Pomio invasion by Greenpeace illegal

Source: The National -Monday, October 31st 2011 I am from Mamusi, Pomio district. I was really disturbed by the way Greenpeace, an international NGO, acted beyond international legal jurisdictions to invade my people’s peaceful life recently. Greenpeace, instead of bringing environmental peace in the form of providing balanced advice to the concerned people, came with the ulterior intention of sabotaging the oil palm integrated project that my people have supported and hoping to depend on as the immediate solution to seeing tangible development. At the outset, it was a well-planned “mission of attack” by Greenpeace, the 14 people from the project impact area, and Post-Courier to dismantle the project. The Memalo oil palm integrated project is owned by 121 clans, consisting of some 5,000 people. Unfortunately, Greenpeace and its allies on Oct 23, displayed a gross unethical and irresponsible beha­viour towards the 121 clans without any sense of remorse and respect. Their actions could have resulted in many lives lost, if the police and the Pomio district administrator had not intervened. I agree with your editorial (Oct 26) regarding the invasion, which undermines the sovereignty of PNG, its immigration laws and causing damage to properties, and committing disturbance to my people’s lives. The incident is a wake-up call to the government to start acting to protect the sovereignty of this nation by similar invasion from Greenpeace in future. The people of Pomio are not terro­rists that Greenpeace and its allies have the absolute supremacy of invading them using sophisticated equipment installed on the Esperanza. I do recognise the role that Greenpeace has understaken to protect the environment. However, what international law gave them the right to invade my people’s land? In this regard, I call on the United Nations, as the international organ for “peace and unity” to see what Greenpeace and its local allies have done to scare my people from pursuing a development project that they fully supported. Is it Greenpeace’s intention to prevent development programmes from reaching millions of poor people in developing countries, including my people? As a concerned son of Pomio, I do not see any tangible development in terms of road, electricity, piped water, telecommunication and other econo­mic-related infrastructure reaching us. Pomio has high infant mortality and low literacy rates. We have been leading the same lifestyle since Independence in 1975. We often rely on church-run education and health facilities, with minimal support from the government over the years. We no longer wait for miracles to happen to change our lives today and in the next 50 years. This is the inescapable fact that Greenpeace and its local allies must accept. Greenpeace, Post-Courier and others who oppose this project must redefine “sustainable development” within the context of exploiting natural resources to meet current population needs, while preserving and conserving for future generation. Development and environmental destruction co-exist, but striking a delicate balance between these two to attain sustainable exploitation of natu­ral resources is the mantra of any development programmes for both present and future population. I believe the integrated oil palm project at least aims toddress the UN’s general objective of sustainable use of resources. The proponents of the project, acknowledging this international principle, conducted wide consultations and awareness for almost 10 years to gauge the people’s views on the pros and cons of the project. This has resulted in the 121 clans agreeing in principle to support it. The people of Pomio have learnt a lot from the past logging activities, where our timbers were stolen without tangible development on the ground for landowners. Memalo Holdings does not want this to happen again and that is why it initiated the integrated and sustainable project that would address the problem. I urge the Post-Courier and Greenpeace not to use photos showing children. These innocent children lack the capacity of reasoning and making informed decision on their own, and they should not be exploited in this regard. We, the people of Pomio, want development. Greenpeace, please go somewhere else to practise your invasion. Records around the world indicate that your ulterior motive is more towards destroying people’s lives, not bringing development to them. I reiterate my point that environmental destruction and development co-exist where human activities are taking place. Greenpeace and its local allies must accept this fact. Alex K. Teu Via email http://www.thenational.com.pg/?q=node/24785