Rabu, 25 Juni 2008


BASEL COP9 HIGHLIGHTS, Tuesday, 24 June 2008

The ninth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP9) to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal convened for its second day on Tuesday 24 June, 2008. Delegates convened in the COW throughout the day and contact groups on technical matters, BCRCs and ship dismantling met concurrently. A finance and work programme contact group convened during the afternoon.


REVIEW OF IMPLEMENTATION OF DECISIONS ADOPTED BY COP9: Cooperation and coordination among the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions: Osvaldo Álvarez (Chile), Kerstin Stendhal (Finland) and Yue Ruisheng (China), Co-Chairs of the Ad Hoc Joint Working Group (AHJWG) on Enhancing Cooperation and Coordination between the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions, presented the deliberations of the Group (UNEP/CHW.9/INF/19), a proposed recommendation (UNEP/CHW.9/14) and a note on the costs and organizational implications of establishing certain joint services of the three conventions (UNEP/CHW.9/INF/20). They noted that the proposed recommendation would: improve the implementation of the conventions at the national, regional and global levels while maintaining the autonomy of each convention; raise the political profile of the three conventions; and contribute to discussions on international environmental governance (IEG).

BRAZIL said that the recommendation broke new ground and should be considered section-by-section. The EU countered that the recommendation had been adopted by consensus by all regions and reflected a carefully worded compromise. NEW ZEALAND, INDIA, ETHIOPIA, POLAND, NORWAY, SWITZERLAND, URUGUAY, AUSTRALIA, the AFRICAN GROUP, INDONESIA, TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO, ARGENTINA and CANADA supported its adoption. The EU said if parties to the Basel Convention were to adopt the recommendation, they would put the Convention as a forerunner of the process and send a positive signal to the IEG process in the UN. NEW ZEALAND, supported by MEXICO, said that the work of the AHJWG represented a way forward in driving IEG discussions.

In response to several questions from BRAZIL, the AHJWG Co-Chairs clarified that, on issues such as compliance, where only the Basel Convention had a mechanism, information would be exchanged once the Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions developed such mechanisms. Regarding BCRCs, they said the recommendation would ensure BCRCs delivered their work in accordance with defined priorities. UNEP discussed resource mobilization and said it supported enhanced synergies and cooperation and would meet the costs of the recommendation as outlined in the document (UNEP/CHW.9/INF/30). JAPAN supported the recommendation provided that it did not result in an increased budget for the three conventions. Further discussion on the issue was deferred until Wednesday.

Financial Matters: Kummer Peiry presented the budget (UNEP/CHW.9/35) and stressed the need to consider financial matters and priorities together. She explained that three scenarios had been developed, namely: the Executive Secretary’s assessment of the required rate of growth; increasing the operational budget of 2007-2008 by 10 per cent nominal growth; and maintaining the 2007-2008 level in nominal terms. She stressed the first scenario was the only one that would allow the Secretariat to continue activities at its current level, and proposed that a working group consider the work programme as well as the budget, so that the two were compatible.

In the ensuing discussion, the EU said it would propose a one-time, three-year budget instead of following the customary biennial cycle. He said this would both provide significant cost savings and bring the Basel Convention’s budget cycle in line with those of UNEP and the Stockholm Convention, as recommended by the AHJWG. JAPAN, NORWAY and SWITZERLAND expressed interest in the proposal. The EU urged parties still in arrears to pay their assessed contributions. He suggested the Secretariat prepare a report on its efforts to correct this situation for COP10. JAPAN and MEXICO supported zero nominal growth in contributions and said that a more efficient use of resources should be pursued.

NORWAY opined that the Secretariat’s advisory role demanded increased resources and, supported by SWITZERLAND, urged that core activities be financed through the core budget rather than through voluntary contributions. SWITZERLAND said it could support a 10 per cent budget increase, provided that synergies with the Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions were improved and all parties paid their contributions. The Committee agreed to establish a contact group on finance and the work programme to be co-chaired by Karel Blaha (Czech Republic) and Messalegne Mesfin (Ethiopia).

Resource mobilization and sustainable financing: The Secretariat outlined its resource mobilization activities (UNEP/CHW.9/34). The EU said future actions should be conducted within the context of the review of the Strategic Plan and called on the Secretariat to work with donors to develop innovative projects. He said a new decision for resource mobilization was not required at COP9. The draft decision was forwarded to the contact group on finance and the work programme for further consideration.


Strategic issues for consideration by COP10 and COP11: The Secretariat introduced a draft decision on a process to evaluate the effectiveness of the Basel Convention at COP11 (UNEP/CHW.9/38), noting that Article 15(7) of the Convention required such an evaluation.

Several delegations said the proposed evaluation was timely. The EU suggested that its scope was too ambitious and risked taking a large portion of the Secretariat’s limited time and resources. He cautioned against delaying the ongoing review processes and the entry into force of the Ban Amendment. TANZANIA urged that the Ban Amendment not be subjected to the evaluation process before its entry into force. NIGERIA, supported by SRI LANKA and others, requested the purpose of the evaluation be clarified. CANADA and SWITZERLAND proposed that COP9 launch a solid evaluation process with guidance from parties and that an ad hoc working group be established for that purpose. NORWAY and JAPAN supported a step-by-step process and said that it was premature to decide that a review of the Convention should be conducted at COP11. JAPAN urged basing the evaluation on scientific data to ensure its objectivity. The Committee agreed to consider the draft decision in informal consultations to be led by Canada on Wednesday morning.

Strategic Plan for the Implementation of the Basel Convention: The Secretariat introduced a report on the work programme (UNEP/CHW.9/4) and a review of the Strategic Plan (UNEP/CHW.9/5). The EU said the implementation of the Strategic Plan was not effective enough and, with SWITZERLAND and CHINA, called for an analysis of its successes and failures. He highlighted that UNEP had made hazardous wastes one of its priorities and that the new strategic plan should reflect this.

The implementation of the timing and construction of a new strategic plan was referred to the informal group chaired by Canada for further exploration.

Legal matters: Regarding a draft decision proposed by the Secretariat on the Technical Cooperation Trust Fund (UNEP/CHW.9/27), ARGENTINA proposed adding a reference urging the parties that were in a position to do so to contribute to the Fund. With this amendment, the Committee referred the draft decision to plenary. On enforcement (UNEP/CHW.9/28), the COW agreed to forward the draft decision to plenary without amendment. On the Protocol on Liability and Compensation (UNEP/CHW.9/29), KENYA proposed a sentence requesting the Secretariat to prepare an information paper analyzing recent hazardous waste dumping incidents. The draft decision, as amended by Kenya, was forwarded to plenary.

Draft decisions on national definitions of hazardous wastes (UNEP/CHW.9/31) and on agreements and arrangements (UNEP/CHW.9/32) were forwarded to plenary without amendment.

A note and draft decision on designation of competent authorities and focal points (UNEP/CHW.9/33) was also approved and forwarded to plenary without amendment.

A note on the interpretation of Article 17(5) (UNEP/CHW.9/30) and comments received from parties (UNEP/CHW.9/INF/27) were discussed. Stating that the issue was a strictly legal one, JAPAN said consideration of the matter should be detached from political considerations and, with INDIA, NEW ZEALAND, REPUBLIC OF KOREA and THAILAND, expressed support for the "current time approach" in line with the practice of the UN Office of Legal Affairs. The EU and NORWAY backed the "fixed time approach" and urged resolving the issue at COP9 to ensure early entry into force of the Ban Amendment. BRAZIL and others said the Convention would be strengthened by the Ban Amendment’s entry into force. The Basel Action Network said that “great damage” was being done by the Ban Amendment lying in a “bureaucratic coma” and urged parties to reject the current time approach, as it would be the Amendment’s “death sentence.”


BCRCs: The group discussed the review of the operation of BCRCs (UNEP/CHW.9/7) throughout the day. On the issue of developing strategies for sustainable financing, BCRC host countries called for a global financing model that could apply across centres and be individually implemented. Others emphasized that financial models should be developed by each centre independently. Participants disagreed on who should be named in the draft decision to support the work of the centres. Suggested actors included: developed countries, host countries, regional members served by the centres, multilateral donors and those with the capacity to contribute. Some participants focused on the need for immediate support for BCRCs, while others stressed the importance of building the BCRCs’ self-sufficiency and autonomy.

TECHNICAL MATTERS: The contact group on technical matters met in the morning to discuss the table of contents (ToC) of the draft revised technical guidelines on the ESM of used tyres. Participants strove for consistency with other Basel Convention technical guidelines, reordered paragraphs and debated what should be included in annexes and appendices. In the afternoon, they reviewed and agreed on the draft decisions on mercury and POP wastes. Discussions continued on the revised ToC and consensus was reached after a debate on, among other things, keeping terminology strictly in line with that of the Convention or going for a clear and useable set of guidelines that would be applied by people who may not be familiar with the Convention. In the evening, discussions centered on the draft decision on tyres.

DISMANTLING OF SHIPS: Discussions focused on the OEWG’s work programme on ship dismantling. Participants agreed the OEWG would carry out a preliminary assessment on whether the IMO ship recycling convention, once adopted, establishes an equivalent level of control to that of the Basel Convention. Some favored reiterating the Basel Convention’s principles as guidelines for the task, while others argued that the OEWG’s work should be situated in a more general context and not be prejudged with regard to equivalence in the levels of control. The OEWG’s work on the duplication of regulatory instruments was deferred because the outcome of the IMO convention remained unknown. In the afternoon the group discussed the Global Programme for Sustainable Ship Recycling, with one country voicing concerns about the Programme’s narrow focus on Asia. In the evening, participants agreed on an amended draft decision to be forwarded to the COW for approval.


Some delegates feared that the process to evaluate the effectiveness of the Convention proposed by the Secretariat represented yet another effort by long-time Ban opponents to delay the entry into force of the Ban Amendment. According to some rumblings, behind the proposal lay a “hidden agenda” to weaken, rather than strengthen, the Convention’s key objectives, in particular the minimization of transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and the minimization of waste generation at source.
Concerns were heightened by a rumor that a “non-paper” was being prepared on the interpretation of Article 17(5) whereby the COP would assert that the number of ratifications required for the Ban Amendment had not yet been met.

COP9-BALI: REPORT OF DAY-1, Monday, 23 June 2008

COP9-BALI: REPORT OF DAY-1, Monday, 23 June 2008

The ninth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP9) to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal convened on Monday 23 June, 2008. In the morning delegates enjoyed a welcoming ceremony and heard opening speeches. During the afternoon, delegates addressed organizational matters and established a Committee of the Whole (COW) to discuss substantive agenda items. In the evening, contact groups met on the Basel Convention Regional Centres (BCRCs), and on technical matters and dismantling of ships.


Hyoman Yasa, Executive Secretary, Province of Bali, delivered a welcoming speech on behalf of the Governor of Bali, highlighting the Province’s efforts to protect the environment, and underscoring the links between a healthy environment and a sound economy.

COP8 President John Njoroge Michuki, Minister of Environment (Kenya), noted that several COP8 decisions had not been implemented due to a lack of funds. He expressed hope that COP9 would address pending issues, including the establishment of a financial mechanism and the interpretation of paragraph 5 of Article 17 (entry into force of amendments).

Delegates elected Rachmat Nadi Witoelar Kartaadipoetra, State Minister for the Environment (Indonesia), as COP9 President by acclamation. He underscored the theme of the conference “Waste Management for Human Health and Livelihood,” noting the impacts of hazardous waste on people and nature. He said the illegal traffic of hazardous waste showed no sign of decreasing and the generation of such waste was increasing.

Katharina Kummer Peiry, Executive Secretary of the Basel Convention, reminded delegates of the Convention’s achievements, including: tackling the problem of e-waste; engaging in international efforts on ship dismantling; collaborating with UNEP to strengthen Côte d’Ivoire’s hazardous waste handling capacity; increasing stakeholder involvement; strengthening the capacities of developing countries through the BCRCs; and formulating draft technical guidelines for used tyres and mercury waste. She pointed to challenges facing the Convention, including considering the recommendations of the Ad Hoc Joint Working Group on Enhancing Cooperation and Coordination among the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions and the creation of a solid financial basis for the Basel Convention. She hoped that COP9 would place the Basel Convention firmly on the international agenda and reaffirm its implementation as a prerequisite to sustainable development.

Chile, on behalf of the GROUP OF LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN COUNTRIES (GRULAC), lamented the strategic plan’s slow implementation and expressed concern about the English-only availability of some official documentation at this meeting. Nigeria, on behalf of the AFRICAN GROUP, highlighted toxic waste dumping incidents in Nigeria and Côte d’Ivoire and encouraged: a “more pragmatic approach” to financing; resolution of the debate over the Ban Amendment’s entry into force; and further capacity building efforts for the Convention’s enforcement. CÔTE D’IVOIRE expressed appreciation to the international community for its support in dealing with hazardous waste in Abdijan and offered to host COP10. Egypt, on behalf of the ARAB GROUP, raised concern about the increase in illegal global trade of hazardous waste, particularly in areas of armed conflict. The United Kingdom, on behalf of the WESTERN EUROPEAN AND OTHERS GROUP (WEOG), emphasized the challenges facing the Convention.


Delegates elected Mary Harwood (Australia), Magda Gosk (Poland), Osvaldo Álvarez (Chile), and Angelina Madete (Tanzania) as COP9 Vice Presidents. Angelina Madete was elected Rapporteur. Delegates adopted the provisional agenda (UNEP/CHW9/1 and Add.1) without amendment. COP9 President suggested, and delegates agreed, to establish a COW to address substantive agenda items, with Mary Harwood as Chair.


Chair Harwood opened the deliberations in the afternoon. Regarding the issues to be addressed, SWITZERLAND highlighted the formulation of a strong commitment to the sound management of hazardous wastes and the review of the implementation of the Convention and of the Strategic Plan as priorities. CANADA and NORWAY stressed the importance of the review of the effectiveness of the Convention.

REVIEW OF IMPLEMENTATION OF DECISIONS ADOPTED BY COP9: Basel Convention Regional and Coordinating Centres (BCRCs): Chair Harwood opened discussion on: a recommendation of the South Asia Co-operative Environment Programme (SACEP) to establish a new BCRC in South Asia (UNEP/CHW.9/INF/8); a regional needs assessment report (UNEP/CHW.9/INF/8/Add.1); comments on the referred proposal (UNEP/CHW.9/INF/9); and a review of the proposal (UNEP/CHW.9/8). Several delegates explicitly reiterated the importance of BCRCs as an implementation instrument for the Basel Convention, but disagreed over whether a new centre should be established. France, on behalf of the EU, and CANADA suggested that decisions on the establishment of new centres be postponed until after the review of existing centres is complete. IRAN cautioned against overlap in BCRC membership. PAKISTAN commented that no regional centre was fully addressing the issues of e-waste and ship dismantling in South Asia.

SACEP stressed that its proposal had been long-standing and endorsed by its eight member countries. LIBYA stated that the establishment of the new centre should have been approved earlier. Delegates agreed to refer this issue to the Contact Group on BCRCs.

Technical Matters: The Secretariat introduced the revised technical guidelines on environmentally sound management (ESM) of used tyres and the related draft decision and noted that an informal consultation had been held on 22 June 2008. BRAZIL said that the revised technical guidelines furthered those adopted in 1999, improving sections on, inter alia, the prevention and reduction of waste generation and the potential risks to human health and the environment, and adding new parts, including on technical terms. The EU proposed several amendments, including to the draft’s structure. CAMBODIA urged the guidelines to also address motorcycle tyres. THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA highlighted the issue of mosquitoes in tyre piles. The matter was referred to the contact group.

The EU, INDONESIA, TANZANIA and others supported further work on the technical guidelines on the ESM of mercury waste. Noting that work on mercury was occurring in various international fora, NORWAY suggested that it could be the building block for a future legally binding regime on mercury. JAPAN recalled the problems it faced with Minamata Disease, but cautioned that duplication with other efforts should be avoided.

Regarding the technical guidelines on the ESM of persistent organic pollutant (POP) wastes, the EU suggested that the Stockholm Convention on POPs include experts from the Basel Convention in its review of best available techniques (BAT) and best environmental practices (BEP) to improve coordination in waste management. INDONESIA disagreed with the inclusion of a concentration limit of POPs in wastes, explaining that this could lead to the import of waste with low POP contents.

Delegates referred discussion on technical guidelines on tyres, mercury waste and POP wastes to a contact group for further consideration.

Dismantling of ships: The Secretariat introduced the documents on ship dismantling: ESM of ship dismantling (UNEP/CHW.9/34); report of the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) of IMO (UNEP/CHW/INF/28); compilation of comments on the ESM of ship dismantling (UNEP/CHW/INF/29); and a document submitted by the Basel Secretariat to the MEPC (UNEP/CHW/INF/30). INDONESIA said that effective short and medium term measures for the ESM of ship dismantling should be explored and discussed, and the level of control clarified. The EU noted it would monitor progress in the development of the IMO draft Convention on the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships to ensure that it established a level of control equivalent to that of the Basel Convention. The NGO PLATFORM ON SHIPBREAKING and the BANGLADESH ENVIRONMENT LAWYERS ASSOCIATION expressed concern that the proposed IMO convention would not have the same level of control. CHINA highlighted the importance of technical assistance and support to developing countries to enable them to achieve environmentally sound ship recycling. TURKEY urged parties to support its pilot project on ship dismantling. A contact group was established to discuss the draft decision on ship dismantling.


BCRCs: Prakash Kowlesser (Mauritius) chaired the contact group and asked delegates to craft a draft decision by Wednesday, based on the Secretariat’s proposed text (UNEP/CHW.9/7). Delegates supported a proposal to encourage information and expertise exchange among the BCRCs', as it was seen to promote South-South cooperation.

Adding “promoting political guidance,” as set by the COP for BCRCs, to the role of the Secretariat led to debate, as some felt this pre-empted other decisions about the BCRCs’ independence. Some delegates stressed the need to focus on BCRC’s self-sufficiency, while others emphasized the continued role of the Secretariat in supporting their activities.

TECHNICAL MATTERS: The contact group on technical matters, chaired by Mohammed Khashashneh (Jordan), gathered in the evening. Delegates discussed EU proposals on: the draft revised technical guidelines on the ESM of used tyres; and revision of the draft decisions on the ESM of POP wastes, and of mercury waste. They agreed to reconvene on Tuesday morning to discuss these two issues. On the EU proposal on ESM of POP wastes, the group agreed to prepare a new text, bracketing a few areas.

DISMANTLING OF SHIPS: Chaired by Roy Watkinson (UK), the contact group agreed to use the draft decision proposed by the Secretariat (UNEP/CHW.9/34) as the basis for work and identified several paragraphs, as well as the Global Programme for Sustainable Ship Recycling, as matters requiring further discussion. Delegates raised several issues of concern, including the lack of agreement about criteria for “equivalent level of control,” the division of competences between the draft IMO ship recycling convention and the Basel Convention to avoid duplication of regulatory instruments, and the work programme for the OEWG.

As delegates began tackling COP9’s heavy agenda, some, having based their positions on English-only documents, were concerned that this affected their ability to negotiate trickier matters. Most predicted protracted negotiations on the issue of financing, as the Secretariat’s administrative costs and the costs of implementing the Convention in developing countries, in particular through the BCRCs, required a substantial increase in contributions. Many feared parties’ pockets may not be deep enough at the present time, with waste low on governments’ environmental shopping list. Others foretold of controversial issues, including the interpretation of Article 17(5) of the Convention and the entry into force of the Ban Amendment, the final adoption of the guidelines of the Mobile Phone Partnership Initiative - which some felt were not stringent enough, and the guidelines on the ESM of used tyres – on which one delegate was heard wondering if the Convention was “barking up the wrong tree” as many question whether used tyres should be considered “hazardous” at all.


23 - 27 JUNE 2008

The ninth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP9) to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal begins Monday, 23 June 2008 in Bali, Indonesia. The theme of COP9 is “Waste Management for Human Health and Livelihood,” which will be considered during the COP’s high-level segment on Thursday and Friday, 26 and 27 June respectively.

The key issues to be considered by COP9 include: the 2009-2010 programme of work; a budget for the Basel Convention trust funds for 2009-2010; a recommendation for improved cooperation and coordination between the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions developed by the Ad Hoc Joint Working Group on Cooperation and Coordination; initiating a process to develop a successor arrangement for the Strategic Plan beyond 2010; agreeing to an approach towards reaching an agreed interpretation of paragraph 5 of Article 17 of the Convention (and entry into force of amendments); and initiating a process leading to an evaluation of the effectiveness of the Convention at COP11, in accordance with paragraph 7 of Article 15 of the Convention.


The Basel Convention was adopted in 1989 and entered into force on 5 May 1992. It was created to address concerns over the management, disposal and transboundary movement of the estimated 400 million tonnes of hazardous wastes that are produced worldwide each year. The guiding principles of the Convention are that transboundary movements of hazardous wastes should: be reduced to a minimum; managed in an environmentally sound manner; be treated and disposed of as close as possible to their source of generation; and be minimized at the source. There are currently 170 parties to the Convention.

COP1: The first COP was held in Piriapolis, Uruguay, from 3-4 December 1992. COP1 requested industrialized countries to prohibit the transboundary movements of hazardous wastes for final disposal to developing countries (Decision I/22). Decision I/22 also noted that the transboundary movements of wastes for the purpose of recovering and recycling materials should take place in accordance with the requirement that the wastes be handled in an environmentally sound manner. Decision I/22 is not legally binding, and a “pro-ban coalition,” consisting of developing countries, Greenpeace and the Nordic states, urged delegates to adopt the ban as a binding amendment to the Convention. The issue of hazardous wastes destined for recycling and recovery was forwarded to the Technical Working Group (TWG) for further study.

COP2: During the second COP, held in Geneva from 21-25 March 1994, parties agreed on an immediate ban on the export of hazardous wastes intended for final disposal from Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries to non-OECD countries. Parties also agreed to ban, by 31 December 1997, the export of wastes intended for recovery or recycling (Decision II/12) from OECD to non-OECD countries. Since Decision II/12 was not incorporated into the text of the Convention itself, the issue of whether or not the ban was legally binding was unclear.

COP3: At the third COP, held in Geneva from 18-22 September 1995, the ban was adopted as an amendment to the Convention (Decision III/1). The Ban Amendment does not use the OECD/non-OECD membership distinction but bans the export of hazardous wastes for final disposal and recycling from Annex VII countries (EU, OECD and Liechtenstein) to non-Annex VII countries. According to Article 17, paragraph 5, entry into force of amendments takes place upon ratification by at least three-fourths of the parties “who accepted them.” There are differing interpretations over the term “who accepted them” and therefore over the number of ratifications required for the Ban Amendment to enter into force. Some parties suggest that the number is 62, that is, three-fourths of parties at the time of adoption of the Ban Amendment. Others, including the UN Office of Legal Affairs, argue that three-fourths of current parties must ratify the Ban Amendment. To date, the Ban Amendment had been ratified by 63 parties. COP3 mandated the TWG to continue its work on the characterization of “hazardous wastes” and the development of lists of wastes that are hazardous (Decision III/12).

COP4: Two of the major decisions adopted at the fourth COP, held in Kuching, Malaysia, from 23-27 February 1998, related to the Ban Amendment. COP4 considered proposals by countries seeking to join Annex VII and decided that the composition of this annex would remain unchanged until the Ban Amendment entered into force (Decision IV/8). In this decision, COP4 also requested the Secretariat to undertake a study of issues related to Annex VII. On the question of which wastes should be covered by the Ban, COP4 considered the proposal put forward by the TWG on List A, identifying hazardous wastes, and List B, identifying non-hazardous wastes. COP4 decided to incorporate these lists as Annex VIII and Annex IX to the Convention, respectively.

COP5: The fifth COP met in Basel, Switzerland, from 6-10 December 1999, when delegates celebrated the tenth anniversary of the Convention’s adoption. They also adopted the Protocol on Liability and Compensation for Damage Resulting from Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal, and a “Basel Declaration” for promoting the environmentally sound management (ESM) of hazardous wastes over the next ten years, along with a decision setting the next decade’s agenda. To date, eight parties have ratified the Protocol on Liability and Compensation, which will enter into force upon receipt of 20 instruments of ratification. The COP also adopted decisions covering the Convention’s implementation and monitoring, legal matters, prevention and monitoring of illegal traffic, technical matters and institutional, financial and procedural arrangements.

COP6: The sixth COP met in Geneva, Switzerland, from 9-14 December 2002. COP6 restated the importance of the Basel Convention’s goals relating to sustainable development and launched a partnership programme with environmental non-governmental organizations, industry and business. The COP adopted decisions on issues relating to the implementation of the Convention, amendment of the Convention and its annexes and institutional, financial and procedural arrangements. COP6 also agreed on guidance elements for the detection, prevention and control of illegal traffic in hazardous wastes, and on technical guidelines for ESM of biomedical and healthcare wastes, plastic wastes, waste from lead-acid batteries and ship dismantling. Delegates at COP6 agreed to promote further cooperation between the Basel Secretariat and other organizations and secretariats involved in chemicals management. COP6 set the budget for 2003-2005, agreed on a compliance mechanism for the Convention, adopted a Strategic Plan, and finalized a framework agreement on the legal establishment of the Basel Convention Regional Centres (BCRCs) for training and technology transfer.

COP7: At the seventh COP, held in Geneva from 25-29 October 2004, delegates considered decisions on a range of issues relating to the BCRCs, the Basel Convention Partnership Programme, institutional arrangements, the Ban Amendment and the Basel Protocol on Liability and Compensation. COP7 also adopted decisions on definitions of hazardous wastes, hazardous waste characteristics and a number of technical guidelines. Delegates adopted decisions on guidance elements for bilateral, multilateral or regional agreements and on the follow-up to the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD). After protracted negotiations, COP7 set the budget for 2005-2006 and took decisions on the Strategic Plan and the 2005-2006 work programme for the OEWG.

COP8: The eighth COP was held from 27 November to 1 December 2006 in Nairobi, Kenya. COP8 opened against the backdrop of a toxic waste dumping incident in Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire. Delegates considered reports on activities within the Convention’s mandate and adopted a declaration on e-waste and more than 30 decisions on, inter alia: the 2007-2008 programme of work; the implementation of the Strategic Plan, including consideration of the work and operations of the BCRCs, as well as the Basel Convention Partnership Programme; synergies and cooperation; e-waste and end-of-life equipment; ship dismantling; legal matters; amendments to the general technical guidelines for the ESM of persistent organic pollutant (POP) wastes; guidelines for the ESM of wastes; and the election of new members of the Compliance Committee and the Committee’s work programme.


AD HOC JOINT WORKING GROUP: The Ad hoc Joint Working Group of the Stockholm, Rotterdam and Basel conventions held three meetings to prepare joint recommendations on enhanced cooperation and coordination among the three conventions. The first meeting was held from 26-28 March 2007 in Helsinki, Finland. At that meeting the group agreed on a non-exhaustive list of objectives and guiding principles to be applied in its future work. The second meeting, held from 10-13 December 2007 in Vienna, Austria, agreed to focus its work on four themes: organizational issues in the field; technical substantive issues; information management and public awareness issues; and administrative issues. The Working Group adopted a recommendation at its third meeting (25-28 March 2008, Rome, Italy), which has been submitted to COP9.

OEWG6: The sixth session of the OEWG took place in Geneva, Switzerland, from 3-7 September 2007. The meeting considered several issues, including: the development of a work plan on e-waste for 2009/2010; the ESM of mercury wastes; ship dismantling; the interpretation of paragraph 5 of Article 17 of the Basel Convention; the revised technical guidelines on ESM of used tyres; and illegal traffic, reviewing the outline of an instruction manual for the legal profession. In total, the Group adopted 28 decisions.

COMMITTEE FOR ADMINISTERING THE MECHANISM FOR PROMOTING IMPLEMENTATION AND COMPLIANCE: The Committee held its fifth and sixth sessions on 8-9 September 2007 and 28-29 February 2008, respectively. In addition to implementing its work programme for the biennium 2007-2008, the Committee considered how it could better use its full capacity in the future. The Committee reviewed the activities that it had undertaken since its establishment, identified possible limitations and developed its proposed work programme for the biennium 2009–2010.

OPEN-ENDED WORKING GROUP ON MERCURY: The First Meeting of UNEP’s Ad hoc Open-ended Working Group (OEWG) to Review and Assess Measures to Address the Global Issue of Mercury was held from 12-16 November 2007, in Bangkok, Thailand. The OEWG discussed options for enhanced voluntary measures, and new or existing international legal instruments on mercury. Delegates agreed on tasks to be undertaken during the intersessional period, including analysis on, inter alia: financial considerations of a free-standing convention, a new protocol to the Stockholm Convention and voluntary measures; technology transfer; implementation options; organization of response measures; meeting demand for mercury if primary production is phased out; major mercury containing products and processes with effective substitutes; and funding.
UNEP GOVERNING COUNCIL/GMEF: The tenth special session of the UNEP Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environmental Forum was held in Monaco in February 2008. Among other things, the GC/GMEF adopted a decision on chemicals management, including mercury and waste management. The Basel Convention Secretariat was asked to provide further input on waste management by the end of May 2008 to be presented to the 25th session of UNEP Governing Council in February 2009.

This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin © is written and edited by Melanie Ashton, Paula Barrios, Ph.D., Kate Neville, Olivia Pasini, Anne Roemer-Mahler, and Kunbao Xia. The Digital Editor is Markus Staas. The Editor is Pamela S. Chasek, Ph.D. and the Director of IISD Reporting Services is Langston James “Kimo” Goree VI . The Sustaining Donors of the Bulletin are the United Kingdom (through the Department for International Development – DFID), the Government of the United States of America (through the Department of State Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs), the Government of Canada (through CIDA), the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMU), the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the European Commission (DG-ENV) and the Italian Ministry for the Environment, Land and Sea. General Support for the Bulletin during 2008 is provided by the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Government of Australia, the Austrian Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management, the Ministry of Environment of Sweden, the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, SWAN International, Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN), the Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs, the Japanese Ministry of Environment (through the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies - IGES), the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (through the Global Industrial and Social Progress Research Institute - GISPRI) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Funding for translation of the Bulletin into French has been provided by the International Organization of the Francophonie (IOF). Funding for the translation of the Bulletin into Spanish has been provided by the Ministry of Environment of Spain. The opinions expressed in the Bulletin are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of IISD or other donors. Excerpts from the Bulletin may be used in non-commercial publications with appropriate academic citation. For information on the Bulletin, including requests to provide reporting services, contact the Director of IISD Reporting Services at , +1-646-536-7556 or 300 East 56th St., 11A, New York, NY 10022, USA. The ENB team at Basel COP9 can be contacted by e-mail at .

Back to IISD RS "Linkages" home Visit IISDnet Send e-mail to IISD RS
© 2008, IISD. All rights reserved.

Rabu, 16 April 2008

Respon Pasar Tembakau Rendah Nikotin

Respon Pasar Tembakau Rendah Nikotin ( Studi Kasus Tembakau Madura )


Tembakau dan industri hasil tembakau mempunyai peran penting dalam perekonomian nasional, karena mampu menyediakan lapangan kerja secara langsung maupun tidak langsung bagi 6,4 juta orang, meliputi 2,3 juta petani tembakau, 1,9 juta petani cengkeh,199.000 pekerja pabrik rokok, sekitar 1,15 juta pedagang eceran dan asongan, 900.000 orang yang bekerja pada sektor lembaga keuangan, percetakan dan transportasi (Rachman, 2003).

Produksi rokok nasional rata-rata 215.671 juta batang (2000-2004), sejumlah 187.331 juta batang (87%) adalah rokok kretek yang 85% bahan baku tembakaunya dari dalam negeri. Penerimaan negara dari cukai selalu naik dari tahun ke tahun; pada tahun 2004 sebesar Rp. 28,6 triliun, tahun 2005 Rp. 33,2 triliun dan 2006 ditargetkan sebesar Rp. 38,5 triliun. Penerimaan devisa negara dari ekspor rokok dan tembakau (terutama cerutu) dari tahun 2000-2004 rata-rata sebesar US$ 209,38 juta (Direktorat Cukai, 2005).

Luas areal tembakau di Indonesia rata-rata 198.590 ha dengan produksi 155.441 ton per tahun (Ditjenbun, 2005). Di daerah pengembangannya, tembakau memberikan sumbangan 60-80% dari total pendapatan petani, sehingga merupakan komoditas unggulan. Di beberapa daerah tembakau merupakan penggerak roda perekonomian. Sebagai contoh di Madura, uang kartal yang disediakan oleh Bank Indonesia pada musim panen tembakau di Pamekasan dan Sumenep meningkat menjadi Rp. 750 juta sampai Rp, 1 triliun per bulan, sedangkan pada bulan-bulan biasa hanya Rp. 100 juta (Kompas, 2003).

Hal-hal tersebut di atas merupakan faktor yang menyebabkan agroindustri tembakau mempunyai basis yang kuat. Usaha untuk mengurangi areal tembakau sulit dilakukan karena tembakau memberikan keuntungan bagi petani. Penggantian tembakau dengan tanaman alternatif seperti bawang merah, semangka dan melon pada awalnya memberikan hasil yang baik, tetapi pada saat komoditas tersebut makin berkembang pasar menjadi kendalanya, sehingga petani cenderung bertahan untuk menanam tembakau.

Pada saat ini tantangan yang dihadapi oleh agroindustri tembakau adalah kampanye anti rokok yang dipelopori WHO (World Health Organization) sejak tahun 1974. Di Indonesia gerakan anti rokok baru dimulai tahun 1991 dengan adanya peringatan pemerintah bahwa merokok dapat merugikan kesehatan. Selanjutnya terbit Undang-Undang nomor 23 tahun 1992, yang pada pasal 44 berbunyi: “Diperlukan peraturan pemerintah tentang pengamanan rokok bagi kesehatan”. Peraturan pemerintah ini baru terbit pada tahun 1999, yaitu PP.81/1999 kemudian diperbarui dengan PP.38/2000 yang antara lain menetapkan pembatasan kadar nikotin dan tar (dalam asap) maksimum 1,5 mg dan 20 mg per batang rokok. Peraturan pemerintah ini berdampak cukup besar, antara lain penurunan produksi rokok kretek dan jatuhnya harga tembakau rakyat (lokal) pada tahun 2000 sampai 2003. Akhirnya peraturan ini diperbarui menjadi PP.19/2003 yang menghapus ketetapan batas maksimum nikotin dan tar tiap batang rokok; namun tetap mewajibkan pencantuman kadar nikotin dan tar serta peringatan bahaya rokok bagi kesehatan pada setiap bungkus rokok. Selain itu Departemen Pertanian diwajibkan mencari tembakau dengan resiko kesehatan seminimal mungkin, serta mencari komoditas alternatifnya. Salah satu kegiatan yang dilakukan adalah berupaya menurunkan kadar nikotin tembakau bahan baku rokok kretek.
Permasalahan dan Teknologi Tembakau Rendah Nikotin

Permasalahan :

Nikotin (β-pyridil-α-N-methyl pyrrolidine) merupakan senyawa organik spesifik yang terkandung dalam daun tembakau. Apabila dihisap senyawa ini akan menimbulkan rangsangan psikologis bagi perokok dan membuatnya menjadi ketagihan. Selama ini yang terjadi adalah tembakau mutu tinggi pada umumnya mengandung nikotin dan senyawa aromatisnya tinggi, terutama tembakau lokal. Sebagai contoh pada tembakau temanggung, semakin ke atas posisi daun pada batang maka kadar nikotin dan senyawa aromatisnya semakin tinggi, demikian pula mutu dan harganya juga semakin tinggi. Kadar nikotin, mutu dan harga tembakau temanggung dan madura yang ditanam di lahan tegal lebih tinggi dari pada yang dfitanam di lahan sawah. Pada tembakau virginia, krosok bermutu tinggi yang berperan sebagai pemberi rasa ternyata juga berkadar nikotin tinggi. Oleh karena itu budidaya dan penelitian pada masa lalu selalu ditujukan untuk memproduksi tembakau dengan kadar nikotin dan senyawa aromatis yang tinggi.

Menurut Legg dan Collins (1971) dan Schumacher (1989), kadar nikotin dikendalikan oleh dua gen utama dan sejumlah gen minor. Tanaman tembakau dengan gen AABB berkadar nikotin tinggi dan tanaman tembakau dengan gen aabb berkadar nikotin rendah. Dengan demikian persilangan antara varietas berkadar nikotin tinggi dengan varietas berkadar nikotin rendah akan menghasilkan individu-individu beragam yang berkadar nikotin rendah sampai tinggi. Menurut Leffingwell (1999), kadar nikotin tembakau dapat berkisar antara 0,5 sampai 8%. Faktor lingkungan yang berpengaruh terhadap kadar nikotin antara lain tipe tanah, ketinggian tempat, kerapatan populasi tanaman, dosis pupuk dan jenis lahan. Tembakau yang ditanam pada tanah berat berkadar nikotin lebih rendah dibanding yang ditanam di tanah lempung. Kadar nikotin tembakau cenderung meningkat bila ditanam di daerah yang lebih tinggi. Semakin banyak populasi tanaman per hektar kadar nikotin semakin rendah, dan semakin tinggi dosis pemupukan nitrogen kadar nikotin semakin tinggi. Kadar nikotin tembakau yang ditanam di lahan sawah lebih rendah dibanding di lahan tegal (Suwarso et.al., 1992; Murdiyati et.al., 1999; Rachman, 2003).

Dari keterangan di atas, maka dimungkinkan untuk menurunkan kadar nikotin tembakau dengan merubah genetik maupun lingkungan tumbuh. Menurut Abdallah (1970), penurunan kadar nikotin dapat dilakukan sampai batas yang sesuai dengan kebutuhan industri rokok. Hal ini disebabkan kadar nikotin berkorelasi positif dengan senyawa-senyawa lain yang berpengaruh terhadap mutu baik maupun dengan mutu organoleptik seperti rasa dan aroma. Oleh karena itu bagi pabrik rokok, upaya untuk menurunkan kadar nikotin lebih mudah dilakukan secara pabrikasi dibandingkan dengan mengganti jenis tembakau dalam racikan rokok. Salah satu contoh adalah tembakau Lumajang VO yang berkadar nikotin rendah (0,3 – 1,2 %). Tembakau yang di produksi di Lumajang (Jawa Timur) ini hanya sesuai untuk keperluan tembakau pipa dan tidak sesuai untuk rokok kretek. Cara pabrikasi untuk menurunkan kadar nikotin rokok (cigarrete design) antara lain dengan menggunakan filter untuk mengurangi kadar tar dan nikotin dalam asap yang dihisap perokok; atau menggunakan kertas sigaret yang pori-porinya lebih banyak, sehingga ada pengenceran kadar nikotin dan tar dalam asap karena udara yang terhisap lebih banyak.

Teknologi yang sudah diperoleh :

Upaya Balittas untuk menurunkan kadar nikotin tembakau lokal dimulai pada tahun 1994. Tembakau madura varietas Prancak 95 disilangkan dengan beberapa varietas tembakau oriental yang berkadar nikotin <>
Tabel 1. Potensi hasil rajangan kering, mutu dan kadar nikotin varietas Prancak N-1 ,              Prancak N-2, dan Prancak 95 Varietas Potensi hasil rajangan kering.

                     (ton/ha)  Indeks    Indeks         Kadar
                                  mutu       tanaman      nikotin ( % )

Prancak N-1    0,9       62,45        60,07          1,76
Prancak N-2    0,8       68,52        56,07          2,00
Prancak 95     0,8       57,12        45,22          2.31

Sumber : Suwarso et.al., 2004

Tabel 2. Keragaan usahatani petani kooperator dan petani non kooperator.

No.    Uraian                                          Petani               Petani
                                                             kooperator        Non-kooperator

1 Produktivitas rata-rata (kg/ha)               624                     687
2 Kadar nikotin rata-rata ( % )                  2,41                    3,26
3 Mutu (Indeks mutu)                              57 - 76                56 – 60
4 Harga (Rp/kg)                                      16.000-21.400      15.800–17.000
5 Penerimaan petani rata-rata (Rp/ha)      11.082.240           11.144.514
6 Biaya usahatani rata-rata (Rp/ha)          9.100.000             10.805.000
7 Pendapatan petani rata-rata (Rp/kg)      1.982,240             339.514

Respon pasar (pengguna) terhadap varietas rendah nikotin

Tahun 2004 :
  • Sebagian besar petani kooperator yang menanam tembakau varietas Prancak N-1 dan Prancak N-2 seluas 50 ha dapat menerima varietas baru.
Tahun 2005 :
  • Selain petani kooperator seluas 50 ha, ada petani di sekitarnya yang menanam varietas baru seluas 30 ha.
  • Selain itu PT.Gudang Garam unit Pakong dan PT. Langgeng Setia Bhakti (pemasok PT.H.M. Sampoerna) membagikan bibit dari varietas baru untuk ditanam seluas 44 ha.
  • Iklim tahun 2005 kurang mendukung karena saat panen masih banyak hujan, akan tetapi ada petani kooperator yang menanam Prancak N-1 dan Prancak N-2 memperoleh harga tembakau Rp. 24.000,- - Rp. 25.000,- per kg.
  • Salah satu petani kooperator (H.Zaini) yang menanam Prancak N-1. Pada waktu prosesing dilakukan penghilangan ibu tulang daunnya dan dirajang halus. Hasil rajangan keringnya memperoleh harga Rp. 100.000,- per kg karena mutunya sangat bagus. Selain pegangannya lembut dan aromanya sangat harum.
  • Lima ketua kelompok petani kooperator membuat benih varietas baru dari tanamannya dengan bimbingan teknisi dari Balittas untuk ditanam pada tahun 2006. Mereka adalah (1) M.Djais (Kelompok Tani Subur Tani) varietas Prancak N-1; (2) Moch. Matsuri (Kelompok Tani Sama Rukun) varietas Prancak N-1 dan Prancak N-2; (3) Achmad Zhaeni, DH (Kelompok Tani Raya Makmur) varietas Prancak N-1 dan Prancak N-2; (4) Saprawi (Kelompok tani Tani Mulya) varietas Prancak N-1; dan (5) Anas (Kelompok Tani Al-Mustaqbal) varietas Prancak N-1. Beberapa petani di sekitarnya sudah memesan benih tersebut.
  • Dinas Kehutanan dan Perkebunan Pamekasan membuat pembenihan varietas Prancak N-1 sebanyak 150 kg.
Tahun 2006 (Sahid et.al., 2006)
  • Untuk tahun 2006, benih varietas baru yang tersedia dari Dishutbun Pamekasan sebanyak 150 kg. PT. Langgeng Setia Bhakti membeli dari Balittas sebanyak 3 kg.
  • Sudah terjadi difusi teknologi. Petani kooperator yang pada tahun 2005 membuat benih dari tanamannya dengan bimbingan teknisi Balittas juga menyebarkan benihnya kepada anggota kelompok tani dan petani disekitarnya untuk membuat pembibitan sendiri. Demikian juga bibit yang dihasilkan disamping ditanam sendiri ada juga yang dijual ke petani lain bahkan ke kecamatan lain.
  • Perkembangan areal kedua varietas ini pada tahun 2006 di Sumenep 350 ha, Pamekasan 2.750 ha dan Sampang 100 ha.
  • Harga yang diperoleh beberapa petani kooperator pada tahun 2006 mencapai Rp 28.000,- per kg (mutu istimewa).
  • Petani di Kecamatan Guluk-Guluk, Kabupaten Sumenep lebih memilih Prancak N-1, karena produktivitasnya lebih tinggi dibanding Prancak N-2.
  • Menurut PT. Langgeng Setia Bhakti dan PT. Gudang Garam (Gudang Perwakilan Sumenep) varietas Prancak N-1 rasanya terlalu ringan, sedang Prancak N-2 lebih berat dari Prancak N-1, tetapi lebih ringan dari Prancak 95. Menurut PT. H.M. Sampoerna varietas Prancak N-2 lebih diminati.
  • Pada tahun 2006 ketua kelompok petani membuat benih sebar lagi dari tanamannya seperti tahun 2005. Salah satunya adalah M. Djais, yang tanamannya menggunakan benih dasar dari Balittas. Benih yang dihasilkan untuk pertanaman tahun 2007.
  • Implikasi Kebijakan

Selera konsumen sangat berpengaruh terhadap produksi maupun pasar suatu merek rokok, sehingga konsistensi rasa dan aroma rokok sangat penting. Oleh karena itu pabrik rokok sangat berhati-hati dalam memilih jenis tembakau untuk racikan rokoknya, termasuk dalam mengganti varietas. Respon pabrik rokok terhadap isu bahaya rokok terhadap kesehatan sebetulnya sudah dimulai dengan cara memproduksi rokok menggunakan filter; untuk rokok putih dimulai tahun enampuluhan, sedang rokok kretek pada awal tahun tujuhpuluhan. Pada saat ini semua produksi rokok putih menggunakan filter, sedang produksi rokok kretek yang berfilter mencapai 71%. Pabrik rokok kretek berusaha menggiring konsumennya ke arah rokok yang lebih ringan. Hal ini kelihatannya berhasil, sehingga pada saat ini tembakau “hitam” yang kadar nikotinnya relatif tinggi permintaannya menurun, sedang tembakau “kuning” yang nikotinnya relatif lebih rendah permintaannya meningkat. Sebagai contoh tembakau temanggung yang kadar nikotinnya relatif paling tinggi di antara tembakau lokal, arealnya tetap dan harganya cenderung menurun, sebaliknya tembakau madura yang kadar nikotinnya medium areal dan harganya terus meningkat. Pada saat ini areal tembakau madura mencapai + 70.000 ha/tahun, dan merupakan jenis tembakau yang ditanam terluas di Indonesia.

Kebijakan penelitian tembakau masih diteruskan untuk menurunkan kadar nikotin jenis tembakau selain madura; untuk tahun 2005-2009 diutamakan untuk tembakau temanggung. Dalam upaya penurunan kadar nikotin ini dilakukan persilangan-persilangan antara tembakau temanggung dengan jenis-jenis tembakau yang kadar nikotinnya rendah. Seleksi terhadap galur-galur yang diperoleh melibatkan petani untuk menentukan fenotipe (morfologi) yang sesuai dengan tembakau temanggung; dan melibatkan pabrik rokok sebagai konsumen untuk menentukan mutu yang sesuai.


Penurunan kadar nikotin tembakau bahan baku rokok dapat dilaksanakan sampai taraf tertentu yang masih dapat diterima oleh pabrik rokok. Diharapkan usaha penurunan kadar nikotin ini tidak menurunkan karakter mutu yang lain yang berpengaruh terhadap rasa dan aroma asap rokok, bahkan karakter lain seperti aroma dan kehalusan pegangan perlu ditingkatkan.

Balittas, Malang


Pabrik Cerutu Indonesia

PD Taru Martani 1918
Pabrik Cerutu Tertua yang Mulai Menggeliat

Pengantar Redaksi
Pabrik cerutu PD Taru Martani yang kini berusia 84 tahun (1918-2002) memiliki sejarah penting bagi industri rokok di dalam negeri. Perusahaan rokok cerutu peninggalan Belanda yang berlokasi di Yogyakarta ini sempat menikmati masa kejayaan dan juga cukup lama kembang kempis dalam perjalanannya. Namun, di tengah berbagai badai yang menimpa, PD Taru Martani tetap berdiri, bahkan ada tanda-tanda mulai bangkit. Untuk itu, Sinar Harapan menuliskan lika-liku pabrik cerutu tertua tersebut dalam dua tulisan.

’YOGYAKARTA – Taru berarti daun, sementara Martani berarti kehidupan. Jadi, Taru Martani adalah daun yang memberi kehidupan. Itulah nama yang diberikan Sri Sultan Hamengku Buwono (HB) IX untuk pabrik cerutu yang berlokasi di Baciro, Yogyakarta. Nama itu tak sia-sia. Meski tak luput dilanda krisis yang menerpa Indonesia dan pernah pula menghentikan ekspor ke mancanegara, dan yang hebat lagi dengan masih memakai alat-alat kuno peninggalan Belanda, toh pabrik cerutu ini masih eksis hingga kini dengan mempekerjakan sekitar 356 karyawan
Didirikan tahun 1918 dengan nama Firma (Fa) Negresco dengan 25 pekerja, pada awalnya produksi cerutu Taru Martani hanya untuk konsumsi orang-orang Belanda di Yogya -- yang tetap ingin menikmati cerutu – setelah bertahun-tahun kekurangan akibat Perang Dunia I. Namun dalam perkembangannya, cerutu ini juga dijual ke daerah Hindia Belanda dan ketika itu mendapat sambutan yang cukup baik.
Dan di tahun 1930, Fa Negresco melakukan ekspansi dengan menambah pekerja menjadi 1.000 orang yang sebagian besar untuk membuat cerutu buatan tangan. Tak lama kemudian, Jepang masuk Indonesia, dan ini menimbulkan perubahan besar. Nama Negresco berubah menjadi Jawa Tobacco Kojo. Pabrik inipun dilengkapi pula dengan mesin pembuat rokok sigaret hasil sitaan dari British American Tobacco (BAT) yang terletak 200 mil barat laut kota Cirebon.
Bermodalkan mesin hasil sitaan ini, dan melibatkan 2000 pekerja, pabrik ini membuat cerutu Momo Taro dan dua merek sigaret yakni Mizuo dan Koa. Kesemua ini untuk konsumsi Angkatan Bersenjata Kekaisaran Jepang.

Ambil Alih
Setelah PD II berakhir, HB IX mengambil inisiatif untuk mengambil alih dan mengganti nama perusahaan ini menjadi Taru Martani. Namun pada tahun 1949, Belanda kembali menguasai Yogya, dan pabrik pun jatuh ke tangan Negresco, pemilik lama. Meski begitu, pabrik tak bisa beroperasi karena terjadi kekacauan politik. Dan pada tahun 1951, BAT memboyong kembali mesin-mesinnya ke Cirebon. Akibatnya, pabrik di Yogya dibiarkan kosong begitu saja.
Selang setahun kemudian, pemerintah Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta (DIY) dan Bank Indonesia membeli perusahaan ini dan namanya kembali menjadi PT Taru Martani. Ada tiga merek cerutu yang diproduksi, yakni Mundi Victor, Senator dan Elomercio. Sementara untuk kertas sigaret adalah Chaveaux Blancs. Dan pada tahun 1957, menambah lagi produknya berupa tembakau shag dan dua merek rokok kretek, yakni Roro Mendut dan Roro Jonggrang.
Nama PT Taru Martani kembali berubah menjadi Perusahaan Negara Perindustrian Rakyat Budjana Jasa. Ini terjadi ketika pemerintah menetapkan policy untuk merasionalisasi semua perusahaan Belanda. Dan ketika ada pergantian rezim Soekarno ke rezim Soeharto, perusahaan ini mengalami kembang kempis dan hanya bisa mempekerjakan sekitar 100 orang.
Tahun 1972, HB IX -- kala itu menjabat wakil presiden -- kembali mengambil peranan. Perusahaan ini lagi-lagi menjadi milik pemerintah DIY. Nama pun berubah lagi menjadi PT Taru Martani Baru. ”Kala itu Sri Sultan berpendapat cerutu ekspor haruslah menjadi usaha utama dari perusahaan ini, sebab akan lebih banyak menyerap tenaga kerja daripada jika membuat jenis produk tembakau lainnya,” ungkap Direktur Utama Perusahaan Daerah Taru Martani Bimo N Wartono.
Tak lama kemudian, masuklah perusahaan tembakau Belanda, Douwe Egberts dengan menyertakan modal, tenaga ahli serta akses ke pasaran ekspor. Dalam era ini, selain meneruskan pembuatan Mundi Victor dan Senator, juga menambah lagi tiga merek, yakni Adipati, Ramayana dan Panter. Dan antara tahun 1973–1978, perusahaan ini juga mulai memproduksi kertas sigaret Chaveaux Blancs dan Counryman. Juga memperkenalkan empat merek tembakau, yakni Van Nelle, Countryman, White Ox dan Prahu. Van Nelle adalah merek lisensi perusahaan Belanda yang namanya Douwe Egberts Van Nelle Tabak MV.
”Semua produk tembakau shag difokuskan untuk pasaran dalam negeri,” kata Bimo.
Ada perubahan besar di era tahun 1980-an. Para konsumen mulai menyukai cerutu kecil yang rasanya lebih ringan. Dan, menurut Johanes, Corporate Communications PD Taru Martani, perusahaan menanggapi permintaan ini dengan memproduksi cerutu jenis Cigarillos dengan merk Borobudur. Tak hanya itu, Taru Martani juga mulai membuat Amphora, tembakau pipa pada tahun 1984.
Masa kejayaan PT Taru Martani Baru kembali merosot, seiring dengan Douwe Egberts menarik diri. Dan ini jelas mengganggu kelancaran finansial dan kegiatan ekspor. ”Bahkan waktu itu boleh dikatakan kami hanya memproduksi tembakau shag saja, karena produksi cerutu dalam jumlah kecil saja hanya untuk kebutuhan pasar lokal yang juga masih sangat kecil. Tapi syukur tak ada PHK. Yang ada hanya peremajaan seiring banyak karyawan yang sudah masa pensiun,” tutur Jan, panggilan akrab Johanes.
Mundurnya Douwe Egberts ini menyebabkan status Taru Martani berubah dari PT menjadi PD hingga kini. Sejalan dengan penerapan UU Otonomi Daerah, dalam proyeksi ke depan PD Taru Martani direncanakan untuk privatisasi menjadi PT.
Dan dalam upaya membangun image, Taru Martani ingin menonjolkan unsur ketuaan, yakni dengan menggunakan ”TARU MARTANI 1918.” ”Ini bagian dari strategi kami yang menggunakan ikatan emosional dengan Belanda. Kita tahu, di Belanda itu kebutuhan cerutu mencapai 100 juta batang pertahun,” ungkap Bimo.
Di era kepemimpinan Bimo yang saat ini tergolong masih muda – umur 40 tahun, PD Taru Martani berniat bisa bangkit mencapai kejayaan seperti masa lalu. Bila pada tahun 2001 omsetnya mencapai Rp 13 miliar, dan tahun 2002 ini mencapai Rp 15 miliar, tahun 2003 omset direncanakan bisa mencapai Rp. 20 miliar (sebanyak 70% dihasilkan dari ekspor dan 30% lagi dari pasar dalam negeri).
Adapun cerutu yang dihasilkan Taru Martani saat ini, yang diekspor, dalam berbagai jenis dan merek. yang dikelompokkan dalam cerutu natural taste, flavor taste dan mild taste. Merek-merek seperti : Island Collection, Celestino Vega, Key West dan sebagainya cukup dikenal di pasar Amerika. Sedangkan untuk yang pasar domestik, di antaranya Adipati, Ramayana, Panter, Senator, Mundi Victor, dan Borobudur. Untuk tembakau shag yang merupakan konsumsi dalam negeri meliputi Van Nelle, Countryman dan Drum.

Untuk mendapat omset yang lebih besar dibandingkan dengan tahun sebelumnya, menurut Bimo, pihaknya tak akan meningkatkan jumlah produksinya, namun lebih menekankan pada mutu. Apalagi bila dilihat dari mesin yang digunakan, merupakan peninggalan Belanda sejak tahun 1952. Walaupun mesin tua dan telah kanibal pula, namun dari 6 mesin itu bisa dihasilkan (dalam kapasitas terpasang) 20 juta batang cerutu/tahun.
”Namun kami tidak akan memforsir, tapi hanya 75 persen saja dari kapasitas mesin. Hal itu sesuai dengan umur mesin. Mesin itu sejak tahun 52. Ini suatu prestasi yang bisa dibanggakan,” kata Bimo.
Guna menjaga kelangsungan produktivitas dari mesin-mesin tua tersebut, terutama pengadaan suku cadang, pihak Taru Martani di samping telah bekerja sama dengan dengan ATMI Solo, juga akan merintis kerja sama dengan Sekolah Teknik Menengah yang ada di Yogyakarta. ”Kami tengah memikirkan perintisan untuk pengadaan suku cadang mesin ini,” ungkap Bimo. (SH/yuyuk sugarman/su herdjoko)

Copyright © Sinar Harapan 2002