 Welcome to all of you to this panel entitled Governance and Legal Friends to Promote Sustainable Landscapes. It's a great pleasure and honour to moderate this session and we have some renowned panellists who will share some of their experiences from across the ASEAN region in terms of the many governance challenges we face. We hope the panel will examine the complex governance of land and natural resources in the region and explore ways in which we can shape institutions, decision making processes and rules so that they can foster and encourage sustainability in terms of landscape governance. The landscapes in this region as in many other parts of the developing world are in constant change shape my various forces that interact in very complex ways. The production and livelihood activities of small holders, large-scale land-based investments and the multi-level governance systems that operate at global, regional, national and sub-national levels. These governance systems all interact and ultimately influence who has access to and rights of use to land and forest resources and how these are ultimately managed. In the Southeast Asian context of rapid change and this complexity, new opportunities but also risks are emerging for the future of how these landscapes are managed. So we hope we will present a number of very different cases related to transnational regulation and particularly the role of certification processes, the emerging progress that's been made in relation to the Indonesia what's called the SDLK process, the FLEC-TVPA process, some of the challenges associated with law enforcement, a particular reference to Indonesia, many of the challenges related to ensuring that the rights of indigenous peoples other rural, disenfranchised communities are upheld and many other challenges associated with how we can ultimately try and push the agenda in terms of devolving authority for the management resources to local communities. So without further ado, it's my great pleasure first and foremost to introduce His Excellency TC Gunn who is Secretary of State in the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries in Cambodia. TC Gunn was formerly the head of the Forestry Administration in Cambodia and during his tenure he was also the chair of the mandated technical working group on forestry and environments which is co-chaired with representatives of the donor community. He completed his doctoral research with particular reference to community forestry at the University of Sciences in Malaysia in 2012 and was recently appointed as Secretary of State in the Ministry of Agriculture. Secondly, it's my pleasure to introduce His Excellency Ambassador Holok School who came to Indonesia as the Ambassador for Indonesia, Bruno Dar es Salaam and ASEAN, in 2012, is that right? He is a Swedish diplomat with extensive experience of both multilateral negotiations focusing on peace and security as well as broader bilateral development agendas and I think he's thrown himself very much into the fray with regard to the European Union's interest in supporting the reflecting DBA process. It's a great pleasure to have you here. Thirdly, it's a great pleasure and for many of you from Indonesia I'm sure he doesn't really need an introduction. Mass Habman Santosa is an extremely experienced environmental lawyer with more than 25 years of experience. He was instrumental in helping frame and shape the environmental framework law in Indonesia and since when he has been more recently appointed as Deputy Head of the President's Delivery Unit for Development Monitoring Oversight who got that impact for those of you who know that I speak fluent Indonesian. Fourthly, it's my pleasure to introduce Roka Sombolinghi who is the Deputy to the Secretary General of Aman and for those of you who know Indonesia this is one of the most important alliances I apologize for the pronunciation which is an alliance of indigenous peoples organizations and represents this across the whole of the Indonesian article. And she's the International Advocacy Coordinator of Aman so it's a pleasure to have you with us on this panel. Last but not least, it's a pleasure to also introduce the Executive Director of the Forest Stewardship Council. Kim Carstensen has had also a long and illustrious history formally working with World Climate Life Fund as head of the Danish WWF delegation and subsequently WWF International before he joined as the overall leader of FSCs World Globally in October 2012. So, will you welcome all the panelists? I'm going to start by inviting his action CTC to and during the panel preparations we discussed that we thought it might be a good idea to try and start from the community level as much as possible. So, it's my pleasure to introduce Tiziko who will also speak from the podium on the experiences from Cambodia in terms of devolving authority in relation to particular community forestry but also community officials. Tiziko. Thank you very much Dr. Anjou for your nice introduction. I'd please allow me to stand and read my comment or not because the time is very limited. Actually, I have many things to share with you all. I bring up over 200 words that I try to condone and less than 1,000 words. The Global Landscapes Forum held last year in Warsaw called for more integrated and people-centered approach and much more work on the ground. Much more work on the ground. This is what a policy maker such as myself needs the most but what to do and how to do it. Let me share then the Cambodia experience with you, the Royal Government of Cambodia. Under why an effective leadership of Prime Minister something like that you won't say and supporting and actively participating such integrated and people-centered approach over the past decade. The government has recognized that it is not enough to merely tell people not to misuse natural resources. This will only be accomplished by providing the proper incentive to override internal pattern of thinking, acting, and behaving. Psychological incentives include a securing land tenure and resource-assessed ride. Cambodia afforded to ensure resource-assessed ride of the local people. We are specifically in 2002 when it imposed a locking ban from forest conservation and terminated over 59% of the 1998 total forest conservation area in response to their unsatisfactory performance. This includes then the lack of engagement with the local community in the development of sustainable forest conservation management plan. In the same year, Cambodia propagated a new forest law that provided an enabling policy and legal framework for community forest development in the country. We have subsequently witnessed continue the growth of the number of community forest side. This by 2013 has grown to 457 spread across 21 provinces and encompassed more than 400,000 hectares. Community forestry has demonstrated some promising results in terms of contribution to improving sustainable forest management practice in the country and livelihood of the forest-dependent community. While deforestation remains a critical concern in some part of the country, the interpretation of geospatial satellite information has indicated that forest cover managed under community forest has remained relatively impact compared to forest cover in adjoining area as well as in the protected area, importantly. It has also resulted in a significantly lower rate of poverty incident among community forestry members that in that experience among non-community forestry members. Excellency ladies and gentlemen, over the past 10 years, community-based participatory approach has become an integral part of the natural resource management in Cambodia. Associated not only with forest, but also the sustainable management of another natural resources. This has resulted, for instance, in the constellation of fishing lot from private concessionaire and just designated as the conservation area and subsequent allocation to local community fishery management. Indeed, there are currently 516 community fisheries representing more than 89% of the total fishing area in the country. Concurrently, a comprehensive land reform program has been implemented to provide legal land title to local people, a prerequisite for the development of the rural economy. The has been supplemented since 2012 by new action on existing land policy to allocate an issue land title to over 400,000 families of landless groups and more than 710,000 certificates encompassing 1.2 million hectares of land have seen an issue. More importantly, Cambodia has also recently developed a white paper on land that introduced a comprehensive policy on the sustainable management of land and other resources. The white paper is guaranteed to improve institutional coordination and integrating action of relevant stakeholders to effectively implement the government policy regulation strategy and program in an equitable and sustainable manner. This aim to integrate various sector policies like agriculture, water, forest, fishery, protected area, tourist infrastructure development and mining exploitation. On the basis of our experience, as well as the lessons learned from other countries, we are convinced that it takes much more than a sector-wide approach to address the interrelated forestry issue of the livelihood enhancement policy reduction for security and climate change, adaptation and mitigation in the context of sustainable development. Recognizing their cross-cutting nature, this issue requires integrated action not only from individual ministries at the national level, but also concerted action from other relevant ministries and organizations at various levels, from the global and regional to the national and sub-national. Lastly, but not least, Cambodia has also developed an implemented sub-national demographic development process and providing equal opportunity for every citizen to participate in local development and demand better and more comprehensive public service in order to reduce unequivocity associated with the first economic growth. We have enacted an organic law on capital, province, municipality, district and community administration and established democratically elected sub-national council as well as what are referred to as one-bit all-service office. This D&D approach removes sustainable local development and contributes directly to poverty reduction through the establishment of a sub-national system that embodied the primary tenet of the good governance. Those tenets include accountability, adhering to the rule of law, transparency, participation, equity, inclusiveness, responsiveness, efficiency and effectiveness. Excellency, ladies and gentlemen, we have learned much in Cambodia from the implementation of proper policies through the community-based and democratic development process over the past several years. Nevertheless, we as other countries continue to stuck with the challenges associated with the persistent of poverty and natural resource degradation. We recognize that a primary reason for this lack is local capacity limitation. The underlying challenge is therefore to balance sound policy formulation at national level with effective implementation at sub-national level. It must indeed continue to direct our effort to capacity development through investment in equipment resources. We have learned that we could not be indeed a people-like by securing their tenure or early shift over resource. We must also act to inspire them through several initiatives. The provision of support of shaping their innovative capacity development and introduction of practical incentives including the sharing of benefits through carbon market and other treatment for ecosystem service. It is my hope that by sharing what we have learned together we will be reintegrated in our effort to develop action that will support sustainable landscape and other local people. We have learned as much as Mike from the success story that mistake. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. I think your presentation illustrated very well the challenges in terms of getting both horizontal and virtual integration in terms of the highlights you raised specifically linked to D&D reforms and I think you provided an interesting perception in terms of some of the legal reforms that helped precipitate changes in terms of change of approach in 2002. I'm nice going to invite Ambassador School to talk at a very different scale in terms of the implementation of the European Union's Forest Law Enforcement Governance and Trade Policy Partnership Agreement. But whether I link to this in terms of TC Coons, I understand that the discussions are now just starting with the Government of Cambodia vis-a-vis the reflected process. Indonesia however now has a lot of multi-stakeholder process. So, Ambassador School, let's hear more about the status. Thank you very much Andrew for that very kind introduction and thank you to C4 for a fantastically important conference summit and the work you do in this area. I think my claim to fame comparison to these experts on the panel is the fact that my surname, Scoop, actually means forest bush. I'm going to talk a little bit about the VPA and the fact how government contacts have, I think, contributed to a lot of progress on the Indonesian side in terms of legally exports in timber. Ten years ago the EU and Indonesia had a huge problem. We, the European Union were importing too much legal timber and certainly Indonesia was producing and exporting way too much illegal timber. There have been considerable efforts on both sides of the last decade 11 years as was said to address the problem from both sides and I thought I'd say a little bit about the experience of that work and where we are today and the challenges that still remain. On the EU side what we did, we developed the FLECT action plan an important part which is the EU timber regulation which places a legal burden on importers of timber into the European Union to address to demonstrate that they are importing only legal timber into the European market. On the Indonesian side there has been a lot of work to develop a national timber legality assurance system as referred to as the SVLK designed to certify the legality of timber at all stages of the supply chain. Over the last few years efforts on both sides have worked very hard to bring the EU's and Indonesia's efforts together in a voluntary partnership agreement BPA. Difficult, complicated and very technical negotiations have been going on but inspired on both sides by the same vision and goals they need to combat illegal logging in Indonesia and promote the expert of legal timber from Indonesia to the lucrative I believe EU market. In legal terms the aim is to ensure recognition of the Indonesian legally certified timber as flagged licensed timber meaning that importers in the EU do not have to conduct due diligence on every shipment from Indonesia in other words if Indonesia says that it is legal in the European Union this is the goal. We're not there completely yet but we have together made tremendous progress. Negotiations between the EU and Indonesia were successfully completed the BPA was signed in September last year and it was ratified by both sides earlier this year. Legally we are now ready to evaluate the SELK and see if it meets the high standards set in the BPA and expected under the EU timber regulation. An initial joint assessment of the SELK has already been held last year this found that Indonesia has made huge progress on many issues in designing and implementing the SELK but it also found that there are still a number of issues which need to be resolved before the system can be assessed as ready for recognition by the European Union. These issues have been put into a jointly made action plan which is now being worked on particularly on the Indonesian side. The main remaining issues include ensuring consistency between the BPA and the SELK both of which have evolved and changed in the years since we started all this ensuring complete legal certification at every stage of the supply chain and you can imagine the challenge of this in a country as vast diverse as Indonesia and that non-certified timber cannot enter the supply chain building up the capacity of the different actors in the SELK system to perform their roles including local governments, auditors, verification bodies independent monitors and ensuring that SELK coverage for all part of the industry known to be the large number of small and medium enterprises micro enterprises which are a large part of the Indonesian industry here but of course for each one of those implementation of fairly rigid regulations is more burdensome or difficult. Once again congratulations to the Indonesian authorities who have approached these tasks with energy and determination a further national consultation is underway to revise and update the SELK and government actions are being prepared to ensure also application of the system on the entire timber industry in this country. So we will then do a further joint assessment as expected later this year and we expect that it will show considerable progress towards our shared goal of winning recognition for Indonesian legally certified timber to the EU market. We're not there yet but we should acknowledge the tremendous efforts by the Indonesian authorities on this. I also think we can already now and I think it's useful for this debate draw one or two conclusions from our experience so far which I think needs to be addressed for whatever process you set in motion for whatever country you're looking at. First and foremost this has not been an affair just between governments. At the heart of the FLEC action plan that we're looking at on the EU side and the integral to the SELK development on the Indonesian side has been the multi-stakeholder process. I really stress that if there's one thing you need to remember from this intervention it's the necessity to set up a credible multi-stakeholder process. We've gone through great lengths to build a common approach to the industry and with civil society. You cannot hope to implement what is basically an industrial measure like the one we're working out without extensive consultation with the industry itself. And the role of civil society has been crucial in Europe. Civil society has helped shape public opinion creating the demand for legal products and civil society support will remain crucial also on the Indonesian side because FLEC licensing would not be worth much if the environmental NGOs do not buy into it or believe in it. Alongside the legal certainty provided by FLEC status we also need to ensure that there is a market confidence. It certainly helps that civil society has played a vital role on the Indonesian side too has been involved in the design of this monitoring system from the start and they remain and need to be involved as work progresses. Second conclusion we cannot have a VPA concept that fights against the market. It is a concerted attempt to match the demand on the European side for legal timber with a regular supply of legal timber from Indonesia. It pleases the EU consumers to know that they help meet the concerns about the legal logging about deforestation etc in Indonesia. It pleases the industry in Indonesia because it offers a real market advantage over countries which have not put in place the kind of the system. So I think if we are able to do this in Indonesia we will give Indonesia a lot of credit not just for timber but also for other products which are being worked on. Our task for the coming months is to ensure that the VPA achieves all of these things in practice but already it is clear that Indonesia is moving in the right direction there are excellent intentions and ever improving implementation on the ground and as a result Indonesia's reputation and credibility for legal timber is I think increasing globally. Third and this is my last point don't think this is an easy process we have been at it for several years 10 years already our hard effort on both sides to get us where we are today I think it is worth it I hope the next few months will show that this work will pay off for Indonesia to ship a flag licensed timber into the EU I think it would be historical in the sense that Indonesia could be the first country in the world to do this, to achieve this in the EU and I think above all it is a very good thing a realistic approach to a sustainable use of the natural resources so thank you very much for listening to that short intervention thank you very much many thanks OLEF not an easy process a long process and I think there are many lessons that can be learned from the flexi process in Indonesia that would be perhaps a problem even to some of the ongoing discussions there are no short cuts to resolving some of these complex problems anyway I am going to move on it is now my pleasure to invite SANTOSA who is going to tell us a little bit more in depth about the specific national level challenges associated with law enforcement and many of the additional efforts which have been undertaken by the Government of Indonesia thank you very much Andrew dear friends distinguished speakers distinguished participants my presentation will be very much associated with my duty assignment as deputy head for PDU President Delivery Union in charge for the empowerment of enforcement institutions of the President Delivery Union and at the same time I have been assigned to coordinate legal reforms and enforcement related programs for new established red glass agencies at this point it should be acknowledged that the Government of Indonesia has made some progress in addressing the Government challenges at present there are at least 5 legal initiatives under the UK before or PDU President Delivery Unit and red glass agency in cooperation of course with the ministries and agencies to promote profound governance reforms such as developing roadmap for legal reform on forest and peatland governance in cooperation with the ministry of law and human rights forest and peatland governance reform should be supported by responsive and comprehensive legal frameworks the basic principles of justice democracy and sustainability are used as benchmarks for developing legislation and regulations second conducting license audit and developing a license information or database system to improve license governance in the provinces of Central Kalimantan, East Kalimantan and Jambi as a pilot provinces the license audit covers various aspects such as corporate management aspects administrative and regulatory aspects environment, annual rail and state revenue third helping the process to recognize and protect custom based society as some of you have already know our center parliament has initiated bill on the protection and recognition of custom based society which will be elaborated by RUKA for sure the president Susilo Blambang Yudhionov has appointed minister of forestry as the leading minister to respond on the parliamentarist bill the coordinating minister for people's welfare is conducting policy review to follow up the constitutional court decision number 35 2012 which guarantees the existence of Kuta Nade or customary forest with support from the UKP4 and we must have this red plus four developing a robust conflict resolution mechanisms for red plus related conflicts we developed conflict resolution mapping in five national parts Kaya Tantara, Kerti Seblat Kutai, Teso Nilo Sebano and Balboa National Park the fifth support law enforcement efforts to protect forest and pit lands by introducing what we call multi door approach or multi use of multi regime approach why we need to introduce multi door approach forestry and natural resources crimes are multi sectoral crimes and further improving certain other crimes such as money laundering gratification, bribery and tax evasion the prevailing laws and regulations tend to promote a sectoral approach such as only applying forestry law in forest areas for example while to improve effectiveness of law enforcement other law should also be applied this existing approach has limitation in handling forestry and other natural resources crimes therefore encourage more effective law enforcement UKP4 and web plus agency initiated the multi door or multi legal regime approach in combating natural resources related crimes multi door guidelines have been implemented in cases located in Santra Kalimantan, Ancest and Rio province many cases are related to land and forest fires in addition to criminal enforcement Indonesia needs to utilize other legal avenues such as civil liability law suit and administrative enforcement to promote high level of compliance one of the unprecedented case was civil liability court decision which was awarded in 2013 few months ago by the district court of Milano attack the court declared that plantation company was guilty of burning and clearing forest and peak land in violation of law 32,009 on environmental protection and management the court granted ministry of environmental claims against the company to pay compensation of 10 million US dollar to the state and environmental restoration fee 23 million US dollar meanwhile the criminal law suit has currently reached of the trial process ladies and gentlemen as president SBY Susilo Babangudano stated in his keynote address yesterday this legal measure sends a firm messages burning land and forest logging illegally and farming on illegal plantation either by individual or companies will not be tolerated nor left unpunished thank you very much thank you very much Mas Santos I think you've given us a wonderful highlight of the current initiatives that have been led by Hukka Bamper and many of the challenges which will continue to be addressed I think for many years to come now we're moving back to the community level it's my pleasure to introduce Hukka Hukka expressed a particular interest to be able to present in Basa Indonesia but I quickly wanted to do a quick show of hands how many of you have got headsets for translation Hukka would you mind because I know your English is actually very good would you mind presenting in English because I think we do actually have a problem of a chronic shortage given that there are about 200 people in this room and I think I can probably count 30 headsets at best yes perfect so Hukka will talk to us more about some of these land-run issues actually I thought this is very very privileged where normally I am forced to speak English before international audiences so I was thinking to take that opportunity to induce my privilege speaking in my own language before the international audience but anyway we have some technical problems here so I will try and I will start my presentations as you have heard the previous presenters have talked about a legality and law enforcement I am going to start my presentations giving you one example of an unintended result of what so-called law enforcement and legality four of our indigenous leaders in Semendebanding Agung community just last week there were sentenced four years in prison and fined for 1.5 billion rupiah or around 150 thousand US dollars for violating there were charges violating of the law on the eradication and prevention of forest destruction which was meant to combat illegal logging but the first victim was indigenous peoples they live in their ancestral territories for centuries that were later claimed by the ministry of forestry as national park during the court trial the ministry of forestry were unable to provide evidence that clearly defined their territories at national park so that's the history the story that I'm going to to open my speech this time but going back to event last year where we have the historical constitutional court ruling that affirmed the constitutional rights of indigenous peoples offer our territory including our forest our customary forest so we have that good legal a good legal certainty of indigenous peoples offer our land and the other initiative that we have that we over the years we continue to map the indigenous land and the national geospatial information agency have accepted our map 2.4 million hectares but this map hasn't been officially accepted as the part of the one map policy of the government and the second one we also have the national strategy on the red plus where actually we do the protections on the rights of indigenous peoples including in the free pilot and form consent in the red plus projects at the moment what we have also in the government institution is that the ministry of as mentioned earlier the ministry of social welfare has been assigned to be the coordinator of organizations of the national those are the positive things that coming up in Indonesia but the situation is we still have a huge gap to fill in the future first is like because the structure of of the control of government in the agrarian resources in the land and tender resources is very much controlled 80 percent or the majority the vast majority of the control of the tender and land resources in Indonesia including forests is very much in the hand of the ministry of forestry the ministry of forestry control 80 percent of the total address of Indonesia and they are the one that is supposed to be firstly in charge in the implementations of the the constitutional court truly what happened was two of the policies first is the circular letter by the ministry and the second one is the ministry of decree that have been issued by the ministry of forestry of very much in contrary to the constitutional court ruling the constitutional court ruling accept the legal entity of indigenous peoples based on first is the map the participatory map and the second one by the decree of of bupati or head of district which is the case of the Kasebuha in Chisintu but then what happened the ministry of forestry set higher standard than the constitutional court itself that's actually they said that they are beyond the highest level of the decision making of the legal making in this country which is the constitutional court so and then the case of the cement abounding Agu were to actually use the law that was adopted five months after the constitutional court ruling was issued the use the intentionally deliberately used that law to punish indigenous peoples who they call living international part so those are the negative responses from the institutions from the ministry that supposed to implement first the national court ruling they supposed to set the boundary they should be first set the boundaries of indigenous customary forest and state forest and then from there what is supposed to be done after setting the boundaries is to them talk to them talk on the plan development plan what is supposed to be done in those areas indigenous peoples we are willing to contribute to national development we are willing to contribute we are rich but what we need is our rights to be protected to be recognized and from there we can live together we can share those wealth but the recognition and protection is still found the draft law of the protection and recognition on the rights of indigenous peoples are still being discussed by the parliament and again the ministry of forestry has ensnared any gesture that they are willing to push this forward it's been almost a year since they've been appointed as the coordinator but they haven't done anything significant yet so those are the main and we're talking about targeting degraded and genuinely available land for industries you can only get those because if you have the protections of the rights of indigenous peoples we are willing to talk with government we are willing to talk with industries but first we have to recognize our rights and the main homework of this country is we need the the organizations to gain your control we have to have equal power among all the ministries and institutions to have to deal with resources we can't move forward with the territorial reform if we have one institutions like ministry of forestry or to lead this country so those we need to redistribute we need to redistribute and that's the only way we can assure that the protections of peoples rights of indigenous of farmers of local communities and also the certainty of business can be assured thank you very much thank you what are in many countries in Asia and many parts of sub-Saharan Africa the complex challenges associated with what scholars refer to often as a wicked problem namely whose property belongs to whom and this is an ongoing issue and you highlighted a particular case in Indonesia which again is very common in many parts of the developing world of the complex nature of managing protected areas and rights which existed before protected areas existed and how they can still be protected after they have been established again where there are very rich colonial precedents but which are continued in terms of the gazetting of additional national park areas even in the contemporary area so we'll come back to this I'm sure Ruka and I'm sure the audience will have questions too our last speaker is Kim and Kim is going to take us back to the sort of transnational regulatory world and talk to us a little bit more about how FSC operates and the role that certification can play in terms of addressing some of the illegality issues that Santos spoke about. Thanks Kim. Thank you Andrew and what I'm going to talk about is 20 years of experience in FSC in dealing with governance on a market based way and in a way that is engaging multi-stakeholder discussions FSC comes out of a strong, strong frustration with the lack of intergovernmental ability to deal with the issue of responsible or sustainable forest management. We are now 20 years old, what we have established is a system of engaging market leaders and also of engaging multi-stakeholder communities in setting the standards for what responsible forest management looks like globally and also in countries around the world. We've established a system whereby environmental actors, social actors and economic actors get together in a set of forums where none of these sets of actors can overrule the others. There has to be agreement across these interests. We have members inside FSC from the environmental community. We have environmental organizations like RePeace, like WWF as our members and a number of other environmental organizations. We have major actors from the social communities around the world such as Indigenous peoples organizations and the trade unions and development organizations as members of our social community and we have a large number of important economic actors both including forest donors including forest concessionaires including companies who are at all stages of the supply chain in forest products. And what we've done is that through discussions across these chambers we have set up standards for what responsible forest management is agreed to be. Has it worked? I'll answer yes in two ways. One way is that it has worked in terms of actual penetration in the market. We have still 180 million hectares of forest certified across the world under FSC. We have 28,000 companies engaged in FSC as certificate holders and we are in that way the most and strongest global engagement strategy for sustainable forest management that involves the market. I'll answer yes to the question whether it's worked in another way by referring to a very recent study about the social impacts of FSC certification in the Congo Basin. What was looked at by C4 in that study was comparing FSC certified concessions with non-FSC certified concessions. And to be very honest I was surprised to see the consistent over performance of the FSC certified concessions over the non-certified concessions in terms of the social impact of FSC certification. Consistently we had better performance in terms of workers' conditions better performance in terms of engagement with local communities and indigenous groups better performance in terms of children's education and all other aspects of social issues. I think it would be very very interesting to look at the same kind of study in other areas of the Congo Basin because I think it would be very interesting to see what would the similar study look like if we did that in Indonesia and other countries in Southeast Asia and also in the Amazon Basin. I think we would be very interested in working with C4 to see a thing like that. FSC is at the moment now facing in many ways different developments in the situation around us. From Ambassador Skog about the discussions that the EU is having on setting up bilateral agreements with Indonesia on the FLEC VPA setup and the SVL car coming up in Indonesia which is for us of course a different situation in the sense that we are now seeing a government legality framework that is serious in a way that we have never seen before and which means of course that we need to look at how our system can complement and fit together with the SVL car. I believe that is perfectly possible and it's certainly one thing that we would be very interested and are very interested in exploring in the years going forward. We're also seeing I believe in Indonesia a very significant potential shift in the business model of some of the major players in the forest sector. I'm thinking about companies like APP who are now developing forest conservation strategies which I believe are largely in many ways inspired by the kind of multi-stakeholder engagements and discussions that have happened inside FSE and we are now of course in informal discussions with companies like APP and April about how could they possibly fit into the FSE model going forward. We are not there yet at all but I think maybe even quicker than the 11 year process like the EU VPA process we may be able to look into something that would get these companies back into a system of multi-stakeholder governments that I believe would be very interesting and important for their future performance in Indonesia. Thank you very much. Thanks very much Kim. Just to try and wrap up I think a very rich collection of presentations what struck me is that we've heard in many cases that considerable progress has been made and continues to be made there are several initiatives which still need the test of time to show to what extent they are contributing to improving governance and of course there are still many challenges and before I open up the floor for a Q&A session with you I just want to ask two quick questions one which I will cluster to address to Tiziquan Ruka and Masantosa in relation to the property rights issues but firstly I just wanted to ask both Kim one of the challenges I think we face with many of the international, the transnational regulatory frameworks is the question of access particularly for small and medium enterprises given that the costs of certification accreditation or whatever validation processes that they have to go through tend to be very high I just want to ask you to what extent in terms of both the FLEGT process but also the FSE are you actually trying to address this in trying to provide the sorts of incentives that might actually enable much greater participation among small and medium enterprises well I can say that the issue of engaging small holders is one that we have been working on for several years we now have about 150,000 small holders engaged in the FSE system worldwide and by no means we are very far from being enough we are working on improving and strengthening our system by we have set up what we call a small holders fund which is providing funding for small holders to gain experience and to become models for small holder engagement globally one of those projects is happening here in Indonesia we are also working on training so we are doing training the trainers program that I believe would help also in engaging small holders we are consistently working on trying to find ways in which we can make our standards simpler and easier to deal with for small holders and communities including indigenous communities because we believe that is crucially important and we believe it is possible however what we cannot allow of course is to lose the credibility of the strength of the standards so I think we are working on solutions but we are not there yet because it just coincides with the experience we have had in the years we are working on this there has been various discussions I think over the years whether we would start with just some part of the market and exclude the others etc but I think the idea now is to cover all of it that adds this particular challenge of reaching out to the small holders because if you add them up they actually make up quite an important part of the system so in order for it to be credible now how do we facilitate their possibilities financially for them to I think we will discuss that also because for now it is really up to the Indonesian government to ensure that everyone is on board etc and let's see if there is a need for the EU to make sure that some of the support we are giving to Indonesia in climate change etc should be channeled towards helping small holders to be capable of adapting to the system that needs to be seen okay thanks very much in both cases we will interpret liberally your answers as a framework for ideas that needs to be explored and constitute that as a commitment both of you that's the school so now just before I open up the floor I wanted to frame a question given these vexing problems associated with property rights that I am going to address to the other three members of the panel we've heard from Ruka of some of the concerns that she's raised because of the rights and the way in law can sometimes be implemented in a certain way with some negative consequences and she was referring to law number 18 from 2013 which on the elimination of a renovation and prevention of forest degradation but I think the more important issue is how can we reconcile the differences between different interest groups when different statutes have been applied at different times I don't know the particular case of the national park you were referring to and whether this is a national park that was established in Indonesia during Dr. Bologna rule or it's a national park that was established after independence but both exist in Indonesia both are characterized as in many other parts of the world by what I would call porous boundaries that communities continue to move in and out of these protected areas because ultimately they were very often customary lands before the protected areas were established but I think if I frame the question in two parts one is perhaps TC Kun can tell us a little bit more about how Cambodia has been able to address this issue and then the specific question I have for both Mats Santosa and Ruka is even after the constitutional court decision in 2013 the other critical issue 2012 sorry the lawyer is always going to be my apologies the decision in 2012 still leaves open the question of the legal definition of indigeneity as a precondition or precursor to being able to make a claim to indigenous or communal land and this is an issue that has vexed other countries in the region so I wanted to ask both of you what is the Government of Indonesia doing in terms of trying to address this issue in terms of trying to move that debate forward so perhaps Ruka and Mats Santosa and then we'll hear from TC Kun in terms of the experiences from Cambodia I need to check if I'm a lady or not okay thank you very much you talk about the definitions of indigenous peoples it's been an international agreement that there shouldn't be definitions of indigenous peoples that's why during the adoptions of the UN declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples there is no definitions why? because definitions tend to define something put something in the box that can actually exclude many of those outside the box from the rights that they deserve that's the basic argument behind the absence of definitions of indigenous peoples but in the context of Indonesia to make sure that things are clear that it is clear what we call indigenous peoples or machara from the other the rest of the society that's why we actually we propose at least two main characteristics which is the territorial and the history of the people but if you want to refer of those existence definitions in the law the Indonesian law you can actually refer to the law on the management of marine coastal areas and small islands it has definitions of indigenous peoples there of machara and adat and the second one that you can look into that is the environmental law 2009 where actually a lot of these share common definitions of indigenous peoples of machara and adat so there are actually existing definitions in Indonesia law but that's again the problem is if we make law we tend to ignore other laws those existing laws and that's also happened that's why now on the draft law with the parliament they're still talking about the definition where actually they already have something exist they only need to go and look back into the existing definition and also the positional court ruling also provides some characteristic it doesn't define because that's also the main thinking that you shouldn't define because you define something that means you tend to ignore or exclude more like if you say machara and adat in Indonesia should be living in the same territories intact or something how about those who have lost their land to companies how about those whose land has been locked so that's why definition main characteristic is important the main element is important to set but not the definition so that's it's easier for the government of Indonesia when as already mentioned there are at least two what do you call it two laws two definition in two laws which are more susceptible for protection so I think this is very important to be considered by the government especially ministry of forestry as a leading sector for formulating the new law in relation to protection and the recognition of machara and adat related to what do you call it Ruka has already mentioned about victimization the new law on the 18th number 2013 actually so I'm very much interested to know more about that phase because the main goal of the law number 80, 2013 is to combat more organized crime forestry sector so if the enforcement officers uses that law to victimize the indigenous people or the marginalized people I think that's in contrary with the main goal of the law number 18, 2013 I think you raise a very important point and I think there are potentially similar risks when laws are used to prosecute people in terms of the use of fire let's forget, fire has been a practice amongst many communities in Indonesia probably for hundreds of years and so there are similar risks I think in terms of victimization of small holders rather than some of the other actors who may be involved in using fire anyway, let's close now so we can open oh sorry, TC Kun I would like to share for Cambodia case that the local people or indigenous people have been recognized in the law and regulation even in the forestry law fishery law or protected area law that we have recognized that community local community play a very important role and all the local community always claim that they are not part of the problem therefore we would like to make sure that they are the part of the solution so how to recognize this right in the law is when we make this regulation and law always through the public consultation is a very intensive public consultation and making law process in Cambodia law sometimes take more than a decade to reach the adoption is what we have learned also we not challenge with the recognition law because government from that on this position but the challenge is the capacity of the local community of indigenous people to build to make them more effective in exercising their right that's the key I think we would like to share Indonesia and thank you for that Many thanks TZKON and the previous speakers were talking about law and Pak Kuntoro took office in Uga Ben but he also went public in announcing that he had found that there were 12,000 pieces of subsidiary legislation in Indonesia which went aligned with national legislation he took on that noble task trying to reconcile let's leave that there we welcome questions C1, 2 hands can we get microphones please my name is Roy I'm from Cambodia the question we'll go to Roka the question is around a little bit contrasting between the legal timber threads and Indonesia's right as the people discussion around the room that one side tried to improve cutting through legal process while at the same time indigenous people in the community they tried to claim their own land take the forest for generations so the question we'll go to Roka whether did you know something about the legal timber thread between EU and Indonesia and what kind of benefit that you expected from these legal timber threads in the relationship of your indigenous people in the community and also I want to hear from you whether did you think something about what kind of benefit that you are going to provide to the local community and IP second question is about lead cage yeah well I immediately asked ambassador do have one and he said we're going to have one very soon so I don't have actually clear answer to that but again when you talk about how the legality will benefit indigenous I think it's depending on the elements of the legal what you call the legal itself as I mentioned earlier the load is supposed to combat the legal logging has victimized indigenous peoples and also we believe in the market based mechanism like RSPO and FAC hasn't been really effective on indigenous peoples one of just yesterday one of indigenous our members in Muara Taik has been bulldozed down by one of the company that is actually a member of RSPO and they have been sent by RSPO to stop their operation but they continue and this time they're using they came with military personnel so these are the challenges so it's not really the questions of how these things will benefit indigenous but at first you have to have the people element in the regulations and load and whatever you have or initiative you have to have that thank you briefly I think our system is aimed at ensuring that the exploitation of the natural resource of Indonesia are sustainable there is a legal test about if we did not have this demand in Indonesia I think everyone would be worse off there would be other markets less demanding do we but for us if it's legal and certified legal in Indonesia in terms it will eventually be good enough for us but it will not be good enough for us if there is clear and flagrant violations of indigenous right in that process that's for sure final point we're not just doing this we're doing a lot of other things in Indonesia including empowering communities to assert their rights in terms of spatial planning how natural resources are used etc and to defend their own rights so it's a very vast commitment for us thank you and just to compliment for those of you attended one of the panels yesterday you may have heard Pak Sultan speak about the experiences of an association which has been one of the first in Indonesia that through collective action successfully circumnavigated the cost issue by getting certification for SLK as a group so a success for it thank you Andrew I'm Frederick the Director General of the International Network for Bamboo and Ratan what issues with the EU timber regulation is that bamboo which is not a tree but a grass species is not really recognised as such FSC is another question that really covers bamboo or not I'd like to know the discussions about the VPA in Indonesia have you recognised the special role of bamboo and how does that fit in the local discussion thank you thanks very much, I think all of you are going to have to take that question in the first instance I can't answer that question but you deserve an answer and I'm glad that you have experts in the rooms or perhaps a bamboo expert in the room so I may just pass that question on or direct you to experts afterwards we don't have a separate standard for bamboo it is possible to certify bamboo inside a forest context in a forest environment it can be done so that is definitely possible we do have examples of that but we do not have a separate standard for bamboo at this point in time so it is said that we can take that up biologically afterwards and clearly this is the beginning of a new commitment thank you very much aircraft over in the corner yes, I am in Scott Bodie, I work for aircraft I have a question again for the EU my concern is in my work in West Africa the domestic wood products markets are quite vibrant and active and as you mentioned earlier a lot of the flood VPA standards are now going to be applied or starting to be applied to beyond the export markets so is there a discussion formal discussion going on within the EU about the complexities and the importance of these domestic fuel wood timber, charcoal markets in terms of illegality or legality I think a lot of people's livelihoods are dependent on that and these are informal markets therefore often like in Sierra Leone for example they are illegal yet they are very important to the country they are very important to a lot of the people that depend on these products thank you Olaf would you like to answer that or I am happy to jump in if you are not I mean I think again I would strongly suggest you check out C4's website again a little bit of self promotion there is an enormous amount of material that is being published specifically on the domestic timber market in Indonesia in Cameroon in the Democratic Republic of Congo in Gabon and in Ecuador this was an EC funded project called Profomo which is actually in the final throws of being finalized I think the point you raise is very important our own research that goes back 6-7 years in Cameroon indicated very clearly when the FLEC-T process was first starting that the domestic timber market was as big and as important as the export market and this led to a change in the FLEC policy process where I think four out of the five countries which have negotiated BPAs in Africa have addressed both export domestic timber issues so it's an important issue but I hope that answers Hosni you had a question thank you very much and thanks for the panel for a very interesting discussion when we hear that the EU took about 10 years to implement this FLEC and we hear from the FLEC about the success one would ask the question why not cut it short and devote the process to something with organization like FLEC and instead of going you know maybe if you go to another countries it would take another 10 years or so and if this happens with this devolution how would the governments represent it here and the indigenous people feel about something like this I don't think there's a contradiction between the FLEC doing and what we're doing the fact that this has been 10 years that we are breaking historic ground for this what we offer is access to the EU market no not necessarily what we need to ensure is that the timber regulations that are set in place which are legally binding for all European the whole European market 500 million people but Indonesia can match that that market represents so I think there is no shortcuts to be done but certainly the lessons learned and by the way I don't think it's not the EU process that has taken 10 years it's the implementation of the units inside that takes time as well it's extremely difficult but you know if we're there soon hopefully that will be extremely useful example to be used in other countries as well but if we could explore the gap between what is legal and what is actually necessarily in terms of ecological sustainability and social responsibility and acceptability because we can't make the assumption that's implicit in a lot of what's being said that legality fixes everything legality is only as good as the law and certainly in my experience it's often falling far short of what is actually required to address issues that we've been talking about at this summit you know it may be that an area is allocated okay for logging and if you log it legally you get certification etc but actually it ought to be logged at all you know that type of a thing so I just wonder whether well I don't know I could almost ask the entire panel but I think I mean Kim probably operates in this area of difference so it was interesting to me to hear you talk about the SVLK and harmonising with FSC because I'm not sure what that means about this distinction also possibly the EU and what my relation is thank you I think for us this is a very important distinction because legality for us is the first of our ten principles and therefore it is a crucial aspect of what FSC is all about I mean without legality you cannot be FSC certified but we have nine other principles where some will of course also relate to the legislation because the legislation doesn't only talk about legality per se but it's also about some aspects of sustainability some aspects of social rights etc so for us legality is the basis but there's a lot beyond that and I have yet to see a domestic legislation anywhere in the world that actually fits with what we consider to be responsible for us management I have not yet seen that and I believe for us at least from a market based perspective and from a stakeholder engagement perspective it is important to have that possibility of adding on to the legal requirements which are important and a necessary basis what the stakeholders actually want to see implemented including the indigenous issues including the workers rights issues including the environmental organisation issues and I think what could be a fantastic thing would be if we had more of a conversation across these different initiatives I think they are complementary but I think we are actually focusing too little on talking with each other about the experiences that we have and how we actually make them complementary and not just state that they probably are Thanks very much Kik Mastentoso would you like to add to that? No I think the last point Kim raised about the need for much greater dialogue across multiple initiatives some of these policy arenas we haven't even talked about the validation process associated with carbon standards and all that is associated with those Jelmaas you had another? Jelmaas at the Office Depot Kim it is why we believe we are accepted that the 1994 rule that FSC has around plantations is limited the uptake of the FSC system in tropical forests would you comment on what if anything FSC is doing to look at that wall and perhaps revise or adjust it to allow greater uptake? Happy to I doubt that you will find anybody in the FSC system who thinks that the 1994 rule is at this point in time the right approach to the issue the difficulty is that when the 1994 rule was set into place it was a very good rule to actually avoid creating an incentive for conversion of forest into plantations that I think has been historically very very important and is something that we should be proud of however 1994 doesn't really make sense anymore since 1994 is too long ago to actually be a sensible solution what we need to find however is some other ruling that would actually make sure that we still have the disincentive to conversion and to deforestation while at the same time making it possible to also certify areas in particularly this region which have been converted since 1994 and where the situation is now changing I believe some of the answers will lie in discussions about forest restoration and compensation issues they will lie in finding other ways than just a fixed date for the conversation but I don't know what exactly it will be we have our General Assembly in FSC again this year it should be in Spain in September and this discussion will come up there with a view to finding new solutions and more creative ideas that we are very interested in receiving ideas from our stakeholders as well Quick last question because we need to close at one My name is Faisal Parash working with the as-in-secretariat on the regional program on Sustainable Mashable Pea with the 10 as-in-member states and partners including EU and others where we hope to have a multi-stakeholder way of working to share amongst ongoing initiatives planned initiatives My specific question is for Masama you highlighted some key progress by the UK and agencies in recent times however what we are seeing on the ground are still very serious problems such as the very large scale fires in Rio in 2013 and 2014 and with that El Nino year being predicted this year we anticipate that to get to the worst in 2013 46% of the fires were on land or under the moratorium so can you give some further elaboration on how you feel the measures that you are going to be taking are going to be serious enough to really prevent this large scale expansion particularly by medium-sized players into an area which you already said is no-go area but it's still going ahead are you looking at land confiscation blocking sale of products or sale of the land for those areas cleared by fire? Yes I agree I'm just highlighting about the enforcement practice actually but I think the most the more important enforcement is prevention That's why we are working together with the other ministries especially coordinating minister for people's welfare which is in charge for the prevention of the forest and land fires and we need to work together with the local government as well so I'm sure in the in the future, in the near future the coordination will be taken up by the vice president to ensure the prevention related programs are implemented so for example now we are working in promulgating the protection of the peat land ecosystem for example so now we are discussing how the regulation itself can respond to the forest and land fires on the gumball ecosystem so there are some programs that will be launched especially in preventing land force fires Thank you very much I'm going to be extremely brief about what has been you and your lunch so just to conclude and before we thank all our panelists for their contributions I think again to reiterate what I said earlier I think we've heard some very interesting perspectives at very different scales that highlight the complexity of multi-level governance, many initiatives which are ongoing at different levels in terms of the transnational conversations such as FSC many of the challenges that are still faced and the initiatives that have been taken at the national level particularly with reference to Indonesia and I think we can conclude that there's much room for hope in terms of even some of the commitments that we've heard and the initial steps that have been taken today and I hope that this will just be the beginning of many different dialogues in many different corners of the world to continue this debate so thank you very much for all of your participation and your questions and please join me in thanking the panelists