CIVIL DISTRICT COURT FOR THE PARISH OF ORLEANS

STATE OF LOUISIANA

JUN 19 1996

YOSEFA ALOMANG, ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED,

VERSUS

FREEPORT-McMoRan, INC. AND FREEPORT-McMoRan COPPER AND GOLD, INC.

PETITION FOR DAMAGES

NOW INTO COURT, through undersigned counsel, comes YOSEFA ALOMANG individually and on behalf of all similarly situated class members and represents that:

1.

The petitioner, YOSEFA ALOMANG, a resident of Timika, Irian Jaya (West Papua) within the Republic of Indonesia, represents that the Petition for Damages is brought individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated class members (Indigenous people of Irian Jaya (West Papua)) because: (1) joinder of all members of the class is impractical (numerosity); (2) there are multiple questions of law and/or fact common to the class (commonality); (3) the claims of the petitioner are typical of the claims of the class (typicality); and (4) petitioner will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class. Furthermore, the petitioner alleges that the predominant human rights, environmental and cultural causes of action of the class members present common legal and factual issues. Finally, the petitioner contends that a class action is the superior method of adjudicating the claims, herein.

2.

Made defendant herein is FREEPORT-McMoRan, INC., a corporation incorporated in the State of Delaware having as its primary corporate domicile located at 1615 Poydras Street, New Orleans, Louisiana 70112. Also made defendant herein is FREEPORT-McMoRan COPPER and GOLD, INC., a corporation incorporated in the State of Delaware and also having its primary corporate domicile at 1615 Poydras Street, New Orleans, Louisiana 70112. Hereinafter, defendants are referred to collectively as FREEPORT.

3.

The proper Agent of service of process for both FREEPORT-McMoRan, INC. and FREEPORT-McMoRan COPPER AND GOLD, INC. is C. T. Corporation Systems located at 8550 United Plaza, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70809.

VENUE

Venue is proper under Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 74 in that both corporate defendants have their primary corporate headquarters located at 1615 Poydras Street, New Orleans, Louisiana 70112 and the wrongful conduct giving rise to the claims herein occurred at the corporate headquarters of FREEPORT McMoRan, INC. and FREEPORT-McMoRan COPPER and GOLD located at 1615 Poydras Street, New Orleans, Louisiana, including but not limited to all negligent, grossly negligent and/or intentional corporate decisions relative to the conduct of FREEPORT security personnel, in Irian Jaya (West Papua), Indonesia, the negligent, grossly negligent and/or intentional corporate decisions relative to the mining operations and the conception of any and all "environmental policies" or lack thereof affecting the defendant's mining operations in the Republic of Indonesia.

Petitioners are entitled to have this cause maintained as a class action pursuant to the Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure, Article 591, et seq. for the following reasons:

1) Requiring the institution of separate lawsuits would pose a serious risk of inconsistent adjudications and earlier separate determinations which would have a prejudicial effect upon subsequent litigants;

2) The prosecution of separate actions would substantially threaten the ability of the class members to protect their rights;

3) Defense as to liability of any and all of the defendants would be applicable to all claims presented by all members of the class; and

4) The class action is a superior procedural vehicle for the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy:

a) The great majority of the unnamed class members have no interest in controlling the litigation;

b) There are common questions and issues of law and fact involved in this matter which predominate over questions affecting individual class members;

c) Any defenses would be generally applicable to all members of the class;

d) It is desirable to litigate this matter in a single forum at one particular time;

e) The majority of the class members have neither the resources or the interest in maintaining or controlling the litigation brought on their behalf in separate suits; and,

f) There may be some difficulty in identifying all members of the class, even though the class is adequately identified, thus the unnamed class members may be afforded no protection of relief if it were not for the procedural vehicle of class action.

6.

The named petitioner is severely affected by their injuries, losses and damages, which are not substantially different from the injuries, losses and damages of members of their representative class, and will fully and adequately protect the interests of the other members of their respective class, who were too numerous to be named individually and to individually appear in these proceedings.

7.

The defendants above named are jointly and in solido liable to the petitioners above-named and to all members of the class they represent herein in an amount to be determined by this Honorable Court together with legal interest from the date of judicial demand until paid and for all costs of these proceedings for the following, to wit:

8.

In 1967, defendant, FREEPORT-McMoRan, INC., by and through its predecessor corporation(s), initiated development of the Ertsberg Mine within the region commonly known as Irian Jaya (West Papua), a Province of the Republic of Indonesia.

9.

In 1988, defendant, FREEPORT-McMoRan, INC., by and through its subsidiaries and/or affiliates discovered within the Jayawijaya Mountain an enormous deposit of ore containing copper, gold and silver. Thereafter, the defendants began operating an open pit mine referred to as the Grasberg Mine. Included in the Grasberg open pit mining facility of the defendants is a mill, tunnels, slurry pipe lines and a corporate port located at Amamapare. The aforesaid Grasberg open pit mining operation encompasses an approximately 26,400 square kilometer area.

10.

The Grasberg Mine site, including the cities of Tembagapura and Timika were at all pertinent times ``policed'' by the defendants' security personnel who maintain security stations, vehicles and a staff of paramilitary type security officers. Additionally, upon information and belief, the corporate defendants maintain a military presence within it (sic) mining operation wherein troops of the Republic of Indonesia are fed, transported, paid and provided equipment from the defendants in order to assist its operations.

ENVIRONMENTAL VIOLATIONS

11.

The petitioner(s) allege that the mining operations conducted by defendant corporations referred to herein as the Grasberg mining operation resulted in the destruction of the indigenous peoples' natural waterways within the region; the deforestation of rain forest and the contamination of the region's surface and ground water through ore leachate.

12.

The Grasberg mining operation deposits in the local waterways approximately 120,000 metric tons of tailings which contain trace amounts of metals and are the waste product of the open pit mining operation of defendant corporations at Grasberg.

13.

The environmental ramifications of the tailings released into the waterways of the petitioner's natural living area include toxicity, volume and mass which have resulted in the disruption of the natural waterways, the pollution of natural waterways, the overflow and alteration of the natural waterways leading to the deforestation of the region.

14.

The Freeport mining concession has discharged tailings resulting in massive deposition of tailing of Ajkwa River and the sheet flow of tailings which has substantially destroyed a significant area of the low land rainforest between the Ajkwa River and Minajerwi River. The destruction of the said areas has resulted and caused a major environmental, health, safety hazards and starvation in Mimika (sic), Irian Jaya (West Papua) and other areas of Irian Jaya (West Papua).

15.

Additionally problems resulting from the operation of the FREEPORT mining concession include acid mine drainage from the tailings, the concentration, mobilization and bio availability of non-toxic and toxic materials in the tailings, the degradation of surface and ground water quality, increased sedimentation, sheeting and other adverse affects (sic) that have been caused by the higher percentage of coarser grain tailings, and the mismanagement of solid hazardous waste at the site.

16.

The FREEPORT mining concession additionally has caused the hollowing of several mountains including the sacred mountain of Ertsberg, which are beautiful, natural resources of the glacial mountain range in the region, spontaneous re-routing of major rivers, the death of a large track of the sago forest and the increase in levels of toxic and non-toxic materials and metals within the river systems of the area.

17.

Other major rivers affected by the dumping of the tailings into the rivers of the indigenous peoples' region are the Aghawagan River also known as the Aroanogong and the Otomona River, equally affected by the mismanagement of the tailing released by the defendant corporations.

18.

As a result of the lack of a proper tailings management program by defendant corporations, areas as large as 50 square kilometers of fresh water swamp forest have been transformed into a denuded tailings deposit area.

19.

The contamination of the waterways by the enormous tonage of tailings dumped by the defendant corporations prevents sunlight penetration into the water, prevention of oxygen dilution and is a practice which is unacceptable anywhere on this planet.

20.

The petitioners allege that acid mine drainage from the Grasberg ore zone is an equally significant environmental violation caused by the defendant corporations and is caused by chemical and biological oxidation of sulfides and excavation of sulfide containing waste materials during mining which exposes previously unweathered rock to oxygen thereby greatly accelerating the oxidative process.

21.

One of the by products of sulfide acid which in turn can dissolve residual metals and other metals such as arsenic in the mine waste to product (sic) an extremely toxic leachate.

22.

Petitioners allege that defendant corporations have failed to engage in adequate acid mine drainage management programs and have failed to develop a comprehensive mining and waste handling plan to ensure prevention of acid generation from waste rock tailings, open pits and underground work areas.

23.

The Grasberg mining operation within the FREEPORT concession already exhibits visual evidence of acid mine draining which is the result of sulfide oxidation within it (sic) property.

24.

The petitioners allege that due to the mismanagement of the defendant corporations that toxic leachates from the open pits of the Grasberg mining operation have been widely disbursed into the ground water and surface waterways within the FREEPORT concession.

25.

Defendant corporations mining operations in Irian Jaya (West Papua), has and will result, in the continued destruction of the beautiful valleys, glacial mountain ranges and the rain forests of the region.

26.

The corporations mining operations disrupted the delicate ecosystem balance between the sea, the beaches, the swamp, the rain forest and the alpine areas within the FREEPORT mining concession.

27.

Petitioners specifically allege that the defendant corporations have failed to engage in a zero waste policy, an acceptable enclosed waste management system, have failed to maximize environmental rehabilitation, have failed to engage in a appropriate acid leachate control policy, have failed to adequately monitor the destruction of the natural resources of Irian Jaya (West Papua) and have disregarded and breached its duty to protect one of the last great natural rain forests and alpine areas in the world. All of which acts of negligence are in violation of the laws of the State of Louisiana including Louisiana Civil Code Article 2315.

28.

Petitioner avers that the Grasberg mining operation was at all relevant times hereto in the custody and garde of FREEPORT and as a result said defendants are strictly liable under the provisions of La. C. C. Art. 2317 for the damages caused by the mining operation.

29.

The actions of FREEPORT were willful and in violation of all applicable safety standards and statutes and, as a result, Freeport's conduct constituted negligence per se.

30.

Further, alternatively, petitioner avers that FREEPORT as the custodians of the Grasberg mining operations are absolutely liable to petitioner under the provisions of Louisiana Civil Code Article 667 and all other provisions of Louisiana law for the damage resulting from the Grasberg mine in a manner by which harm to the vicinage has occurred.

31.

Further, alternatively, petitioner avers she is entitled to recover exemplary damages from FREEPORT under the provisions of Louisiana Civil Code Article 2315.3 due to the defendants' reckless and wanton disregard of public safety in the storage, handling and/or transportation of hazardous and/or toxic substances.

HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS

32.

Petitioner herein reiterates each and every foregoing paragraph of this Complaint.

33.

The petitioner herein submits that defendant corporations, FREEPORT-McMoRan, INC. and FREEPORT-McMoRan COPPER and GOLD, INC. have systematically engaged in a corporate policy both directly and indirectly through third parties which have resulted in human rights violations against the Amungme Tribe and other Indigenous tribal people. Said actions include extra judicial killing, torture, surveillance and threats of death, severe physical pain and suffering by and through its security personnel employed in connection with its operation of the Grasberg Mine.

34.

Upon information and belief, the petitioner, individually and on behalf of those similarly situated, complain that the defendants' security guards in conjunction with third parties acting by and through the corporate policy of the defendants have engaged in summary executions, arbitrary arrest and detention, torture, disappearances, surveillance and the destruction of property. Said violations have occurred on FREEPORT buses, within FREEPORT workshops, at FREEPORT security command centers, FREEPORT security stations, FREEPORT private roadways and containers owned by said corporate defendants.

35.

On December 25, 1994, on FREEPORT bus 44, while being operated on the road from Timika to Tembagapura, Wendy Tambuni was stabbed and shot to death while being transported on said bus.

36.

Also, on December 25, 1994, at the FREEPORT workshop located at Koperapoka, three civilians were killed after being tortured.

37.

On December 26, 1994, four civilians, arbitrarily and without lawful cause, were arrested at their homes and imprisoned in FREEPORT containers at Koperapoka and then disappeared and have not been seen since.

38.

Repeated acts of torture have been conducted at FREEPORT security stations and FREEPORT containers throughout the FREEPORT concession in Irian Jaya (West Papua), Indonesia. Said torture included kicking about the stomach, chest and head regions while FREEPORT security personnel were wearing military boots, beatings engaged in with fists, sticks rifle butts, stones, starvation, kneeling on iron bars, standing with heavy weights on the subjects heads, shackling of thumbs, writs and legs, stabbing, taping eyes closed and forced labor.

39.

Throughout the operation of the FREEPORT concession in Irian Jaya (West Papua), Indonesia, the defendant corporations have engaged in security surveillance of the indigenous people, including the petitioner, throughout the region and said surveillance has resulted in fear, tensions and severe mental distress resulting from the conduct of FREEPORT security personnel.

40.

Torture victims have been kept in FREEPORT containers where they are required to stand for periods of up to and including seven days in water which was calf high and reeked of human feces.

41.

Indigenous people have also been detained at FREEPORT workshops and security stations throughout the region where their eyes were taped shut, thumbs tied and were subject to repeated beatings and torture by FREEPORT security personnel and are third parties acting in conjunction with said personnel.

42.

The petitioners assert that the indigenous people were never subject to the aforestated human rights violations prior to the presence of the defendant corporations in their region.

43.

That various recent human rights reports contain repeated first hand accounts of the brutal human rights violations of the FREEPORT security personnel and/or agents of FREEPORT whose conduct is acquiesced to, accepted, adopted and/or ratified by the defendant corporations as part of their corporate policy in operating and expanding their FREEPORT mining concession in Irian Jaya (West Papua), Indonesia at the expense of the local indigenous people.

44.

The petitioners allege that FREEPORT security personnel or third parties supported by defendant corporations were acting under actual or apparent authority of the defendant corporations. The petitioners allege that the aforesaid conduct are (sic) violations of Louisiana tort law including but not limited to false imprisonment, assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and right to privacy.

CULTURAL GENOCIDE

45.

The petitioners specifically reallege each and every paragraph of the foregoing Complaint as if repeated herein.

46.

The petitioners allege that the human rights violations and the eco-terrorism engaged in by defendant corporations have destroyed the rights and culture of the Amungme and other Indigenous tribal people.

47.

Since defendant corporations have commenced their operations, many of the Amungme people have (sic) displaced and relocated to areas in the lowlands away from their cultural heritage of highland living.

48.

Other Indigenous tribal people, including but not limited to Komora Tribe, have met the same fate.

49.

The egregious human rights and environmental violations, which have terrorized the tribal communities of the Amungme and other Indigenous Tribal people, destroyed their natural habitats and caused dislocation of the populations have resulted in the purposeful, deliberate, contrived and planned demise of a culture of indigenous people whose rights were never considered, whose heritage and culture were disregarded and the result of which is ultimately to lead to the cultural demise of an unique pristine heritage which is socially, culturally, and anthropologically irreplaceable.

DAMAGES

50.

Petitioners and others similarly situated incurred damages proximately and directly caused by the acts and/or omissions of defendant corporations set out heretofore said damages which include but are not necessarily limited to:

• a. bodily injury;
• b. physical injury in the past;
• c. bodily injury and physical impairment in the future;
• d. physical pain, suffering and mental anguish in the past;
• e. physical pain, suffering and mental anguish in the future;
• f. emotional distress in the past;
• g. emotional distress in the future;
• h. increased risks of disease or other ailments;
• i. cost of medical monitoring with regards to toxic exposure;
• j. medical expenses and services in the past;
• k. medical expenses and services in the future;
• l. disfigurement;
• m. loss of earning capacity;
• n. devaluation and/or loss in use and enjoyment of personal property.
• o. devaluation and loss of vegetation;
• p. loss of consortium; and
• q. loss of services.

51.

Additionally, all petitioners are entitled to exemplary damages as may be shown by the grossly negligent acts and omissions of defendant corporations as well as human rights violations and cultural genocide amounting to a sum to be determined hereafter.

REMEDIES

52.

Require defendant corporations to put into effect:

• a. an appropriate tailings disposal policy to implement a waste rock dumping policy;
• b. to cease and desist all open pit mining operations;
• c. to release all relevant environmental data;
• d. the defendant corporations to fund an independent soil and monitoring program;
• e. to force defendant corporations to demilitarize its security forces;
• f. to require the implementation of mediation panels between FREEPORT-McMoRan and the indigenous people; and
• g. to create a trust fund to be administered, operated and for the exclusive sole benefit of the indigenous people.

The petitioner requests a trial by jury.

WHEREFORE, petitioner prays:

(1) that process in due form of law, according to the course and practice of this Honorable Court, issue against said defendants,

(2) that after due proceedings had, that this action be certified as a class action pursuant to the provisions of La. C. C. P. Art. 591, et seq. In the respects alleged hereinabove, for the purposes of determining the common issues of liability for compensatory and exemplary damages and the basis for assessment for exemplary damages, if any;

(3) That, upon certification of the class action, the Court called for the formulation of a suitable management plan pursuant to La. C. C. P. Art. 593 (C);

(4) that after due proceedings be had, judgment be entered in favor of petitioner, YOSEFA ALOMANG AND OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, and against the defendants, jointly, severally and in solido, for damages and punitive damages in an amount to compensate for the aforedescribed conduct of the defendants in an amount to be determined by this Honorable Court, plus prejudgment interest from the date of filing, costs, punitive damages that the petitioner(s) have such other relief as in law and justice they may be entitled to recover.

Respectfully submitted:

REGAN, MANASSEH, and BOSHEA, P. L. C.

MARTIN E. REGAN, JR. (LSBA No. 111530)

JAMES P. MANASSEH (LSBA No. 19022)

Attorney for Petitioners, 2125 St. Charles Avenue, New Orleans, LA 70130, (504) 522-7260

The preceding text is the law suit filed by Yosefa Alomang against Freeport in New Orleans on Jun 19, 1996. The text above was typed by Robert S. Boyer from a copy received from the law firm that filed the suit.

It is a safe bet that Freeport will strongly deny the allegations contained in the text above because the allegations are rather similar to allegations made in a similar federal court suit. For example, about the federal filing, Freeport spokesman Garland Robinette has said "There is no basis in law or in fact for the claims." Richard C. Adkerson, vice chairman of Freeport-McMoRan Inc. and chief financial officer of Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold, called the federal suit "frivolous and opportunistic." One example of a strenuous denial by Freeport of any involvement by its personnel in human rights abuses may be found in, a letter from Freeport-McMoRan Vice President Tom Egan.

On Oct. 17, the Austin Chronicle reported that a federal court in New Orleans rejected Freeport's request that the state and federal suit be joined in federal court. Apparently, this was a major and precedent-setting decision.

On February 21, 1997, this law suit was dismissed on the grounds that it was an Indonesian matter.