silent and shadow by zikri
TRANSCRIPT
Miftah Zikri
MSc - Business With Management 2009
Silent and Shadow Account of Freeport Indonesia
Miftah Zikri © 2009
Silent and Shadow Report 1
Silent and Shadow report of
Freeport – McMoran Copper & Gold Inc
I. Part A
1. Introduction
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) arouses much controversy and
contestation in management. From definition of CSR itself is vary, as expressed
by McWilliams et al (2006) “there is no strong consensus definition for CSR”. But,
CSR definition according to Baker (no date) is about sustainable livelihoods from
establishing capacity building skills of employees, the community and the
government, respect cultural differences and finds the business opportunities.
Based on corporate perspective, the principle of CSR is to create an image of the
company to the public, and another reasons behind that such as to persuade
relationship with local government or stakeholders in order to help and develop
its business processes. Thus, from public or society perspective, the company has
taken some advantages or resources from their areas and the company must give
improvement to society especially in local community area in terms of improving
their quality of life. As explained by Blowfield et al (2005) stated that, for the
reason of commercial viability or to add value to society, business needs to
manage its relationship with wider society.
CSR is an agreement between company and its stakeholders. From two different
perspectives can be argued if the both of parties do not fulfill their pledges. In
order to give information to readers from both parties, the silent and shadow
report is created to describe and discuss clearly from both perspective, which is
company (silent) and public or society (shadow) to CSR issues of the company.
As supported by dev (2007) Silent part that is collected with data published from
organisation concerned or liable. Then, shadow is from non-company resources
and published to public.
1
Silent and Shadow Report 2
2. Background of the company
One company has been chosen to be identified some issues in CSR. The company
is Freeport – McMoran Copper & Gold Inc. The company through its wholly
owned subsidiary, Phelps Dodge Corporation (Phelps Dodge) is a copper, gold
and molybdenum mining company. The Company’s portfolio of assets includes
the Grasberg minerals district in Indonesia, which contains single recoverable
copper reserve and the single gold reserve of any mine; significant mining
operations in North and South America, and the Tenke Fungurume development
project in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). In addition, PT Freeport
Indonesia is a subsidiary company established by Freeport McMoran Copper and
Gold Inc, who own the majority of its shares. PT Freeport Indonesia has
conducted exploration at two sites in the Tembaga Pura region, Mimika Regency,
Papua Province, namely the Erstberg mine (from 1967) and the Grasberg mine
(since 1988)
As of December 31, 2008, consolidated recoverable proven and probable
reserves totaled 102.0 billion pounds of copper, 40 million ounces of gold, 2.48
billion pounds of molybdenum, 266.6 million ounces of silver and 0.7 billion
pounds of cobalt. Approximately 35 % of its copper reserves were in Indonesia,
approximately 31 % were in South America, approximately 28 % were in North
America and approximately 6 % were in Africa. Approximately 96 % of its gold
reserves were in Indonesia, with its remaining gold reserves located in South
America.
3. Problem Identified
On this report the researcher will focus upon the subsidiary in Papua –
Indonesia. Because some issues have been identified such as the environment in
Papua is getting damage. Some demonstrations from societies have been
occurred to claim the company pledges to the society. As reported by
socialfunds.com (16 June 2006), “the Freeport exclusion was based on
allegations that the company has caused extensive environmental damage by
disposing of tailings including arsenic, cadmium, and mercury from its Papua,
Indonesia copper mines into a natural river system. Moreover, some other issues
will be identified at silent and shadow section.
2
Silent and Shadow Report 3
Silent and Shadow Report: PT. Freeport
4. Silent and shadow account
Silent Shadow
Environment
Information from Freeport official website stated that, the surrounding environment of its operation is managed and minimized in order to prevent the unfavorable impact. The company is committed by using risk management strategies to reclaiming and revegetating influenced land. Yet, the supports both scientific researches to further comprehend the environments in which it is operated and comprehensive monitoring to determine the effectiveness of management practices. In the course of Environmental Policy, the company commits to reverberation environmental management and practices, to providing adequate resources to fulfill its responsibilities and to continuously improving its environmental performance at every operational site. CSR report 2008 stated that, to evaluate data and make recommendation for operational performance, the company engages with a tailing management system by using a controlled riverine deposition system. Then, deposition area can be reclaimed with natural vegetation or used for agriculture, forestry or aquaculture when the mining is completed.
Environment
News from Indonesia Antara agency (2008) stated that Freeport Ltd had a problem with local community in Papua because of the environmental damage in plant site area. On August 11th, 2008, The leader of tribal of Papua sued PT. Freeport to get compensation from company due to environmental and ecological damage that has been made by company. The Jakarta Post also reported that the company had polluted the Aijkwa River in Kaimana district. . Furthermore in reality, many more rivers that had been polluted that had not been known. The head of community reported, the company had also polluted rivers in Kapiraya Mimika Barat Jauh and Mimika Tengah sub districts, including rivers in Teluk Etna and Poturawae sub districts. Eventually, the regional village communities were now facing water deficiency because the chemical pollutants from the company contaminated their rivers. As described by Amin (2006) Systematic killing toward environment in mining area. Plants, animal, and forest have been extinct because of Freeport.
3
Silent and Shadow Report 4
Silent and Shadow Report: PT. Freeport
Government
As explained on Annual Report 2006 Pursuant to Section of The securities Exchange Act of 1934 that Freeport Indonesia Ltd has a contract of work agreement with government of Indonesia. Contract of work would involve rights and obligations to taxes, exchange controls, royalties, repatriations and others. Both agreements were protected by Foreign Capital Investment Law. Yet, the company also stated that it has experience no disputes arbitration since 39 years operated in Indonesia. Freeport Indonesia Ltd had regularly been one of the largest taxpayers in the Republic of Indonesia. In addition, it pays royalties on all minerals
Government
In 26 January 2006, Amin (2006) disclosed on Kompas newspaper that, some main problems of Freeport Indonesia Ltd with government as follows:
1. The Government of Indonesia did not know, how many thousands ton of gold and copper concentrate were plundered by the company. Those concentrates were transferred through pipes (100km) from centre mining area to shipping offshore.
2. “Tax Blackout” to government was happened, means that the number of taxes should be paid more but in fact the company
3
Silent and Shadow Report 5
Silent and Shadow Report: PT. Freeport
removed from the ground. Royalty payments are based on the volumes and prices of minerals sold in accordance with the terms of PT Freeport Indonesia’s Contract of Work.
hided their profit or uncalculated production to reduce the taxes. In addition, there was no good contribution of Freeport to society in Papua. In addition, the people on those areas were still primitive.
Community Development
Freeport Indonesia Ltd CSR Annual Report 2002 described some points to achieve policy in community development. Firstly, build relationship with people in the host country and especially with people indigenous to areas of operations and explorations. Secondly, consult with local populations about important operational issues that will impact to their communities. As supported on annual report Pursuant 2006, in order to support community development in Papua, Freeport Indonesia Ltd formed community development program, which was called The
Community Development
An article from Amnesty.org (2002) described that Freeport Indonesia Ltd has a contract of work that described the company has broad powers over the local original population and resources. The rights to take land and other property and resettle indigenous citizen with provide equitable compensation only for dwelling and other permanent improvements are included. Yet, the article explained The communities especially in Kamoro and Amungme disrespected by agreement that explained the conventional land rights and granted insufficient
3
Silent and Shadow Report 6
Silent and Shadow Report: PT. Freeport
Freeport Fund for Irian Jaya Development. In 1996, Freeport Indonesia Ltd was in agreement to commit and contribute at least one percent of its revenue. The activities would be included as follows:
Charitable donations Cultural Preservation programs Agricultural assistance programs Several public program, including extensive malaria control Basic education program Comprehensive job training A business incubator program to encourage the local people to
establish their own scale businesses
Moreover, Freeport Indonesia Ltd committed to improve community development in Papua. As mentioned on CSR report 2007, Freeport Indonesia Ltd provided financial support, share knowledge and expertise, and strengthen employee volunteers to lend a hand for communities. The company also said, most effective when focus efforts on understanding the needs of the communities.
protection for their rights to livelihood, adequate housing, food health, and right to practice their cultures. In addition, the article also described, “it also ensures that the Indigenous population had no legally available right of refusal, of informed consent, or to adequate compensation. The contract gave Freeport the right “to take and use” on a tax free basis the water, timber, soil, and other natural resources in the project area and from other parts of the territory. No social or environmental impact assessment of the project was required or conducted. Moreover, the cultural rights of the people and their right to subsistence have been violated as their sacred mountains and religious sites are being destroyed and they are being forced to relocate to make room for the mining operations”.
Furthermore, news by Kapanlagi.com on 17 March 2006 stated that Jakarta community Care for Papua Association insists government to facilitate meeting between Freeport Ltd and Papua society. The demonstration was happened due to dissatisfaction of society toward Freeport Ltd contribution.
Employee
As described by an article from mining.com, Freeport Indonesia focus on CSR key issue, which was integrating of ethnic minorities in the workplace and community. Thus audit repot announced that Freeport Indonesia Ltd had a program to enhance in training and employment of the Papuans. The company also committed to increase the number of Papuan employment. Then Freeport also responsible to improve their prospect employment and promotions. Ultimately, the company paid more attention to Papuan. Training program was established in order to
Employee
Beratabui (2007) expressed that; Freeport Indonesia Ltd had around 13,000 Non-Papuans and 5000 Papuans origin who were working. The discrimination was happened toward Papuans as well as Non-Papuans with non-staff position such as firstly, non-staff employees are not allowed to bring their families to live with them in the worker barracks. Secondly, restaurants, shopping centers and kiosks that owned by Freeport were not allowed to use. Moreover their children were not allowed to attend the school owned by multinational company.
3
Silent and Shadow Report 7
Silent and Shadow Report: PT. Freeport
prepare people technically for their jobs at mine site. Papuans would be treated like “premium class”. They have first preference especially Papuans who from 7 local tribes. In addition, the company would be responsible to create working environment without discrimination in all aspects to Papuans employment.
Source: Human Rights, Employment, and Social development audit report 2005
Only one Papuan (Agus Kafiar) who represented top management level without right to make decision-making was given. Beratabui (2007) also said “Three Papuans are found at the Management level. The first Papuan manager ever at PT Freeport got his position just one year before retiring and therefore with little influence. In addition, according to Christian Evangelical Churches (GKI)’s sources “PT Freeport employs Papuans with poor qualifications in order to minimize their influence. Mrs. L & P stated that even though they had been working for PT Freeport for already ten years they had not been promoted yet”.
3
Silent and Shadow Report 7
5. Discussion
Although much has been written on silent and shadow report toward Corporate
Social Responsibility (CSR), in the report it has been described about what the
company doing toward its stakeholders. Much less consideration has been paid
to the development of the company to its stakeholder and stated from both
perspectives. This section will discuss the issues from silent and shadow table
and linked to the theories in context of environment, government, community,
and employee.
5.1 Environment
From silent and shadow report can be concluded that the environment
management system by Freeport, does not prevent the risk environmental
damage in Papua. The company said that by tailing management system,
deposition area could be reclaimed with natural vegetation or used for
agriculture, forestry or aquaculture when the mining is completed. But in reality
some rivers is contaminated with chemical pollutants. From this case, the
attitudes of the company toward public concerns should be developed and
crystallized. By maintaining and concern to environmental impact, the company
will improve its efficiency and reduce barriers. As supported by Koch (1979) the
isolations of corporation can be reduced by revitalized sense of corporate
mission for more active and broader role in society and turn around some of the
current negative public attitudes toward business. This theory also supported by
Hunt (1995) the diminishing or removal of trade barriers and persistent search
for improving efficiency will impact to businesses in easier communication,
transport and the growing sophistication and awareness of consumers. In order
to increase its intensity, Company has to deal with environmental concerns in
conjunction with a horde of other pressures. Hunt (1995) also described that a
recognition of the need for environmental integrity as a requirement for
organizational survival and success.
Hunt (1995) said that the level of concern fluctuates from time to time, the
environmental concern on the part of the public at huge scale tends to wax and
wane based on economic condition. The declining of environmental concern as a
7
Silent and Shadow Report 8
general issues due to the present recession. There are some factors which the
company should maintain its environment performance according to Hunt
(1995), as follows:
Scientific evidence of specific aspects of environmental damage
Increasing public awareness of environmental issues
Greater satisfaction of basic needs
Increasingly to internalize environmental costs through taxes and charges
Growing emphasis on environmental matters in education
5.1.1 The Importance of Good Environmental Performance
Good environmental performance can give benefits to the company. The
confident approach to environmental issues within an organisation can give
enticement to other parties and aspects, Hunt (1995) expressed:
Table 1.1 The potential benefits of sounds environmental performance and
attitudes
Aspect Potential Benefits
1. Legal Avoidance of litigation, fines and legal costs, clean-up costs, civil
liabilities.
2. Image Enhanced organizational pride, corporate image/PR and
attractiveness as employer.
3. Financial Increased confidence of regulators, investors and insurers.
4. Management Improved “peace of mind”, consistency on issues and time utilization
5. Business Enhanced performance from product differentiation, ‘eco-label’
recognition, improved market share, improved margins, sound and
opportune investment, improved cost control and sound acquisition
and divestment.
Source: Environmental Management System by David Hunt
Related case to Freeport Indonesia ltd, the company did not consider how the
important of the environmental concern is. As stated by the Jayapura-based
environmental organization (YALI) and the Indonesian Legal Aid Institute (LBH)
1999, indicated that five local indigenous Papuans had died as a result of copper
poisoning incurred from eating mollusks and other living organisms from the
8
Silent and Shadow Report 9
river system affected by Freeport tailings. Two years earlier, Kamoro
communities affected by mine tailings had written a letter to PTFI management,
calling attention to the serious environmental and health impacts of the
company's mining operations. The document, signed by 77 people from the
Negeripi and Nawaripi communities, states: "The 87 families and 300 people of
our villages who have suffered from the disposal of mining wastes and
environmental damage caused by Freeport for over thirty years in this area
protest to company strongly about the continuous pollution and devastation of
our tribal land” (Abrash 2002).
5.2 Government
From the Annual Report 2006 Pursuant to Section of The securities Exchange Act
of 1934 stated that the governmental issues between the government of
Indonesia and Freeport Ltd have been bonded with contract agreement and
foreign investment law protected it. From this contract agreement both of
parties must be disclosed in order to underpinning the agreement. But in this
case, Amin (2006) stated that there are some main problems between the
company and government, firstly the company plundered gold and copper
concentrate. Secondly, tax blackout was occurred, means that the company hides
its production and profit in order to reduce taxes. This problem had not been
disclosed before, according to Shakely (1977) lack of disclosure will create
several problems. The problem between government and the company will give
impact to the company’s performance and public, news from earthtime.org by
DPA (11 July 2009) stated, unknown sniper shot one of Freeport’s Australian
worker when he was driving a car in Papua. This problem was caused because of
fraud and injustice by Freeport and seeks government’s attention, as cited from
www.menkokesra.go.id.
5.2.1 Government Policies for CSR and its Relationship
As expressed by Moon (2008) there is a relationship between CSR and particular
patterns of business-government-civil society relations. Basic theory the
relationship between CSR and government was found by Schmitter and
Lehmbruch (1979), they stated that government normally partner with business
to formulate and implement public policy. In addition, Heclo (1979) the
9
Silent and Shadow Report 10
government also officials informally involve business and other interests in
defining policy objective and assisting their implementation.
CSR performance by company actually can be stimulated through establishing
policy and institutional framework. For instance, the UK government (1990s)
said that, “our approach is to encourage and incentives the adoption of CSR,
through best practice guidance and where appropriate, intelligent regulation and
fiscal incentives”. This is the old command regulatory model, which was the
government described governance issues without mandating behaviour and
specifying penalties for non-compliance (Vogel, 2008). But related to the case,
this old model is not appropriate to be applied because, the company has
disobeyed the rule, which was tax blackout and so on. Punishment can be the
good way to improve corporate responsibility to government and public. Moon
(2008) said “government as a driver for CSR”, means that government has ability
to make a rules and policy in order to reduce mistreatment from company in
doing its expertise. According to Levy (1999) give and take is the new context
model in modern business regulation, means that the government gives its
responsibility and take the sources, or if the company does not give do not take
it. In addition, Burchell (2000) said, “by locating rule at the heart of our
theoretical formulations, we can trace and assess the processes of governance
wherever they may occur. That is, through focusing on rule systems we will not
be confined to the world of states and will be empowered to explore issues and
processes in terms of the way in which authority is created, dispersed,
consolidated or otherwise employed to exercise control with respect to the
numerous issues and processes that states unable or unwilling to address.
To conclude governmental issues discussion, disclosing or being honest between
parties to the public and government, is the way to improve company
performance. Disclosing will recover their trust and reduce conflict. If the conflict
is happened, business failure or collapse will may be happened.
10
Silent and Shadow Report 11
5.3 Community Development
Freeport Indonesia Ltd committed to build relationship and consult about
operational issues to local origin people (Freeport annual report 2002). But
some cases were happened due to Freeport disrespected the agreement (see
silent and shadow account). According to (Welford 2002; Utting 2002; Blowfield
and Frynas 2005; Frynas 2005), business continuously prefers profit than
making a sensible contribution to development, which deserves expenses that
not related to its profit. They also expressed that contribution to community
development is unlikely done through CSR recently, because company judges it is
a voluntary nature. They suggested that, although it is a voluntary nature, there
is a need a commitment to establish voluntary nature to community
development, which is commitment to society from responsibility to
accountability through legally tied by international regulations that grip
accountability of MNC for its practices in overseas.
Blowfield (2004, 2005) and Jenskins (2005) expressed that contribution to
development was not set out through CSR, CSR issues especially international
development and poverty reduction recently disheveled. An example as
suggested by Vires (2004) that the character of CSR development should be done
by private sector, and it can be a supplement to the development efforts of
governments and institutions that concerned to community development.
Related to case, Freeport Indonesia should pay attention to community
development program, because community development is an investment to
company to support its business. Manager of Byblos (2006) said, “We realize that
we operate within a bounded space and that giving back to the community is
paramount and investing in the community implies a better environment to
conduct our business”. Freeport Ltd should maintain its relationship with local
community with establish well-prepared real community development program
not only development program solely, but through win-win solutions between
community and Freeport or give more benefits to society. In the event of
community development program must involves engagement, transparency and
11
Silent and Shadow Report 12
benefit to the society. According to Common Ground Consultation Inc (2007) the
benefit of community development should cover:
Construct comprehensive system for employment service and maximizing
quality of life with consultation or agreement to community.
Enhance for maximizing local employment and training, have a
preference to local services and suppliers, stimulate the creation local
business to provide services.
Underpinning and strengthening local community institutional social
program.
Assist the community in liaison with regional and national authorities.
If there is a potential society and wish to work, assisting the community
to have connection and access to have an appropriate training in order to
be qualified for the position in the mining.
Community development program may help company to increase its profit. As
explained by Burchel (2008) CSR is the notion business response to underpin the
challenge of sustainable development. Community development can be
improved through company knowledge and skills to improve social Condition
especially in mining area.
To conclude, if the company respects to the community development agreement
and commit to contribute to improve standard quality of community’s life, the
business can reduce its risk to society impact and help the company to increase
its profit as explained by scholars above. Weeds
5.4 Employee
The problem on employee issues has been highlighted on silent and shadow
account. Discrimination in the workplace was happened in the Freeport
Indonesia. As proved by Beratabui (3007) Freeport Indonesia Ltd had around
13,000 Non-Papuans and 5000 Papuans origin who were working at. In addition,
only one Papuan who represented top management level without right to make
decision-making was given. Then, employees had not been promoted yet
although working more than 10 years. But audit report argued that Freeport
12
Silent and Shadow Report 13
Indonesia had a program to enhance in training and employment of the Papuans.
In additions, mining.com expressed that Freeport Indonesia focus on CSR that
integrate of ethnic minorities in the workplace and community. As expressed on
direct.gov.uk, there are some types of discriminations related to these issues.
Which are, Direct discrimination is happened when an employer treat a worker
differently with other employees with less favourably can be called as direct
discrimination. Then Indirect discrimination, can be happened when a condition
in the workplace or rules difficulty one group of people than another. Indirect
discrimination is illegal, it is done based on particular purpose. This is illegal way
to get business work and the way to achieving in improper way.
F. Conclusion
Four main issues have been identified, which are these issues related
improvement to its stakeholder. CSR is an agreement between company and its
stakeholders or particular. It like a “give and take”, which means company gives
its obligations or voluntarily to its stakeholders. Then stakeholders must give
opportunities to company to maximise the resources to be developed and
generated profit to improve the quality of its stakeholder in ethical behaviour.
According to Windsor (2006) ethical behaviour that represent burly corporation
with self-control, philanthropic duties and spacious public policy to toughen
stakeholder rights.
II. Part B
1. Book review
The book that has been chosen is the corporation – the pathological pursuit of
profit and power by Joel Bakan, the book tells us about the corporation issue
related to corporate social responsibility problems. Particularly, examine the
nature, the evolution impacts, and the possible future of the modern business
corporations.
The corporations nowadays become dominant, and strengthened by law
protections. Which is the products or services of the corporations give impacts to
human life especially people. The book expressed that the corporation is a legal
13
Silent and Shadow Report 14
person, which is some of people who have invested their money and got rights
what they want by incorporating. Then by legal status the corporations harm
and exploit on this earth such as, low wages, environmental damage, oppressing
the society, then other corporate fraudulences and crimes.
The corporations have created the problems and they feel no guilty for that.
Because the corporation’s mind set is about profit, profit, and profit. They find
out the way how to get more profit by reducing cost or increase their sales
without concern to social matters. For instance, some of products have been
produced with the high price but the cost or wages for the workers is very low.
This is a kind of matter that faced by people not for the corporations, because the
corporations do not concern to social life. The books also expressed the
corporation concern to health and safety in the organisation. Some of examples
were illustrated regarding the corporate misconduct to safety measure and cost
of benefits. Then Bakan demonstrated how the corporations were approaching
to its stakeholders through donations and lobbying, because they were in a
threaten condition. On this book he also proposed a kinds of improvement and
restructuring to power of corporation back to people, this kind of the claim to the
modern corporations because of their harm to the human life.
In conclusion, Bakan presented the argument to the corporations why it is an
appropriate entity of business involvement, he brought the readers to see the
idea of the corporation focused on that the shareholders with some kind values
of ownership and authority to conduct and control through impunity and
accountability regardless.
2. Learning gained from the reading
The book and documentary movie are worth reading. The book gives the reader
especially me to think the corporation’s purpose is not only for some people or
legal but how the corporations give positive impacts and influence to human life.
Concerned to the society is the most important factor to be learned, because
many corporations that mentioned on the book misconduct their rights to
society. They have got their right but only for the individual or some of people
14
Silent and Shadow Report 15
purposes only. From this book, I also learned how the impact of the future
corporation if the company will not contribute or concern to the society and
environment. People will be like in the colony era and environment will be
extinct.
III. References
Abrash, A. (2002) Human Rights Abuses by Freeport Indonesia. Mineral Policy Institute [Online]. Available at: www.mpi.org.au/campaigns/rights/human_rights_abuses_freeport_indo/ (Accessed: 18 July 2009).
Amnestyusa.org (2002) Amnesty International’s Annual Report 2002. [Online]. Available at: http://www.amnestyusa.org/justearth/indonesia.pdf (Accessed: 14 August 2009).
Baker, M. Definition of CSR. [Online]. Available at: www.mallenbaker.net (Accessed: 18 July 2009).
Beratabui, C. [Online]. Available at: http://www.west-papua-netz.de/upload/racial_discrimination_papaua.pdf (Accessed: 13 July 2009).
Bernstein, A. (2005) Freeport's Hard Look At Itself [West Papua] [Online]. Available at: http://www.business-humanrights.org/Links/Repository/679002 (Accessed: 19 July 2009).
Blowfield (2004)(2005) in Idemudia, U. (ed.) Conceptualising the CSR and developing debate: Bridging existing analytical gaps. Canada: York University, pp. 92-93.
Blowfield (2005) 'Understanding The Concept of CSR', in Burchell, J. (ed.) The Corporate Social responsibility Reader. Great Britain: Routledge, p. 80.
Business-humanrights.org Case profile: Freeport-McMoRan lawsuits (re West Papua). [Online]. Available at: http://www.business-humanrights.org/Categories/Lawlawsuits/Lawsuitsregulatoryaction/LawsuitsSelectedcases/Freeport-McMoRanlawsuitsreWestPapua (Accessed: 19 July 2009).
Businessweek.com (2005) Freeport's Hard Look At Itself: The mining giant's gutsy human-rights audit may set a standard for multinationals [Online]. Available at: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_43/b3956122.htm (Accessed: 19 July 2009).
Business-wire (1999) U.S. Fifth Circuit Court Of Appeals Affirms Dismissal Of Beanal Lawsuit; Freeport-McMoRan's Mining Operations Do Not Violate International Law. [Online]. Available at: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_1999_Dec_1/ai_57876395/.
15
Silent and Shadow Report 16
Byblos-Manager (2006) 'CSR Domain', in Jamali, D. (ed.) Journal of Business Ethics: CSR theory and practice in a developing country context. Lebanon: Springer, pp. 252-253.
Direct.gov.uk Type of discrimination. [Online]. Available at: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/ResolvingWorkplaceDisputes/DiscriminationAtWork/DG_10026557 (Accessed: 26 July 2009).
Djmbp.esdm.go.id [Online]. Available at: http://www.djmbp.esdm.go.id/modules/news/index.php?_act=detail&sub=news_minerbapabum&news_id=574 (Accessed: 17 July 2009).
DPA (2009) Australian shot dead at Freeport mine in Indonesia's Papua. [Online]. Available at: http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/277031,australian-shot-dead-at-freeport-mine-in-indonesias-papua.html (Accessed: 22 July 2009).
Fcx.com Education and training. [Online]. Available at: http://www.fcx.com/envir/ed_train.htm#case_study (Accessed: 16 July 2009).
Fcx.com Environmental Performance. [Online]. Available at: http://www.fcx.com/envir/envir_perf.htm (Accessed: 15 July 2009).
Fcx.com Volunteerism. [Online]. Available at: http://www.fcx.com/envir/volunteer.htm#volunteers (Accessed: 16 July 2009).
Freeport (2002) Real People Real Commitment. Papua: Freeport Indonesia [Online]. Available at: www.fcx.com (Accessed: 22 July 2008).
Freeport (2006) ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934. U.S: [Online]. Available at: http://www.fcx.com/ir/downloads/FCX200610K.pdf (Accessed: 20 July 2009).
Frynas (2005) in Idemudia, U. (ed.) Conceptualising the CSR and developing debate: Bridging existing analytical gaps. Canada: York University, pp. 92-93.
Heclo (1979) 'CSR, Government and Civil Society', in Moon, J. (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility. United States: Oxford University Press, p. 305.
Hedman, E.-L. E. (2007) [Online]. Available at: http://www.rsc.ox.ac.uk/PDFs/RSCworkingpaper42.pdf (Accessed: 16 July 2009).
Hunt, D. (1995) Environmental Management System: Principles and Practice. UK: McGraw-Hill.
Jenkins (2005) in Idemedia, U. (ed.) Conceptualising the CSR and developing debate: Bridging existing analytical gaps. Canada: York University, pp. 92-93.
Kapanlagi.com [Online]. Available at: http://www.kapanlagi.com/h/0000107739.html (Accessed: 16 July 2009).
Koch, F. (1979) The New corporate Philanthropy. New York and London: Plenum Press.
16
Silent and Shadow Report 17
Laohamutuk.org Human Rights Abuses by Freeport in Indonesia. [Online]. Available at: http://www.laohamutuk.org/Oil/LNG/Refs/002AbrashFreeport.pdf (Accessed: 14 July 2009).
Leith, D. Freeport's trouble future. [Online]. Available at: http://insideindonesia.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=453&Itemid=29 (Accessed: 15 July 2009).
Levy, R. (1999) Give and Take: A Candid Account of Corporate Philanthropy. US: Harvard Business School Press.
Magazine.mining.com Freepoort Indonesia Issues. [Online]. Available at: www.magazine.mining.com/issues/0810/PTFreeportIndonesia.pdf (Accessed: 20 July 2009).
McWilliams (2006) 'CSR as A Field of Academic Inquiry: Definitions and Boundaries', in Crane, A. (ed.) the Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility. UK: Oxford University Press, p. 5.
Menkokesra.go.id (2009) The reason of violence in Papua because of freeport injustice. [Online]. Available at: http://www.menkokesra.go.id/content/view/11859/1/ (Accessed: 22 July 2009).
Reuters.com Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc. (New York Stock Exchange). [Online]. Available at: http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/companyProfile?symbol=FCX.N (Accessed: 17 July 2009).
Rosenau (2000) 'Global Governance: Towards a new world order', in Held, D. (ed.) The Corporate Social Responsiblity: Globalization. New York: Routledge, p. 21.
Schmitter (1979) 'CSR, Government, and Cilvil Society', in Moon, J. (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility. United Stated: Oxford University Press, p. 305.
Shakely, J. (1977) 'Corporate Disclosure: Let the Sun Shine In', in Koch, F. (ed.) The New Corporate Philanthropy. New York and London: Plenum Press, p. 23.
Sociafunds.com (2006) Norwegian Government Pension Fund Dumps Wal-Mart and Freeport on Ethical Exclusions. [Online]. Available at: http://www.socialfunds.com/news/article.cgi/2034.html (Accessed: 20 July 2009).
Uthiny (2002) in Idemudia, U. (ed.) Conceptualising the CSR and developing debate: Bridging existing analytical gaps. Canada: York University, pp. 92-93.
Vires (2004) in Idemudia, U. (ed.) Conceptualising the CSR and developing debate: Bridging existing analytical gaps. Canada: York University, pp. 92-93.
Welford (2002) in Idemedia, U. (ed.) Conceptualising the CSR and developing debate: Bridging existing analytical gaps. Canada: York University, pp. 92-93.
Windsor (2006) 'Corporate Social Responsibility Theories', in Mele, D. (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility. US: Oxford New York Press, p. 48.
17
Silent and Shadow Report 18
Zen (2006) Strikes and book launch keep Freeport-Rio Tinto in the news. [Online]. Available at: http://dte.gn.apc.org/73mi2.htm (Accessed: 14 July 2009)
18