The denials issued by the RGE Group and APRIL in reponse to the allegations made in the Pulping Borneo report are insufficient to rebut the evidence provided in the study, the publishers of the investigative study have asserted.
The Pulping Borneo report late last month had alleged that Indonesia’s Royal Golden Eagle Group (RGE) with subsidiaries Sateri, Asia Pacific Rayon, APRIL and Asia Symbol have not only failed to eliminate deforestation from across its supply chain, but instead been greenwashing its efforts while threatening some of the globe’s biggest tropical rainforests.
The organisations which jointly published the report were Yayasan Auriga Nusantara, Environmental Paper Network, Greenpeace International, Woods & Wayside International, and Rainforest Action Network.
In a joint statement, made available to texfash.com, they said: "While RGE, APRIL and Asia Symbol reiterate a stated commitment to ‘No Deforestation’, they fail to specifically address the evidence raised in the Pulping Borneo report of deforestation among certain RGE suppliers. We take this as further validation that there is ongoing deforestation in the RGE supply chain despite well-publicised claims of no-deforestation.
“Two months ago, Asia Symbol—RGE’s subsidiary—pledged to conduct an investigation into deforestation raised with it in the lead up to the Pulping Borneo report. RGE’s customers, financiers, and other enablers should demand to know the results of that investigation and how RGE will change its practices to do better in the future."
They were reacting to the rather terse 230-word statement that the RGE Group had issued shortly after publication of the report. It did not disprove or refute any specific allegation.
The RGE statement took exception to "two of the entities named in the report as operating in Kalimantan are under the ‘common control’ of RGE. RGE has acknowledged the Accountability Framework Initiative and its definition of ‘Corporate Group’ and we can confirm that no such association, influence or control exists in relation to the two entities mentioned in the EPN report. It is not therefore possible or appropriate for RGE to comment on matters related to those parties and unrelated to RGE."
The Group, one of the largest producers of viscose, asserted: “RGE’s business groups operate in accordance with the RGE Sustainability Framework, which includes explicit no deforestation commitments, and each business group develops and enforces its own sustainability policies consistent with their operating context and RGE’s overall framework. These companies also have ambitious 2030 sustainability targets that aim to contribute to the achievement of national and global goals on climate, nature protection, and sustainable development.”
RGE subsidiary APRIL too issued a denial. Its APRIL Dialog website remarked: “APRIL fibre suppliers are subject to strict due diligence standards, compliance monitoring and third-party assurance. During the term of their contract with APRIL, third party suppliers are also subject to monitoring of their compliance with our policies and procedures and are subject to annual assurance by an independent third party to assess compliance with our SFMP 2.0. This includes the identification and reporting of fires. A list of APRIL’s suppliers and concession maps are publicly available on APRIL’s Sustainability Dashboard.
“Regarding long-term fibre supply, the company has adopted a target of a 50% gain in fibre plantation productivity by 2030. Over the past three years, we have gained more productivity from the same land bank, posting a 29% increase in fibre yield. As a result of our commitment to R&D, more than 60% of our total plantation base is now on the higher end of our productivity range. Improvements in our production processes for wood conversion have also reduced the amount of fibre required per pulp production ton by up to 10%.”
On its suppliers, the company said: “The report repeats past claims regarding the actions of two suppliers, PT Adindo Hutani Lestari and PT Fajar Surya Swadaya. We stand by the published responses we have shared previously with EPN and stakeholders.”
The five organisations reacted to the APRIL contention: "APRIL’s continued denial of deforestation in forestry concessions managed by PT Adindo Hutani Lestari and PT Fajar Surya Swadaya defy the satellite imagery documenting the forest loss that is publicly and freely available on Nusantara Atlas. Thanks to technological advances, gone are the days that companies like APRIL can deny forest loss when it has clearly occurred. If APRIL’s sustainability policy does not consider the documented forest loss to be a violation, then there is something very wrong with the policy or its implementation."
They argued: “In the absence of sufficient explanation by RGE to rebut the evidence cited in the report, we stand by the conclusion that the evidence indicates PT Balikpapan Chip Lestari and PT Phoenix Resources International are under common control with the RGE Group. RGE’s denial of “association, influence or control” does not explain why there are such significant links between RGE and these operations, which are documented in the report.
“We published a 65-page investigative report with 161 footnotes and 47 figures. RGE is wrong to think that a half page response, which fails to even mention the names of the companies it claims RGE is not linked to, addresses the legitimate concerns about control of a giant new pulp mill and its deforestation risks raised in the report.”
