JERA neglecting community stakeholder engagement

By Market Forces

October 22^nd, 2024

Over the past year, JERA has rejected meeting requests from at least 10 community stakeholders

Communities and civil society organizations from the Australian Tiwi Islands, Bangladesh, Japan, and the U.S. have tried to reach out to JERA, Japan's largest power company. They have asked the company to sit down, listen, and respond to concerns about the destructive impact its fossil fuel projects have or will have on their communities.

But each time, they haven’t been allowed to speak. Over the past year, JERA has rejected meeting requests from at least 10 civil society organisations and / or community stakeholders. JERA, despite publicly committing to engage with community stakeholders, has turned its back on those who are or will be most affected by its projects.

The open letter to JERA and the Japan Exchange Group (JPX) from these stakeholders highlights the governance issues arising from the lack of community engagement and the urgent need for investors to perform due diligence ahead of a potential JERA IPO.

Full text of Open Letter to JPX here

JERA neglecting community stakeholder engagement

Takashi Okubo, Executive Director, Taketoyo Citizens' group for environmental issues in Taketoyo Town says:

'We have been living in anxiety every day since the explosion at Taketoyo Thermal Power Station. The operator, JERA, is trying to push ahead with the restart of the plant without clearly explaining the cause of the explosion, saying in an abstract manner that ‘we will consider every possible measure to prevent the recurrence of accidents in the future,’ but the residents are not convinced. JERA is not listening to our safety concerns and opposition to the restart.’

Therese Wokay Bourke, Tiwi Islands Traditional Owner, Elder and Leader says:

“We travelled to Japan to meet with JERA and then we got ignored, we stood out the front of their office in the freezing cold temperature waiting for them to meet us. If they destroy our home, they destroy us, because we are deeply connected to our environment.

I feel irrelevant, very irrelevant. JERA don’t seem to care about anything to do with human rights. It’s like policies, codes of conduct and governance principles only exist to make corporations feel good about themselves. It’s not for us, the people who are directly impacted. It hurts and it shows that they don’t care about Indigenous peoples lives, or our homes.”

Pirrawaying, Tiwi Islands Traditional Owner, Elder and Leader says:

“The first thing that I want to say is, I’m not really offended, I don’t feel offended, because I know the people of JERA, JPX and investors have good hearts, and something will help them change their minds. I know we’ve all got a conscience, especially if we are not doing something good.

My question to JERA, JPX and investors is; what do you want the future Japanese children to remember you by? What do you want the Japanese people to remember all of you by? Do you want them to remember you by the good decisions you make or by the bad decisions you make about humanity.”

Manning Rollerson with Freeport Haven Project says:

“It’s just completely immoral that JERA continues to fund Freeport LNG while refusing to meet with the people who are directly impacted by this dangerous methane plant. My community deals with all the risks of their investment. We breathe in the chemicals, experience the explosions, and they don’t even have the decency to hear our side of the story. It’s sad.”

Hasan Mehedi, Coastal Livelihood and Environmental Action Network (CLEAN) says:

"It’s outrageous that JERA continues to finance harmful LNG and fossil fuel projects, ignoring the devastating effects on local communities. While we suffer from pollution and safety hazards, they profit in silence, evading responsibility for the devastation they leave behind."

Meg Fukuzawa, Asia Energy Campaigner, Market Forces says:

“JERA’s refusal to engage with communities that are or will be impacted by its fossil fuel projects not only breaks principles of good governance for stakeholder engagement but may also pose reputational risks for the company that investors should be concerned about as the company eyes a potential IPO.”