (OHL) in 2003. On the other hand, based on the Decree of the Minister of Environment and Forestry No. 350 of 2018, NPL wood should not be used.

People Monitor

3. PT RKA Processes Logs into Sawn timber. The monitoring result shows that PT RKA is suspected in a collaboration with PT KPM to carry out the processing of merbau type logs into processed wood in the Forest area. Whereas, based on the permit, PT RKA as a natural forest concession holders cannot process logs into processed wood. The log is estimated to be processed around March and November 2020. This is known from photos belonging to facebook account Via Kenzi Via Kenzi . The photos show that Via Kenzi Via Kenzi (Allegedly real name initials R) works at PT KPM based on the evidence such as the salary slips issued by PT KPM and employee monthly time sheets. These images were obtained from the social media account of someone named Via Kenzi Via Kenzi uploaded on December 1, 2020. It is strongly suspected that the Via Kenzi Via Kenzi account is a worker of PT KPM. This is also evidenced by the field findings of the monitors who find processed wood in the forest area as in the photos below.

Picture 22. Map of illegal logging locations outside the PT RKA concession area, in allegedly committed by PT RKA through PT KPM

People Monitor

Picture 23. PT Rimba Kayu Arthamas Timber Circulation Chain

People Monitor

Downstream Industry and Sonokeling Phenomenon SVLK Monitoring in East Java As a downstream area, Surabaya or more generally East Java Province became the center of the timber trade, especially the timber recipient originating from various regions outside Java. The following we will present about two forestry business units that serve as the downstream of the wood circulation which is suspected to come from illegal logging, namely CV Surabaya Trading & Co and PT Dwi Rimba Agung; as well as two forestry business units related to logging and trade of Sonokeling timber from the Perhutani region of KPH Jember and KPH Banyuwangi Selatan. CV Surabaya Trading & Co CV Surabaya Trading & Co (hereinafter referred to as STC) is a company holding Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) Number LVLK-003-Quality/LK/213 with validity period from July 11, 2020 to July 10, 2023, issued by Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) of PT Mutuagung Lestari (MAL). Timber Forest Product Processing Primary Industry Business License (IUIPHHK) company and Industry Business License (IUI) is located at Jl. Veteran No. 142, Gending Village, Kebomas District, Gresik Regency, East Java Province and Jl. Major General Sungkono No. 35A, Gresik Regency, East Java. IUIPHHK STC on Jl. Veteran 124 Gresik has wood production with capacity sawn of 15,000 m3/year and the other in Jl Mayjen Sungkono 35A Gresik is 5,950 m3/year. While the Upstream Industrial License (IUI-Lanjutan) in Jl. Veteran 124 Gresik has a Molding production with the capacity of 18.000 m3/year and flooring with the capacity of 2,000 m3/year. The capacity of the IUI-Lanjutan (Upstream Industrial License) is in Jl. Major General Sungkono 35A Molding production with the capacity of 15,600 M3 per year. In addition to these two permits, STC also has a TPT KB permit with LVLK of PT TRIC. The director or owner of STC with the initials RG who is known as one of the main actors in smuggling Merbau wood from Indonesia (Papua) to China and is difficult to prosecute. There are 75

People Monitor

several illegal timber cases revealed by suspected law enforcement officers involving STC, but it is unable to ensnare RG. From digital data search and interviews with RG’s “right hand” allegedly that STC still receives illegal timber. The mode is forging documents, one of them is forging the V-legal barcodes to deceive the law enforcement officers. RG also has a company named CV Surabaya Trading Industri as wood exporting company or Non-Producer Exporter with PT MAL certification body. Office of CV Surabaya Trading industry is located in Jl. Veteran No. 142 RT.001 RW.001 Gending Village, Kebomas District, Gresik Regency, Province East Java. The timber legality certificate of STC is ever been revoked by Sucofindo. In addition, the information obtained by The Center of Environmental Education (PPLH) of Mangkubumi, technical staff (GANIS) for recording timber receipts had its permit revoked by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, for committing manipulation of wood mutation records. In 2019, the owner of STC was ever harshly reprimanded by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry for receiving wood from West Papua, where the timber is actually destined for Semarang but the physical wood to the STC. The alibi put forward by the STC that there is a cooperation between STC and a company in Semarang. This monitoring activity is carried out using an open and closed method, where observers make in-person visits to the industrial locations and see the industrial activities. Closed method is conducted to interview the STC owners or workers. Monitors also digging the online data related to STC. The results of monitoring of STC are: First, some data and information mention that STC is suspected to receive illegal timber but can always escape the law, so it requires intensive investigation. Second, STC is suspected to receive illegal timber from other companies by falsifying documents, one of which uses the used V-Legal barcode. Third, STC receives log that is affixed V-legal barcode and this violates Ministry of Environment and Forestry Regulation 66/2019 regarding administration of Timber Forest Products Derived from Natural Forests. Fourth, STC conducts a routine monitoring of environmental conditions in the around of the factory every 6 months. However, the monitoring of environment condition data is not available. Fifth, the workforce at STC work by not using safety and health requirements. 76

People Monitor

Picture 24. Merbau Logs Without V-Legal Barcode (Left) and Wood Merbau Month at CV STC Warehouse

Meanwhile, the monitoring results of CV Surabaya Trading Industri are: PT Surabaya Trading Industri is a forestry industry located in Gresik, beside as a primary industry, PT Surabaya Trading Industri is also registered as exporter of processed wood and other building materials. Name of Industry Address Business License TDP Number Product Audit Body

PT Surabaya Trading Industri Jl. Veteran No. 142 RT.001 RW.001 Gending Village, Kebomas District Gresik Regency, East Java Province No. 246-17-P.I/437.74/PM/2017 No. 13.02.1.47.03197 Kayu Olahan PT Mutuagung Lestari

The monitoring team conducts monitoring in location of PT Surabaya Trading according to the address we have. The wood processing activity at the location is running normally, even we got some informations from the director of PT Surabaya Trading Industry as follows: • PT Surabaya Trading Industri having its address at Jl. Major General Sungkono No. 35A and on Jl. Veteran No. 142 which both operate normally; • The main office or the industrial center is the one on Jl. Veteran No. 142; • The owner is Ricky Gunawan; We found a new mode on PT Surabaya Trading Industri by not processing the logs they own but only as evidence or complement that he processes 77

People Monitor

wood from logs, but he brings in the processed wood from Kalimantan and Papua; • Wood logs are only available at the head office, namely Jl. Veteran No. 142, while on Jl. Mayjend Sungkono only has wood processed: (6). Both industries, on Jl. Veteran No. 142 and Jl. Major General Sungkono are producing processed wood • Wood raw materials are received from Kalimantan, Sulawesi and Papua • At the location on Jl. Veteran No. 142, some things we can say are the following: –– There are piles of processed wood of various types of timber, one of them is merbau with the size of the rail bearing. –– Pile of timber in the size of finger joint, flooring, molding, etc. –– Processed wood is not accompanied by a tally sheet as the requirements in order to be known the traceability of the wood. –– The wood will not only be sent to the area or the local market but also be shipped overseas to China and Japan. Currently, the monitors are continuing to dig and delve that there is an allegation of illegal timber business from West Papua which was received and circulated by CV STC through non-producer exporters, CV STI. Currently, the Center Environmental Education (PPLH) Mangkubumi is finalizing the complaint report about the disobedience and violations committed by CV STC for the provisions in the Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK). The complaint Report IS addressed to Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) of PT TRIC. There are obstacles for the Center of Environmental Education (PPLH) Mangkubumi to report criminal allegations committed by CV STC to law enforcement officers. This is because the crime is occurred in the past. A lesson learned. The establishment of CV STI as a non-producer exporter aims to support the export process of wood products generated by CV STC. Thus, in the context of obedience against the provisions of the SVLK, checking is only can be carried out one step back, that is only from CV STI to CV STC. 78

People Monitor

Picture 25. Loading the merbau processed wood from Papua at CV STI and STC’s log and processed log warehouse (right)

Picture 26. PT Surabaya Trading & Co. timber supply chain

People Monitor

PT Dwi Rimba Agung PT Dwi Rimba Agung has an office and factory on Jl. Raya Sememi No. 7, Benowo Sub-district, Surabaya City, East Java Province. This company has a Timber Forest Products Primary Industry Business License (IUIPHHK) with production capacity > 6.00 M3 and IUILanjutan with investment value is > Rp. 500 Million. The production capacity of sawn timber of this company is 5,000 m3/year, Dry Kiln 5,000 m3/year and Molding 4,000 m3 per year. PT Dwi Rimba Agung has a Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) that issued by PT Sucofindo (Persero), namely VLK 00588 with a period of valid from April 17, 2015-16 April 2021. The Center of Environmental Education (PPLH) of Mangkubumi in November-December 2020 conducted monitoring to PT Dwi Rimba Agung. The results of the monitoring on the legal aspect, namely PT Dwi Rimba Agung has complete permits, starting from TDP, Business license Number, IUIPHHK, IUI-Lanjutan, Environmental Permit and SVLK. Other than that, it is found that there are other companies that carry out activities at the the same address as PT Dwi Rimba Agung, namely PT Gunung Giri Perkasa which is a non-producer exporter and has a Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK). In terms of the legality of raw materials and production, there are some of the monitoring findings: •

•

In the FWI report (2020), it is stated that on August 20, 2020 there is a shipment of illegal timber from the Aru Islands, specifically from UD Zahra Pratama with the aim of PT Dwi Rimba Agung. The wood is suspected to have come from natural forests in Aru Islands, Maluku. UD Zahra Pratama which is located at Jl. paradise, Aru Islands, Aru Islands sub-district, Maluku, in the SILK data of The Ministry of Forestry and Environment, does not have SVLK. UD Zahra Pratama is not registered in PNBL Online system of Ministry of Environment and Forestry, but there is a Legal Certificate document Forest Products and Transport Note Documents from the Ministry of Environment and Forestry. In the Decision of the Surabaya District Court Number 2182/ Pid.B/LH/2019/PN SBY on September 27, 2019, decided the 80

People Monitor

defendant TS, the Director of PT Rajawali Papua Foresta is guilty of smuggling Merbau wood from Papua between 2017-2018. One of the facts revealed in trial is that there are 36 companies or individuals who become the destination of illegal merbau timber shipments from PT Rajawali Papua Forest. One of them is CV Dwi Rimba Agung Surabaya. On the environmental aspect, PT Dwi Rimba Agung has environmental permit document. However, the activities of PT Dwi Rimba Agung on July 28, 2020 and August 13, 2020 pollutes Western Regency housing area. Due to the malfunction of the chimney, the sawdust scattered and it is polluted Western Regency housing area which is near the factory. The pollution is not reported to the authorities but resolved by means of the company by paying the actual compensation of IDR. 28,000,000,. However, the residents just receive around IDR. 18,000,000. This compensation is not only borne by PT Dwi Rimba Agung but also by PT Gunung Giri Perkasa and PT Kharisma Jaya. For the wood oven process, PT Dwi Rimba Agung uses coal. Use of coal as fuel is potentially pollute the environment. The ash from burning coal must also be treated properly before being discharged into the environment or utilized. On January 14, 2021, the Center of Environmental Education (PPLH) of Mangkubumi has sent a letter of complaint to LVLK Sucofindo regarding the receive of processed wood by PT Dwi Rimba Agung Surabaya East Java that is sent from UD Zahra Pratama, Aru Islands, Province Maluku. For this, the Center of Environmental Education (PPLH) of Mangkubumi recommends Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) of Sucofindo to conduct an audit to ensure the validity of the origin of the source of raw materials received by PT Dwi Rimba Agung for the period of August – December 2020. Moreover, the Center of Environmental Education (PPLH) of Mangkubumi also has sent a letter of complaint dated December 15, 2020 to the Mayor of Surabaya regarding air pollution caused by the production activities of PT Dwi Rimba Agung. On the report of the Center of Environmental Education (PPLH) of Mangkubumi to Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK), Sucofindo on January 14, 2021, Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK), Sucofindo on February 8, 2021 conducted a special field audit to PT Dwi Rimba Agung in Sidoarjo Surabaya, East Java. 81

People Monitor

Picture 27. Timber Delivery Documents from UD Zahra Pratama to PT Dwi Rimba Agung

Picture 28. Transiting Merbau Timber by KM Asia Ship to PT Dwi Rimba Agung

People Monitor

Picture 29. Pile of Timber in PT Dwi Rimba Agung Factory

Picture 30. Flow of Illegal Logging from Forests Supplied by UD Zahra to PT DRA

People Monitor

Perum Perhutani KPH Jember Based on the Certificate of Sustainable Production Forest Management (S-PHPL) issued by PT Equality Indonesia with the Certificate of Sustainable Production Forest Management (S-PHPL) number 041.4/EQC.PHPL/VII/2020 which is valid until May 17, 2021 as part of the forest resource management unit (SDH) of the East Java Regional Division, the area of KPH Jember reached 71,776.49 Ha. KPH Jember itself is divided into three classes of companies, namely, Teak, Mahogany, and Pine. Outside these 3 types of wood, KPH Jember also has Sonokeling plant which is concentrated in blocks 14, 15, and 19 RPH Sabrang BKPH Ambulu. Although there has never been any official felling, Sonokeling logs from RPH Sabrang, especially block 14, are often felled under the pretext of rongkatan or disaster. There has been a practice of illegal logging of sonokeling wood in the protected forest block 35 of RPH Sabrang BKPH Ambulu Perhutani KPH Jember by Mr. Robi, who is suspected of collaborating with wayward officials of Perhutani KPH Jember. The logs from illegal logging enter to the number of industries, including UD Albarokah, UD Sumber Rejeki. Both industries have Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK). In addition to these two industries, Sonokeling (Sonokeling) wood was also sent to UD Semi Jaya Perkasa and CV Makmur Greenindo Multifarm. Both industries do not have Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK). The four industries are located in Jember. The four companies use a profit-sharing system with Mr. Robi, that is 50% of the profits from the illegal logging activities. The Sonokeling wood sold by Perhutani, after being investigated by observers, is not listed on Perhutani’s online timber sales website, www.tokoperhutani.com. Thus, it is suspected that the timber and the proceeds from the sale were not recorded in the assets of the Perum Perhutani company. Sonokeling wood should not be cut because it is in protected forest. Furthermore, Sonokeling is a type of wood that is included in CITES Appendix 2 where its circulation must obtain a distribution permit from the local KSDA Center.

People Monitor

The Center of Environmental Education (PPLH) of Mangkubumi is currently investigating this case, especially the parties involved in the illegal practice of logging Sonokeling wood in KPH Jember. If strong evidence is found, the Center Environmental Education (PPLH) of Mangkubumi will report to law enforcement and a letter of complaint to Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK)

Picture 31. The Flow of Sonokeling Circulation in KPH Jember

People Monitor

Picture 32. PK Perhutani Ambulu (BKPH Ambulu) dan Puger Kulon (BKPH Wuluhan)

People Monitor

Perum Perhutani KPH Banyuwangi Selatan Perhutani KPH Banyuwangi Selatan conducted Sonokeling logging activities at Chinatown RPH, BKPH Genteng, Banyuwangi. The mode used, Mr. R cooperates with the Perhutani foreman with the initial B to cut the Sonokeling by paying the slasher/labor. The Sonokeling, after being stacked in front of the foreman’s house, is then transported to the Perhutani wooden shelter (TPK) for the first type of wood movement, but some is directly transported to the industry for the second type of wood movement. Mr. R sends wood to industries in Pasuruan and Sidoarjo. In addition, Mr. R also sends wood to PT Warisan Eurindo Banyuwangi. Then, from companies in Pasuruan and Sidoarjo and then exported to China. Likewise, PT Warisan Eurindo sells its products to companies in Jombang or exports it to China. Sonokeling product types are floors, walls, and house fences. The logging is not registered in Perhutani’s online timber sales system (tokoperhutani.com). Timber from the sawmill is belonging to Mr. R (whose company name is not yet known) accommodates illegal logs from Perhutani forests. Sonokeling illegal logging is carried out openly by blandong (a lumberjack) because he received support from the lower level Perhutani officer, namely the foreman. The Sonokeling, which is suspected to have been the result of illegal logging, also went to a company that has a Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK), namely PT Warisan Eurindo. The pretext used is that PT Warisan Eurindo, based on the RPBBI document, it has a supply contract with Perum Perhutani for Sonokeling wood. The majority of Sonokeling logging is outside of Perum Perhutani Annual Cutting Plan. This means that the Sonokeling that grows naturally is not recorded as Perhutani’s assets. Thus, wayward officials of Perhutani take advantage of the wood. This clearly causes state losses. What we learned is that the benchmark price for Sonokeling is 3 times less than the benchmark price for teak. The benchmark price of Sonokeling type A1 is 1,300,000. On the other

People Monitor

hand, in the market, the price of Sonokeling per m3 is between 8 million and 13 million. Therefore, the Center Environmental Education (PPLH) of Mangkubumi will submit a letter to the Ministry of Environment and Forestry regarding the low benchmark price of wood made in 2017 which is no longer relevant to the current market price of Sonokeling. This has an impact on state revenues in the form of the Forest Resources Provision (PSDH). It is hoped that the raised Sonokeling benchmark price will provide added value to the state revenues in the forestry sector.

Picture 33. PK Perhutani Ambulu (BKPH Ambulu) and Puger Kulon (BKPH Wuluhan)

People Monitor

V-Legal Trading Practices Allegation Why do we do monitoring? In general, in the mid of the COVID-19 Pandemic in 2020, the valuation of exports of products and commodities from Indonesia decreased compared to 2019. Surprisingly, this is not happened to exports of furniture and other wood products. Based on data from the Indonesian Central Statistics Agency (BPS), in the JanuaryOctober 2020 period, the export valuation of furniture and other wood products reached USD 1.9 billion, or up 13.3% from the previous year. Nevertheless, the facts on the ground shows that the increase in Indonesian wood export products has not been accompanied by legal and sustainable practices, especially at the level of export business actors. For example, there is still the practice of trading “flags” or names and company legality, to obtain V-Legal documents that occurred in several Non-Producer Exporter permit holders spread across Semarang City, Central Java. According to the initial information we received, this practice was caused by the reluctance of producer exporters to administer the Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) because it was deemed expensive. So they buy V-Legal from non-producer exporters. From January to April, the Independent Forestry Monitoring Network (JPIK) received information on the practice of buying and selling V-Legal documents from more than 25 permit holders in Semarang City. The practice of buying and selling V-Legal is often referred to as UNDERNAME. The mode is that non-producer exporters apply for permits which then offer services to obtain V-legal documents to MSME (UMKM) actors or by collaborating with Marine Freight Forwarding (EMKL). For further investigation of this practice, the Center of Environmental Education (PPLH) of Mangkubumi with funding support from the FAO-EU FLEGT Program collaborated with Forestry Independent Monitoring Network (JPIK) then carried out monitoring activities to ensure several legal aspects in accordance with Ministerial regulation of Environmental and Forestry (LHK) No 21 of 89

People Monitor

2020 and Kepdirjen No 62 of 2020. And of course also legal aspects other related to administrative offenses and other environmental crimes. When and how do we carry out monitoring? The stages of this monitoring are receiving complaints from the public, conducting desk research, conducting field monitoring, and writing reports. There are three important things that were reported to us about UNDERNAME exporters in Semarang, namely: (1). The misuse of V-Legal documents; (2). In practice, the V-Legal seller receives an order for the manufacture of V-Legal documents from Forwarding/EMKL (Sea Ship Loading Expedition) in which the Forwarding/EMKL receives an order from its client; (3) There are certain wayward individuals who take advantage of the business of trading V-Legal documents. Then, based on this initial information, we conducted a desk research and found 14 companies that are suspected of being the perpetrators of buying and selling V-Legal documents in Semarang, namely: PT Satria Mulia Agrotama, PT Satria Luhur Perkasa, CV Permata Berkah, CV Mekar Jaya, PT Hanita Maju Persada, CV Geulis Art, PT Ramadhika Jaya Mandiri, PT Saudara Mustika Makmur, CV Arliadifa Jaya Woodexindo, CV Mandala Setya Putra, CV TVP Prime Wood, CV Drojogan Berkah Karya, CV Lautan Berkah, and CV Indo Trading Mandiri. In order to ensure the practice of buying and selling V-Legal documents by these companies, then from April 26 to May 5, 2021, we conducted field monitoring in Semarang, Central Java. The monitoring strategy we use is to disguise ourselves as company owners looking for non-producer exporters who sell V-Legal documents. We act as company owners, company owner staff, and drivers. After they were convinced of this disguise, we sought information about the export flow, the required documents, the payment process, the stuffing process and the risk of inspection from the security forces if it happened.

People Monitor

What did we get? From the results of research and field investigations, the monitoring team tried to analyze the practice of buying and selling V-Legal documents carried out by non-producer exporters. Some of the analyses are the followings: • Misuse of V-Legal documents by Non-Producer Exporters In practice, the owner of the goods (seller) in this case is an industry or SME, buys V-Legal document at a price of around 3 million rupiahs to 8 million rupiahs for each container to the forwarder/EMKL they appoint to take care of export activities. Then the non-producer exporter or UNDERNAME receives payment from the forwarder/EMKL as the owner of the order for the export license rental broker activity and the purchase of this V-Legal document in the amount of 800 thousand – 1.5 million/container.

Picture 34. Flow of the sale and purchase of V-Legal documents

From the information obtained from Independent Forestry Monitoring Network (JPIK) informants in Semarang, UNDERNAME never knew their service users who ordered V-Legal manufacturing services, because UNDERNAME knows that only orders are received from forwarders, and forwarders hide their identities from sellers/SMEs. Then, UNDERNAME in the process of making V-Legal documents is very quickly, by compiling all the supporting documents in the form of transportation notes, buying and selling notes, and Supplier Declaration of Conformity (DKP) from suppliers. In making the V-Legal document, it is only adjusted to the packing list and invoice they receive from the forwarder. 91

People Monitor

Because they never know who the seller is that ordered V-Legal documents from UNDERNAME, problems often occur with V-Legal documents in the destination country. Such as an error in the number, type of goods, type of wood, and so on. It’s all because the undername made up all the supporting documents and if then Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) as the issuer of the V-Legal document confirms this to the license holder (undername/ non-producer exporter), they replied that they made a typo or wrong input when submitting a V-Legal document. •

Inconsistency with Surveillance Results

Based on interview information and findings obtained in the field, non-producer exporters or often referred to as UNDERNAME in the process of making V-Legal/FLEGT documents compose all supporting documents starting from transportation notes, buying and selling notes, and Supplier Declaration of Conformity (DKP) suppliers. If you look at the summary of the results of surveillance carried out by Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK), indicator 2.1.1 shows that products received from suppliers should already have Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK) or Supplier Declaration of Conformity (DKP), but in its implementation UNDERNAME does not know in detail about the suppliers, clients from UNDERNAME are only asked to prepare packing lists and invoices, even in the process of making V-Legal supporting documents such as DKP is manipulated. However, the results of the written summary meets. In addition, there were also discrepancies in the audit of certification issuance for non-producer exporters of CV Arliadifa Jaya Woodexindo. Where in indicator 1.1.1 point C on the Company Registration Certificate (TDP) and Warehouse Registration Certificate (TDG) are only TDP assessed and TDG is not assessed. The TDG should also be included in the assessment, but in the surveillance summary the TDG was not assessed and the surveillance results were declared to be satisfactory. Another discrepancy is that CV Arliadifa Jaya Woodexindo received a supply of goods from SMEs which is indicated that they did not have Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK), where the name of the supplier was UD Cipelle Furniture. 92

People Monitor

•

Weak supervision by the Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK)

In the audit process for the issuance of certification, LVLK should be able to identify and ensure that the supplied goods come from legal or legal sources. However, in reality, there are still discrepancies with the findings in the field, as happened in the issuance of CV Arliadifa Jaya Woodexindo certification. •

Inappropriate Address of Non-Producer Exporter

Of the 14 Non-Producer Exporter license holders monitored by the monitoring team, many addresses did not match, such as not finding the office location, even though the monitoring team had headed to the appropriate location. Then, it was found that there were several offices of non-producer exporters that were located in the same location or in the same building but had slightly different addresses, then the office address was for living, while the activities of non-producer exporters used a different office address. In addition, there are several non-producer Exporters whose office locations are in one with the forwarder/EMKL.. What are our conclusions and recommendations? •

Conclusion –– The results of monitoring and field investigations show that there has been a V-Legal abuse practice involving 14 nonproducer exporting companies. –– Non-producer exporters plays a role as V-legal document service providers, forwarders/EMKL act as intermediaries/brokers/ negotiators, while SMEs are the buyers of V-legal documents. –– V-Legal document sales and purchase rate are 2 million rupiahs up to 8 million rupiahs for each container, the difference in V-legal prices based on the type of HS Code. –– Weak supervision by the Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) against non-producing exporters in Semarang City has an impact on the proliferation of buying and selling of V-legal documents, the lack of LVLK monitoring on product conformity with documents, the ease of non-producer exporters in registering export products based on online, so that this becomes a gap for non-producer exporters to deceive LVLK 93

People Monitor

–– The address of the Non-Producer Exporter is not the same as stated in the results of the LVLK assessment. Of the 14 owners of Non-Producer Exporter permits monitored by the monitoring team, many addresses did not match, such as not finding the office location, even though the monitoring team had already headed to the appropriate location. •

Recommendations –– The Ministry of Environment and Forestry (KLHK) will immediately improve the Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) assessment methodology for LVLK and establish standard reporting standards for SVLK assessment so that it can close the loophole for violations, especially for non-producer exporters. –– The Timber Legality Verification Agency immediately conducts special audits on non-producer exporters in the city of Semarang and conducts chain of custody of suppliers to ensure that the timber products circulated can be legally accounted for. –– Forestry Businesses encourage KLHK/Government to provide rewards for companies that consistently implement SVLK. –– The Ministry of Environment and Forestry (KLHK) needs to facilitate SMEs who want to commit to implement SVLK through mentoring and capacity building. –– There is no limited collaboration with industry/partners with DKP. Only partners who are in the craftsman category should be allowed to apply for DKP and suppliers/partners with Industrial Business License (IUI) status are required to apply for S-LK. –– V-Legal documents are document-based only. There is no regulation regarding the obligation of physical photos when stuffing. The physical photo when staffing should be attached to the V-Legal document submission –– V-Legal documents can be issued before stuffing goods, V-legal documents should be issued after stuffing to prevent manipulation –– On the findings of massive misuse of V-Legal documents in Semarang City, JPIK will immediately file a complaint to 94

People Monitor

LVLK in the hope that a special audit will soon be carried out –– Independent Forestry Monitoring Network (JPIK) will report on the widespread practice of buying and selling V-legal documents to the Ministry of Environment and Forestry in the hope that the Ministry of Environment and Forestry can supervise non-producer exporters and immediately revise the Timber Legality Verification (VLK) assessment standards and guidelines, especially for non-producer exporters.

Picture 35. Photo of CV Mekar Jaya’s Office with Nameplates of 3 Other Companies

People Monitor

Picture 36. Location of CV Geulis Art and PT Minako Marine Logistik

Picture 37. PT Satria Mulia Agrotama’s Offer to Clients Prospective V-Legal Buyers

People Monitor

CHAPTER IV

Analysis

Introduction

he implementation of the Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) is expected to prevent the circulation of illegal timber and ensure that timber products are legally sourced by implementing a chain of custody scheme to the location of logging. The SVLK has undergone 7 regulatory revisions with the issuance of Ministerial regulation of Environmental and Forestry (LHK) No 8/2021 concerning Forest Management and the Preparation of Forest Management Plans, as well as Forest Utilization in Protection Forests and Production Forests. In addition to reducing illegal logging practices, SVLK is expected to increase the competitiveness of Indonesian products in the international market. To ensure the credibility of the SVLK implementation, the local/indigenous communities of five provinces in Indonesia carry out monitoring in their respective regions, with training and assistance by the Center Environmental Education (PPLH) of Mangkubumi and Independent Forestry Monitoring Network (JPIK) supported by funding from the FAO-EU FLEGT Programme for 2020-2021. Monitoring is carried out by an integrated monitoring strategy from upstream to downstream. In the upstream as the source of wood origin, while in the downstream as the estuary, the wood is processed and marketed. Indigenous people/local communities as Independent Monitors are expected to be more courageous in reporting violations of the implementation of SVLK/ Certificate of Sustainable Production

People Monitor

Forest Management (S-PHPL) as well as forestry violations and crimes that occur in their area of residence. Logging outside the RKT and outside the concession are frequent violations by concession holders. Another violation is the practice of illegal logging in forest areas, either by individuals, concession holders or S-PHPL holders. The most common mode is the practice of cooperation between timber players and timber companies through counterfeiting and buying and selling as well as buying and selling permits. This kind of violation will be difficult to prove by the Independent Monitor because it requires data information and documents for the permit holder. So far, these documents are still difficult to access by Independent Monitors. Data such as concession maps, licensing documents and Forest Product Administration Information System (SIPUHH) are currently still difficult to access by Independent Monitors. On the other hand, some of this information is public data which, according to the Law on Public Information Disclosure, should be accessible to the public, including by independent observers. Therefore, in order to ensure the credibility of SVLK and close the gap for SVLK violations, the Ministry of Environmental and Forestry as the regulator and LVLK as the party that verifies the legality of business actors must be more open to responding to complaints from Independent Monitors. The role of LVLK in controlling the implementation of a credible SVLK is also very important. Besides conducting a standard-based assessment and its existing assessment guidelines, checking and rechecking the data and the field in conducting a strict audit is also very necessary. The results of PI monitoring on LVLK clients can be a consideration for LVLK in the SVLK assessment. Publication of each SVLK assessment by the auditor institution is very important to close the gaps that exist in the SVLK as well as violations committed by the existing management unit. In this chapter, we will present two analytical models, namely a study of the interests and knowledge of SVLK actors on SVLK sustainability; as well as technical studies on SVLK violations from forestry business actors that have been monitored by local/ indigenous communities in 5 (five) provinces.

100

Analysis

The Community Interest Study In terms of current forest management, it must be directed at the greatest possible prosperity of the communities in accordance with the spirit of Article 33 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution, where the State controls natural resources including forests which are utilized for the prosperity of the communities. For forest management it must involve all stakeholders, namely the government, society and the private sector or the business world, these components interact with each other and carry out their respective functions in mutual cooperation. The government creates a conducive and transparent political and legal environment as well as policies, the private sector creates jobs and income while the community plays a positive role in social, economic interactions and politics, especially in supporting forestry development programs. In terminology, community participation can be defined as a way of interacting between two groups that have not been included in the decision-making process, which is dominated by the government. A more specific meaning is that participation is actually a moral incentive that empowers groups that have the potential to spearhead forest protection to take part in negotiating forest management policies. In other words, the moral incentives serve as their participation to influence the higher macro spheres related to decision making that greatly shape their well-being. Regarding community participation in eradicating illegal logging or illegal logging, it is regulated in several laws and regulations, including: 1. Constitution no. 18 of 2013 concerning Prevention and Eradication of Forest Destruction, Article CHAPTER VI Community Participation is explained as many as 6 Articles (58 – 63) on how the involvement and participation of the community in eradicating illegal logging 2. The SVLK regulation which was first enacted through Minister of Forestry Regulations No 38/2009 which then underwent several refinements with the issuance of Minister of Forestry Regulations No 68/2011, Minister of Forestry Regulations No 45/2012, Minister of Forestry Regulations 101

People Monitor

No 42/2013, Minister of Forestry Regulations No 43/2014, Ministerial regulation of Environmental and Forestry (LHK) No 95/2014, 30/2016 and finally the issuance of PP. 23 of 2021 concerning the Implementation of Forestry, the SVLK Regulation is refined again through Ministerial regulation of Environmental and Forestry (LHK) No 8/2021 concerning Forest Management and the Preparation of Forest Management Plans, as well as Forest Utilization in Protection Forests and Production Forests. The process of community involvement both in the management and prevention of forest destruction and illegal logging basically has very clear rules but in its implementation not all community reports can be accepted and followed up by the authorized law enforcement officers and illegal logging is still rampant in various regions. In its development, the Independent Monitor as part of the SVLK is expected to be able to support the credibility of forestry business governance by monitoring forestry violations and the implementation of the SVLK has not been able to fully carry out its functions. This is due to many things, including the openness of the Forest Product Administration Information System (SIPUHH) system, which until now access to the openness of Forest RKU/RKT data and wood supply chain data has not been accessed by PI even though independent monitors have followed the applicable data and information request procedures. Another weakness found by observers from elements of the community as well as observers who have joined the monitoring network institutions, often experience problems limited knowledge, understanding of forest governance, reporting flows and processes coupled with limited funding. Often in monitoring activities, the distance is quite far so that the costs for transportation and accommodation are not small. There is one obstacle in monitoring activities. Some of these obstacles lead to the problem of the knowledge system which is the basis for making SVLK policies that use a scientific forestry approach and formal legality, as well as not considering the existing knowledge of local/indigenous communities as important to be involved. Another estuary is that this system does not view 102

Analysis

local/indigenous communities as having a high interest in the forest on the one hand, and has a direct and significant impact on forest and environmental damage on the other. From a series of changes in the SVLK policy since it was first published in 2009 until now, the knowledge base and interests of local/indigenous communities have unfortunately not been optimally accommodated. So, the obstacles mentioned above can still be found today. The following is the result of our analysis of the interest base of the SVLK actors: 1. The government as a regulator and representative of the state has an interest in providing institutions, organizations, and policies for better forest governance; 2. The certification body has an interest in obtaining certification clients from the forest or timber concession industry, wood processing and exporting industries from Indonesia; 3. Sellers and buyers of legally certified timber have business interests, and environmentalists have interests in nature conservation. 4. Environmentalists are usually in non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that carry out independent monitoring. Indigenous people/local communities have an interest in the sustainability of living spaces in the form of forests and a clean and healthy environment. Therefore, based on the experience of SVLK monitoring in five provinces conducted by local/indigenous communities, we formulate a future SVLK monitoring transformation scheme in the following table:

103

People Monitor

Table 3. The Transformation of SVLK Monitoring Problem Level Superstructure

Currently •

•

Struktur

•

Infrastruktur

•

Future

The SVLK actor’s interest base currently used does not guarantee the massification of the monitoring movement and its continuity. The basis of the interests of saving the living space of local/indigenous communities (economic, social, ecological) which ensures the massification of the monitoring movement and its continuity

•

SVLK regulations formulated in a technocratic and procedural manner Complexity of monitoring procedures and complaints that are not accessible to community monitors Partial and limited monitoring of one step back wood mutation traceability

•

The number of monitors and law enforcers is not proportional to the number of business units being monitored Limited resources (funds, facilities)

•

104

•

he knowledge base used in the SVLK system and implementation is still dominated by scientific and technocratic forestry, and ignoring public knowledge Require the community’s Knowledge Base to be accommodated in the SVLK system & implementation. SVLK regulations and monitoring procedures are simple and accommodate the interests and knowledge of the community. Upstreamdownstream monitoring through networking with and between indigenous/ indigenous communities in other places. Indigenous communities as many as the monitored business units Proximity and affordability of monitoring locations which results in low funding and facility requirements.

Analysis

Technical Review of SVLK Violations Monitoring the implementation of the Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) aims to measure weak points of some regulatory principles/ Indicators and Verifiers SVLK so that the findings obtained are then analyzed by using a descriptive formal evaluation analysis method, namely the assessment measure used in policy evaluation is based on the formal objectives stated in the document policy. Assessment parameters used in evaluation is the conformity of the implementation of the good principles in the standard SVLK and PHPL regulations contained in the Director General of PHPL No. P. 14 of 2016 concerning Standards and Implementation Guidelines Performance Assessment of Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) and Timber Legality Verification (VLK) owned by the holder Timber Forest Product Management Business Permit (IUPHHK), Permit Timber Utilization (IPK), Forest Products Primary Industry Business License Timber (IUIPHHK), Advanced Industrial Business Permit (IUI-Advanced) and Non-Producer Exporter. Methods of collecting data and information in conducting analysis of the suitability of SVLK implementation by using interview method and field observation. The interview is carried out by using a closed monitoring strategy or by using cover, it is meant to get real information from sources. Field observations were made to see in more detail the movement receipt of industrial wood raw materials and delivery of wood products resulting from. This is done to ensure the company’s obligation to comply with the rules in terms of installation documents on physical wood as well as installation obligations barcode on physical wood, especially on log products. Besides it is in the observation activities carried out, monitors map the actors in a company or industry who are strongly suspected of having an interest in the existence monitored company. For the selection of resource persons interviewed by the team independent monitors are affected communities, people who have business/business relationships with monitored companies and employees who know the flow production chain of industrial wood raw materials and products wood processing at companies holding business licenses Timber Forest Product Management (IUPHHK), 105

People Monitor

Timber Utilization Permit (IPK), Timber Forest Products Primary Industry Business Permit (IUIPHHK), Permit Advanced Industrial Enterprises (IUI-Advanced) and Non-Producer Exporters. Selection of LK certificate holder objects monitored by Independent monitors based on information that obtained from public complaints, media information and data other sources from the government and nongovernmental organizations People who are concerned about environmental protection issues. The information is then studied and analyzed and Prioritization is made based on sources available information. From the results of data collection and analysis conducted by independent monitoring team, in the period 2020-2021 team monitors observe 32 companies and industry holder of Timber Forest Product Management Business License (IUPHHK), Timber Utilization Permit (IPK), Primary Industrial Business Permit Timber Forest Products (IUIPHHK), Advanced Industrial Business Permits (IUI-Lanjutan) and Non-Producer Exporters spread across West Papua, North Maluku, Central Kalimantan, Central Java and East Java. The findings and analysis of violations are as in following table:

106

Analysis

Table 4 Analysis of SVLK Monitoring by Indigenous communities in Five Provinces 1. Province

Central Kalimantan

IUPHHK-HA PT Rinanda IL Prinsiple/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

Director General Regulation of Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) No. P.14/PHPL/SET/4/2016. 2. Production. Appendix 2.1 Legality Verification Standard Wood on Holder IUPHHK-HA, IUPHHKHT, IUPHHK-RE, and Rights Management of Criteria and Indicator 2.2.1 Holder permission to have a plan legal work in accordance with applicable regulation, Verifier b, Location suitability and utilization volume natural forest wood in the area land preparation allowed to forest development industrial plant.

Suspected of committing logging outside the concession

1. From the findings that obtained by the Monitoring Team, PT Rinanda IL has logged outside the RKT that has been made with self-approval 2. PT Rinanda IL too suspected of having committed logging outside the area obtained permission, so that it doesn't fit with administrative regulations mandatory wood implemented

Environmental Education Center (PPLH) of Mangkubumi with local community who joined in Kaharingan The Institute has reported to Law enforcement of Ministry of Environment and Forestry for can be followed up

107

People Monitor 2. Province

Central Kalimantan

IUIPHHK UD Kawus M Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of monitoring

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

1. Director General Regulation of Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) No. P.14/PHPL/SET/4/2016 Annex 2.6 Standard Timber Legality Verification on Business License Management of Natural Timber Forest Products (IUIPHHK) on criteria and indicators 2.1.1 Business units are able to prove that the raw materials received from the source legitimate

Allegedly for receiving illegal timber and do forgery document

1. The Monitoring Team is alleged to have breaking the rules with receive and accommodate wood of unknown origin the suggestion

Environmental Education Center (PPLH) of Mangkubumi has report the allegation and has been followed up by Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) with the revocation of Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) on December 22, 2020

2. UD Kawus Masauh too suspected of having committed forgery violation SKSHH document

108

Analysis 3. Province

Central Kalimantan

IUPHHK-HA PT Gaung Setyagraha Agrindo Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

1. Director General Regulation of Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) No. P.14/PHPL/SET/4/2016 Appendix 2.1 Standard Timber Legality Verification on Business License Management of Natural Timber Forest Products Timber Forest Products Primary Industry Business License (IUPHHK-HA), IUPHHK-RE, and Rights management on Criteria and indicators 3.1.2 Whole wood transported outside the permit area protected by letter valid statement of results Forest.

Data/ information of Monitoring

Allegedly faked illegal timber documents, on behalf of PT Gaung, send to UD Karya Abadi

109

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

1. Monitoring team find indication violations that have been done together with other industries in the process of faking documents so that the wood the illegal can enter in the production supply chain, this has violated Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) regulations

Has been responded, with contents response: • PT RGT do audits remote to PT GSA August 4-10, 2020 • PT RGT delivered that PT RGT and PT GSA signed the letter rights agreement/Sub.L icence Use of the V-Legal Mark where in it is rights and obligations Rights holder/ Sub.License • Alleged for disobedience of PT GSG fully become the responsibility of PT GSG and PT RGT works accordingly contracts and the obligations of PT GSG is maintain the Certificate of Sustainable Production Forest Management (SPHPL) fully • Currently PT GSA renew permit to Ministry of Environment and Forestry and in progress Recertification to LS PTBWI. Kaharingan Institute invited

People Monitor

Province

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier in consultation assessment by auditor from LS and the results of the assessment have not go out. • Response/reply to PT RGT for complaint of Environmental Education Center (PPLH) of Mangkubumi N0.014/PPLH/TA /III/2021 date March 16, 2021 on PT GSA • CONCLUSION; SVLK revoked, the case is CLOSED.

110

Analysis 4. Province

Central Kalimantan

IUIPHHK UD Karya Abadi Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

Monitoring Analysis

1. Director General Regulation of Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) No. P.14/PHPL/SET/4/2016 Annex 2.6 Standard Timber Legality Verification on Timber Forest Products Primary Industry Business License (IUIPHHK) on criteria and indicators 2.1.1 Business units are able to prove that the raw materials received from the legitimate source

Allegedly for setting people in doing illegal logging by using heavy equipment

1. Monitoring team find the indication violation of Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) regulations because has done logging in the area which has not been encumbered with a permit utilization 2. UD Karya abadi has been commit a violation the provisions of the SVLK oblige every industry must receive raw materials legal and legitimate as per the regulations applicable wood business

111

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier 1.

Environmenta l Education Center (PPLH) of Mangkubumi has reported it to Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) and has been followed up with SVLK cessation in November 2020 Monitoring team has reported it to Police Criminal Investigation, Director UD Karya Abadi has set as a suspect

People Monitor 5. Province

North Maluku

IPK-APL KT Tonidora Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

Director General Regulation of Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) No. P.14/PHPL/SET/4/20 16 Annex 2.6 Standard Timber Legality Verification on Timber Utilization Permit (IPK) holders including IPPKH Annex 2.4 Criteria and Indicators 1.4.1 Business actors have IPK on AP

Allegedly not having permission SVLK and do logging outside the concession

1. On the findings that obtained by team Monitor, KT Tiodora has violated statutory regulations wood business, which required to have Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) in progress wood trade 2. Violation also related to logging outside the concession or unauthorized area in administration forest product utilization wood

The monitor team has reported to Law enforcement of Ministry of Environment and Forestry on March 24 2021 to be followed up

112

Analysis 6.

IUIPHHK & IUPHHK-HA PT Mahakarya HI

Province

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

North Maluku

Director General Regulation of Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) No.P.14/PHPL/SET/4/2016 Appendix 2.1 Standard Timber Legality Verification to Timber Forest Products Primary Industry Business License (IUIPHHKHA) holders, IUPHHK-HT, IUPHHKRE, And Management Rights Criteria and Indicator 3.1.1 Whole logs that cut down/harvested or something harvested/used has been Production Result Report (LHP).

Data/ information of Monitoring

Allegedly processing wood in the forest and do manipulation wood production records

113

Monitoring Analysis

Violations committed by PT Mahakarya HI related to log processing in forest area, so this violates on wood administratio n regulations even though PT Mahakarya HI have processing permit as primary industry

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

People Monitor 7. Province

North Maluku

IUIPHHK UD Ketapang Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

Director General Regulation of Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) No. P.14/PHPL/SET/4/2016 Annex 2.6 Standard Timber Legality Verification on Timber Forest Products Primary Industry Business License (IUIPHHK) on criteria and indicators 2.1.1 Business units are able to prove that the raw materials received from the legitimate source

Receive and processing illegal wood from the Agejawe Lolobata National Park

UD Ketapang has received and processing the invalid and unclear wood, protected area is an area that not encumbered with permission with utilization of wood forest products

The monitoring team has reported to Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) and has been followed up with Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK) cessation in November 3, 2020 Currently, Environmental Education Center (PPLH) of Mangkubumi and Malut Independent Monitor is sending a letter to Malut Forestry Officer above rampant logging incidents wild things that happen in Aketajawe Lolobata National Park. The letter contains about application for coaching to the village community around Aketajawe Lolobata National Park.

114

Analysis 8.

IPK-APL CV. Sula Baru

Province

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

North Maluku

Director General Regulation of Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) No. P.14/PHPL/SET/4/2016 Appendix 2.1 Standard Timber Legality Verification to Timber Forest Products Primary Industry Business License (IUPHHKHA), IUPHHK-HT, IUPHHKRE holders, and Management Rights Criteria and Indicators 2.2.1 The license holder has legitimate work plan according to regulations applicable, Verifier b, Location suitability and wood utilization volume natural forest in the area land preparation allowed to forest development industrial plant.

Data/ information of Monitoring Doing logging in outside the concession, namely in the forest area of Auponhia Village

115

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

CV Sula Baru is proven to have commit a violation Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) regulations on practice logging outside the area so SVLK CV Sula Baru revocation is carried out

The monitoring team with the community have reported to Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) and has been followed up with Suspension of Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK) on January 27, 2020. CV Sula Baru license has been revoked its Timber Utilization Permit (IPK) and SVLK. Conclusion: Case is CLOSED. Additional information: heavy equipment belongs to CV Sula Baru has been moved to the village of Wailoba, Mangoli, Kab. Kep. Sula. Allegedly CV Sula Baru changed its name to CV. Azara

People Monitor 9.

IUIPHHK CV. Alco TI

Province

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

West Papua

1. Director General Regulation of Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) No. P.14/PHPL/SET/4/2016 Annex 2.6 Standard Timber Legality Verification on IUIPHHK on criteria and indicators 2.1.1 Business units are able to prove that the raw materials received from the legitimate source

Allegedly received wood processed from a place that invalid; and did not report the receipt of whole logs and wood production processing

On the result that found by the monitoring team, CV Alco IT commits a violation on shelter activities wood sourced from outside the area that is not have valid permission

At the time this report was prepared, the team monitor is still doing information digging up and research on the findings that obtained

10. IUIPHHK PT Uniraya T Province

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

West Papua

Director General Regulation of Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) No. P.14/PHPL/SET/4/2016 Appendix 2.1 Standard Timber Legality Verification to Timber Forest Products Primary Industry Business License (IUPHHKHA), IUPHHK-HT, IUPHHKRE holders, and Management Rights Criteria and Indicator 3.1.1 Whole logs that cut down/harvested or something harvested/used Production Result Report (LHP)

Allegedly disobedient in compiling a wood mutation report

On the results of the monitoring done, PT Uniraya Timber is thought to have commit a violation as per the regulations timber business in relation manipulation of records in preparation of mutation reports wood that has been done

Information: In December 16, 2020, Environmental Education Center (PPLH) of Mangkubumi sent a letter to Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) of BRIK Quality for RPBBI Uniraya Timber, but it has not replied yet

116

Analysis 11. IUIPHHK PT Kharisma CK Province

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

Monitoring Analysis

West Papua

Allegedly Received wood that the origin is not clear

Information obtained by the monitoring team that PT Kharisma CK received the original wood obtained from the invalid area

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier Report to Law enforcement in February 9, 2021 (with number complaint; #210108) has not been responded

12. IUPHHK-HA PT Rimba KA Province

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

West Papua

Director General Regulation of Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) No. P.14/PHPL/SET/4/2016 Appendix 2.1 Standard Timber Legality Verification to Timber Forest Products Primary Industry Business License (IUPHHKHA), IUPHHK-HT, IUPHHKRE holders, and Management Rights Criteria and Indicators 2.2.1 The license holder has valid work plan according to regulations applicable, Verifier b, Location suitability and wood utilization volume natural forest in the area land preparation allowed to forest development industrial plant.

Conducting sawing timber in the concession, and wood from outside the concession

PT Rimba KA was found do logging outside concessions and within concessions outside the RKT, so this strongly suspected of doing violation of the rules wood management

Found disobedience/nonco nformity so that the Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) of PT RKA frozen by PT Garda Mutu Prima for 6 months since January 5, 2021

117

People Monitor 13. IUIPHHK-IUI CV. Surabaya TC Province

East Java

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

Director General Regulation of Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) No.14/PHPL/SET/4/2016 Appendix 2.5 Standard Timber Legality Verification on Timber Forest Products Primary Industry Business License (IUIPHHK) on criteria and indicators 2.1.1 Business units are able to prove that the raw materials received from the legitimate source

Suspected of receiving illegal timber and barcode forgery

Monitoring on CV Surabaya TC indicates that PT Surabaya TC did violation of the wooden shelter its origin is not clear and receiving wood with suspected fake barcode

In April 1, 2021 Environmental Education Center (PPLH) of Mangkubumi sent a letter to LS PT MAL asking for the information of log receipt data at CV Surabaya Trading & Co on the 23rd and 25th November 2020. Related this data/information request, We are waiting for a response from Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) of MAL party has respond the complaints of Environmental Education Center (PPLH) of Mangkubumi and did not find the appropriate violation alleged monitor.

118

Analysis 14. IUIPHHK-IUI PT Dwi RA Province

East Java

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

Director General Regulation of Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) No. P.14/PHPL/SET/4/2016 Appendix 2.5 Standard Timber Legality Verification on Timber Forest Products Primary Industry Business License (IUIPHHK) on criteria and indicators 1.1.1 business unit is a producer have a valid permission letter of Environmental documents (AMDAL/UKLUPL/SPPL/DPLH /SIL/DELH/ And; 2.1.1 business units are able to prove that the raw materials received from the legitimate source

Receiving illegal processed wood from UD Zahra of Islands Aru; Conducting pollution Environmen t

PT Dwi RA at the time of monitoring is suspected did a violation of receipt of wood from the illegal logging into the industrial supply chain

Environmental Education Center (PPLH) of Mangkubumi has submit a complaint to Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) on February 8, 2021. March 1, 2021, LVLK of Sucofindo sent a letter to PPLH audit results: PT DRA applies Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) well and consistently. Reporting to DLH the result is not proven. CONCLUSION: case closed

119

People Monitor 15. FMU PHPL KPH Jember Province

East Java

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

Monitoring Analysis

Perdirjen PHPL No. P.14/PHPL/SET/4/2016 Lampiran 2.1 Standar Verifikasi Legalitas Kayu pada Pemegang IUPHHK-HA, IUPHHK-HT, IUPHHK-RE, Dan Hak Pengelolaan Kriteria dan Indikator 2.2.1 Pemegang izin mempunyai rencana kerja yang sah sesuai dengan peraturan yang berlaku, Verifier b, Kesesuaian lokasi dan volume pemanfaatan kayu hutan alam pada areal penyiapan lahan yang diizinkan untuk pembangunan hutan tanaman industri.

Sonokeling illegal logging by company and wayward officials of Perhutani officers and accommodat ed by industry primer with S- Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK)

FMU PHPL of KPH Jember on monitoring results that have been conducted is suspected for being involved in the utilization of wood on the list CITES then monitors suspect FMU PHPL of KPH Jember suspected conducted a violation to planning for wood utilization

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

Monitoring Analysis

Director General Regulation of Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) No. P.14/PHPL/SET/4/2016 Appendix 2.1 Standard Timber Legality Verification to Timber Forest Products Primary Industry Business License (IUPHHKHA), IUPHHK-HT, IUPHHKRE holders, And Management Rights Criteria and Indicators 2.2.1 The license holder has legitimate work plan according to regulations applicable, Verifier b, Suitability location and wood utilization volume of natural forest in the preparation land area are allowed to forest development industrial plant.

Sonokeling illegal logging by company and wayward officials of Perhutani officers and accommodat ed by industry primer with S- Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK)

The Monitoring Team monitor on KPH Jember and Banyuwangi, from the results of the monitoring there is a common mode conducted by wayward officials of KPH Jember in do the woodcutting on the list CITES

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier There is no prosecution from Law Enforcement of Ministry of Environment and Forestry.

16. FMU PHPL KPH Banyuwangi Province

East Java

120

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier There is no prosecution from Law Enforcement of Ministry of Environment and Forestry.

Analysis

17. IUIPHHK-IUI PT Feltico UA Province

East Java

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

Director General Regulation of Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) No. P.14/PHPL/SET/4/2016 Appendix 2.6 Standard Timber Legality Verification on Timber Forest Products Primary Industry Business License (IUIPHHK) on criteria and indicators 2.1.1 Business units are able to prove that the raw materials received from the legitimate source

Receiving logging illegal timber from Papua. The sender was caught, but PT Feltico does not get punished.

In the upstream and downstream monitoring process that has been done, team monitor finds violation of wood reception sourced from illegal wood received by PT Feltico UA. This is violation of system mandatory wood business that require to receive the wood comes from a location that legitimate and legal

Environmental Education Center (PPLH) of Mangkubumi has file a complaint with Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) and has been followed up with revocation of Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK) by at November 18, 2020

121

People Monitor Non-Producer Exporter Semarang Province

18. PT Satria Mulia Agrotama 19. PT Satria Luhur Perkasa.

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

Director General Regulation (Perdirjen) of Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) No. P.14/PHPL/SET/4/2 016 Appendix 2.10 Standard Timber Legality Verification on Non-Exporters Producer

1. PT Satria Mulia Agrotama only an undername of PT Satria Luhur Perkasa. Both of them have an address that same as stated in Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK).

On monitoring activities done by Monitoring Team on permission holders of non-producer exporter spread over the Semarang Central Java area, Monitoring Team analyze some findings who is strongly suspected of committing violation of Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) regulations. Those findings contradicted with Principles/indicators and SVLK verifier as in Perdirjen PHPL No. P.14/PHPL/SET/4/201 6 Appendix 2.10 Standard Timber Legality Verification on Non-Producer Exporter Among them 1. Non-producer exporters that we observe is suspected deliberately trade the V-legal documents which is not accompanied by complete inspection of wood original documents from partner/supplier industry

From the findings and analysis, monitoring team from Environmental Education Center (PPLH) of Mangkubumi and Forestry Independent Monitoring Network (JPIK) have done some things regarding the findings 1. The Monitoring Team submits letters to several LVLK who have issued SLK on each NonProducer Exporter

2. No activity found on both companies. 3. There are two boards name at the company location: PT Satria Mulia Agrotama and PT Satria Luhur Perkasa. 4. Based on the information, the owner of both companies are Teddy Wardana. 5. PT Satria Mulia Agrotama and PT Satria Luhur Perkasa allegedly sold V-Legal services, based on proof of offering letter, packing list, and invoice company. 6. V-Legal documents found in monitoring, published by Nonproducer exporter. 7. Non-producer exporters indicated to do receipt of goods from unclear consumer and origins.

122

2. Conducting forgery of location inclusion industry, in this case Monitoring Team suspect there is involvement from

2. Coordination with Ministry of Environment and Forestry to organize the activities of forest product trade wood on Non-Exporters Producer 3. Bringing the findings results on discussion of guidelines and standards SVLK revision to be fixed

Analysis

Province

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

Monitoring Analysis

Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) that passed SVLK assessment results although in fact the location field totally inappropriate by address 3. Ownership of business facilities very such as a warehouse is doubtfully then it has an impact on explanation in implementation product stuffing in export activities

20. CV. Permata Berkah 21. CV. Mekar Jaya

1. CV Permata Berkah and CV Mekar Jaya has the similar office location at Mijen Permai regency, in the form of a residence. 2. Monitoring results in the field, there is only a board name belongs to CV Permata Berkah. 3. According to the information that obtained the montoring team, the owner of both companies is Panji Darmono and selling VLegal services. 4. Panji Darmono is a “player” of V-legal furniture undername that well known in Semarang.

123

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

People Monitor

Province

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

5. At the Mijen Permai found 1 house with 4 (four) company board name, including: . CV Permata Berkah, CV Mekar Jaya, and two Marine Cargo Expeditionary Companies (EMKL)/Forwarder: CV Putra Berkah Jaya Abadi and CV Lestari Berkah Mandiri. 6. The office location of CV Permata Berkah and CV Mekar Jaya different from that registered in SILK. 22. PT Hanita Maju Persada

1. PT Hanita Maju Persada is an undername of EMKL/Forwarder, PT HTrans Sakti. 2. Obtaining information that Company issues VLegal from consumers or MSME did not have Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK), at a cost of 2-8 million per containers

23. CV Geulis Art

1. CV Geulis office location Art is in one office with other companies, namely PT Minako Marine Logistics (forwarder/EMKL) at Perum Semarang Indah. 2. Information that obtained by the monitoring team, CV Geulis Art is owned by

124

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

Analysis

Province

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

PT Minako Marine Logistics. 3. For export activities, we get the information that VLegal publishing company from consumers or MSMEs do not have Timber Legality Certificate (SLK), at a cost of 2-8 million per containers. 24. PT Ramadhik a Jaya Mandiri

1 Owner of PT Ramadhika Jaya Mandiri is Sri Astuti. 2. Sri Astuti also has Forwarder/EMKL of PT Ramadhika Jaya Mandiri. 3. The address of two Companies are different

25. PT Saudara Mustika Makmur

1. 1 Information that obtained by the monitoring team, undername PT Saudara Mustika Makmur used by several EMKL/Forwarder: PT Jalindra International Logistics and PT M+R Forwarding Indonesia. 2. Additional information, this company trades V-Legal services to other Forwarding/EMKL.

125

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

People Monitor

Province

26. CV Arliadifa Jaya Woodexin do

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

1. There is "Register Company (TDP)” and “Warehouse Register Sign (TDG)" at CV. Arliadifa Jaya Woodexindo’s office 2. According to auditor data on surveillance summary of Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) assessed the TDP and TDG declared compliant. Findings in the field CV. Arliadifa Jaya Woodexindo as a nonexporter the manufacturer does not have TDG. 3. . Audite data on criteria indicator “Products received from suppliers who have have S-LK or DKP”, CV Arliadifa Jaya Woodexindo get wood supply from UD Cipelle Furniture in March-April 2021 period. 4. Forestry Independent Monitoring Network (JPIK) as a monitor confirmed to TRIC, it turned out that UD Cipelle Furniture is incorporated in KUB Almira in Jepara. The fact that since 2019 UD Cipelle is no longer joining in KUB Almira.

126

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

Analysis

Province

27.CV Mandala Setya Putra

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

1. CV Mandala Setya Putra is a joint venture of two undername companies; Panji Darmono (owner of CV Permata Berkah and CV Mekar Jaya) and Sri Astuti (owner of Ramadhika Jaya Mandiri). 2. Location and address of CV Setya Putra Mandala is unclear, and not able to be found.

28. CV TVP Prime Wood

1. Monitoring team is not able to find the location of CV TVP Prime Wood 2. Owner of CV TVP Prime Wood is Dody Iskandar.

30. CV Drojogan Berkah Karya

1. The owner of CV Drojogan Berkah Karya is Dody Iskandar, owner of CV TVP Prime Woods. 2. Dody Iskandar is an “expert” in the world undernames, especially for CITES of Sonokeling and processed wood. 3. Practically, Dody Iskandar use two undername; CV TVP Prime Wood and CV Drojogan Berkah Karya. 4. There are no board name of CV Drojogan Berkah Utama, but seems some activity offices.

127

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

People Monitor

Province

31. CV Lautan Berkah

Principle/ Criteria/ Indicator

Data/ information of Monitoring

1. Owner of CV Lautan Berkah is Andi Wardana. 2. Andi Wardana works with 5 undername “players”. 3. CV Lautan Berkah sells ±50-100 V-Legal documents every month. 4. No activity on CV Lautan Berkah. The office for work activities is different with the address registered. The address for work activities is in Semarang Indah regency, Block J 16 No 21. 5. We also found CV Alam Sirikit in the office of CV Lautan Berkah that is in Semarang Indah regency 6. The address listed of CV Alam Sirikit is on Jl Bedagan, Sekayu Village. 7. There are found a lot V-Legal documents in CV Lautan Berkah office.

32. CV Indo Trading Mandiri

1 CV Indo Trading Mandiri office is not an office in general. 2 CV Indo Trading Mandiri office is used for onions business.

128

Monitoring Analysis

Follow-up monitoring Conclusion for verifier

Analysis

Conclusion Violation of the laws and regulations that applies basically not only on the existence of opportunities and gaps in a system that has been structured in such a way together. The Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) is prepared by multi-stakeholders, the government, business actors and Non-Governmental Organizations for a better forest governance purposes and answering the international community’s accusations for the rampant of illegal logging in Indonesia. Gap and violations in each system are able to be covered by integrity of business actors and the government that implements the regulations. Compliance Management Unit on running SVLK and Sustainable Production Forest Management (PHPL) demands control from the Independent Monitor who integrated at upstream and downstream. The involvement of indigenous people/local communities in monitoring activities as a community that is in monitoring location as well as the affected community is a very effective in controlling the implementation of SVLK on Management Unit and License Holder. To encourage awareness and campaign on the importance of SVLK, it is necessary to give rewards for the Management Unit that is consistently implementing SVLK. For Independent Monitors, campaigns can be carried out by encouraging local governments to make regulation on the use of SVLK’s certified goods and services. Weak Supervision by the Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) on non-producer exporters has an impact to the proliferation of buying and selling V-legal documents. The minimum of LVLK monitoring on the conformity between product and documents, the ease of non-producer exporters in registering online-based export products become a gap for non-producer exporters to deceive LVLK. V-Legal abuse practice by non-producer exporting company as the document service provider of V-legal, forwarder /EMKL acts as intermediary/broker/negotiator, while SMEs are the buyers of V-legal documents. It is necessary to improve the SVLK assessment methodology for LVLK and to establish standard for reporting SVLK assessments by Ministry of Environment and Forestry so that it is able to close the loophole for violations, as is rife with non-producer exporters. 129

People Monitor

Ensure all government regulations and policies related to SVLK are carried out by all other related parties which is directly related to the derived rules. There are important things and progress with the presence of Government Regulations (PP) 23 in 2021 that it would be one of the answers related to inter-ministerial coordination, in this case is Ministry of Environment and Forestry and Ministry of Industry in accordance with its authority. During this pandemic, of course, this is a challenge for the government to continue to be able to carry out monitoring even though there are limitations related to the data and information. Government needs to prepare regulations related to the implementation of remote audits by involving Independent Monitors. Weaknesses of implementating the SVLK, the existence of a Management Unit that is easy to move to other LVLK to obtain the SVLK certificate, so it is necessary to have strict audit rules towards the management unit that still has homeworks or still has obligations in the provisions of SVLK.

130

CHAPTER V

Conclusion

Conclusion The Dynamics of SVLK Policy and Implemenation

he Indonesian government since 2002 has rolled out

initiatives to tackle illegal logging and promoting legal timber through the Verification System Timber Legality. Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) aims to ensure that timber and wood products come from legal and sustainable sources. Formally, the Indonesian government through the Ministry of Forestry has stipulated mandatory for the implementation of SVLK based on the Regulation of the Minister of Forestry Number 38/2009. The dynamics of the SVLK policy in its journey has experienced improvements and refinements, this SVLK regulation has underwent seven changes / revisions. Currently SVLK policy regulated by Minister of Environment and Forestry Regulation 8/2021 concerning Forest Management and Preparation of Forest Management Plans, and Utilization Forests in Protected Forests and Forests. The product is a derivative of Government Regulation Number 23 of 2021 concerning Forestry Implementation and Law Number 11 of 2020 on Job Creation. In Ministerial regulation of Environmental and Forestry (PermenLHK) 8/2021, there are some terminology changes, including the Verification System Timber Legality as a Legality and Sustainability Verification System SVLK). In PermenLHK 8/2021, Legality Verification System and Sustainability (SVLK) is a system to ensure credibility guarantee the legality of forest products, traceability

People Monitor

of forest products, and/or sustainable forest management. The meaning of this new SVLK makes all products must come from a clear source and sustainable forest products not only for timber forest products, but also for non-timber forest products. In the regulations are explained about obligations of all PBPH (Business Agreement Forest Management) holders, management rights, private forestry, social forestry, and the obligation of PBPHH (Forest Product Management Business Agreement) to have a Certificate of Sustainable Forest Management (S-PHL), Certificate of Legality (S-Legality) and Independent Declaration of Forest Products. In addition, it is also explained about the assessment, awarding of certificates, and monitoring carried out by independent parties in order to maintain the credibility of the SVLK. To maintain the credibility and legitimacy of SVLK, the government has formally recognized the existence of civil society as a independent monitors whose role is to supervise implementation of the SVLK. SVLK monitoring by civil society is needed to ensure forest industry compliance in implementing SVLK and seeing the reality of the forestry business actors in timber (forest) producers area and wood processing industry (downstream). Likewise towards the performance of Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK). To test the effectiveness of the SVLK policy, the Center of Environmental Education (PPLH) of Mangkubumi with indigenous people/local communities in the period of 2020 to 2021 has monitored the company forestry in five provinces, they are West Papua, North Maluku, Central Kalimantan, East Java and Central Java for 32 timber companies to forestry concession holders (upstream), wood processing companies (downstream) and export companies (markets). Monitoring results in five provinces found at least three The important points as follows: the weak of law enforcement in Timber Administration, communities’ concessions as a pretext for legality and legitimacy of Illegal logging practice and SVLK stands on the porous pillar of the TUK. In upstream, for example, concession holders and primary industries cooperate for practicing illegal logging outside the concession. Two illegalities (timber and documents) ‘transformed’ into legal and S-LK certified, other findings Timber 134

Conclusion

Utilization Permit [IPK] under the guise of a group farmers who carry out illegal logging outside the IPK area, the result of timber Logging is claimed to have originated from the IPK location. Downstream, Surabaya and Gresik are the recipient of illegal timber from various regions outside Java such as Papua, Maluku, and Kalimantan. Law enforcement are mostly done at the port of arrival, rarely at port of departure. In addition, wood buyers with legal transactions are difficult to be ensnared by law like suppliers who are doing illegal logging. While the license of the exporter company is found to have abused with selling V-Legal documents to business actors who do not have Timber Legality Certificate [S-LK]. If this is continued, it will undermine the credibility of the SVLK which has been promoted and being global world discussion as a system to prevent illegal logging and illegal timber trade. Of the 32 monitored timber companies, they have produced 15 times the report addressed to LVLK on the findings of SVLK violations, and 8 times reported to law enforcement for indications of violations of forestry crimes, 14 other companies were reported to Ministry of Environment and Forestry because they are indicated to have committed a violation exports that are not acted upon by the certification body. Companies who are indicated to have violated the SVLK and other violations forestry are reported to LVLK as well as to law enforcement. In the field, from upstream, downstream, and export are still happening deviations / violations of SVLK provisions and violations of forestry as shown in the following table:

135

People Monitor

Table 5. List of SVLK Deviations at Upstream, Downstream, and Exporters Upstream

Downstream

Market (Exporter)

• Forgery of timber documents legalized with timber certificates from Land Rights Owners (PHAT). • Timber Utilization Permit [IPK] under the guise of a farmer group conducted illegal logging outside the IPK area, the timber from illegal logging is claimed that comes from the IPK location • The company uses the claims of indigenous communities over their customary forests, as a mode of mobilizing communities to carry out illegal logging. • Logging outside the concession permit but legalized with a timber certificate as if the wood came from within the concession permit. • There are companies that do not report the realization of the fulfillment of raw materials in the RPBBI.

• Companies manipulate the logs of wood mutations as if the wood came from a particular company. In fact, the wood comes from illegal logging. • Manipulating timber transport documents by passing through various companies as if the timber had actually moved places when it had not. This is carried out to obscure the origin of the timber which actually comes from illegal timber. This is also used as a mode to anticipate loopholes in the Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) provisions which only track timber one step back. • Not reporting the mutation of the wood to the Certification Agency or the relevant Department as it actually happened. • Using a different certification body from the previous certification body, after the company has its timber legality certificate revoked.

• The results of field monitoring show that there has been a V-Legal abuse practice involving dozens of non-producer exporters • Non-Producer Exporters act as V-legal document service providers, forwarders/EMKL act as intermediaries/brokers/ negotiators, while MSMEs are the buyers of V-legal documents. • The price for VLegal documents trading around 2 million rupiahs up to 8 million rupiahs for each container, the difference in V-legal prices is based on the type of HS Code • Weak supervision by the Timber Legality Verification Agency (LVLK) on non-producer exporters has an impact on the proliferation of V-legal document trading, • The address of the Non-Producer Exporter is not the same as that stated in the LVLK assessment results.

136

Conclusion

The Urgency of Indigenous People/Local Communitiesbased Monitoring Monitoring by indigenous communities are able to have an impact on the effectiveness and efficiency of monitoring. In terms of driving factors, the community’s loss in economic and environmental sides as the result of the bad forestry practice are very powerful to mobilize the community to monitor. From the process side, indigenous people/local communities monitoring are very effective and efficient because the monitors are located at the monitoring locations and in long duration. In terms of reporting and complaints, the position of indigenous people/local communities is very legitimated to be involved in the monitoring of the implementation of the Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK). Monitoring by indigenous people can be seen clearly in the monitoring in Central Kalimantan Province by indigenous people of Ngaju and Kaharingan Institute; West Papua by indigenous people of Muskona and Panah Papua; North Maluku by Aliansi Masyarakat Nusantara; East Java and Central Java by local community around the company. The impact of the placement of indigenous people/ local communities as the main monitoring actors in this program is the increase number of management units which were successfully monitored from the original planned management 8 units [company] to 32.

Urgency of the Importance of Upstream-Downstream Monitoring Upstream-downstream monitoring is used as a strategy in carrying out integrated monitoring of timber producers locations to the location of wood processing, which is the object of monitoring in the management who has a valid permit and has Timber Legality Certificate [S-LK] and Management Certificate Sustainable Forest (S-PHL).

137

Upstream and downstream monitoring is an important role because it is able to ensure traceability of wood moving from upstream, downstream, and export. There are many forms in the implementation of upstream and downstream monitoring. For example, the Halmahera (upstream) monitor is getting an information that there is a company supplies wood which is indicated from illegal logging, supplied to one of the timber company in Surabaya, East Java Province (downstream), from this information, observers in East Java then carried out an investigation and subsequently reported the findings to The institutions that have provided Timber Legality Certificates (S-LK) and to the Law enforcement of Ministry of Environment and Forestry (KLHK).

SVLK from the Positif Side Despite the bad capture that is happened, we do note the best practices and impacts of the SVLK in the field, among others are: (i) The increase of the compliance of license holders and certificate holder to regulations on timber governance, the compliance to safety and health procedures, the compliance to environmental aspects, etc.; (ii) Some of the companies being monitored are currently cautious in buy wood by checking the legality of the wood or legality timber legality documents; (iii) Management unit that has S-LK recognizes that the bargaining power of their products improves; (iv) By implementing SVLK, companies are hindered and no longer carry out illegal activities because illegal activities have an impact on their business continuity.

SVLK the Negative Side SVLK policies are able to give impacts between positive and negative side for the wood industry, based on the results of monitoring and interviews to the business actors and related parties in the five provinces the activity targets complained that the SVLK policy had a negative impact from various aspects: First, from the aspect of compliance: Companies declared to fulfill the SVLK standards and 138

guidelines to an Independent Assessment and Verification Agency, but the reality on the field is still committing violations / irregularities that do not comply with the SVLK standard. Second, from the economy aspect: SVLK has not provided significant added value, additional cost (certification) to production costs and not increase market access yet. Third, Policy Aspects: SVLK transformation which is dynamically, almost every year is undergoing revisions that makes uncertainty in the business climate. Fourth, Aspect of Administration: for small business, strict records are very burdensome, especially when SVLK does not give an impact on the existence of the industry, especially the local market, complicated administrative requirements lead to additional loopholes transaction fees. Fifth, aspect of financing: costs for surveillance still burdensome, especially since the majority of Timber Legality Verification Agencies (LVLK) are in Jakarta / provincial capital. The number of nearest LP & VI is still lacking mainly in smallholder and industrial timber producing areas. Other than that, the certification model scheme which triggers a gap in auditor negotiations and industry will make low quality of certification.

Reflection and Lesson Learned Program initiated by the Center of Environmental Education (PPLH) of Mangkubumi on the support from the FAO-EU FLEGT Program entitled “Improvement of forest governance through system monitoring Verification of Indonesian Timber Legality by indigenous people/ local communities in Indonesia” for 15 months from June to August 2021 is able positively to contribute on the efforts to encourage the improvement of forest governance that can be used as a reflection and learning as follows: First, increasing the competence of indigenous people/local communities in supervising the implementation of SVLK through: SVLK monitoring training for indigenous people/local communities and monitoring assistance in 5 provinces, including West Papua, Central Kalimantan, North Maluku, East Java and Central Java. Second, SVLK Monitoring by indigenous people/local communities is 139

able to increase credibility and accountability of SVLK through: initial assessment (desk research) regarding the company’s performance on the compliance in carrying out implementation of the SVLK, the results of the initial assesment becomes the basis for monitoring with an upstream-downstream approach in five provinces including; West Papua, Central Kalimantan, North Maluku, East Java and Central Java. Monitoring is located at three nodes of wood movement, such as in the wood-producing industry, the wood processing industry, and exporters. Third, the findings of irregularities which is committed by timber industry and other parties that are involved have been reported to the Ministry of Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Independent Assessment and Verification Agency and Law Enforcement Officers, where the industries that are concerned has been given sanctions both administratively (suspension and revocation of Timber Legality Certificate) which impact on the cessation of forest product exports, and partly have been sentenced to forestry criminal sanctions and others are still in investigation process by law enforcement officers. Sanctions both administratively and law enforcement are expected to provide a deterrent effect for perpetrators to not repeat the similar violations. Fourth, increasing communication and coordination of the parties and dissemination of program implementation learning through: Wood Monitoring Channel (https://pplh-mangkubumi.or.id/ pantaukayu/), Focus Group Discussion “Closing the SVLK Violation Gap and Forestry, socialization and dissemination of final project workshops, Publishing books and disseminating the learning outcomes of the project through websites and social media. Fifth, strengthening the SVLK standards, monitoring findings will be used as material for evaluating improvements to the rules regarding SVLK. As a system, the implementation of SVLK in Indonesia has not perfect yet and still has gaps that are exploited by “actors” who have an interest in it. Based on the results of SVLK monitoring in five provinces by the Center of Environmental Education (PPLH) of Mangkubumi with indigenous people/local communities shows that 140

violations has benn happened which are conducted by timber legality certified companies both upstream, downstream and exporters.

Recommendation • Expanding Monitoring Actors 1. Ideally, more actors are involved in SVLK supervision, it would narrow the gap transgression, in addition to demand the necessity of the development of complaints and handling institutions for the options to maximize the coordination function between institutions that act as SVLK regulators. 2. One of the challenges of SVLK monitoring is the limit number of of indirect interest monitors, and partial; monitoring by indigenous people/local communities with an upstream and downstream approach is the future of SVLK monitoring, Why? (i) indigenous people/ local communities as much or much more than what will be monitored; (ii) indigenous people/local communities both upstream and downstream are affected subjects and beneficiary subjects in good or bad practice of forestry business; (iii) indigenous people/local communities network in multi-scale from village to inter country has been and is being developed. So, that allows upstream and downstream monitoring with duration continuously. In addition, monitoring by indigenous people/local communities impacts on the effectiveness and the efficiency of monitoring because the monitoring location is similar with the monitors location. Also, it is possible for a long-term monitoring. Efficiency is also reflected from the increase in the realization of the monitored industries.

141

People Monitor

•

Substantive 1. To support the sustainability of SVLK monitoring, a new way of monitoring is needed by making indigenous people/local communities as the SVLK monitors in each living space of indigenous peopl/local communities. They are very important in two ways, such as the affected parties and also the party that influences (give impact) the implementation of forestry governance. 2. Need to do a review on the basis of knowledge in the SVLK system and implementation, where at this time, the knowledge of indigenous people/local communities are still has not become a substance in the whole system in timber legality, specifically in SVLK.

•

Policy (government) 1. The role of indigenous people/local communities in SVLK monitoring would be more optimal if the data and information about SIPUHH (Forest Product Administration Information System), export - import data and other supporting data are opened to the public. The stated data will be used by the monitors as the material for analysis on findings of infringement practices in the field and as initial information for monitoring needs. The government is expected to immediately open the SIPUHH access data and other forestry data to the monitors on the findings of monitoring results by indigenous people/local communities in West Papua Province, Central Kalimantan, North Maluku, East Java and Central Java then the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (KLHK) needs to strengthen the principles, standards, SVLK guidelines and assessments which related to: the arrangements regarding sanctions for Certification Body (LS) who do not carry out the procedures / terms apply, for example do not publish the assessment results, surveillance, recertification, apply V-Legal documents and non-procedural in conducting assessment and handling complaint. 142

Conclusion

2. The existence of Independent Monitors who currently have been recognized in the system, should have an adequate rights in getting support from the Government. This support is able to be in the form of provision of funds originating from the budget State Revenue and Expenditure (APBN), support funding facilitation from donors and support in establishing a financing mechanism through the planned certification fund. 3. The Ministry of Environment and Forestry (KLHK) through the UPT Forestry and the Local Forestry Service have to tighten up the control towards the use of Supplier Compliance Declaration (DKP). DKP is still used by big companies as a reason for not having to follow the Timber Legality Certificate (S-LK), even though DKP was built for temporary and especially for community enterprises / SMEs •

The Implementation (Upstream – Downstream Business Actors) 1. The needs for increasing the human resource capacity of timber business actors in order to have sufficient ability to implement the SVLK policy. The number of the skills needed; Forest Product Administration, administration and finance as well as data and information. 2. Downstream business actors must be selective in accepting logs or processed wood which is supplied from the high risk areas for illegal logging. 3. Downstream timber business actors must have a chain of custody mechanism of the wood that has been produced so that the wood received is really from a legal source.

143

People Monitor

•

Support (Transnational Institutions) One of the problems faced by the monitors: there are difficulties in accessing funding that have an impact on the monitoring work. No guarantee security and safety for, companies that ‘close’ to Military or Police and the integrity of LP&VI is questioned. Monitoring activities are mostly supported by funding from donors for the implementation process in Indonesia, there is a few monitoring activity field at the initiative of independent monitors, other issues faced by the monitors are the difficulty to get data and information where the data will affect the final monitoring results.

Support from FAO EU FLEGT in Indonesia to CSOs/NGOs and the community regarding current monitoring work is feasible to be continued in the coming year, so that the SVLK policy that have been built by the parties through a long process are able to be credible and has legitimacy from the public.

144

REFERENCE Afiff, Suraya, dan Celia Lowe. “Claiming Indigenous Community: Political Discourse and Natural Resource Rights in Indonesia.” Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 32, no. 1 (2007): 73–97. Basuki, Kurniawan, Athaillah Mursyid, dan Ahmad Kurnain. “Analisis Faktor Penyebab dan Strategi Pencegahan Pembalakan Liar.” EnviroScienteae 9 (2013): 27–43. Budiastuti, Arum. “In DNA We Trust?: Biolegal Governmentality and Illegal Logging in Contemporary Indonesia.” East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal 11, no. 1 (1 Maret 2017): 51–70. https://doi.org/10.1215/187521603641422. Carson, Savanna L., Fabrice Kentatchime, Eric Djomo Nana, Kevin Y. Njabo, Brian L. Cole, dan Hilary A. Godwin. “Indigenous Peoples’ Concerns About Loss of Forest Knowledge: Implications for Forest Management.” Conservation and Society 16, no. 4 (2018): 431–40. Cashore, Benjamin, dan Michael W. Stone. “Can Legality Verification Rescue Global Forest Governance?: Analyzing the Potential of Public and Private Policy Intersection to Ameliorate Forest Challenges in Southeast Asia.” Forest Policy and Economics, Emerging Economic Mechanisms for Global Forest Governance, 18 (1 Mei 2012): 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. forpol.2011.12.005. Counsell, Simon, dan K. Terje Loraas. “Trading in Credibility: The myth and reality of the Forest Stewardship Council.” The Rainforest Foundation, 2002. Davis, Diana K. “Power, Knowledge, and Environmental History in the Middle East and North Africa.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 42, no. 4 (2010): 657–59. Erbaugh, James T. “Responsibilization and Social Forestry in Indonesia.” Forest Policy and Economics 109 (Desember 2019): 102019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.102019. FAO & UNEP. The State of the World’s Forests 2020. Forests, Biodiversity and People. Rome: FAO and UNEP, 2020. https:// doi.org/10.4060/ca8642en.

Foucault, Michel. Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972-1977. Disunting oleh Colin Gordon. 1st American ed. New York: Pantheon Books, 1980. Giessen, Lukas, Sarah Burns, Muhammad Alif K. Sahide, dan Agung Wibowo. “From Governance to Government: The Strengthened Role of State Bureaucracies in Forest and Agricultural Certification.” Policy and Society 35, no. 1 (Maret 2016): 71–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polsoc.2016.02.001. Hasyim, Moh Zainuri. “Peran Pemantau Independen dalam Sistem Verifikasi Legalitas Kayu (SVLK) di Indonesia.” Universitas Gadjah Mada, 2017. Hidayat, Herman. “Dynamics of Illegal Logging from Soeharto Regime to Regional Autonomy.” Jurnal Kependudukan Indonesia II, no. 2 (2007): 75–98. ICEL. “Penyelesaian Keterlanjuran Kegiatan Usaha di dalam Kawasan Hutan Pasca UU Cipta Kerja.” Seri Analisis #8. Jakarta: Indonesian Center for Environmental Law, 2020. Kartodihardjo, Hariadi. “Beda antara Tujuan dan Isi RUU Cipta Kerja.” The Monitor, 2020. KLHK. “The State of Indonesia’s Forests 2020.” Jakarta: Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan, 2020. Klooster, Dan. “Environmental Certification of Forests: The Evolution of Environmental Governance in a Commodity Network.” Journal of Rural Studies 21, no. 4 (Oktober 2005): 403–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2005.08.005. Li, Tania Murray. “Articulating Indigenous Identity in Indonesia: Resource Politics and the Tribal Slot.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 42, no. 1 (2000): 149–79. Lounela, Anu K. “Shifting Valuations of Sociality and the Riverine Environment in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia.” Anthropological Forum 31, no. 1 (2 Januari 2021): 34–48. https://doi.org/10.108 0/00664677.2021.1875197. Mansourian, Stephanie, Magali Rossi, dan Daniel Vallauri. “Ancient Forests in the Northern Mediterranean: Neglected High Conservation Value Areas,” 2013. https://doi. org/10.13140/2.1.5170.4640. Marx, Karl. Grundrisse. Disunting oleh David McLellan. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1972. 146

Maryudi, Ahmad. “Choosing Timber Legality Verification as a Policy Instrument to Combat Illegal Logging in Indonesia.” Forest Policy and Economics 68 (Juli 2016): 99–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. forpol.2015.10.010. Maryudi, Ahmad, Emmanuel Acheampong, Rebecca L. Rutt, Rodd Myers, dan Constance L. McDermott. “‘A Level Playing Field’? – What an Environmental Justice Lens Can Tell us about Who Gets Leveled in the Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade Action Plan.” Society & Natural Resources 33, no. 7 (2 Juli 2020): 859–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2020.17252 01. Maryudi, Ahmad, Dwi Laraswati, Muhammad A.K. Sahide, dan Lukas Giessen. “Mandatory Legality Licensing for Exports of Indonesian Timber Products: Balancing the Goals of Forest Governance and Timber Industries.” Forest Policy and Economics 124 (Maret 2021): 102384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. forpol.2020.102384. Maryudi, Ahmad, dan Rodd Myers. “Renting Legality: How FLEGT Is Reinforcing Power Relations in Indonesian Furniture Production Networks.” Geoforum 97 (Desember 2018): 46–53. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.10.008. Mongabay. “Pemerintah Cabut Aturan Ekspor Kayu Tanpa Verifikasi Legal, JPIK: Koordinasi Lemah.” Mongabay.co.id, 4 Juni 2020. https://www.mongabay.co.id/2020/06/04/pemerintah-cabutaturan-ekspor-kayu-tanpa-verifikasi-legal-jpik-koordinasilemah/. Mustalahti, Irmeli, Violeta Gutiérrez-Zamora, Maija Hyle, Bishnu Prasad Devkota, dan Nina Tokola. “Responsibilization in Natural Resources Governance: A Romantic Doxa?” Forest Policy and Economics 111 (1 Februari 2020): 102033. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.102033. Peluso, Nancy Lee. Hutan Kaya Rakyat Melarat. Jakarta: Kophalindo, 2006. Scoones, Ian. Penghidupan Berkelanjutan & Pembangunan Berkelanjutan. Diterjemahkan oleh Nurhady Sirimorok. Seri Kajian Petani dan Perubahan Agraria. Yogyakarta: Insist Press, 2020.

147

Setyowati, Abidah, dan Constance L. McDermott. “Commodifying Legality? Who and What Counts as Legal in the Indonesian Wood Trade.” Society & Natural Resources 30, no. 6 (3 Juni 2017): 750–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2016.12392 95. Smith, Adam C., dan Bruce Yandle. Bootleggers and Baptists: How Economics Forces and Moral Persuasion Interact to Shape Regulatory Politics. Washington, D.C: Cato Institute, 2014. TRIC. “Di Ultah Chatham House, Menteri Siti Nurbaya Jelaskan SVLK Dan Peran Hutan Di Masa Pandemi Covid-19.” TRIC Indonesia (blog), 18 Juli 2020. https://tric-indonesia.com/berita/svlk/diultah-chatham-house-menteri-siti-nurbaya-jelaskan-svlk-danperan-hutan-di-masa-pandemi-covid-19/. Varagis, Panayotis N, CA Primo Braga, dan Kenji Takeuchi. “Tropical Timber Trade Policies: What Impact Will Eco-Labeling Have?” World Bank, 1993. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/ en/535441468741004003/pdf/multi0page.pdf. Vincent, Jeffrey R. “The Tropical Timber Trade and Sustainable Development.” Science 256, no. 5064 (1992): 1651–55. Westoby, Jack C. “Changing Objective of Forest Mangement.” My Forest 5, no. 1 (April 1968): 1–18. Williams, Michael. Deforesting the Earth: From Prehistory to Global Crisis: An Abridgment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006. World Bank. “Partnerships for Conservation Management of the Aketajawe-Lolobata National Park, North Maluku Province,” 2007. Zizek, Slavoj. Pandemik! Covid-19 Mengguncang Dunia. Diterjemahkan oleh Khoiril Maqin. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Independen, 2020.

148

NOTE

Timber Legality Verification System (SVLK) is one of preventive devices which is developed by Indonesian Government to support illegal logging eradication, all at once for increasing the trade of legal and sustainable forestry products. The system which is developed by involving various stakeholders in Indonesia has been implemented for more than a decade. Within the framework of FLEGT VPA agreement with European Union, SVLK also has been accepted as the instrument of timber legality verification which is exported to European Union, and SVLK certificate is equal with FLEGT License. This book explains how the dynamics of SVLK monitoring by indigenous people/local communities in Indonesia.

People Monitor

Articles inside

Reference

Recommendation

Conclusion

Technical Review of SVLK Violations

The Community Interest Study

Downstream Industries and Sonokeling Phenomenon

V-Legal Trading Practices Allegation

Timber Legality and Indigenous People Rights

Illegal Logging Under Pretext of the Company

Chapter 3-People Monitor

Disturbed Living Space

The Challenges of SVLK Implementation in the Future

Independent Monitors

The Export Provision of Forestry Products

SVLK

People Monitor

BAB 2-SVLK

Chapter 1-Position

Monitoring

Deforestation & Certification

The Application of SVLK to Business Actors