MFA Spokesman's Comments: Export of "Organic Material" From Singapore to Batam, Indonesia

"We are surprised to learn that a group of demonstrators had attacked the Singapore Embassy in Jakarta this morning. We are disappointed that this has happened when both the Indonesian and Singapore governments had agreed to refer the matter to the Secretariat of the Basel Convention, as had been requested by Indonesia.

This is a matter between the Indonesian government and a private company. Nevertheless, to help achieve an amicable outcome, Singapore had offered to engage an independent expert, mutually acceptable to both sides, to take samples of the material from Batam and Singapore to carry out tests to establish definitively the facts. The next step is for Singapore and Indonesia to meet in Geneva under the auspices of the Basel Secretariat. The meeting in Geneva will enable both Parties to explain their case, understand more fully the pertinent facts and how the relevant provisions of the Basel Convention should be interpreted and applied to this case.

The facts of the case are at Annex."

. . . . .

MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
SINGAPORE
22 MARCH 2005

Annex

FACT SHEET ON EXPORT OF "ORGANIC MATERIAL" FROM SINGAPORE TO BATAM, INDONESIA

1 On 6 Sep 04, the Indonesian State Ministry of the Environment (KLH) wrote to the National Environment Agency (NEA) alleging that 1,149.4 tons of "organic material" originating from a Singapore company had been dumped in Batam. KLH claimed that tests conducted on the "organic material" showed that the material contained heavy metals, and hence is regarded as hazardous waste under the Indonesian laws.

2 The "organic material" was exported from Singapore to Batam on 28 Jul 04 by Asia Resource Enterprise Ltd, a company registered in the British Virgin Island and managed by ecoWise Holdings, a Singapore listed company. The "organic material" was imported by PT ASIA PACIFIC ECO LESTARI (PT APEL) to Batam. PT APEL had obtained approval from the relevant authorities in Batam to import the "organic material" for use as a plant media in Pulau Galang Baru, Batam.

3 Since then, there was an exchange of correspondence between KLH and NEA on the matter. Indonesian officials and NEA also met on 29 Oct 04 to discuss the facts of the case. At the meeting, Indonesia and Singapore agreed that while Indonesia classifies the "organic material" as a hazardous waste under Indonesian law, it is not a hazardous waste under Singapore law. The meeting also established from the facts of the case that, at the time of export (28 Jul 04), the "organic material" was not a hazardous waste under the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal. The key facts established were as follows:

(a) The "organic material" in question was not classified as a waste under Singapore laws; it was compost used as a soil conditioner and fertilizer. When the said material was exported to Batam on 28 Jul 04, Indonesia had not informed the Secretariat of the Basel Convention (SBC) and other State parties that it considered such "organic material" as hazardous waste that contained heavy metals exceeding concentration or toxicity limits.

(b) On 29 Jul 04, Indonesia notified SBC that it considered the material to be hazardous waste. However, Indonesia's notification to the Secretariat did not include any information on the toxicity limits.

(c) On 17 Aug 04, SBC transmitted the Indonesian notification of 29 Jul 04 to all state parties, including Singapore. Singapore only received the notification from the SBC on 27 Aug 04.

4 Following the meeting, KLH wrote to NEA that the "organic material" was a hazardous waste under the Basel Convention, and requested Singapore to take back the "organic material". KLH had, in a letter dated 10 Jan 05, informed NEA of its intention to invoke the Basel Convention to re-export the "organic material" back to Singapore by end Jan 05, without the need of consent from Singapore. (Note: On 26 Jan 05, ecoWise was copied a letter from KLH to PT APEL stating that the "organic material" was a hazardous waste and under the Basel Convention, should be returned to the country of origin by end Jan 05.)

5 On 17 Jan 05 NEA replied to KLH that as the "organic material" was not classified as a hazardous waste under the Basel Convention, the question of Indonesia invoking the Basel Convention to re-export the "organic material" back to Singapore did not arise. In the same letter, NEA had proposed to meet with KLH to discuss the matter further with a view to finding a mutually-acceptable solution.

6 On 18 Jan 05, SBC wrote to NEA offering to assist Indonesia and Singapore in arriving at a mutually acceptable solution to the matter. SBC's letter stated that the offer was made "at the request of Indonesia".

7 On 25 Jan 05, NEA replied to SBC accepting its offer and suggesting a meeting at a neutral venue, possibly at the Office of SBC in Geneva, and at a mutually convenient date between 31 Jan and 4 Feb 05. On 28 Jan 05, KLH wrote to SBC, in response to NEA's letter dated 25 Jan 05 to SBC, stating that Singapore's proposed dates (31 Jan to 4 Feb) for a meeting in Geneva was not suitable to the Indonesians.

8 On 28 Jan 05, KLH replied to NEA's letter dated 17 Jan 05. In its reply, it reiterated its position that since the "organic material" in question was classified as a hazardous waste under Indonesian laws, it should be regarded as a hazardous waste under the Basel Convention. It ignored the fact that Indonesia had only classified as hazardous waste after the material had been exported by Singapore.

9 On the same day, KLH wrote to SBC, copied to NEA, in response to NEA's letter dated 25 Jan 05 to SBC. In its letter, KLH informed SBC that before a mutually acceptable date could be set for the meeting in Geneva, it would invite SBC to visit Pulau Galang Baru, Batam to examine the sample of the "organic material".

10 On 2 Feb 05, NEA replied to KLH to reiterate that Indonesia's notification to SBC was on 29 Jul 04, a day after the export of the "organic material" to Batam on 28 Jul 04, and that Singapore received Indonesia's notification from SBC only on 27 Aug 04. Furthermore, Indonesia's notification to SBC was not complete as it did not contain any information on the toxicity limits. Hence, the "organic material" in question could not be regarded as a hazardous waste under the Basel Convention at the time of export. NEA added that a meeting with KLH and SBC in Geneva would be useful towards reaching a mutually acceptable solution.

11 On 3 Feb 05, NEA received SBC's reply to NEA's letter to SBC and KLH dated 25 Jan 05. The key points in SBC's letter are as follows:

(a) The SBC advised that it was not in a position to conduct an on-site visit at Batam, as requested by Indonesia. The Secretariat, however, said that if both Singapore and Indonesia could agree that a visit by an expert would assist in resolving the matter, the Secretariat could recommend an objective expert for the visit, which would be funded by both Singapore and Indonesia.

(b) If both parties agreed that an on-site visit should be undertaken, the SBC also proposed that they could begin discussion on the practical needs and terms of reference for such an expert visit as well as to set a date for a need to meet with SBC following the expert visit.

(c) If the parties decided that an on-site visit would not help to achieve a solution to this matter, the Secretariat suggested that further dialogue between the Parties could be useful. If the parties could agree to have such a dialogue, the Secretariat would be happy to offer its good offices to host the dialogue.

12 On 4 Feb 05, NEA responded to the SBC's letter of 2 Feb 05. In its letter, NEA indicated that it would be more useful for both Parties to present their version of the pertinent facts of the case before the SBC. NEA was therefore agreeable to SBC's suggestion for a dialogue with Indonesia, preferably in the SBC's office in Geneva, in order to identify the specific outcomes that a meeting hosted by SBC on this matter could achieve.

13 On 22 Feb 05, SBC replied to NEA's letter dated 4 Feb 05. SBC advised that before it could host a meeting for Singapore and Indonesia, both countries should hold further discussion to reach an agreement to identify the (i) specific outcome that could be achieved; and (ii) the date of the meeting to be hosted by the SBC.

14 On 28 Feb 05, KLH replied to SBC that as Singapore had "refused" to discuss the re-export of the organic material to Singapore, it would not be useful to have a meeting. However, KLH also stated that if SBC still felt that a meeting would be useful to help resolve the issue, Indonesia was willing to have a meeting at SBC's earliest convenience.

15 On 1 Mar 05, SBC wrote to NEA and KLH to invite Singapore and Indonesia to a meeting in SBC's offices in Geneva from 10-11 Mar 05. In its letter, SBC said that it had offered its good offices for the meeting at the request of Indonesia. SBC said that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss a practical way forward, with the aim of reaching an amicable resolution to the matter. In preparation for the meeting, SBC had asked both Parties for information to be provided to the meeting.

16 On 3 Mar 05, NEA accepted SBC's invitation to meet in Geneva, and on 4 Mar 05, NEA proposed the draft agenda for the 10-11 Mar meeting and asked for confirmation of the meeting.

17 On 8 Mar 05, Indonesia unilaterally announced that the "toxic waste" had been loaded onto trucks over the past two days, and would be re-exported back to Singapore. The Indonesian State Minister for the Environment Rachmat Witoelar was reported to be in Batam to witness the sending off of the material to Singapore.

18 On the same day, NEA sought clarification on the Indonesian media report on Indonesia's plan to return the material to Singapore. NEA expressed surprise over this development given that a meeting under the SBC's auspices had already been arranged for 10-11 Mar 05. NEA stressed that any unilateral action by Indonesia to export the material to Singapore would be inappropriate. If such action was undertaken, Singapore would have no choice but to deny the entry into its territorial waters. NEA expressed the hope that the meeting at SBC would help solve the matter in an amicable manner.

19 On 8 Mar 05, Minister for Environment & Water Resources Prof Yaacob Ibrahim and the Minister for Foreign Affairs George Yeo spoke to their respective Indonesian counterparts Rachmat Witoelar and Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda to inform them that since Singapore had accepted the SBC's offer of "good offices" made at Indonesia's request and the matter was presently before the SBC, Singapore could not agree to take back the material until all the facts were established, and the matter resolved in line with the Basel Convention.

20 When KLH did not respond to the SBC's offer, the SBC wrote to both NEA and KLH on 9 Mar 05 to postpone the meeting to 23-24 Mar 05. NEA replied that it accepted the new dates for the meeting in Geneva on 23-24 Mar 05.

21 Minister for Foreign Affairs George Yeo and Indonesian Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda met in Jakarta on 9 Mar 05 and agreed that both sides should seek an amicable and mutually acceptable solution under the framework of the Basel Convention.

22 On 9 Mar 05, KLH replied to SBC that it could accept the meeting proposed by SBC on the following conditions:

(a) The meeting should not prejudice Indonesia's rights under the Basel Convention to take legitimate and necessary actions on the issue;
(b) The meeting should discuss the relevant information requested from SBC, and therefore, the relevant information should be provided before the meeting;
(c) KLH would extend its full cooperation to enable Singapore to take samples of the organic material from Batam for laboratory testing, as required under item 5 of SBC's letter dated 1 Mar 05.

KLH had proposed that the date of the meeting be determined after both Parties completed their preparations of the information requested by SBC.

23 In its reply of 9 Mar 05, SBC informed KLH that Singapore had confirmed its attendance for the 23-24 Mar 05 meeting. SBC indicated it would continue to plan on the basis of the meeting taking place on 23-24 Mar 05. It also asked Indonesia for information on any development concerning the waste in question and their disposal.

24 On 9 Mar 05, SBC acknowledged NEA's reply and informed NEA of Indonesia's suggestion that the date be determined once both sides were ready to provide the information requested by SBC in its letter of 1 Mar 05. SBC said it would continue to plan on the basis of the meeting taking place on 23-24 Mar 05.

25 In its letter to SBC of 10 Mar 05, NEA agreed with Indonesia's proposal that both sides should make available the information requested by SBC before the meeting, and suggested the information be submitted on or before 16 Mar 05. NEA also agreed with SBC that both sides should submit the full reports of any laboratory testing that had been conducted. NEA also addressed Indonesia's suggestion (in its letter of 9 Mar 05) that Singapore obtain samples from the site, saying that this issue could be discussed at the meeting. NEA asked for SBC's early confirmation of 16 Mar as date of submission of the information, and 23-24 Mar 05 for the actual meeting.

26 SBC wrote to NEA and KLH separately on 14 Mar 05 on NEA's proposal that both sides submit the information requested SBC on the case by 16 Mar 05. It informed both sides that it was working on the basis that the 23-24 Mar 05 meeting would proceed as scheduled.

27 On 18 Mar 05, to help move forward the process of seeking an amicable solution under the auspices of the SBC. In its letter to SBC, NEA suggested engaging an independent expert to take samples of the organic material at both Batam and Singapore and carry out tests on these samples. NEA asked SBC to recommend an independent expert for both parties' consideration. NEA stated that it would pay for the cost of engaging the expert.

28 SBC replied on 18 Mar 05 agreeing to NEA's suggestion and agreed to identify an independent expert. In a similar letter to KLH, SBC informed the former of Singapore's offer. Separately, KLH wrote to SBC on 18 Mar 05 requesting that tests be done on the samples of the material in Batam before the meeting in Geneva.

29 Singapore welcomes the SBC's agreement to assist in identifying an independent expert for Singapore to engage to take samples of the organic material in Batam and Singapore to carry out the relevant tests. The report by an independent expert will establish the pertinent facts which will enable both parties to reach an amicable solution under the auspices of the Basel Secretariat when we meet in Geneva.

. . . . . . . . .

22 March 2005