VZCZCXYZ0001
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHUL #0888/01 0790655
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 200655Z MAR 06
FM AMEMBASSY SEOUL
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 6690
INFO RUEAEPA/EPA WASHINGTON DC
RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC 2976
RHEHAAA/WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON DC
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 0302
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 0384

UNCLAS SEOUL 000888 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
PASS USTR FOR RUSSELL SMITH 
STATE FOR OES/ETC, OES/ENV, OES/PCI 
STATE ALSO FOR EB/TPP/BTA AND EAP/K 
EPA FOR OIA 
USDOC FOR 4431/ITA/MAC/OPB/EAP/MORGAN 
WHITE HOUSE FOR CEQ 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: SENV PGOV KS
SUBJECT: KOREA ENVIRONMENT ISSUES: SUPREME COURT RULING ON 
SAEMANGEUM PROJECT A SETBACK FOR NGO'S 
 
 
Summary 
------- 
¶1.  On March 16, South Korea's Supreme Court handed down a 
final ruling that the Saemangeum Reclamation Project, begun 
in 1991 but stalled over the last year by a lawsuit, could 
go ahead.  The world's largest coastal reclamation project, 
the Saemangeum project will convert 40,100 hectares of tidal 
flats and shallows off the southwestern coast into farmlands 
and a freshwater reservoir.  With the verdict, a long and 
contentious litigation between the government and local 
environmental groups ended in favor of development rather 
than conservation, disappointing local environmental NGOs, 
local fish-farming interests and a number of international 
NGOs dedicated to conserving wildlife habitats. 
Nevertheless, the lengthy controversy has heightened the 
awareness of environmental issues among the Korean public 
and has reinforced Korean society's understanding of the 
need to consider environmental impact in planning major 
development projects.  End Summary. 
 
Huge But Controversial Project 
------------------------------ 
¶2.  The Saemangeum Reclamation Project involves the 
construction of a 33-kilometer-long embankment to protect 
reclaimed land from the sea.  It is located in North Jeolla 
province, in the estuaries of the Mangyeung and Dongjin 
Rivers. 
 
¶3.  Critics describe the project as a pork-barrel plan by 
former President Roh Tae-woo to win North Jeolla votes.  It 
was presented as a campaign pledge during the 1987 
presidential campaign.  In the intervening years, 
environmental awareness has grown steadily in South Korea 
and so has opposition to the project.  Complicating the 
problem, President Roh Moo-hyun opposed the project when he 
was the Minister of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries during 
the Kim Dae-jung Administration, but changed his position to 
support it after he won the 2002 presidential election. 
 
¶4.  Since ground was broken in 1991, the project has become 
one of the most controversial of the nation's major 
development projects.  Debates about whether to go ahead 
with the project or stop construction have arisen repeatedly 
over the past 15 years. 
 
¶5.  As the project dragged on, the estimated total cost has 
snowballed from 1.3 trillion won (USD 1.3 billion) to 4 
trillion won (USD 4.1 billion.  The government has spent 
about two trillion won (USD 2.1 billion) on the project so 
far.  Of the planned 33-kilometer seawall, only a 2.7- 
kilometer section remains unfinished, halted by a lower 
court decision in 2005. 
 
Supreme Court Rules In Favor of the Government 
--------------------------------------------- - 
¶6.  The Supreme Court on March 16 ruled that the project 
could go ahead, upholding a similar decision dated December 
21, 2005, by the appellate-level Seoul High Court.  The 
appeals court decision overturned a February 4, 2005 ruling 
by the Seoul Administrative Court in favor of the 
environmental groups.  The lower court had ordered the 
suspension of the project, concluding that no net economic 
benefits could be expected due to the anticipated economic 
losses caused by water pollution in the proposed reclamation 
reservoir, and by the destruction of the tidal-flat 
ecosystem. 
 
¶7.  The Supreme Court recently decided to handle cases 
involving the nation's major development projects in an 
expedited manner to minimize social conflict.  The procedure 
was applied for the first time in this case, providing a 
quick response to the appeal filed by environmental groups 
in January. 
 
¶8.  Eleven of 13 justices, including the Chief Justice, 
ruled in favor of the project, while the remaining two voted 
against it.  The Court said if the project were cancelled or 
shelved at this point, the national and social interests of 
securing farmlands would not be achieved and losses would be 
incurred because of the enormous investments made to date. 
The court concluded that the expected environmental damage 
would not be great enough to outweigh the prospective 
economic losses of terminating the project.  The court 
stated that protecting the environment is a value enshrined 
in the Constitution, but said that economic development is 
also an important constitutional value. 
 
Reactions to the Court's Final Ruling 
------------------------------------- 
¶9.  Both the central and provincial governments welcomed the 
court's decision, while local environmental NGOs, fish 
farmers, and a number of international groups dedicated to 
conserving the habitats of global wildlife expressed their 
strong dissatisfaction with the result.  Some of the local 
environmental groups said they would continue their fight 
against the project.  Work is expected to begin on closing 
the remaining gaps in the seawall later this month.  The 
whole project is currently scheduled for completion by 2012. 
 
¶10.  Mindful of increasing costs due to the suspension of 
the project, public opinion generally welcomed the court's 
decision.  Most daily newspapers printed favorable 
editorials and featured the decision on their front pages. 
 
Comment 
------- 
¶11.  As one editorialist noted, the controversy over 
Saemangeum has helped raise public awareness about the 
importance of the environment.  The lengthy and expensive 
conflict over the project also serves as a reminder to 
policymakers about the importance of including environmental 
concerQ up front in the policymaking process.  End Comment. 
 
VERSHBOW