, ,

Hernando de Soto on Land Title

Thursday, March 1, 2007

I came across an interesting insight from Hernando de Soto, on his views why land reform fails:

If a government does not give to everyone the impression that it is really trying to improve things, it opens the possibility for the left to protest in the name of all the discontented people. One main reason why the informal sector has not become formal is that from Indonesia to Brazil, 90 percent of the informal lands are not titled and registered. This is a generalized phenomenon in the so-called Third World. And it has many consequences.

The question is: How is it that so many governments, from Suharto's in Indonesia to Fujimori's in Peru, have wanted to title these people and have not been able to do so effectively? One reason is that none of the state systems in Asia or Latin America can gather proof of informal titles. In Peru, the informals have means of proving property ownership to each other which are not the same means developed by the Spanish legal system. The informals have their own papers, their own forms of agreements, and their own systems of registration, all of which are very clearly stated in the maps which they use for their own informal business transactions.

If you take a walk through the countryside, from Indonesia to Peru, and you walk by field after field--in each field a different dog is going to bark at you. Even dogs know what private property is all about. The only one who does not know it is the government. The issue is that there exists a "common law" and an "informal law" which the Latin American formal legal system does not know how to recognize.


In Indonesia, a person can get a lot of money by titling and registering a land. First they check out on the map which area is going to be projected for public-infrastructure development, and then they purchased the land from the poor people that owns them through customary law with a very cheap price and then they register the land at the land registrar. When the government come with their buldozer, land speculants show their certificate and demand compensation, of course, at a very high price.

, , , ,

Citizen Suit

Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Hukumonline posted (in Bahasa) interesting articles on the emerging practice of citizen suit in Indonesia. So far the effort to get legal standing in a citizen suit has failed and the government has refused to acknowledge it as they are deemed to be an alien concept. However, the central jakarta court did finally decided to recognize plaintiffs legal standing, on the national exam case.

Citizen suit (wikipedia link) is used in anglo saxon legal system, mostly for environmental cases. Citizen can sue governmental insitutions both for their action which contravenes prevailing regulations or their omission in upholding or enacting regulation.

I want to see how this develop. This may go further to appeal and supreme court level. If the supreme court say 'yes' to citizen suit, civil socities (NGOs) in Indonesia will have a better position and ease in doing their job.

If you are interested in knowing how it works in US, here is a link to an SSRN paper.

, , ,

Bird flu strain: ownership or just profit?

Saturday, February 24, 2007

A colleague of mine wrote (in Bahasa) a nice piece in his blog, suggesting that the Indonesian government should create a material transfer agreement ("MTA") when handling the bird flu strain. To get an idea what a standard MTA looklike, you can click this link.

News however tend to suggest that Indonesia is claiming ownerhsip over the strain. But I agree with my colleague, it doesn't seemed like Indonesia is claiming ownership. It only wants a fair treatment. Health Minister said in an interview:
“WHO should have had walls to protect us as victims. It turned out to be that’s not the case and this is how it is in the world. Developing countries are always on the losing side like what happened to the AIDS and heart disease drugs,” she said.

Thus, there is indeed a case of securing it through the MTA. The non exclusive nature of the MoU is a good thing, as Indonesia still can make cooperation with other pharmaceutical companies.

, , , , ,

Some good points on regulating the unknown

This article from R.F.Wilson deserves a review:
This article examines our emerging knowledge base about the hazards of nano-sized particles (NSPs), focusing on risks posed by two types of exposure, inhalation of NSPs and topical application of products containing NSPs. It examines why the current regulatory framework is inadequate to respond to these risks and why regulators believe their hands are tied until new legislation is enacted. It then argues that this regulatory inaction leaves a significant role for the private insurance market, but that regulators should support this market in tangible ways, such as requiring federal grant recipients to carry commercial liability policies that would protect the public from potential adverse consequences
I still don't think that current research results on nanotoxicity is conclusive enough to start underwriting. A very limited underwriting agreement can be applied I guess. Swiss Re wrote a good report on the case, downloadable here.

Regulation of the Water Sector

Thursday, February 22, 2007

Here's a good link to all regulations related to Water Sector in Indonesia. Unfortunatelly, not all is in English. If you want the english version, try searching it at the search box of this weblog.

Good luck!

, , , ,

Weak regulation on cosmetics a time bomb

Voluntary regulatory system in US cosmetic industry can be a time bomb:
Now, new nanotechnologies are being widely deployed in cosmetics products, despite evidence of serious potential health risks. Moreover, the physical application of some of the nanotechnologies to the body in cosmetics makes these uses uniquely prone to skin penetration, inhalation and ingestion of the nanotech materials.

List of cosmetics using nano products:
  • Penetration enhancer - Encapsulating or suspending key ingredients in so-called nanospheres or nanoemulsions, increases their penetration into the skin
  • L’Oreal (which ranks No. 6 in nanotechnology patent holders in the U.S.) 75 has used polymer nanocapsules to deliver active ingredients, e.g. retinol or Vitamin A, into the deeper layers of skin. In 1998 the company unveiled Plentitude Revitalift, an anti-wrinkle cream using nanoparticles.
  • Freeze 24/7, a new anti-wrinkle skincare line is planning to incorporate nanotechnology in future products.
  • La Prairie’s product, the Dollars 500 Skin Caviar Intensive Ampoule Treatment, claims to minimize the look of uneven skin pigmentation, lines and wrinkles in six weeks using nanotechnology. La Prairie’s vice president of retail marketing and training, Holly Genovese, says the nanoemulsions in the product “optimize the delivery of functional ingredients into the skin and allow these materials to get to the site of action quicker”.
  • Procter & Gamble’s Olay brand was designed with nanoemulsion technology in 2005.
  • Other companies using nanotech in their skin products as of 2005 include: Mary Kay and Clinique from Lauder; Neutrogena, from Johnson & Johnson; Avon; and the
  • Estee Lauder brand.
  • Hair products – using nanoemulsions to encapsulate active ingredients and carry them deeper into hair shafts.
  • PureOlogy began experimenting with nanoemulsions in 2000 when the company’s founder set out to create a product line especially developed for color treated hair.Sunscreens – the zinc and titanium in sunscreens are “micronized”, making them transparent, less greasy, less smelly and more absorbable into the skin.
  • DDF planned more nanotech-enhanced anti-aging products as of 2004.
  • Colorescience markets a product named Sunforgettable, a powder which contains titanium dioxide nanoparticles.
  • Paris-based Caudalie launched its Vinosun Anti-Aging Suncare, a sunscreen and anti-aging treatment that relies on “nanomized” UV filters and antioxidants, in the US in 2003.
I guess although the heading is "cosmetic", when nanoproducts are used, examination mechanism shall not be voluntary. Download IEHN report here.

, ,

KPK can no longer prossecute?

Wednesday, February 14, 2007

A friend of mine told me that some people suggested to cut KPK's (Corruption Eradication Commission) authorities in the new draft law so that they will be required to hand in their case to the public prossecutor's office. In the current law, KPK has the authority to prossecute people. So far, I have obtained no documents indicating that this story is true.

In my last post, I quoted a Jakarta Post article reporting that the new draft law will "delete" corruption court and future cases will be settled in public courts.