Sinar Mas Says Audit Finds Greenpeace Report ‘False’

Fidelis E Satriastanti Jakarta Globe 27 Sep 10;

Jakarta. Jakarta-based Asia Pulp & Paper, a subsidiary of Sinar Mas Group, on Monday went on the counterattack, accusing Greenpeace of using false and misleading information to damage its credibility.

Greenpeace has accused APP of massive expansion in Indonesia, destroying peatlands and other unsustainable forestry practices.

In a statement, APP said an independent peer-reviewed audit released by consultancy ITS Global on Monday showed the environmental watchdog’s report “is highly misleading and simply not defensible,” citing ITS chief executive Alan Oxley.

According to the Melbourne-based ITS, which was commissioned by APP to conduct the audit, Greenpeace had in its report on APP provided unattributable quotes, maps that showed concessions that did not exist and used source material with high margins of error, trying to pass them off as facts.

However, Bustar Maitar, lead forest campaigner for Greenpeace Indonesia, dismissed ITS’s report, saying it was biased. “If they claim it’s an independent report, it’s a joke because Alan Oxley is speaking as an APP representative,” he said.

Oxley is well-known for his strong support of the palm-oil industry, which he says is an effective vehicle for relieving poverty in the developing world.

He was also a former Australian ambassador to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the precursor to the World Trade Organization.

When contacted by the Jakarta Globe, an ITS representative was unable to provide any details about the audit and did not respond to further questions submitted by e-mail.

Sinar Mas also commissioned a separate audit last month to analyze Greenpeace’s claims. British auditor BSI Group, however, complained that the company had misrepresented its findings.

BSI Group and Control Union Certification had found that some of Greenpeace’s claims were false or exaggerated, but also found that Sinar Mas had cleared high-value deep peatlands and 38,000 hectares of natural forest without conducting an impact assessment.

Last week, the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil, in apparent response to the BSI Group audit, publicly censured Sinar Mas Agro Resources & Technology for its practices.

The RSPO, a group of industry planters, green groups and palm oil buyers, said Smart was in “serious noncompliance” with its principles and criteria, and faced suspension or expulsion if it did not “take the necessary remedial actions.”

It was the first time that the RSPO had censured a member.

Greenpeace Slammed for Using 'False Data' on Sinar Mas: Report
Fidelis E. Satriastanti Jakarta Globe 27 Sep 10;

Jakarta. Greenpeace on Monday rejected allegations of using "false and misleading information to attack a company's credibility," after an independent study questioned the environment watchdog's data.

International Trade Strategies Global, also known as ITS, conducted a peer-review on Greenpeace's report, "How Sinar Mas is Pulping the Planet."

The report was launched in July 2010, highlighting the environmentally devastating actions of one of the world's leading pulp and paper companies, Asia Pulp and Paper, also known as APP, owned by Sinar Mas.

"The evidence shows that Greenpeace provided quotes that don’t exist, maps that show concessions that don’t exist, and used source material with high margins of error that was cited as absolute fact," said Alan Oxley, chief executive office of the Melbourne-based ITS Global on the press release.

Oxley said the Greenpeace report was highly misleading and indefensible. In addition, the audit stated that a map in the Greenpeace report shows four concessions which don't exist.

“Sadly this is not an isolated incident. Greenpeace has exaggerated claims in the past.

"When we see reports like this with such obvious factual inaccuracies it makes us call into question the real Greenpeace agenda, risking the greater good to achieve its own political ends."

However, Bustar Maitar, team leader of Greenpeace SouthEast Asia, retaliated saying that the reviews were not independent considering the reviewer was allegedly paid by the company.

"If they claim it's an independent report, it's a joke because Alan Oxley is speaking as an APP representative," Bustar said.

Concerning the maps, he said the maps were based on data drawn from the government and the company's internal sources.

"So, if they said that those maps don't exist then they should have corrected the government and their own sources," he said.