Beanal, a leader of LEMASA, the leadership council of the Amungme tribe, the indigenous group which has been directly affected by the Freeport mine, is among the named plaintiffs who filed suit in U.S. District Court. They allege that Freeport has "systematically engaged in a corporate policy both directly and indirectly through third parties which have resulted in human rights violations against the Amungme Tribe and other Indigenous tribal people. Said actions include extra judicial killing, torture, surveillance and threats of death, severe physical pain and suffering by and through its security personnel employed in connection with its operation of the Grasberg Mine."
As for the environmental charges, the plaintiffs say that Freeport's operation has resulted in the "deforestation of rain forest and the contamination of the region's surface and ground water through ore leachate. Said violations of international environmental law are tantamount to acts of eco-terrorism."
A key factor in the case, known as Beanal v. Freeport- McMoRan, Inc. and Freeport-McMoRan Copper and Gold Inc., will be the issue of forum. The plaintiffs allege that they have exhausted all their remedies in Indonesia. A lawsuit filed by the Indonesian Environmental Forum, known as WALHI, against Freeport several months ago was dismissed. The other obstacle faced by the plaintiffs is the certification of a class in the suit. Resolution of both issues could take months. The plaintiffs have requested a jury trial.
A spokesman for the New Orleans-based law firm Regan Manasseh & Boshea, which filed the suit on the plaintiffs' behalf, said that Beanal could never have received a fair hearing on his claims in Indonesia because "The Indonesian government is a partner in the mine. If that's not a conflict of interest, I don't know what is. How could these poor folks ever get justice?" The spokesman added "In the Indonesian legal system, [Indonesian dictator] Suharto can decide if a supreme court order or ruling has to be enforced."
The lawsuit comes on the heels of Freeport's dubious claim that they have settled their dispute with LEMASA and the indigenous tribes that live near the mine. Freeport CEO Jim Bob Moffett met with LEMASA on April 13 and handed over a packet with Freeport's plan. In a full page ad in the local daily on April 25, the company said, "Fact: An agreement has been reached with our Indonesian neighbors."
Information coming out of Australia and Indonesia indicates that no such agreement has been reached, and that LEMASA still wants Freeport and the government to dismantle the heavily armed security detachment that rules the region. A statement released this week by the Tenth International NGO Forum on Indonesian Development (INFID), which met in Australia, said that Freeport's ad "directly contradicts a statement by Freeport Vice President Paul Murphy who conceded at a public forum sponsored by the Australian Council for Overseas Aid and INFID on April 24 that the April 13 meeting did not result in an agreement and was only the beginning of a process of negotiation with the Amungme and Komoro people."
LEMASA also released a statement on the meeting with Moffett which said that the company's offer to spend $15 million per year on development programs for the local people cannot be embraced because it "fails to address the roots of the problem."
Freeport spokesman Bill Collier did not return calls seeking comment. However, the Austin American-Statesman portrayed Freeport CEO Moffett's reaction to the lawsuit in rather heroic metaphors in the story's lead: "[Moffett] approached the suit... the same way he dealt with opposing football players years ago as a tackle for the University of Texas. He met it head on," wrote reporter Ralph K.M. Haurwitz, who quoted Moffett as saying at the shareholders' meeting, "We hope to quickly convince the courts that is a frivolous and opportunistic lawsuit." -- R.B.
So if the teachers say he works like a dog to help them become more effective, why is Heydrick, a seven-year AISD employee, being shown the door?
"I'm incompetent, inefficient, and don't follow directives," answered the rather reserved Heydrick, quoting reasons from district policy for non-renewal. But when pressed a little further, Heydrick admitted that he has some "professional disagreements" with some of his superiors, including the use of his voice mailbox. Superintendent Jim Fox recently ruled that central office staff may not use the voice-mail system during the workday, a rule that Heydrick finds onerous, he said, because he receives 30 calls per day. Heydrick also voiced his disagreement with the district's plan for teachers to share laboratory space in new science classrooms (which will be built with bond funds), instead of giving each teacher her own lab/classroom set-up.
But the main point of contention, Heydrick said, is that he was not granted due process. He said he has received "outstanding" job evaluations -- up until February, just one month after he learned his contract would not be renewed. He is entitled per AISD policy to a "professional growth plan," which allows an employee a specified time to bring his or her work performance up to par, but he maintains he never received one. Heydrick is appealing his non-renewal to the highest level he can at the district level -- before the board of trustees on May 15. He is also taking the unusual step of opening up that hearing to the public. Heydrick said he will ask for a one-year term contract, to demonstrate his dedication to the teachers in his profession.
"I am pursuing this because of principle," Heydrick said. "I realize it will be hard for the board to overturn the superintendent's decision -- but my case has so many unusual circumstances that I really hope they will give me the benefit of the doubt."
Associate director of personnel Ann Fields said she could not comment on Heydrick's specific claims of professional disagreement, but denied that AISD non-renews employees without extending them an opportunity to improve their performance. "I am not ever going to be part of a non-renewal simply because of a `difference of opinion'," Fields said. -- R.A.
Event organizer Pat Cuney says that the forum is part of an on-going series on "Feminism in These Times," which seeks to mitigate the misogynistic attacks that she says are being made by some political candidates this campaign season. "During this national election season, the discussions have centered around `family values,' pitting feminist values against traditional values," Cuney explains. "The Religious Right keeps throwing around the term `feminazis,' blaming women for the break-up of the family because they have to work to make ends meet in a society where social programs benefiting women and children are being slashed at the same time that military spending continues to increase."
Preceding the seminar is an afternoon discussion session in which 20 local social activists will take part. The afternoon session will last from 1-5pm and is free to the public. The evening session costs $10. The event takes place at the Austin Convention Center; parking is available at Third and Brazos for $2.50. -- A.D.