Group responds to decision

PROJECT Sepik has spoken out as a response to the East Sepik government’s decision on the environmental impact statement of the Frieda River Project (Frieda Mine) which was submitted to the Conservation and Environment Protection Authority (Cepa).
Project Sepik echoed the ESP decision by calling for the rejection of the Frieda Mine on the grounds that the environment impact statement was ‘unfit for the purpose’.
Project Sepik is happy with the process taken by the East Sepik government by listening to the concerns and fears of the people.
The people have been saying ‘no’ to the mine for a long time.
It is particularly assuring that the provincial government has given an ultimatum, and that is: if the Frieda Mine could not find any safe way to build the mine, then the minerals must be preserved for the future generations who would perhaps have better technology.
This is the highlight of the decisions made which stitched to our fourth goal in the PNG Constitution.
And that is, “We declare to be for Papua New Guinea’s natural resources and environment to be conserved and used for the collective benefit of us all, and be replenished for the benefit of future generations”.
This decision by the East Sepik government must be respected because Frieda Mine’s environmental impact statement is defective in many ways.
Just the opening remarks of the environmental impact statement already gives so much room for doubt.
Project Sepik was supported by 10 expert scientists from all overseas who also reviewed the environmental impact statement.
Their reports were submitted to Cepa on March 31, 2020, in Port Moresby.
They conclusively resolved that the environmental impact statement was defective.
The experts surmised three main issues in the environmental impact statement.
Firstly, the environmental impact statement has done nothing to reassure experts from the fact that there is no secure way of storing the massive amount of mine waste (tailings) safely without damaging the river.
Second, there is no evidence of free, prior and informed consent of all impacted customary landowners in the environmental impact statement, including communities on the mine site and along the Frieda and Sepik Rivers.
Thirdly, the environmental impact statement is missing critical reports and information that would normally be necessary in any comprehensive assessment.
Project Sepik still believes, that this decision is perhaps not as airtight as it should be, given that the environmental impact statement is flawed and dangerous.
A number of the decisions by the ESP had some red flags. One of which was to encourage Conservation and Environment Protection Authority to ensure proper investigations later on.
While this is a good call for the science and engineering aspect of the proposed mine, the call to complete the process of consultation especially along the Sepik River is something the people there do not want. They are afraid that these consultations will only be for compliance. The people have repeatedly stated that they have nothing else to say and do not want to hear from the company seeking to run the Frieda River Mine and the Government.
Frieda Mine fails to live up to international principles and guidelines in their practices at the ground level.
The people of the Sepik River have placed a total ban on the Frieda River Mine.
The provincial government has proclaimed its deep concerns, especially about the tailings dam.
We need the Government to stand up for its people and to protect the Sepik River.
It is a spiritual place that should be protected.
It is a treasure in PNG’s crown and the money in the world could not replace it.
We need our leaders to be strong and to stand with us.

Emmanuel Peni
Coordinator, Project Sepik