TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - Transportation Minister Ignasius Jonan has asked that the decision of Richard Joost Lino, CEO of state-owned shipping company Pelindo II, to extend the operations contract with Hutchinson at the Jakarta International Container Terminal, (JICT) be ignored. The criteria for the contract extension, according to the law on shipping, contradicts it. Today, Jonan admits he is in the process of drafting a legal action against Lino's desperate move. "If we find any violation, the amendment to the contract will be cancelled," Jonan told Tempo reporter, Khairul Anam, who met him at his office on July 7.
Last June, the state-owned enterprises (SOEs) minister agreed to extend Pelindo II's contract with Hutchinson at JICT. Has the debate over this extension abated?
The approval was conditional (concessions must come first).
Has the Transportation Ministry reminded Pelindo II of those concessions?
Ask the SOE minister. Ask Dahlan Iskan, ask Rini Soemarno. Our legal basis is the law on shipping and government regulations on ports. Those fundamentals must be used. If, for example, we find violations of the law, then the contract amendment can be cancelled.
You can annul the contract amendment between Pelindo II and Hutchison?
Of course. We can even withdraw the operating license of Pelindo II, if we wanted to.
Wouldn't that be risky?
Just cancel the JICT one. The shipping law was not made exclusively for Indonesia alone. Singapore uses concessions. Previously, the port authorities in Singapore acted like Pelindo II, both as operators and regulators. But with the enactment of the law on shipping, he is only the operator. The regulator is the state. So, there must be a system of concessions. When they run out, we will extend the concessions again. Who owns Pelindo II? Does Pak Lino own it?
Pelindo II feels the contract extension with Hutchinson is effective because the SOEs minister had approved it.
If the amendment is seen to violate the law, let those who approved the amendment be investigated. We'll see what the results will be.
Pelindo II even asked the Attorney General for his opinion whether concessions were needed or not.
The statement of the Attorney General is unlikely to be higher than the law.
Is this concession debate leading to a conflict between Ignasius Jonan versus R.J. Lino?
Not at all. I'm the minister, remember? Why must I fight with the CEO of Pelindo II? It's not my level. I only suggested that the contract with Hutchinson not be extended.
Let's say Pelindo II in the end gets the concessions from JICT. Can Pelindo II extend its contract with Hutchinson?
No problem. It's up to him. If Pelindo II complies with the concessions, it can collaborate with anyone. The fact that the contract valuation would be considered cheap or expensive, is the responsibility of Pelindo II's management and the SOEs minister, not ours.
Would there be a requirement to report non-tax revenues when the port operates on concession?
They must.
In other words, there might be a loss in non-tax revenues?
If they don't sign the concession, yes. The state will not get those revenues.
Which is the concession, the 2.5 percent of the port's gross revenues?
I don't know how much, but 2.5 percent is minimal.
You have written the SOEs minister about this. What's the next step?
If the concession cannot be signed by Pelindo II, we will take legal action and see what happens. Pelindo II can certainly work together with a third party. But there must be a concession first.
Are you anti-foreign interests?
If we want to cooperate with foreigners, like in Panjang port in Lampung, why not there? It's still quiet there. Or Teluk Bayur port in Padang. Everyone wants to work with JICT, because it's already making profit. (*)
