Miftah Zikri

MSc - Business With Management 2009

Silent and Shadow Account of Freeport Indonesia

Miftah Zikri © 2009

 Silent and Shadow Report 2

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

2
 Silent and Shadow Report 3

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.

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

3
 Silent and Shadow Report 4

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.

4

Silent and Shadow Report: PT. Freeport
4. Silent and shadow account
Silent
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
Silent and Shadow Report 5
Shadow
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,
3
 Silent and Shadow Report 6

Silent and Shadow Report: PT. Freeport

reclaimed with natural vegetation or used for animal, and forest have been extinct because of
agriculture, forestry or aquaculture when the mining is Freeport.
completed.

3
 Silent and Shadow Report 7

Silent and Shadow Report: PT. Freeport

Government Government

In 26 January 2006, Amin (2006) disclosed on Kompas

As explained on Annual Report 2006 Pursuant to Section newspaper that, some main problems of Freeport
of The securities Exchange Act of 1934 that Freeport Indonesia Ltd with government as follows:
Indonesia Ltd has a contract of work agreement with 1. The Government of Indonesia did not know, how
government of Indonesia. Contract of work would many thousands ton of gold and copper
involve rights and obligations to taxes, exchange concentrate were plundered by the company.
controls, royalties, repatriations and others. Both Those concentrates were transferred through
agreements were protected by Foreign Capital pipes (100km) from centre mining area to
Investment Law. Yet, the company also stated that it shipping offshore.
has experience no disputes arbitration since 39 years 2. “Tax Blackout” to government was happened,
operated in Indonesia. Freeport Indonesia Ltd had means that the number of taxes should be paid
regularly been one of the largest taxpayers in the more but in fact the company hided their profit
Republic of Indonesia. In addition, it pays royalties on or uncalculated production to reduce the taxes.
all minerals removed from the ground. Royalty In addition, there was no good contribution of
payments are based on the volumes and prices of Freeport to society in Papua. In addition, the
minerals sold in accordance with the terms of PT people on those areas were still primitive.
Freeport Indonesia’s Contract of Work.

3

Silent and Shadow Report: PT. Freeport
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
3
Silent and Shadow Report 8
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

Silent and Shadow Report: PT. Freeport
to support community development in Papua, Freeport
Indonesia Ltd formed community development program,
which was called The 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.
3
Silent and Shadow Report 9
Kamoro and Amungme disrespected by agreement that
explained the conventional land rights and granted
insufficient 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.

Silent and Shadow Report: PT. Freeport
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 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
3
Silent and Shadow Report 10
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.
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
 Silent and Shadow Report 11

Silent and Shadow Report: PT. Freeport

had not been promoted yet”.

3
 Silent and Shadow Report 1
2

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

12
 Silent and Shadow Report 1
3

(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 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.

13
 Silent and Shadow Report 1
4

3. Financial Increased confidence of regulators, investors and

insurers.
4. Improved “peace of mind”, consistency on issues and
Management 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
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.

14
 Silent and Shadow Report 1
5

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
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

15
 Silent and Shadow Report 1
6

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.

5.3 Community Development

Freeport Indonesia Ltd committed to build relationship and consult
about operational issues to local origin people (Freeport annual

16
 Silent and Shadow Report 1
7

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

17
 Silent and Shadow Report 1
8

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 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

18
 Silent and Shadow Report 1
9

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 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.

19
 Silent and Shadow Report 2
0

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 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

20
 Silent and Shadow Report 2
1

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 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).

21
 Silent and Shadow Report 2
2

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/LawsuitsSelected
cases/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/.
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/Discriminati
onAtWork/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).
22
 Silent and Shadow Report 2
3

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.
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.

23
 Silent and Shadow Report 2
4

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.
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)

24