What Kind of Solidarity for West Papua? A response to Martin Pelcher’s article ‘Fear, Grief and Hope in Occupied West Papua’
What Kind of Solidarity for West Papua? A response to Martin Pelcher’s article ‘Fear, Grief and Hope in Occupied West Papua’
by Jason MacLeod
DISCUSSION PAPER
In a recent article, ‘Fear, Grief and Hope in Occupied West Papua’, author activist Martin Pelcher issued a thought provoking challenge to international advocates working in solidarity with West Papuans. Pelcher, who is predominately speaking to ‘White’, ‘Western’ activists, argues that a recent surge in state violence against Komite Nasional Papua Barat (KNPB – the West Papua National Committee) is cause for re-evaluating international solidarity for West Papua. Pelcher wonders whether Western support for Papuan freedom might be counter-productive. While there is much in Pelcher’s article that I agree with I think Pelcher lets Western solidarity activists – and by extension governments and transnational corporations who support the Indonesian government’s continued occupation of West Papua – off too lightly. Reflexivity is essential but we need to ensure that Western activists do not avoid responsibility for challenging the way Western governments and corporations fuel violence and exploitation in West Papua. Solidarity activists can take comfort in the fact that a broad spectrum of Papuans[1] are also asking for international support in ways that respect and strengthen their own agency.
Pelcher’s piece is an invitation to dialogue. It has already generated much conversation. The call to make that conversation more public, or visible amongst growing international solidarity networks, has been picked up by the West Papua Advocacy Team in the United States and also by the Faith Based Network for West Papua who encouraged people to respond to Pelcher’s article. This piece is a response to that invitation and written with the desire to continue the conversation.
Pelcher’s original argument
Western support for a free West Papua taps into deeply embedded Indonesian narratives of western imperialism. Pelcher writes that this is not just lingering nationalist hurt over the loss of East Timor. Even progressive Indonesian activists support West Papua’s continued integration into Indonesia. Notice, for example, Indonesian Friends of the Earth’s (WALHI) recent failure to publicly support their representative in West Papua, Fanny Kogoya when she was forced into hiding because of her links to KNPB. Indonesian citizen support for the occupation is a tremendous source of power for the state that helps the state maintain and justify military aggression.
Although attacks on KNPB have received more coverage – in what is still a grossly under-reported struggle – other groups also continue to be targeted by the state. Papuan political prisoners in jail represent both highlanders and islanders and a broad diversity of political groups. Political organisations aside from KNPB who also pursue independence include the Federal Republic of West Papua, West Papua National Authority, AMP (Aliansa Masyarakat Papua), AMP-PT (Aliansa Masyarakat Papua – Pegunungan Tengah), DEMAK (Dewan Masyarakat Koteka), Sonamapa (Solidaritas Nasional Mahasiswa Papua Barat), FNMPP (Front Nasional Mahasiswa Pemuda Papua Barat), West Papua National Youth Awarenesss Team (Westpanyat), AMAK (Aliansa Masyarakat Anti-Kekerasan), ParJal (Parlamen Jalanan), Garda and others. Activists in other parts of the country like Fak-Fak, Manokwari, Yapen, Merauke and elsewhere have also been hit by the repressive force of the Indonesian state. Even groups that eschew an overt political agenda, preferring to expand the contours of freedom through campaigning for basic rights, are routinely harassed by the state. They include civil society groups like Elsham Papua, Dewan Adat Papua, Bersatu untuk Keadilan, Foker LSM, Jubi, Kontras, the churches and others. Some human rights defenders have had to periodically relocate themselves and their families to Jakarta to protect themselves from intimidation and threats.
Papuans also consider the TPN-PB (Tentara Pembebasan Nasional – Papua Barat), or National West Papuan Liberation Army – which consists of a decentralised network of groups based around attachment to clan, tribe, and geographic area – an important part of resistance to the Indonesian state. But in terms of numbers, activities and effectiveness the TPN-PB are marginal players. Members of the armed struggle are routinely co-opted by the state to further the Indonesian security services own aims, whether that is about protecting vested private business interests – mostly in logging, mining and extortion – or pursuing national security objectives designed to weaken and destroy the Papuan independence movement.
The random and brutal nature repression by the Indonesian state means that citizens not actively involved in the freedom movement routinely become victims of state violence. In his article Pelcher focuses on KNPB but alludes to the fact that the whole of Papuan society is caught up in the same repressive net. Papuans live with this foreboding sense that they, their family members or their friends could be targeted at any time.
In seeking to explain the state repression in West Papua Pelcher reminds us that the Indonesian nation was formed and defended in the context of a long, and relatively recent, anti-imperialist struggle against the Dutch. Nearly two decades after Indonesian nationalists declared independence in 1945 Sukarno launched a military invasion to wrest back control of what he called the “Dutch Puppet State”. For this reason, as well as for the fact that West Papua’s inclusion into the Indonesian archipelago reinforces a multi-ethnic, multi-religious Indonesian identity, West Papua’s inclusion in the Unitary Republic of Indonesia is a source of tremendous pride for the overwhelming majority of Indonesians, including left wing activists. This view is deeply entrenched. The fact that the Indonesian political elite also gained control of bountiful supply of valuable natural resources was simply icing on the cake. Western narratives of Papuans nonviolently fighting for democracy, rights and national liberation against a brutal military occupation are rendered immediately suspect, tapping into what many Indonesians believe is a ‘hidden agenda’ by the West. The narrative of a Papuan led anti-colonial resistance struggle does not easily fit with the dominant Indonesian view that they liberated Papua. Instead sympathetic Western portrayals of the Papuan struggle are re-cast and attached to ulterior motives. Pelcher:
Western support for East Timorese independence – and signs of such support being extended to West Papua – have been easy to frame [by the Indonesian press] as vehicles for the West’s neo-imperial manipulation and pursuit of the region’s abundant mineral and petroleum resources. The more Western advocates succeed in focusing global attention on the plight of Papuans under Indonesian rule, the more the Indonesian security establishment can deploy the spectre of a “foreign intervention” (like the UN’s intervention in East Timor) to mobilize Indonesian public opinion behind its harsh policing measures.
One of the reasons why Pelcher’s article is so challenging is that he writes to us as an insider, as a fellow solidarity activist, who is searching his conscience for answers to the question ‘what to do?’, and in doing so prompting us to search our own conscience. And it is not as if the issues he raises have gone away. Since Pelcher wrote the article attacks against KNPB have gotten worse. The Indonesian state has all but “declared war” on the pro-independence civilian based organisation. At the time of writing 22 leaders had been summarily executed by the security forces. Scores have been arrested. Much of the leadership has been driven underground and into exile … but KNPB maintains it’s politically defiance stance. The group’s leader, Victor Yeimo continues to insist that KNPB is committed to resolute nonviolent resistance and will not back down from its call for a referendum.
So what should international advocates do? Pelcher has more questions than answers. He acknowledges that Western advocates are increasingly putting Papuan human rights on the international community’s agenda. Pelcher also recognises the work of Papuan human rights defenders and their allies in Jakarta who have raised questions about the Indonesian security forces use of summary justice instead of legal means to investigate acts of violence. However, the dominant story in the Indonesian media supports a police narrative that pins “the blame on the student activists of KNPB as well as the wider network of underground Papuan nationalist resistance.” The central question Pelcher raises in his article is how can international advocates generate global solidarity against injustice in West Papua without strengthening the state’s pretext for terror?
Papuans are the drivers of the struggle
I agree with Pelcher that Papuans are the drivers of the struggle. The more Papuans rise up and collectively and nonviolently resist the occupation the more the legitimacy of the Indonesian government’s continued aggression in West Papua is strained; the more likely more people outside Papua will stand in solidarity with them, and the more effective that solidarity is likely to be. Papuans are the primary architects of their own liberation. While external solidarity is important it will always be secondary to movements for change inside the country. We need critical reflection about the role of external solidarity. As well as reinforcing the way the security forces frame Papuan resistance as a foreign led plot, at times international solidarity action has tended to tap into unrealistic Papuan beliefs about the willingness and ability of the international community to assist Papuan freedom goals. Although solidarity in other parts of Indonesia and international solidarity outside Papua is necessary to support Papuan freedom goals, by itself it will never be sufficient. We need solidarity that is respectful; solidarity that strengthens collective action that is led by Papuans. We need less solidarity action and rhetoric that fosters dependency, passivity and false hopes that outsiders will save the Papuans. They cannot. They will not. As Benny Giay, the moderator of the Papuan church once said, “Papuans are the captains of their own lives.”
South-South solidarity
Pelcher is not arguing against solidarity; he is asking what kind of solidarity might be most useful to the Papuan’s struggle for freedom. Some solutions are implicit in his article, others Pelcher is more forthright about. In particular, Pelcher calls for more “south-south” solidarity as a necessary corrective to White Western perspectives.
Two types of South-South solidarity are particularly important. The first is solidarity from Pacific Island countries, particularly the Melanesian countries. Why should other states worry about what is happening in West Papua when Pacific Island countries in general, including Australia and New Zealand, and the Melanesian nations in particular, say and do little to support West Papua? The voice of Melanesian citizens and governments are essential to mobilizing greater international support. If the Papuans continue to push for an independent state they will need the support of other states but that goal, if it eventuates, is a long way off. Independence is even less likely without the active support of the Melanesian Spearhead Group (Papua New Guinea, Vanuatu, Solomon Islands and Fiji).
Secondly, there is much valuable learning that can happen between Papuans and other peoples who are resisting occupations and struggling for self-determination. Recently I had the privilege of witnessing a learning exchange between West Papuans and Burmese who shared notes about how to work nonviolently for democracy, rights and liberation in a repressive context. Papuans have learnt much from their colleagues in East Timor and Aceh. Imagine if there were more venues where focused learning could take place. Spaces where West Papuans could meet with people from other self-determination struggles who have successfully enlarged the contours of freedom: East Timorese, South Sudanese and Kosovars. Imagine too if Papuans could exchange strategies and tactics with people who are still struggling for self-determination: Palestinians, Tibetans, Saharawi’s from Western Sahara, Nagas, Kanaks (people from the French colony of New Caledonia), people from Mahoi Nui (Tahiti and French Polynesia), Bougainvillians, the Kurds and other indigenous peoples caught in the grip of the state.
Solidarity between Papuans and Indonesians
I also agree with Pelcher that solidarity with progressive Indonesians is also essential. This is something that both Papuans and their transnational allies could cultivate more. People like Budi Hernawan, Andreas Harsono and Eko Waluyo are providing leadership here. They hold out a challenge to other Indonesians who care about democracy, human rights, and social and environmental justice.
There is a strategic paradox to wrestle with here. Many Papuans opposes the Indonesian state but they also need the support of ordinary Indonesians to secure greater freedom. This is because Jakarta depends less on Papuans to maintain the occupation than on sustaining domestic support for an Indonesian state that includes West Papua at all costs. In brief, Papuans need Indonesian allies. However, when Papuans exclusively appeal to indigenous identity and Christianity, frame their grievances around historical injustices, and communicate their aspirations in ways that emphasise independence, they unwittingly limit their ability to mobilize support from other Indonesians who are overwhelmingly nationalist and Muslim. As a result, Papuans reduce their chances of winning over a key influence on the Indonesian government: the Indonesian people.
This highlights the conundrum for Papuan activists. There is a perception that working for intermediate objectives means selling out the long-term goal of independence. Yet to build Indonesian support for greater political freedom in West Papua and to put pressure on the Jakarta government requires framing campaigns around intermediate objectives like: freedom of expression; open access to West Papua for journalists, diplomats, NGOs, tourists, and others; democracy; environmental protection; corruption; sustainable development; economic justice, civil rights, universal access to education and health services; accountable government; and human rights. This does not mean giving up on larger goals like independence. As one senior Papuan leader recently said to me: “the struggle for basic rights is not the enemy of independence”. It means taking a longer view about building political power.
Campaigns for more limited strategic objectives can simultaneously strengthen Indonesian democracy and build Papuans’ international reputation—developments that will leave Papuans in a better position to realize larger aspirations. This is a strategic challenge. Papuans need to use collective action frames that resonate with different audiences at different times, define intermediate demands, and time mobilization to achieve short-term objectives, but in ways that leave the movement in a stronger position to achieve their ultimate goal: full political freedom.
In this way a new Papua gets built on an inclusive vision and a deeper articulation of the multiple meanings of merdeka (freedom). People like John Rumbiak and Benny Giay urge that this vision needs to include not only diverse Papuan tribes, but also Indonesian migrants, another source of the Indonesian government’s power in West Papua. Mobilization through an exclusive Papuan identity and through a single focused demand for independence framed exclusively in opposition to Indonesia will create a fragile unity, perhaps liable to break down under stress and less capable of carrying through an agenda for democratic transformation.
Non-partisanship
There are other areas where Pelcher and I agree, particularly his implicit argument for solidarity that is non-partisanship. It is clear from his article that Pelcher is close to the radical highland independence youth movement, KNPB. This is a group that I also sympathise with. However, Pelcher does not exclusively take sides. He also writes about the leadership of the Federal Republic of West Papua currently imprisoned for determined, unapologetic and nonviolent acts of insurrection. Pelcher articulates the challenges the movement for freedom in West Papua poses not only to the Indonesian state but also to transnational capital in West Papua. We need more activists like Pelcher who can reach out to the different parts of the movement and in doing so make more space for unity from inside the movement and solidarity from outside.
Where we disagree: the paradox of repression
While I agree with Pelcher’s analysis about how Western support for freedom in West Papua can tap into Indonesian suspicion that there is a foreign plot to access West Papua’s resources I disagree with his conclusions. I think Pelcher is mistaken in his understanding of the dynamics of repression. I also think that part of our role as solidarity activists is to continually emphasize that the struggle is being led by Papuans and that role of outsiders is to support their efforts and amplify their voices. I don’t think that solidarity by Westerns is the cause of repression, even though the state will use whatever means they can to justify their repression.
One of the reasons why the Indonesian government is employing repression against KNPB and other resistance groups – including sanctioning extrajudicial killing – is because they fear the growing power of organised nonviolent resistance against the state. Kopassus’ (the Indonesian Special Forces) own intelligence analysis of the Papuan freedom movement, leaked by Alan Nairn and the West Papua Project from the University of Sydney, reveals that the armed struggle is not a threat because they ‘hardly do anything’.
One of the reasons the armed struggle does not “do anything” – or rarely engages in military action – is because it is hard to recruit people to join the armed struggle. Guerrilla fighters often live difficult lives isolated in the jungle and mountains. The TPN does also not have a state sponsor, and while it will be extremely difficult for the state to destroy the TPN militarily, the TPN will also never be able to out gun or outnumber the Indonesian military. The use of violence to achieve political goals also favours fit young men and involves high levels of commitment and risk. Few Papuans are willing to risk their lives joining an armed struggle that has little prospect of success.
According to the Indonesian military nonviolent resistance is “much more dangerous” because they have “reached the outside world’’ with their ‘obsession’ with ‘merdeka’ (the independence/ freedom struggle) and persist in “propagating the issue of severe human rights violations in Papua,’ i.e. ‘murders and abductions that are done by the security forces.’’
Stopping Papuans who are organising to win freedom is easier if the movement uses violence or if the Indonesian government can convince outsiders that Papuans are engaged in armed struggle. If Papuans respond – or are seen to be responding – with violent action the Indonesian government will be able to frame their actions as terrorism and threats to national sovereignty. This allows the Indonesian government to justify their use of violence against the movement. Action that physically harms others or threatens other people reduces support from third parties. Even if third parties are sympathetic to the goals of the movement the majority of people will question the legitimacy of using violence who tend to view armed movements as extremists. Innocent villagers from the rural areas are particularly vulnerable to disproportionate violent retaliation by the security forces because few journalists, church workers and human rights groups are present and able to hold the security forces accountable through human rights reportage.
The purpose of state violence is to inflict pain but to do so in ways that lessen the likelihood that repression will generate moral outrage and consequently, more political mobilisation. The Indonesian government wants to stop people coming together to press for rights and freedom and they are prepared to use any means necessary. In one sense, therefore repression – if it occurs when the movement is growing in numbers and power – can be interpreted as success; that the opponent recognises the growing strength of the movement.
There is no guarantee of success for any liberation movement. But using nonviolent action increases the likelihood of success and provides more opportunities for large numbers of people to participate in the struggle. The consistent use of disciplined and collective mass nonviolent action over time will is more likely to prompt ordinary Indonesians to question the occupation and even divide their loyalties. That is why nonviolent discipline is so important. The Papuan freedom movement needs to encourage ordinary Indonesians to question what their government is doing. It also needs to carry out actions that encourage and enable more support from domestic and international third parties.
If the Indonesian state continues to use violent repression against Papuans, which it is doing at the moment and is likely to continue to do, the Papuan freedom movement needs to be prepared. The evidence from studies of liberation movements around the world, including from places where repression is more severe than in West Papua, shows that repression can backfire. The most important thing that helps make repression backfire is that repression becomes visible to outside audience and gets interpreted as an injustice in ways that promote moral outrage. Solidarity activists, working in cooperation with Papuan activists, have a big role to play with this. Inviting outsiders like PBI, diplomats, journalists and others to witness and report on both state violence and nonviolent resistance can also help.
There are a range of other things movements can do. Tactically they can emphasise actions that are low risk and high participation. Movements can also build decentralized network structures coordinated by a shared vision, shared goal and a shared strategy. These kinds of structures are more resilient than hierarchical structures because they encourage collective leadership, support tactical innovation and help protect more visible leaders who may be targeted by the state.
People inside and outside West Papua need to raise the political and economic costs of the Indonesian government not negotiating with the Papuan freedom movement. Make no mistake – we need militancy, but militancy of a determined, disciplined nonviolent kind. Papuans are already acting in this way. We need more outsiders to get behind them. One of the reasons the Indonesian government has not engaged in dialogue is because it is not worth them investing political capital in doing so. In other words the conflict in West Papua has not become enough of a problem for them, both domestically and internationally. The conflict has to become more costly economically for transnational capital in West Papua. Papuan activists and the solidarity movement need to use nonviolent methods to compel the Indonesian and foreign governments, and transnational capital to sit at the table in ways that take control of how the struggle is portrayed. We need to understand that the role of repression is to stop Papuans demanding freedom and rights. We need to find ways to continue to support Papuans who live with the tension between the risk of making change and keeping safe. But we also need to be realistic; there is no path in life that does not involve suffering. That is particularly true for those committed to struggling for liberation in the midst of the Indonesian government’s occupation of West Papua. To a much lesser extent that is true for solidarity activists. We need more people like Pelcher who travel inside Papua, get close to Papuan activists struggling for freedom, and provide practical support and moral solidarity to unarmed resistance at some risk to themselves.
Waging the struggle in three domains
It is foreign governments that help supply the Indonesian military and police with arms. It is the Australian and U.S governments that train and arm Detachment 88, the counter intelligence police force that has no qualms about using extra-judicial killing as a form of conflict management. It is unchecked transnational companies that are fueling conflict in West Papua.
In situations where one’s own government supports the Indonesian’s government’s occupation of West Papua the role of solidarity activists is fourfold: first, to nonviolently resist our own government’s support of Indonesian state violence; second, to find ways to support nonviolent resistance in West Papua; third, to make both the human rights violations by the Indonesian state and the nonviolent resistance by the Papuans more visible and more audible; and fourth, to communicate both these to ever expanding audiences who can mobilise on behalf of the Papuans.
I think solidarity activists, including Western activists, need to be more active not less. My own view is that the job of international solidarity activists is to work in collaboration with Papuans to raise the political and economic costs of the Indonesian government’s occupation. And because the Indonesian government depends on support of ordinary Indonesians, foreign governments and transnational capital as well as West Papuans to maintain the occupation we need a stronger movement that wages nonviolent conflict inside West Papua, inside Indonesia and in the societies of the Indonesian government’s international allies. When it comes to West Papua, people inside and out need to generate more conflict, not less. We then need to find nonviolent ways to resolve that conflict that support justice and peace. That does not equate with supporting or being involved with political violence.
What kind of international solidarity for West Papua?
So what kind of international solidarity is needed for West Papua? I think those of us in Western countries that have been ‘armed’ with wealth and opportunity need to use our privilege ethically. Elites in countries like the Netherlands, the U.S and Australia created the problem in West Papua. These countries continue to benefit politically and economically from the situation. That creates a moral imperative for Australians, Dutch, German’s, English, Irish, Scots, U.S citizens and others to act in solidarity with the Papuans. We need to care just as much about decolonization and liberation as Papuans do.
I want to suggest seven things international Western solidarity activists can do.
Firstly, we need to be committed to supporting the struggle through nonviolent means, not just for moral reasons, but primarily because nonviolent resistance is more effective. It allows more people to participate in the struggle, it is more likely to win over uncommitted third parties and it is more likely to blunt the political effectiveness of the Indonesian government’s use of violence to repress the movement.
Secondly, we need more people like Pelcher who visit West Papua. West Papua is isolated internationally. Personal face to face relationships help deepen people’s commitment to accompanying Papuans in their struggle for peace and justice, sensitise them to the issues and provide the means for getting information out. Quantitatively more ties between Papuans and sources of outside support and qualitatively stronger relationships between Papuans, Indonesians and outsiders that are orientated towards respectfully assisting Papuan goals help maximize the likelihood that Papuans will realize their desire for freedom.
Thirdly, and related to the second point, we need more people who learn Indonesian. While many Papuan activists are doing their bit to break down West Papua’s isolation by learning English we also need more people who take the time to learn Indonesian and make long-term commitments to the struggle. Again Pelcher is an inspiration in this regard.
Fourthly, if and when we are invited by Papuans to do so, we can provide technical support to assist nonviolent struggle. Building a strong and secure communications network and increasing strategic capacity is particularly critical.
Fifthly, we need to target the Indonesian government’s external sources of power located in our own countries of origin. We need more U.S’ers to target the way their government and the way Freeport exports terror and exploits West Papua. We need others to target other corporations like BP, Rio-Tinto and logging companies who exploit West Papuan resources and foster economic and environmental injustice. We need more citizens to challenge and disrupt their own government’s willingness to arm and train the Indonesian military and police.
Sixthly, and lastly, we need to build relationships with and collaborate with progressive Indonesian activists and support and work with Papuan activists to do the same. Indonesia will never be a free and equitable society while West Papuans are denied their right to decide their future; while they live in poverty, while their resources are plundered, while foreign journalists are locked out, while political prisoners continue to languish in jail, while the Indonesian security forces continue to use torture with impunity, and while Papuans are denied the right to free speech.
Seventh, Pelcher makes the point powerfully that we all – Papuans, Indonesians and international allies – need to find ways to recast the story that the struggle in Papua is violent and foreign led and that solidarity with West Papua is anti-Indonesian and imperialist. That story is false. It serves vested corporate and military interests, both in Indonesia and in the offices of governments and boardrooms of transnational corporations. We need new memes that recast the story. The struggle in West Papua is a nonviolent anti-occupation struggle for justice, human rights and democracy. West Papua is Indonesia’s Palestine.
West Papua needs more friends and more solidarity from the West, not less. We especially need to continue with the solidarity when the Indonesian government uses ruthless repression in an attempt to silence the Papuan movement for freedom.
I want to leave the last word on solidarity to KNPB chair, Viktor Yeimo. Recently arrested for leading a nonviolent action in West Papua, Yeimo issued a clear invitation to solidarity. Paraphrasing Ché Guevara Yeimo wrote: “when your heart trembles at oppression you are a friend of ours”.
In the spirit of Yeimo’s request may Papuans find that the numbers and commitment of their friends growing daily.
[1] This includes religious leaders, traditional leaders, women, students, academics, NGO activists, human rights defenders as well as members of resistance groups. Notable exceptions like Franzalbert Joku and Nick Messett, who actively support the Indonesian government’s position, notwithstanding.
Related articles
- KNPPB A Rival Organization Created By Indonesia To Compete With KNPB (westpapuamedia.info)
- Herman Wainggai: Open letter to the President of Indonesia on eve of demos in Papua (westpapuamedia.info)
- Victor Yeimo: 22 Members of KNPB killed in 2012 (westpapuamedia.info)
- Victor Yeimo and others arrested as police crackdown on December 1 protests in Jayapura (westpapuamedia.info)
- KNPB: Regional Police Chief Must Wipe Clean ‘Wanted Persons’ (DPO) list (westpapuamedia.info)
- Arrests in Mantembu, Yapen ahead of major demonstrations (westpapuamedia.info)
- Densus 88 shoot and arrest KNPB leaders near Wamena as tensions rises (westpapuamedia.info)
- Breaking News: Knpb Leader Victor Yeimo Among Arrests on December 1 Flagraising Day (westpapuamedia.info)
- West Papua Advocacy Team Urges Unrestricted Visit by UN Special Rapporteur (westpapuamedia.info)
Indonesian police fire shots, tear gas after 100s of Morning Star flags fly at peaceful demo in Manokwari
By West Papua Media and local sources
October 4, 2012
Over a thousand people who had gathered in Manokwari on Tuesday (2/10) to demonstrate in support of the independence movement in Papua were attacked by police who fired tear gas and live ammunition in the air, after hundreds of banned Morning Star independence flags were unfurled.
The rally, called by the West Papua National Authority (WPNA) under the auspices of the national Federal Republic of West Papua (NRF-PB), was to show support for an observer mission to the General Assembly of the United Nations in New York by WPNA diplomat Herman Wainggai, and to reject the failed implementation of Special Autonomy (OTSUS) in West Papua.
A pamphlet released by the WPNA Governor Markus Yenu explained that the rally was to ”address the increase in OTSUS presence and UP4B as a form of “development”, which only extends Papua Political Status by affecting (increasing) marginalization and duping people of Papua, in all aspects of life on the land of Papua.” It also said that “Papuan People should be sold on (support) the terms of independence and sovereignty (as per the) results at the KRP III (3rd Papuan People’s Congress of 2011).”
The rally was held at Sanggeng sports stadium from about 10 am local time, where about 700 people were joined by a long march of about 300 demonstrators who proceeded towards the town. Banned Morning Star flags, which were hidden whilst the rally was under guard at Sanggeng stadium, were provocatively unfurled in their hundreds during the march, and police reacted quickly and brutally at 1039 local time.
West Papua Media stringers at the rally reported that Brimob paramilitary police stormed the gathering, firing their weapons both in the air allegedly with live ammunition and at rally participants with rubber bullets. Three tear gas canisters were also fired into the crowd to disperse them, and police conducted a baton charge at around 1045am. Witnesses however claimed that security forces, including soldiers from the Indonesian army (TNI) were firing indiscriminately, however no live gunshot wounds have so far been reported. However, several live bullet casings were recovered by West Papua Media stringers.
Scores of demonstrators were savagely beaten, with several reportedly seriously injured by Brimob police who were seizing the 150 Morning Star flags. Several of these included elderly people, who tried to intervene whilst Police were brutally beating a speaker named Zet Tata. Ibu Pendeta (a Priest’s wife) Mathelda Maniani – one of the rally speakers - , Ibu Anis (75 years old), Petu Worabay, Vebi Wanma and Edo Kamesfle were all beaten by police. Zet Tata reportedly sustained serious injuries but his condition in currently unknown.
3 rally participants remain unaccounted for, though sources on the ground have unverified reports that they were taken by Police, and grave concerns are held by WPNA activists for their safety. The names of those disappeared are unknown at this stage.
After the brutal intervention by police to seize the Morning Star flags, demonstrators dispersed, but regrouped to hold another long march in defiance of police and close the rally peacefully at 1pm.
westpapuamedia
Related articles
- Indigenous Papuans Arrested for the Celebrating the UN International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples. (westpapuamedia.info)
- Activists threatened with twenty years jail for organising a nonviolent march about media freedom in West Papua (westpapuamedia.info)
- No terrorists in Papua, says governor (westpapuamedia.info)
- So, who is the real terrorist? West Papua Responses to Australia, U.S. and Indonesia (westpapuamedia.info)
- Police torture students after brutal attack on Abepura university dormitory (westpapuamedia.info)
- ELSHAM finds evidence of 749 acts of violence in Papua (westpapuamedia.info)
- PNG Prime Minister to take strong stand over West Papua ‘abuses’ with Indonesia (pacific.scoop.co.nz)
- AMNESTY STATEMENT: Security forces block peaceful demonstration in Papua (westpapuamedia.info)
- Papuan people warned to beware of propaganda in run-up to UN General Assembly (westpapuamedia.info)
- Paniai offensive intensifies as troops conduct house to house searches: reports (westpapuamedia.info)
New Report Reveals Extent of Papua Human Rights Violations
Press Release from Tapol, Franciscans International, Asian Human Rights Commission and Faith Based Network on West Papua (FBN)
NGOs meet in Geneva to address their concerns on the situation of Human Rights in Papua
Geneva, 3 November 2011
Following last month’s violent dispersal by Indonesian security forces of the Third Papuan Peoples’ Congress in Jayapura, Indonesia has been confronted with the full scale of human rights problems in Papua by the new Report ‘Human Rights in Papua 2010/2011’.[1] This was launched yesterday in Geneva, by the Faith Based Network on West Papua (FBN), Franciscans International (FI), and the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC).
The Report portrays the bleak reality of the abuse of civil and political rights, as well as economic, social and cultural rights in Papua in 2010 and 2011. The aim of the Report is to raise awareness of the human rights situation in Papua and to create in Papua a ‘land of peace’.
More specifically, the Report draws attention to the hardship faced by national and international civil society as well as by local human rights defenders who are too often victims of intimidation, harassment and arbitrary detention on the charge of makar (treason) while exercising their right to freedom of expression in their struggle for justice and accountability. The Report further denounces the policy of the Government of Indonesia aimed at discrediting, limiting and jeopardizing the work of international human rights organizations working in Papua, including denied access to international media through the manipulation of bureaucracy. As a result, certain international organizations are directly or indirectly forced to withdraw from the country, as was the case of the International Committee for the Red Cross (ICRC) and Peace Brigades International (PBI).
With a view to presenting the Report and raising awareness on the recent tragic events, Franciscans International organised a round table discussion. This was attended by representatives of the Faith Based Network on West Papua, Geneva for Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, Papua Peace Network (JDP -Jaringan Damai Papua), Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders TAPOL, World Organization Against Torture (OMCT), and the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Indonesia to the United Nations.
In response to the numerous issues and concerns raised during the discussion, the representative of the Permanent Mission of Indonesia made an official statement asserting that “human rights protection is a national priority”. Despite the appreciation for the participation of the Permanent Mission of Indonesia, this statement was visibly met with strong disagreement by NGOs. They attested that “Political statements are not enough to address human rights violations in Papua, since – the reality is -a climate of fear prevails in Papua”.
The NGOs present concluded by calling upon the Government of Indonesia to: Immediately release all political prisoners; Immediately cease intimidation, harassment and physical violence against human rights defenders, journalists, and religious leaders in Papua; to criminalise torture and ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture; ratify the International Convention on Enforced Disappearances; and to Start a genuine dialogue with national and international civil society.
For more information on the report Human Rights in Papua 2010/2011, please contact:
Kristina Neubaeur –Faith Based Network on West Papua, Coordinator
Francesca Restifo – Franciscans International, International Advocacy Director
Paul Barber – TAPOL, Coordinator: +44 7747 301 739; paul.barber@tapol.org
Wong Kai Shing – Asian Human Rights Commission, Executive Director
1] Available at http://tapol.gn.apc.org/press/files/Human-Rights-in-Papua_Report-2010-2011.pdf
Related articles
- Us Congressman Faleomavaega Calls Upon Government of Indonesia to Assure Safe and Humane Treatment of West Papuans in Custody and to Work for Their Release (westpapuamedia.info)
- Breaking News:First Demos since Papuan crackdown to demand Indon take abuse responsibility (westpapuamedia.info)
- AWPA: Increasing tension in West Papua (westpapuamedia.info)
- DPRP members say police and army chiefs should be held responsible for casualties (westpapuamedia.info)
- HRW: Independent Investigation Needed Into Papua Violence (westpapuamedia.info)
AHRC: Manokwari Court acquits four Papuan students but sentences one more student with rebellion
ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME
Urgent Appeal Update: AHRC-UAU-046-2011
4 October 2011
[RE: AHRC-UAU-041-2011: INDONESIA: Manokwari court sentences two Papuan activists in flawed trial]
———————————————————————
INDONESIA: Manokwari Court acquits four Papuan students but sentences one more student with rebellion
ISSUES: Freedom of expression, Indigenous Peoples, Independence of Judges and Lawyers
———————————————————————
Dear friends,
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received updated information from the Institute for Research, Recognition and Development of Legal Aid (LP3BH) in West Papua regarding the sentencing of another Papuan student and the acquittal of four others in relation to their involvement in a peaceful protest on 14 December 2010. While the AHRC welcomes the acquittal of four of the seven victims brought before court the sentencing of the other three presents a violation of their right to freedom of expression. Concerns over the imprisonment of Mr. Bleskadit and the application of the rebellion charge against peaceful protesters in other cases in West Papua remain.
UPDATED INFORMATION:
In the urgent appeal on 23 June 2011 (AHRC-UAC-117-2011), the AHRC raised concerns about the rebellion charges against seven people, for organizing and participating in a peaceful protest and the raising of a West Papuan flag that symbolizes self determination. At the correctional facility, they were ill-treated and denied medical care for weeks resulting in serious health conditions. (photo: Melki Bleskadit in court, source:LP3BH)
On 18 August 2011, the Manokwari district court sentenced Melki Bleskadit (also known as Melkianus Bleskadit) to two years imprisonment. On 23 August 2011, Mr. Yenu was sentenced to seven months and 16 days imprisonment. The AHRC learned that the verdicts were declared based on a flawed process and issued an update AHRC-UAU-041-2011.
On 27 September 2011, the judges panel acquitted four of the five other Papuan students. According to the Manokwari court’s decision No: 84/Pid.B/2011/PN.Mkw, Mr Alex Duwiri and Mr John Wilson Wader were not guilty of acts of rebellion under article 106 jo, (in conjunction with) Article 55 and 56 of the criminal code. The Courts decision No. : 85/Pid.B/2011/PN.Mkw under the same charges declared Mr Panehas Serongon alias Panehas Sarongon and Mr Yance Sekenyap as not guilty. However, according to the latter decision, Mr Jhon Raweyai alias Joni was proven guilty for participating in the rebellion crime, and was sentenced to 9 (nine) months and 17 (seventeen) days imprisonment, most of which has by now already been served during pretrial detention.
The AHRC is of the opinion that the conduct of any peaceful protest is protected by the Indonesian Constitution and international human rights law applicable to Indonesia. Laying criminal charges against the protesters based on the content of the opinion shared violates the victim’s right to freedom of expression in this case. The relevant articles in the Indonesian Criminal Code that originates from the Dutch colonial period have to be reviewed and their further application halted. The AHRC has noted that several steps taken by the authorities have in the recent past aggravated tensions including the stigmatization many indigenous Papuans including activists as rebels. Many are charged and sentenced in flawed processes that lack impartiality and professional standards of judicial conduct, such as in the case of Mr. Bleskadit and Mr. Yenu. The perpetrators of such rights violations are rarely held accountable, which prolongs the use of the courts for political interests. In the cases of Mr Bleskadit and Mr. Yenu, no information regarding accountability actions against the perpetrators are known.
The court held four of the victims not guilty after they had spent approximately nine months in prison without proper access to medical care. Indonesian law entitles the victims to compensation for the deprivation of their liberty during detention and the health conditions they had to endure.
The AHRC has received reports from further sources that the security institutions in Manokwari and West Papua had earlier planned to undertake systematic efforts during 1-14 December 2011 to intentionally create a situation that would allow for the arrest of and criminal charges against protesters. According to the reports received this operation was planned to justify the ongoing stigmatization of indigenous Papuans with the view to scale up security operations. The AHRC urges an immediate investigation into these serious allegations to avoid repetition.
SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write letters to the authorities listed below asking them to intervene in the case immediately to ensure that all allegations of institutional misconduct leading to wrongful deprivation of the victims liberty is investigated, that the victims are compensated and Mr. Bleskadit is released from his political imprisonment. All legal process must to be conducted in accordance with international norms.
Please be informed that the AHRC is sending letters on this case to to the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous people, and the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers.
To support this appeal, please click here: 
SAMPLE LETTER:
Dear ___________,
INDONESIA: Manokwari Court acquits four Papuan students but sentences one more student with rebellion
Name of victim: Jhon Raweyai, Penehas Serongan, Yance Sekeyab, Alex Duwiri, John Wilson Wader, Melki Bleskadit and Daniel Yenu
Names of alleged perpetrators: Police members, including guards of detention cell of Manokwari district police who arrested, detained and examined the victims, the prosecutor who examined this case
Date of incident: December 2010-September 2011
Place of incident: Manokwari, West Papua, Indonesia
I am writing to voice my deep concern regarding the conviction and sentencing of Jhon Raweyai at the Manokwari district court on 27 September 2011 and the ongoing imprisonment of Mr. Bleskadit for their involvement in a peaceful protest on 14 December 2010.
I know that on 14 December 2010, seven people were charged with rebellion after they had conducted a peaceful protest following a flag raising event. At the correctional facility, they were ill-treated and denied medical care for weeks resulting in serious health conditions.
Furthermore, I know that the Manokwari district court issued the verdict that two of the victims, Melki Bleskadit (also known as Melkianus Bleskadit) and Daniel Yenu, were guilty of acts of rebellion. On 18 August 2011, the verdict against Mr. Bleskadit was declared and he was sentenced to two years imprisonment. On 23 August 2011, Mr. Yenu was convicted to seven months and 16 days imprisonment. I am also aware that the verdicts were declared based on flawed process. Meanwhile, the other accused are still undergoing the trial process.
I was informed that on 27 September 2011, the judges panel acquitted four of the five other Papuan students. According to the Manokwari court’s decision No: 84/Pid.B/2011/PN.Mkw, Mr Alex Duwiri and Mr John Wilson Wader were not guilty of acts of rebellion under article 106 jo, (in conjunction with) Article 55 and 56 of the criminal code. The Courts decision No. : 85/Pid.B/2011/PN.Mkw under the same charges declared Mr Panehas Serongon als. Panehas Sarongon and Mr Yance Sekenyap as not guilty. However, according to the latter decision, Mr Jhon Raweyai als. Joni was proven guilty for participating in the rebellion crime, and was sentenced to 9 (nine) months and 17 (seventeen) days imprisonment, most of which has by now already been served during detention.
I am aware that the conduct of any peaceful protest is protected by the Indonesian Constitution and international human rights law applicable to Indonesia. Laying criminal charges against the protesters based on the content of the opinion shared by them violates the victim’s right to freedom of expression in this case. The relevant articles in the Indonesian Criminal Code that originated from the Dutch colonial period have to be reviewed and their further application halted. I am also aware that several steps taken by the authorities have in the recent past aggravated tensions including the stigmatization many indigenous Papuans including activists as rebels. Many are charged and sentenced in flawed processes that lack impartiality and professional standards of judicial conduct, such as in the case of Mr. Bleskadit and Mr. Yenu. The perpetrators of such rights violations are hardly held accountable, which prolongs the instrumentalisation of courts for political interests. In the cases of Mr Bleskadit and Mr. Yenu, no information regarding accountability processes against the perpetrators are known.
I am also concerned that the court held four of the victims as not guilty after they had spent approximately nine months in prison without proper access to medical care. Indonesian law entitles the victims to a compensation for the deprivation of their liberty during detention and the health conditions they had to endure.
I was shocked to hear about further reports that alleged that security operation were planned by some authorities in order to artificially create conditions that would allow the police to charge activists in various places of West Papua as rebels in order to maintain stigmatization and with the view to scale up security operations. Since many of the steps taken by authorities in recent years seem to aggravate the conflict in West Papua, I am very concerned about the approach of Indonesian institutions in West Papua.
Yours sincerely,
—————-
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:
1. Mr. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono
The President of Indonesia
Jl. Veteran No. 16
Jakarta Pusat
INDONESIA
Tel: +62 21 3863777 / 3503088
Fax: +62 21 3442223
2. Head of Indonesian Police
Markas Besar Kepolisian Indonesia
Jl. Trunojoyo No. 3
Kebayoran Baru
South Jakarta 12110
INDONESIA
Tel.: +62 21 3848537 / 7260306 / 7218010
Fax: +62 21 7220669
Email: info@polri.go.id
3. The Minister of Law and Human Rights of the Republic of Indonesia
Jl. H.R. Rasuna Said Kav. 6-7
Kuningan, Jakarta 12940
INDONESIA
Tel: +62 21 5253006, 5253889, 5264280
Fax: +62 21 5253095
4. Mr. Basrief Arief
The Attorney General of Indonesia
Jl. Sultan Hasanudin No. 1
Kebayoran Baru, Jakarta 12160
INDONESIA
Tel.: +62 21 7221337, 7397602.
Fax: + 62 21 7250213
5. Head of Papua Regional Police
Jl. Dr. Sam Ratulangi No. 8
Jayapura
INDONESIA
Tel.: + 62 967 531834
6. Head of Division of Profession and Security of Papua Regional Police
Jl. Dr. Sam Ratulangi No. 8
Jayapura
INDONESIA
Tel.: + 62 967 531834
7. Head of National Commission on Human Rights of Indonesia
Jalan Latuharhary No.4-B,
Jakarta 10310
INDONESIA
Tel.: +62 21 392 5227-30
Fax: +62 21 392 5227
E-mail: info@komnas.go.id
8. Chairman of the National Police Commission (Kompolnas)
Jl. Tirtayasa VII No. 20 Komplek PTIK Jakarta Selatan
INDONESIA
Tel: +62 21 739 2352
Fax: +62 21 739 2317
Thank you.
Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrc.asia)
Related articles
- AHRC: Manokwari court sentences two Papuan activists in flawed trial (westpapuamedia.info)
- Amnesty International Welcomes Release of Papuan Students in Manokwari (westpapuamedia.info)
- Four Papuan students acquitted of makar charges in Manokwari (westpapuamedia.info)
- Amnesty: Papuan Activist Imprisoned for Peaceful Political Activities (westpapuamedia.info)
- Seven months and 16 days for Dance Yenu (westpapuamedia.info)
WPNA: WEST PAPUANS HAVE CONTINUED TO BE HUNTED LIKE ANIMALS
Opinion
By Herman Wainggai, West Papua National Authority
September 15, 2011
WASHINGTON : WEST PAPUANS HAVE CONTINUED TO BE HUNTED LIKE ANIMALS
Since 2009 when the Australian government granted thirty-nine West Papuan friends and myself political refugee status in 2006. Australia has given us protection, permanent residency and in some cases Australian citizenship.
My question to Indonesia is, Why do the Australians value the lives of West Papuans and allow us to enjoy our freedom while at the same time the majority of West Papuans do not even know what freedom feels like?
On October 8 and 9 there will be an historic meeting of the West Papua National Authority Congress unlike any other in our past. It will take place in Port Numbay, the capital city of West Papua. The people of West Papua have known for seven years of the existence of the West Papua National Authority (WPNA). At the meeting we hope to break new ground on the soil of our beloved homeland and forge new and vital relationships with important international powers. Additionally we will be meeting in Cenderawasih University on 16-19 of October. The floodgates of democracy will soon swing wide open and we West Papuans will finally realize our dream of merdeka and the international community shall be behind us on a journey as a nascent, democratic nation.
My hope is that the American government will continue to hear the voices of West Papuans through our presence here in Washington, D.C.
I would like to request that the international community hears our call for help and understands that our policy of peaceful protest is rooted in 50 years of repression and violence. Our continuing struggle for freedom is clearly endorsed and encouraged by President Barak Obama of the United States as illustrated by his words spoken in April 2009 in Prague:
“ peaceful protest could shake the foundations of an empire, and expose the emptiness of an ideology. It showed us that small countries can play a pivotal role in world events, and that young people can lead the way in overcoming old conflicts. (Applause.) And it proved that moral leadership is more powerful than any weapon. “
Related articles
- Pacific cannot be truly free until West Papua is free, say activists (westpapuamedia.info)
- New Hope for West Papuan – or yet another False Dawn? (westpapuamedia.info)
- AWPA: Time to rethink ties with Kopassus. (westpapuamedia.info)
- West Papua: the road to freedom? (westpapuamedia.info)
AHRC: PAPUA: Medical workers criminally charged for protests over their income
August 30, 2011
Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-150-2011
30 August 2011
———————————————————————
INDONESIA: Medical workers criminally charged for protests over their income
ISSUES: Freedom of Expression, Fabrication of Charges, Labour Rights
——————————————————————–
Dear friends,
The Jayapura regional police in West Papua have charged eight medical workers with incitement and objectionable acts following their peaceful protest against regulation 141/2010 by the provincial governor. The regulation deprives the Jayapura hospital’s medical workers of certain payments. An earlier request to meet and discuss the situation was ignored by the governor. Moreover, the medical workers were reported to the Jayapura regional police for violating criminal law with their protest. The AHRC sees the fabrication of these charges as a violation of the workers freedom of expression. Peaceful protesters have frequently been criminally charged for incitement or disobedience in West Papua and other parts of Indonesia. (photo: workers in front of the house of representatives in Papua, source: ALDP)
CASE NARRATIVE:
The AHRC has received information from KontraS, the Commission for the Disappeared and Victims of Violence, regarding the fabrication of charges against workers who had conducted a peaceful protest. The medical workers serving in the Jayapura District Hospital have been receiving an incentive bonus since 2005. In 2010, the governor of Papua decided to alter this incentive.
When news reached them of the possible change the workers feared that they would lose this payment and made requests for a meeting with the governor which were initially ignored. Only after the medical workers conducted a peaceful protest in front of the local parliament building in Jayapura on 2 December 2010 did a dialogue take place the following day. The workers met with several commissioners including the Regional Secretary of the province, the head of the Legal Division, Papua’s health agency representative and a representative of the Jayapura hospital.
This meeting resulted in an agreement regarding the amount of the incentive payment. On 6 December 2010, the governor of Papua issued resolution no. 125 of 2010 implementing the agreement. However, in an abrupt about face, on 30 December 2010, the governor revoked the earlier resolution with another one (no. 141 of 2010) and thus deprived the medical workers of the respective payments. (photo: workers at the regional police correctional facility, source: ALDP)
The medical workers again requested a dialogue with the governor asking the reinstatement of resolution no. 125 of 2010 which was once again ignored. They then held a peaceful demonstration from 1 — 14 March 2011.
On 12 March, 2011 a report was made to the Papua regional police that the protestors were alleged to have carried out acts of incitement and objectionable acts as mentioned in article 160 and article 335 point 1 respectively in the criminal code. The report deplored the medical workers absence from their health service duties while participating in the protest. Leni Ebe, the coordinator of the protest pointed out that not all staff attended the protest and that they had arranged to ensure that health care was sufficiently provided to patients. (photo: workers receive letter regarding leave on bail from a lawyer, source: ALDP)
On 15 March 2011, at 10.00 am, Leni Ebe and Popi Mauri were examined as witnesses in the criminal case against them at the Papua regional police headquarter. At 03.00 pm, the police declared eight persons including Leni Ebe and Popi Mauri as suspects in the case.
The AHRC is concerned about the ongoing criminal procedures conducted against the workers for organising a peaceful protest. Criminal charges against peaceful protesters have increased in Papua and West Papua in recent years and several political protesters were convicted with prison sentences.
SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write letters to the authorities listed below urging them to drop the charges against the eight medical workers of the Jayapura hospital.
Please be informed that the AHRC is sending letters on this case to the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, calling for strong interventions.
SAMPLE LETTER:
Dear _____,
INDONESIA: Medical workers criminally charged for protests over their wages
Name of the victim: Leni Ebe, Popi Mauri, Stevi Siahaya, Luthrinu, Siska Mandosir, Yolanda Inauri, Dolita Ataruri, Imbenay
Alleged perpetrator: Papua regional police
Time of incident: 12-15 March 2011
Place of incident: Papua regional police headquarter
I am writing to express my serious concern over the charges of incitement and objectionable acts against Leni Ebe, Popi Mauri and several others.
According to reports from KontraS, the Commission for the Disappeared and Victims of Violence, the medical workers serving in the Jayapura District Hospital have been criminally charged for their participation in a peaceful protest against a new regulation of the governor of Papua depriving them of some payments.
Fearing that they would lose this payment when news reached them of the possible change the workers made requests for a meeting with the governor, which were initially ignored. Only after the medical workers conducted a peaceful protest in front of the local parliament building in Jayapura on 2 December 2010 did a dialogue took place the following day. The workers met with several commissioners including the Regional Secretary of the province, the head of the Legal Division, Papua’s health agency representative and a representative of the Jayapura hospital. This meeting resulted in an agreement regarding the amount of the incentive. On 6 December 2010, the governor of Papua issued resolution no. 125 of 2010 implementing the agreement. However, on 30 December 2010, in an abrupt about face the governor revoked the earlier resolution with another one (no. 141 of 2010) and thus deprived the medical workers of the respective payments. The reasoning given for this new resolution was that the payment of the incentive would create duplication of budget.
The medical workers again requested a dialogue with the governor asking the reinstatement of resolution no. 125 of 2010 which was once again ignored. They then held a peaceful demonstration from 1 — 14 March 2011.
On 12 March, 2011 a report was made to the Papua regional police that the protestors were alleged to have carried out acts of incitement and objectionable acts as mentioned in article 160 and article 335 point 1 respectively in the criminal code. The report deplored the medical workers absence from their health service duties while participating in the protest. Leni Ebe, the coordinator of the protest pointed out that not all staff attended the protest and that they had arranged to ensure that health care was sufficiently provided to patients.
On 15 March 2011, at 10.00 am, Leni Ebe and Popi Mauri were examined as witnesses in the criminal case against them at the Papua regional police headquarter. At 03.00 pm, the police declared eight persons including Leni Ebe and Popi Mauri as suspects in the case.
I am concerned about the ongoing criminal procedures conducted against the workers for organising a peaceful protest and urge you to ensure that the charges against the eight members of the medical staff be dropped. I hope that the provincial administration could show more openness to dialogue and would commit to ensure that no person will be criminally charged for participating in a peaceful protest as such charges present a violation of every person’s right to freedom of expression as enshrined in Indonesian and international law.
I am kindly urging for your intervention into this case.
Yours sincerely,
———————
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:
1. Mr. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono
The President of INDONESIA
Jl. Veteran No. 16
Jakarta Pusat
INDONESIA
Tel: +62 21 3863777, 3503088.
Fax: +62 21 3442223
2. Minister of Home Affair of Republic of Indonesia
Jl. Merdeka Utara No. 7 Jakarta 10110
INDONESIA
Tel: +62 21 3450058, 3842222
Fax : +62 21 3831193
3. Chairman of the National Police Commission (Kompolnas)
Jl. Tirtayasa VII No. 20
Komplek PTIK
South Jakarta
INDONESIA
Tel: +62 21 739 2352
Fax: +62 21 739 2317
4. Head of Indonesian Police
Markas Besar Kepolisian INDONESIA
Jl. Trunojoyo No. 3
Kebayoran Baru
Jakarta 12110
INDONESIA
Tel:+62 21 3848537, 7260306, 7218010
Fax :+62 21 7220669
Email : info@polri.go.id
5. The Head of House of Representative of Papua
(Ketua Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Papua)
Jl. Dr. Sam Ratulangi No.2
Jayapura, Papua
INDONESIA
Tel: +62 967 533580
Fax:: +62 967 533691
6. Barnabas Suebu
The Governor of Papua
Jl. Soa Siu Dok
Jayapura, Papua
INDONESIA
Tel: +62 967 537523
Fax: +62 967 531847, 531853
7. Head of Police Area Headquarters Jayapura, Papua province
Polda Papua
Jl. Samratulangi No. 8 Jayapura
INDONESIA
Tel: + 62 967 531014
Fax: +62 967 533763
8. Head of National Commission on Human Rights of Indonesia
Jalan Latuharhary No.4-B,
Jakarta 10310
INDONESIA
Tel: +62 21 392 5227-30
Fax: +62 21 392 5227
E-mail : info@komnas.go.id
Thank you.
Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrc.asia)
Related Articles
- More reports about arrested nurses in Papua (westpapuamedia.info)
- Medical personnel arrested in Jayapura for ‘inciting strike’ (westpapuamedia.info)
- Nurses in Papua take their complaints to governor.. and to the ALDP (westpapuamedia.info)
An Indonesian War of ‘Unknown Persons’
By AUBREY BELFORD
Published: August 26, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/27/world/asia/27iht-papua27.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all
JAKARTA — It is a seemingly unending conflict in a part of the world famous for both its awesome remoteness and the incredible wealth on and beneath the ground.
For half a century, Indonesian troops and police officers have fought a shadowy and sporadic war in the vast forests and highlands of Papua, as the western end of New Guinea is known, after taking control of the former Dutch colony in the 1960s. It is a long-running conflict that is poorly understood by even those involved.
On one level, the fight is between security forces and ragtag groups of indigenous separatists, armed with guns, spears and arrows.
Sometimes, it is alleged, it is factions of the security forces fighting among themselves, drawn into competition over the ill-gotten spoils of a region of vast natural resources, including some of the world’s richest mines. Often, official references to those doing the killing go no further than “unknown persons,” leaving their identity — agents provocateurs, business rivals or guerrillas — the stuff of conspiracy theories.
But after an outburst of violence in recent months that has killed dozens, Indonesia is coming under renewed calls to solve a conflict, replete with economic misery and human rights abuses, that has tainted the country’s image as an emerging democratic giant.
A report this week by the International Crisis Group, an independent research organization, is the latest in a series of calls by civil society groups for a renewed dialogue between Papuans, who are ethnically distinct from other Indonesians and many of whom favor independence, and officials in Jakarta, who see the region as an inviolable part of Indonesia.
At issue are special autonomy arrangements put in place a decade ago by the administration of former President Megawati Sukarnoputri to head off renewed calls for independence following the 1998 fall of the Suharto dictatorship. Suharto ruled Papua with an iron fist while making billions for Jakarta from its natural wealth.
Special autonomy devolved some power to Papuans and saw the creation of local governments and the pumping of huge sums of money back into the region. The government also, controversially, split Papua into two separate provinces, Papua and West Papua.
But the report argues that special autonomy has so far failed to solve the roots of the conflict. Deep poverty persists, as does chronic corruption.
Non-Papuan migrants from other parts of Indonesia dominate the economy.
And, importantly, there remains a sense among Papuans that Indonesian security forces remain a law unto themselves, killing and torturing with near impunity.
“The government of President Yudhoyono, on Papua as on everything else, has been glacially slow to develop a policy that would be different from the default response of throwing cash at the problem and hoping it will go away,” the report by the crisis group said.
While democratic Indonesia has made huge strides in solving bloody wars of separatism and intercommunal conflict in provinces like Aceh and Maluku, Papua has stood out as a weeping sore.
Recent violence exposes the complexity of the conflict. The past two months have seen a rash of attacks in the highland district of Puncak Jaya, one of the poorest and remotest areas of Indonesia and a hot spot for a local insurgency led by a faction of the separatist Free Papua Movement, or TPN-OPM.
This month, a helicopter carrying a shot and dying soldier was hit by rebel bullets in the region and, last week, a motorcycle taxi driver was shot and killed in the district capital by “unknown persons,” said Lt. Col. Alex Korwa, the local police chief.
Over the hills, in Puncak, another district created as part of the government’s special autonomy plan, fighting between indigenous clans over control of the local government left 17 dead in late July.
This month, five people, including two soldiers, were killed in separate incidents near Jayapura, the capital of Papua Province. A series of other gunfights and stabbings have continued throughout Papua over this period.
The authorities have, mostly, pointed the finger at the TPN-OPM for the deadliest of the Jayapura attacks, an ambush in which four people were killed. But Papuan independence campaigners assert that elements of the security forces, or their clients, are behind many such attacks.
“These attacks I think have been carried out either by militias, or the military themselves, as violence to create an atmosphere of fear,” said Benny Giay, a pastor in the Gospel Tabernacle Church. The commander of military forces in Papua, Maj. Gen. Erfi Triassunu, said the attack near Jayapura was “purely the TPN-OPM.”
Mr. Giay also alleged that a Papuan farmer, Das Komba, was abducted and killed by soldiers near the border with Papua New Guinea on Friday, but the police and military have so far not commented on the case.
Cases in which members of the security forces received light sentences for the torture and murder of civilians have caused outrage in recent months, but the crisis group argues in its report that the fact such trials exist at all is a step forward.
With Papua thousands of kilometers from Jakarta, and tightly sealed from foreign journalists and many rights groups, it is difficult to confirm independently claims and counterclaims about much of the violence. For those on the ground, too, many attacks remain mysterious.
“How can we trust the police or the military if there are no perpetrators, if no one gets caught?” asked Latifah Anum Siregar, the director of the Democracy Alliance for Papua, a human rights group.
“Police will send out 200, 300 people on a sweep, but they won’t get anyone.”
One senior police officer who has had command roles in Papua’s hot spots said that even he was often uncertain who exactly was behind attacks — rebels or rogue soldiers. “We weren’t sure,” said the officer, who declined to be named because of the sensitivity of the subject. “Every time we got a glance of the shooter, they always disappeared really quickly into the jungle.”
Realizing the drawbacks of special autonomy, the government of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has pledged to put together a temporary body, called the Unit for the Acceleration of Development in Papua and West Papua, to seek solutions to corruption, poverty and rights abuses in the region, but its formation has been delayed.
“There’s a lot of mistrust by the people in Papua, both towards the government in Jakarta and their own regional governments,” said Dewi Fortuna Anwar, a political science professor at the Indonesian Institute of Sciences who is involved in setting up the body.
But building trust may take more than building schools. Many Papuans remain fiercely committed to independence, arguing that the process by which Indonesia achieved sovereignty over Papua in 1969 — a vote by 1,025 Papuan elders handpicked by the Indonesian authorities — was flawed.
Indonesia is similarly inflexible. Simply unfurling the region’s Morning Star independence flag can be considered subversion, a crime punishable by up to 20 years or life in prison. About two dozen people are in jail or awaiting trial in Papua on subversion charges, according to Human Rights Watch.
Amid violence earlier this month, thousands of people protested in Papuan towns and cities to demand a referendum on independence. The political affairs minister, Djoko Suyanto, was firm in his response. “Papua is a part of the unitary republic of Indonesia,” he said. “That is what we must maintain.”
Related articles
- An Indonesian War of ‘Unknown Persons’ (nytimes.com)
- KNPB Press Release: Papuan people don’t need welfare, they want a Referendum (westpapuamedia.info)
- Comments on ICGs Hope and Hard Reality in Papua: (westpapuamedia.info)
- How the Papuan people Continue to Unite in Resistance: Victor Yeimo Interview (westpapuamedia.info)
Supporting Accountability, Not Separatism, in Indonesia
Elaine Pearson
Deputy Asia Director, Human Rights Watch
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/elaine-pearson/supporting-accountability_b_932075.html
The list appears among 500 pages of Indonesian military documents, which recently came to light, that provide an insider view of the military’s surveillance operations in Papua. the country’s easternmost province.
Most of the documents concern the activities of Indonesia’s Special Forces, or Kopassus. The US should be paying close attention since a year ago it restored full military ties with Kopassus, which had been suspended for years because of the force’s notorious human rights record.
Officially, Kopassus operates in Papua to monitor and suppress the Papuan separatist movement, the Free Papua Movement (Organisasi Papua Merdeka, or OPM), which has been engaged in an armed struggle against the Indonesian government since the 1960s. The documents show, however, that the focus of Indonesian military operations in Papua goes far beyond the roughly 1,000 poorly armed rebels and includes a broad swathe of Papuan political, traditional, and religious leaders, and civil society groups who are spied on by a vast network of Papuan informants.
The documents show that the military believes it has more to fear from peaceful “political separatist” activity than from armed separatists. A 2007 Kopassus report states, “Current political activity in Papua is very dangerous compared to the activities of Papuan armed groups because their access already reaches abroad.”
The problem, as the documents make clear, is that pretty much anyone who challenges authority is automatically deemed a separatist. A couple of years ago I met a Papuan family from Jayapura, the provincial capital, who were pro-Indonesia. They told me how their son had taken a romantic stroll on a nearby beach with his girlfriend when they were set upon by eight naval officers, who beat him up and forced the pair to engage in humiliating sexual acts. The family tried to complain to the police and to the naval base to no avail. The youth’s cousin told me, “I am a Papuan woman and an Indonesian citizen. We are not separatists, but whenever anyone tries to stand up for their rights, they are called separatists – that’s how they silence us.”
The reports indicate that Kopassus believes nongovernmental organizations primarily work to discredit the Indonesian government and the armed forces by using the “human rights issue” to garner international condemnation of Indonesia’s military presence in Papua and to promote Papuan independence.
Human Rights Watch has long documented violations by Indonesian security forces in Papua. For years, the military denied the reports of human rights violations in Papua, even when faced with overwhelming evidence. This lack of accountability gives security forces a green light to commit abuses against the local population. However, the recent growth in cell phone video is making it more difficult to deny abuses.
Last year, a film uploaded to YouTube showed soldiers brutally torturing two farmers in Papua, kicking them, threatening one with a knife to his face, and repeatedly jabbing the other in the genitals with burning wood. A prolonged international outcry finally forced the military to take action. In the end, three soldiers got light sentences for “disobeying orders” rather than torture. It is unclear whether the military has discharged any of them. Two months earlier, soldiers from the same battalion shot and killed Rev. Kinderman Gire on the suspicion he was a separatist. At the trial, the defendants claimed Gire led them to believe he was a member of OPM and tried to grab a rifle from one of them, who then shot him in the chest. They dumped the body in a river, after trying to cut off his head. Last week a military tribunal convicted three soldiers, again only for “disobeying orders,” and sentenced them to six, seven and fifteen months in prison.
Indonesia’s military has heralded such light sentences for torture and killing as “appropriate.” Perhaps this is not surprising given a US Defense Department official characterized the prosecution of the video torture case as “progress.”
Last year, when resuming full military ties, then-US Defense Secretary Robert Gates described how Indonesia’s defense minister “publicly pledged to protect human rights and advance human rights accountability and committed to suspend from active duty military officials credibly accused of human rights abuses, remove from military service any member convicted of such abuses, and cooperate with the prosecution of any members of the military who have violated human rights.”
The revelations in the military documents don’t appear to have changed any thinking inside the Indonesian armed forces. Responding to recent articles about the documents, an Indonesian military spokesman told the Jakarta Post: “There is no such thing as a repressive or militant approach. What we do is always a welfare approach, where we help Papuans have better lives.”
And the old pattern of military denials continues. Where individual cases garner international attention, the Indonesian military has understood that all it needs to do to continue receiving US military funding is to slap soldiers on the wrist for “disobeying orders” rather than prosecute them for serious crimes. The US has conveyed multiple messages of disappointment to the Indonesian government and military on individual cases such as the video torture trial. But US unwillingness to impose significant consequences, such as suspending new military cooperation, tells the Indonesians and others that the US doesn’t insist on sticking to its standards.
The US should call on the Indonesian government to fully disclose all military tribunal cases involving alleged abuses against civilians, including prosecutions for “disobeying orders,” and provide transcripts to the public. Until the Indonesian government re-examines these cases, in line with the US Leahy law, which prevents the US from cooperating with abusive military units, the US government should not participate in joint endeavors with military personnel or units working in Papua. The US should also call on Indonesia’s military to stop viewing peaceful political activists as threats to national security and stop spying on them.
Both the US and Indonesia should recognize that people like Senator Leahy, who are named in the Papua military documents, were not seeking to challenge Indonesian sovereignty, but simply to defend the international standards for accountability that the Indonesian military is undermining.
Elaine Pearson is the deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. Follow Elaine Pearson onTwitter.
Related articles
- Comments on ICGs Hope and Hard Reality in Papua: (westpapuamedia.info)
- The Age: Independence at threat from enemy within (westpapuamedia.info)
- Elaine Pearson: Supporting Accountability, Not Separatism in Indonesia (huffingtonpost.com)
- How the Papuan people Continue to Unite in Resistance: Victor Yeimo Interview (westpapuamedia.info)
- AWPA: Time to rethink ties with Kopassus. (westpapuamedia.info)
Comments on ICGs Hope and Hard Reality in Papua:
Comments on
Hope and Hard Reality in Papua: An Update Briefing on the conflict in West Papua by the International Crisis Group (22 August 2011)
(ICG full PDF report available at:
http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/asia/south-east-asia/indonesia/B126-indonesia-hope-and-hard-reality-in-papua.aspx )
Jason MacLeod 23 August 2011
Introduction
The recent ICG report into conflict in West Papua, Hope and Hard Reality in Papua highlights the growing strength of the civilian based movement in Papua. It also points to contradictory developments. On the one hand there is an opening of political space, illustrated by the fact that the conference happened at all and that no topic was off the table. On the other hand, the report details ongoing violence in Puncak Jaya, demonstrating that the presence of the security forces only exacerbates violence as well as highlighting the enduring appeal of armed struggle by a small and hardcore group of Papuans. Hope and Hard Reality in Papua also outlines 44 “indicators of peace” developed during the conference. While still partial these indicators give tangible content to Papuan aspirations for freedom. This content echoes many of the demands made by Papuan youth, student, women’s groups, farmers, pastors, and Adat groups in recent years. Indicators like the “freedom of expression” and “the release of all political prisoners” bring into sharp focus the fact that Papua still remains an nondemocratic enclave of the Republic of Indonesia.
Summary of the report
The recent ICG report on West Papua, Hope and Hard Reality is structured in three sections: the peace conference held in Jayapura in early July 2011; an analysis of the recent spike in violence in the remote and rugged Puncak Jaya district in the highlands of West Papua; and, an evaluation of the extent to which a series of indicators developed during the peace conference could be used to resolve the conflict in Puncak Jaya. The report underscores a key policy recommendation currently sitting on the Cabinet Secretary desk – that the long-delayed new Unit to accelerate development in Papua, Unit Percepatan Pembangunan di Papua dan Papua Barat, known by its Indonesian acronym as UP4B, include a mandate to address political as well economic issues.
The report underscores an opportunity and threat. The opportunity is that there are some key high-level Indonesian allies, including advisors to the Indonesian government and a former Indonesian military officer, who understand that a political as well as economic solution to Papua’s problems is needed. The threat is two-fold. The first is that security operations continue in Papua. This is despite an extraordinary admission by Major-General (Ret.) TB Hassunuddin, deputy head of the Indonesian Government’s parliamentary Commission 1 responsible for security affairs, that all current operations to “hunt down OPM leaders are … illegal”. According to Hasunuddin this is because they do not carry the consent of parliament as stipulated by Law 34/2004 on the Indonesian Armed Forces. The General’s comments illustrate the lack of political will in Jakarta to rein-in the security forces in Papua. This last point relates to the second threat, summarised in the ICG report as “Jakarta’s indifference to indigenous Papuan concerns”.
The Papua Peace Conference and indicators of a peaceful Papua developed during the Conference
The Peace Conference was organised by the Jaringan Damai Papua or Papua Peace Network, a group organised by Dr. Neles Tebay or Pater (Father) Neles Tebay as he is known, and Muridan Widjojo, an Indonesian scholar with the Indonesian Institution of Sciences (LIPI) who was the editor of the Papua Road Map published in 2009. Tebay and Widjojo were previously involved in separate dialogue initiatives but have now decided to combine their efforts. The JDP itself is made up of key individuals, all members of different Papuan civil society groups, but attending as individuals not as representatives of their group or organisation. Both migrants and indigenous Papuans are members.
For me, three things stand out about the conference and the ICG’s summary report on the conference.
The first is that it happened at all. It was neither prevented from occurring by the military nor disrupted by protests. It was also attended by a senior minister of the Yudhuyono’s government, Djoko Sujanto, the Coordinating Minister for Politics and Law, and twenty senior bureaucrats from the various ministries that Sujanto coordinates. This in itself is a sign, albeit a small one, that the Indonesian president may be paying more attention to Papua.
Second, the conference clearly underscored Papuans desire for independence. This can be seen in the final declaration of the conference which outlined a criterion for negotiators and nominated five Papuan Diaspora negotiators, all from the Pro-Independence camp, as well as from an incident during the conference itself. When the Provincial Army Chief of Staff, Erfi Triassunu got up to speak he invited the participants – who were virtually all Papuans – to chant “Papua damai” (Peaceful Papua). Instead the crowd responded as one: “Papua Merdeka!” (Free Papua!). Perhaps not the response the General anticipated.
Third, although the report does not dwell on this, it does suggest that there are still key sectors of the Papuan population that are still not actively engaged in the struggle. These are Papuan politicians, the civil service (who the report acknowledges are engaging in a kind of passive noncooperation illustrated by the fact that in Puncak Jaya for instance, only 30 or an approximate 2000 strong workforce even show up for work); workers, particularly those in the resource extractive industries; and members of church congregations.
Fourth, and this is the most significant in my view, is that the conference produced a list of indicators of a peaceful Papua. Together these indicators are the clearest articulation of the “contents” of a New Papua that we have ever seen. Not only do they constitute a vision of tomorrow they may have important implications for the civil resistance movement. The ICG report argues that the indicators could be used to formulate policy direction for the central and provincial governments. The word “indicators” reflects the language of government and aid and development donors. However, many of the indicators mirror (and in some cases refine) an emerging set of campaign objectives that civil resistance leaders might organise around. In some cases, such as freeing political prisoners, Papuans they are already organising for change. Papuan activists could well use the “indicators” to pursue, and even set, the agenda for change.
Armed Struggle
The report also devotes significant attention to violent insurgency in the Puncak Jaya region by one of the few active units of the TPN-PB (Tentara Pembebasan Nasional di Papua Barat or the West Papuan National Liberation Army). Five things are worth highlighting from the report. First, Papuan guerrillas in Puncak Jaya, and elsewhere in West Papua are poorly armed. The report estimates that Goliat Tabuni’s group in Puncak Jaya has about 30 guns. This reflects the assessment of the armed struggle contained in the recently released Kopassus (Indonesian Special Forces) document leaked by the Sydney Morning Herald. Second, there are very low levels of participation in the armed struggle. Although virtually the entire indigenous population of Puncak Jaya has kinship connections with the TPN there are only a handful of active members. Third, the violence is not just one-sided or in response to Indonesian military attacks. Tabuni and his men, and in some cases other aspiring commanders also initiate attacks on the Indonesian military, not in direct response to Military violence, but to increase their own reputation and prestige. Fourth, Tabuni’s group itself is split into three leadership groups which are sometimes compete and clash with one another. This reflects the fractious state of the TPN elsewhere in Papua. Finally, the ICG report makes it very clear that violence in Puncak Jaya, some of which is also linked to inter-clan competition, is exacerbated by the presence of the security forces.
Theories of Change
Although it is not picked up in the report, Hope and Hard Reality in Papua underscores a battle of ideas underway in Papua. This discussion is essentially about how change (freedom) will be won. It is less a contest between armed struggle and peaceful ways of resolving the conflict. Despite the spike in violence (most of which was perpetrated by the security forces) there is little popular support for armed struggle. The contest is mostly between and within proponents of two different competing theories of change: those who believe dialogue, negotiation or other conventional political processes will secure Papuan aspirations for freedom and those who advocate mass mobilisation or civil resistance. The majority of Papuans still invest in the hope that conventional political processes – either diplomacy (by Papuan representatives of various resistance groups), an inclusive dialogue process of the kind envisioned by Tebay/Widjojo and the JDP, or a legal challenge to Indonesian government sovereignty in Papua – will be able to resolve the conflict. I don’t think there is any real indication that these acts of persuasion will compel Jakarta to sit at the table.
On the civil resistance side are Papuans who argue that a conventional political process is naïve. This group claims that Jakarta will only make key concessions when they are compelled to do through mass nonviolent disruptions that raise the political and economic costs of the status quo. Within the civil resistance camp there is also a subtle difference between those whose methods are based around street protests and those who are seeking to organise a much broader base and support them to be active through a much more diverse range of nonviolent tactics than demonstrations.
The fact that KNPB (Komite Nasional Papua Barat or the West Papua National Committee) organised a demonstration attended by thousands on 2 August in support of an conference about a legal challenge to the Act of Free Choice that was happening in Oxford at the same time, shows that there is growing understanding that a conventional political strategy needs a mass movement. Although, there are still widely held unrealistic expectations that dialogue and/or a legal strategy will bring about independence in the near future.
Then there is also tension around goals. The radical student and youth groups, WPNA (West Papua National Authority) and KNPB, as well as Benny Wenda in London (who heads up the International Lawyers for West Papua, the group who is spearheading the legal challenge) are pushing for a referendum. They see the JDP and calls for peaceful dialogue in opposition to the demand for a referendum. Despite these real differences and tensions the report (and recent events inside Papua) suggest that there is growing recognition that a mass movement and dialogue are not incompatible. Some are starting to say that civil resistance helps creates the conditions for dialogue. In fact the report seems to suggest that last year’s occupation of the Provincial Parliament in Jayapura helped widen the proposed mandate of the UP4B.
Allies
The ICG report also demonstrates that there are is a small but influential group of allies inside Indonesia who while not countenancing independence for Papua, do support real and significant political changes. In addition the report mentions but does not dwell on the fact that there are key non-Papuans inside Papua (who are members of the JDP) that support Papuan political goals.
Conclusion
The report illustrates the growing maturity of the civilian based movement inside Papua. The development of 44 indicators of a peaceful Papua around the themes of politics, law and human rights, economics and environment, security, and social-cultural rights all point to a closer linkage between civil resistance and conflict resolution approaches to change in Papua. The belief that civil resistance is not in conflict with but rather supports dialogue was made by Chris Waranussy, a prominent human rights lawyer in Papua. The most significant thing about the recent peace conference in Jayapura is that it has supported Papuans to more fully articulate the contents of freedom. It also underscores the mainstream Papuan desire for independence. In this sense the gulf between different positions in Jakarta and Jayapura, and the different perceptions of the problems in Papua, remains wide. A fact illustrated by what is going on in Puncak Jaya and the Indonesian military’s response.
Related articles
- Violence Continues in Papua, Soldier Murdered (westpapuamedia.info)
- Security measures escalate in Papua (westpapuamedia.info)
- AWPA: Time to rethink ties with Kopassus. (westpapuamedia.info)
- West Papua Report August 2011 (westpapuamedia.info)
- Indonesian Army shoot mother and 3 children in “crossfire” in Kalome, West Papua, as offensive escalates (westpapuamedia.info)
Melkianus Bleskadit sentenced to two years
JUBI, 19 August 2011
Melkianus Bleskadit was sentenced yesterday in Manokwari court to two
years for his role when the 14-star flag was raised.
A day earlier, the prosecutor asked for him to be sentenced to five
years. The prosecutor has announced that he will mount an appeal against
the verdict.
In a report made public by the human rights lawyer Yan Christian
Warimnussy it was stated that Melkianus was arrested along with Dance
Yenu for flying the 14-star flag to mark the anniversary of independence
for ‘West Melanesia ‘ on 14 December 2010.
In a comment on the verdict, Yan Christian Warinussy who was also a
member of the defence team, said that while the judges had taken a good
decision by limiting the punishment to the criminal element of the
incident, indicating that he was not willing to go as far as the
prosecutor, in the end his client had been given a much higher sentence.
According to past experience involving the case of Jacob Wanggai and his
colleagues, the judges had passed a shorter sentence which was
subsequently increased at the request of the prosecutor, resulting in a
far higher sentence.
He also said that the defendant had been held in a cell of the Manokwari
prosecutor at the Manokwari prison in breach of the law. He said that
both the judge as well as the chief prosecutor had obstructed his
client’s release to the moment when the high court judge could decide on
extending the period of the appeals detention which should have ended
on 19 August.
The three hours of freedom that his client should have enjoyed had been
denied him by the decisions of the prosecutor and the judge. Moreover,
there was a show of force when a company of police security officers as
well special intelligence personnel stood on guard round Bleskadit at
the office of the prosecutor. He said that the the lack of
professionalism by both of these institutions had resulted in his client
being deprived of his basic rights.
Related articles
- LP3BH report on the trial of five students in Manokwari (westpapuamedia.info)
- AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: Indonesia must end criminalization of peaceful political protests in Papua (westpapuamedia.info)
- Seven more Papuans facing charges of makar (westpapuamedia.info)
- West Papua: 5 Students Charged with Subversion for Raising 14-Star Flag || AK Rockefeller (aboriginalpress.blogspot.com)
ROAD TO FREEDOM IN JAYAPURA – Video
by Frengky Making
The rally organised by the National Committee for West Papua (KNPB) on August 2 2011 was led by Mako Tabuni from KNPB. The protesters were on the streets the whole day. There were more than 10,000 people, from Sentani, Jayapura as well as students from Abepura. The peaceful rally was organised to support the seminar by International Lawyer for West Papua (ILWP), initiated by Benny Wenda in London, the UK, which looked into the history of the 1969′s People’s Act of Free Choice (PEPERA).
Download Hi-Res / Screening Version (47.8 MB)
Download via BitTorrent (Seeders: 1)
07:05Anatomy of an Occupation: The Indonesian Military in West Papua
Full Report is available for download and distribution as a pdf Anatomy of an Occupation: The Indonesian Military in West Papua
and the Secret report is available Here
By Jim Elmslie and Camellia Webb-Gannon, with Peter King
Report for the West Papua Project at the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies (CPACS), The University of Sydney, August 2011
Executive Summary
This report deals with a series of Indonesian military documents that were passed to the West Papua Project (WPP) in early 2011.[1] The documents provide remarkable insights into how the Indonesian military (Tentara Nasional Indonesia – TNI), operates within the disputed territory of West Papua (disputed, that is, between the vast majority of Papuans and the Indonesian government), and how they view West Papuan civil society. The documents reveal the names and activities of Indonesian intelligence agents; describe how traditional Papuan communities are monitored; and include a detailed analysis of both the West Papuan armed guerrilla groups and the non-violent civil society organisations which promote self-determination. Identifying so many West Papuan leaders and others as “separatists”, these documents effectively show that support for independence is widespread and surprisingly well organised. West Papuans have long complained of living under an Indonesian military “occupation” and these documents go a long way to Anatomy of an Occupation: The Indonesian Military in West Papuasubstantiating this claim.
The authors of this report have sought to verify information contained in the documents where possible. Much of this information on individuals and Papuan organisations is already well known, although presented here more comprehensively in some respects than ever before. We can therefore be relatively confident that the documents are not fabricated or deliberately misleading, although they do contain inaccuracies, omissions and many obvious examples of false or misleading precision. Names of Indonesian intelligence agents, both Papuan and non-Papuan, are impossible to verify and have been left out of our report. We do believe, however, that the general modus operandi revealed in the documents is a fair representation of how the Indonesian military operates. As many diverse and disputed claims are made about the conflict in West Papua by the Indonesian and other governments, by international commentators and by the Papuans themselves, we believe that this information should be in the public sphere to increase understanding of this little-known, but intense, bitter and long-standing conflict.
The report is split into two sections. The first deals with the 97 slide PowerPoint presentation entitled, Anatomy of Papuan Separatists. The presentation itself can be viewed at http://sydney.edu.au/arts/peace_conflict/research/west_papua_project.shtml. This section acts as a running commentary on the slide show, explaining and contextualising what is an intriguing exposition of the West Papuan armed liberation movement and its non-violent civilian counterpart. The forensic details of the Anatomy leave the reader in no doubt as to the level of military scrutiny under which the Papuans live. It shows just how seriously the Indonesian forces take the threat of “separatism”, especially its attempts to reach out to an international audience. The presentation could accurately be renamed as an Anatomy of the Papuan Occupation.
The second section deals with an assortment of other leaked documents that flesh out the day-to-day reality of living under Indonesian occupation. In both images and text the daily tasks of security force members are outlined as they maintain a close surveillance on communities of traditional Papuans. Details of Indonesian agents – who they are, where they work, what information they can provide – are listed as small links in the heavy chain mesh of an occupation which has at its core the modern practice of “psychological warfare”, PSYOPS. This pernicious system of social control has created a pervasive atmosphere of terror amongst the Papuan population as their lives are manipulated by state actions and threatened with “black operations”. Unsolved, indeed uninvestigated, killings, beatings and rapes occur against a background of a rapidly changing demography as hundreds of thousands of non-Papuan Indonesians move into the province. Predominantly Muslim, the newcomers are adding another layer of tension and fear, as the Muslim-Christian divide widens – taking its cue from the threatened growth of radical Islam in Java and elsewhere.
PSYOPS, as practiced in West Papua, is analysed initially from a general perspective and then from the personal experience of several individual Papuans. As a tool of social control it has been effective in dividing the Papuan people, some of whom now form a Papuan elite that has prospered economically under the bureaucratic “reforms” enacted by the Indonesian government, particularly the creation of two provinces and some 23 new administrative regencies in Papua. However, these documents show that, despite PSYOPS and divide-and-rule administrative policies, there is a high degree of cohesion and unity amongst the West Papuan nationalist majority. Indeed, looking at the Papuan individuals identified in these documents it can be seen that West Papuan nationalism is spread throughout civil society, in the churches, youth groups, customary bodies and political organisations. Far from the desire for self-determination dying out, the younger generation of Papuan leaders is now stridently demanding the rights to which they are entitled by Indonesian law, albeit increasingly as a non-violent, civil resistance movement.
These documents show that Indonesian rule over West Papua can be characterised as an ongoing military/police occupation. Inevitably this involves the systematic infliction of human rights abuses on a civilian population. Our report concludes that Australia should not be co-operating as it does with the TNI elite special forces, Kopassus, because it directly implicates the Australian army and taxpayer in the suffering of the Papuan people. And all Australian military aid to Indonesia should be seriously reconsidered while the military dominated system of occupation persists in Papua. The political and administrative reforms that have benefited so much of Indonesia since 1998 need to be properly implemented in West Papua. Until then West Papua will remain a blight on Indonesia’s international reputation and a place of suffering for its indigenous Melanesian population.
[1] The West Papua Project, at the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, The University of Sydney, has operated since 2000 as an academic think tank and research center examining the conflict in West Papua between the indigenous Melanesian people and the Indonesian state and its security forces. During this period the WPP has held many conferences, workshops and briefings, and its affiliates have produced a wide range of publications including books, scholarly articles and reports.
Introduction
This report is based on a series of documents recently leaked into the public domain that relate to military and intelligence operations in West Papua.[1] The most important is entitled Anatomy of Papuan Separatists and it gives observers unprecedented insight into how the Indonesian army views the situation there. Organised as a confidential briefing document, presumably for senior Indonesian military, political and government figures, it clarifies a situation that is generally regarded as opaque. Other documents relate to the use of Papuan and non-Papuan intelligence agents by the TNI and efforts by soldiers to socialise with Papuan village communities (these documents are analysed in the second section of this report). While the Indonesian government bans foreign journalists and researchers from Papua’s two provinces, now confusingly named Papua and West Papua, in an attempt to block information on the situation from reaching the outside world, here is a case where the Indonesians themselves are providing a frank and comprehensive assessment. While undated, the Anatomy document’s reference to US President Barack Obama suggests it was written, or at least finished, sometime after his election on November 4, 2008.
Anatomy of Papuan Separatists is an extraordinary document in the form of an extended PowerPoint presentation. Produced by the TNI,[2] it is a systematic and detailed analysis of the West Papuan political landscape, mapping who the various actors are and where they fit into a larger picture. Almost every leading West Papuan political and military player is included in this analysis – leaving one with the distinct impression that there is no other game in town except “separatism”. In fact the goal for most of the West Papuan leaders in this analysis is independence, which implies that this is also the desired outcome for the overwhelming majority of the Papuan people. So this document is both a study in “separatism” and a blueprint for a military occupation meant to combat that separatism. Separatism is shown to be not a rare sentiment held by the few, but rather the glue which binds together the West Papuan ethnic and political consciousness. We are given a valuable insight into how West Papua and its Indonesian occupation actually work.
The Anatomy file comprises 97 slides and methodically works through the various ways in which the West Papuans confront the Indonesian state. In broad terms the conflict is split between military and political spheres, with some overlap. Both of these spheres are explored in remarkably frank detail. The military analysis of the “separatist” movement is the most detailed ever undertaken, or at least revealed publicly, and shows just how extensive the armed opposition to Indonesian rule is. The Anatomy document provides details of 31 armed groups of the TPN (Tentara Pembebasan Nasional –the National Liberation Army), the military wing of the OPM (Organisasi Papua Merdeka—the Free Papua Movement) that are spread right across the two provinces (Papua and Papua Barat) that constitute the region referred to collectively in this report as West Papua. Rather than being the ragtag bunch of malcontents – which the OPM/TPN are usually portrayed as — this Anatomy shows them to be a relatively cohesive and deeply entrenched resistance army, highly committed to achieving their goal of independence from Indonesia, even though the Anatomy often seems to imply that all the dozens of groups it identifies across a 40 year period are still functioning pretty much as when first identified.
Before proceeding with analysis of the document we have three general comments.
First, we wish to highlight the pervasiveness of the phenomenon of “separatism” as seen from the (Indonesian military) author’s point of view. Demands for dialogue; the “return” of Special Autonomy to Jakarta, and for demilitarisation, improved human rights, an end to discrimination, economic marginalisation and environmental devastation in West Papua — all amount to only “separatism” in the Anatomy. And separatism is viewed as a legitimate thing for the military to attack; separatists are enemies of the Indonesian state, and therefore enemies of the military and the police. There is no attempt to understand where this sentiment comes from, just to identify its existence to be targeted for destruction. That there are so many separatists does not seem to faze the author(s) of the Anatomy; just to reinforce his (their) sense of mission.
There is little discussion of those Papuans who are not separatists. There are undoubtedly Papuans who have thrown in their lot with Indonesia, one of whom is identified in the Anatomy, Franzalbert Joku. He is the only person of the hundreds listed who has “returned to Indonesia”. Joku is a well-known former independence activist who has given up the struggle as a hopeless cause and works hard to convince other “separatists” to do the same. Later in this report we will explore Joku’s views further as well as those of other prominent Papuans who have eschewed the struggle for freedom.
Second, it is noteworthy that there are so many “separatists” identified in the Anatomy, and that they include so many of the most prominent people from the three generations since the Indonesian takeover of Papua in 1962-3 is striking. While most outside observers dismiss the chance of achieving independence as remote if not impossible, given the power and determination of the Indonesian state and the comparative weakness of the Papuans, many Papuans do not. They are fully committed to the struggle. In fact these documents show that the younger generation, those in their 20s and 30s, are as committed as the older generations. Together the Papuans listed in this document represent most of the current leading figures in West Papuan society. The Anatomy shows how seriously the Indonesian state and military consider the threat of separatism, and indeed it places the people named under grave threat of targeted assassination. Some of them have indeed already been killed since the publication of the document (for instance OPM leader Kelly Kwalik). This has led some informed readers of the Anatomy to describe it as a “hit list” of people targeted for removal.
Thirdly, this document tells us how the Indonesian military views the West Papuan political structure. To an outside observer it is hard to grasp how all the multiple military, social and political Papuan groups relate to each other. Here this complex situation is laid out with surprising clarity: there are traceable lines of authority and engagement — even between various “factions” and geographically isolated groups. One reason that Jakarta has given for refusing to negotiate with the West Papuans over the myriad problems that beset the province is that “we do not know who to negotiate with”.[3] This document undermines that pretext.
[1] These documents have been referred to in a blog site on the internet dated January 30, 2011 at www.nokenlama.blogspot.com/2011/01/kisah-tentang-kekerasan-seksual.html in an entry entitled “Story About Sexual Violence in West Papua [By] Army Personnel”, which refers to “an article titled An Anatomy of Separatists in Papua, [by] Maj. D. Arm Fence”. The article was published by the Secretariat for Justice and Peace, Archdiocese Merauke, Papua. Some others of these documents have been quoted previously (see allannairn.com), although many appear to be new, or at least to have received no public analysis; hence this report.
[2] The author of the Anatomy document is named as Major Arm Fence D Marani.
[3] Private conversation with senior Indonesian officials accompanying President Yudhoyono on his visit to Australia, Sydney University, 8 March, 2010.
Related articles
- SMH: Under the long arm of Indonesian intelligence (westpapuamedia.info)
JUBI: Conditions in Keerom very bad
JUBI, 1 August 2011
Conditions in Keerom are very bad
The Coalition for Justice, the Rule of Law, Human Rights and Public Service (K2PH2P2) has expressed its concern about conditions in the district of Keerom during the first months of this year.
It said that the governing body is far from being capable, responsive and accommodative. Government workers are largely incapable and unresponsive and lacking in discipline in their work. In a press release issued on 1 August in Abepura, a group of leaders including church leaders, civil society leaders and human rights activists expressed their fear that development in the district which was intended for transmigrants is stagnant.
‘Discipline in the civil service is very bad. They live in Jayapura, arrive in their offices at 9am and go home soon afterwards, which means that the service they provide is very bad,’ said Bonefasius A. Muenda of the Keerom Social Institution. Most of them live in Jayapura and arrive in their offices quite late in the morning. Even worse, some of the civil servants only go to their offices twice or three times a week. For the rest of the time, they stay at home.
But there are other problems as well, according to the Coalition. In education for example, Pastor John Jonga, a leader of the Catholic Church in Keerom, said that hundreds of children receive no attention at all because there are no teachers. He said this was more likely to be thousands of children, not hundreds. Ironically, billions of rupiahs are allocated to education but the children are waiting for their teachers.
‘In Towe Hitam, 36 members of the armed forces are paid for by the government but there are no teachers. This is a crime,’ said Pastor Jonga who is a recipient of the Yap Thien (Hien) award.
But that is not all. Medical facilities are worryingly poor in this new district that was set up just a few years ago. Another pastor, Eddy Togotly was of the opinion that there is no serious intention on the part of the government to develop Keerom. ‘People dont come to Keerom to help with development. On the contrary.’
Meanwhile, the chairman of commission A of the provincial legislative assembly, Yosep Turot, said that some officials are so far from adequate that they should be sacked from their jobs. He said that there are a number of reasons for this, including the purchase and sale of certificates among officials which has an impact on the performance of the government.
In view of all this, the Coalition is calling for the appointment of a new local government chief who should be credible, intelligent, creative and concerned about the conditions of the people. And they say that the new chief should pay full attention to the performance of his staff so as to ensure that they work for the development of Keerom and not for their personal interests.’
Related articles
- West Papua’s Indigenous People Treated like Stepchildren – Newcomers (transmigrants/pendatangs-MUKRAT JAWA) treated like kings) (aboriginalpress.blogspot.com)
- MRP dualism threatens the existence of the Papuan people (westpapuamedia.info)
- Hana Hikoyabi formally challenges interior minister for rejecting her membership of the MRP (westpapuamedia.info)
Photo Report: Mass ralllies show Papuans refuse to accept Indonesian Occupation
by Westpapuamedia.info sources
Social Media across West Papua is abuzz with declarations of relief and pride for the successful and peaceful mass mobilisations called by the West Papua National Committee (KNPB) to support the “West Papua: Road to Freedom” conference in in Oxford UK, on August 2. The Photo Galleries below demonstrate unequivocally the scale of Papuan opposition to Indonesian rule.
Despite threats of heavy-handed Indonesian security force actions preventing free expression, attempts by the army to blocakade demonstrators, and unexplained act of violence suspected by many to be the work of Special Forces prior to mobilsations, tens of thousands of people across Papua took to the streets to demand their universal human rights to self -determination and a Referendum on the future of Papua. Though vibrant and very loud, the rallies across Papua reportedly proceeded without any violence or provocations from security forces or proxies.
In Wamena in the Baliem Valley, almost 17,000 people to a mass gathering that saw scenes of exuberance, singing and dancing. After several hours of speeches and music, demonstrators peacefully dispersed.
In Sarmi, Yakuhimo and Keerom, reports are filtering out that flagraising ceremonies were held successfully without incident.
The slideshow below shows the August 2 actions in (in this order) Abepura, Waena and Wamena; and also those of the weak counter-demonstration of Barisan Merah Putih militias funded by the Indonesian special forces, Kopassus, that was held close to the DPRP, or (Papua Province People’s Representative Council).
Related articles
- West Papua – Indon Security Forces Fail in Attempt to Block Access for Demonstrations Across Papua, Militias on Streets in Jayapura (westpapuamedia.info)
- Differing responses to ILWP meeting on 2 August (westpapuamedia.info)
- Breaking News: 4 shot dead in Nafri, West Papua (westpapuamedia.info)
- Indonesian Army shoot mother and 3 children in “crossfire” in Kalome, West Papua, as offensive escalates (westpapuamedia.info)
- People’s Liberation Party slams activist’s arrest at Papuan independence demo (westpapuamedia.info)
WEST PAPUA – INDON SECURITY FORCES FAIL TO BLOCK ACCESS FOR DEMONSTRATIONS ACROSS PAPUA, MILITIAS ON STREETS IN JAYAPURA
by Nick Chesterfield, westpapuamedia.info
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
Jayapura, 1340: The streets of several centres across West Papua are being blockaded today by heavily armed Indonesian security forces in an attempt to prevent a planned gathering of tens of thousands of protestors who are demanding a Referendum on the future of the province.
However, thousands of Papuans have reportedly ignored the strong military presence and are marching the streets of Jayapura, paralyzing the provincial capital with their huge numbers.
The protests, called by the West Papua National Committee (KNPB) and actively supported by the entirety of pro-independence movement, are being held to demonstrate both opposition to Indonesian rule and to the Indonesian-run dialogue process, in favour of legitimate internationally-mediated dialogue that takes into account the wishes of West Papuan people. The demonstrations are demanding a Referendum as the only lasting and credible solution to determine the future of Papua for Papuans.
Outside Jayapura, protests are also being held in Wamena, Biak, Nabire, Manokwari, Paniai, and Timika.
West Papua Media stringers on the ground in Abepura are reporting that the demonstrations outside the main Post Office were being blocked by hundreds of heavily armed riot police and soldiers. This is despite official permits being issued by the Jayapura police for the demonstration to proceed without hindrance.
At 10am local time, three truckloads of soldiers and BRIMOB riot police then decamped and headed to Waena to intercept a long march of several thousand people who were attempting to join together with the Abepura march and then head to Jayapura, in information conveyed to West Papua Media by Daniel Wenda, Secretary General of KNPB. It is unknown at time of writing whether the march has pushed through the security force blockade or if any casualties or arrests have been sustained.
Local human rights sources have reported that a recent spate of violent acts may have succeeded in keeping away crowds of over 10,000 people, with one person stabbed and wounded by a militiaman at a pre-rally gathering in Angkasapura. However in news just to hand, organisers of the rally are reporting that security forces have relented and several thousand people have now successfully joined the demonstration, which is continuing to grow.
With tensions extremely high after the violence, the organisers of today’s rallies across Papua have been at pains to ensure that no symbolic traditional weapons be brought to the gatherings, and have worked with the Dewan Adat Papua to deploy hundreds of peacekeepers from the uniformed Community Security Force of Petapa, or The Guardians of the Land of Papua.
Telephone communication to Jayapura has been sporadic with many calls being cut off and SMS communication delayed, making confirmation of events difficult. It is unclear if the security forces are currently preventing West Papuan people from actively communicating to the outside world.
Reports are filtering through that other political actions are occuring throughout Papua simultaneously with the mass protests, with the KNPB suggesting that those who could not make it engage in innovative and non-violent economic disruption actions, such as strikes by ojek drivers, street vendors and bus drivers.
Independence activists are also reporting that members of two pro-Indonesian militias — Besar Merah Putih and Aswain (headed by Euricio Guterres) — have been deployed widely across the Jayapura area in conjunction with security forces.
Witnesses reported that late last night, a PELNI ship suspiciously landed 92 unfamiliar men at the main Jayapura dock, who are widely believed by activists to be members of Kopassus special forces in plain clothes. Activist surveillance of military facilities has indicated that special forces officers have not been seen at regular barracks for the past three days at least.
Suspicions have also been cast on unidentified forces responsible for a spate of violent incidents prior to the nonviolent mobilisations, who are believed to be connected to the Indonesian security forces, in what many observers see as an attempt by the security forces to spread fear, panic and division among the demonstrators to prevent the protests going ahead.
In the early hours of Tuesday morning, an arson attack on the Rectorate of the Cenderawasih University, Abepura, was foiled by Papuan students. The fire was detected before it took hold by alert from student security and was quickly extinguished.
After attacks yesterday by unknown assailants on Indonesian transmigrants in Nafri, Abepura, sources are reporting that one person has been killed and an unknown number injured in another attack in Koya, where SMS reports from credible local sources have described several incidents involving shootings and stabbings.
The Indonesian military has long had a policy of using civilian proxies and plain-clothes agents to carry out acts of violence to provoke civil resistance movements into self-defence. This has often been used as a pretext to engage in a security crackdown, which reinforces military dominance over the region.
Elsewhere in Papua, the mass rally also being held simultaneously in Manokwari was prohibited by security force, according to organisers from the KNPB. However negotiations succeeded in Indonesian security forces relenting, and the rally is currently ongoing with several thousand people participating. This rally marched from the office of Dewan Adat Papua, and is currently outside the Department of Information in Sanggeng. The atmosphere is described as relaxed.
West Papua Media is monitoring events closely, and will provided updates on the situation throughout the day.
MEDIA NOTE: CONTACTS FOR SPOKESPEOPLE AND STRINGER ON THE GROUND ARE AVAILABLE. PLEASE CONTACT +61450079106 or editor<@>westpapuamedia.info
Related articles
- House of Lords question on West Papua (westpapuamedia.info)
- Differing responses to ILWP meeting on 2 August (westpapuamedia.info)
- Sorry: Indon Army Backs Down Over Threats (westpapuamedia.info)
- Indonesian Army shoot mother and 3 children in “crossfire” in Kalome, West Papua, as offensive escalates (westpapuamedia.info)
- Breaking News: 4 shot dead in Nafri, West Papua (westpapuamedia.info)
Papuan students demonstrate outside UNCEN, Jayapura
Bintang Papua, 30 June 2011
An announcement on Thursday about the selection of students at the
state university led to a demonstration being held by students who also
blocked off the Cenderawasih university campus in Waena. The entry to
the campus was blocked off while a small bonfire was burning in the
middles of the road. The demo was organised by the chairman of the
Students Association of Tolikara, supported by students of the faculty
of law at the university.
Speeches were made and leaflets were stuck on the walls, with demands to
the rector of the university.
One of the leaflets said: ‘Why is it that year after year, indigenous
Papuans account for less than 20 percent of the total while the other 80
percent are non-Papuans?
‘We are asking the rector to account for this, bearing in mind an
earlier promise that Papuans would account for 80 percent,’ said Terius
Wakor, co-ordinator of the action. This was a promise made by the rector
of UNCEN, Prof Dr B Kambuya.
‘We indigenous Papuan students feel very disappointed about this
because the rector promised that priority would be given to indigenous
Papuans with 80 percent of the places. Yet what has happened is that
only 5 percent of the Papuans were accepted into the university.’
Another of the students, Thomas CH Syufi, who also took part in the
demo, said: ‘We as representatives of the Executive Board of the
Students, the BEM of the Faculty of Law, strongly support the views of
our colleagues.’
Following the announcement about the students who were selected, he said
that they hoped that the rector would take account of the views of the
indigenous Papuan students, in view of what the rector promised last
year. ‘We very much hope that the rector will take some action with
regard to the Papuan students who did not pass the selection test. He
suggested that there should be another round of testing for a second
group of students to be accepted to the university.
Meanwhile the deputy rector said that while no promises had been made,
there had been a commitment to increase the percentage of indigenous
Papuan students. He said that at this level (the SNMPTN), it was
difficult to have an effect on the selection of students. He told
Bintang Papua that not enough Papuans were available from the IPS, and
very few had registered with the IPA programme.
[Apologies for not knowing what these initials stand for. TAPOL]
Related articles
- MRP dualism threatens the existence of the Papuan people (westpapuamedia.info)
- Seven more Papuans facing charges of makar (westpapuamedia.info)
Students press for action against widespread corruption in Papua
Students urge DPRP to adopt a regulation on combating corruption
Jayapura: Papua is a veritable paradise for people who corrupt the people’s money while a number of top-level officials behave as if they are beyond the law,’ said Thomas Sugi, chairman of the Students Executive Board of the Faculty of Law at Cenderawasih University. He was speaking at a demonstration of youth and students outside the DPRP – Papua Provincial Legislative Assembly.
The students urged the DPRP to draft a regulation, known as a Perdasi, dealing with corruption and stamping it out. It has been estimated that as much as Rp. 28 trillion of OTSUS – special autonomy – funds were embezzled during the eight years from 2002 – 2010 following the adoption of the OTSUS law, according to the findings of the auditing body, BPK published on 18 April 2011.
Sugi said he hoped that such a regulation would act as a dis-incentive for officials of the province who were thinking of embezzling money that belonged to the people. He said that the students fully support comments made about this problem on a number of occasions by the chief of police of the province, Drs Bekto Suprapto.
But he added that, should the law enforcement agency – the police – be shown to be seeking to protect the corruptors, then they would press for the adoption of a non-confidence motion in the police chief for failing to keep his promise.
On the same occasion, the chief of police of Jayapura, AKBP Imam Setiawan SIK who had been pressed to support efforts to stamp out corruption in Papua declared that the aims of the demonstration were an inspiration to the law enforcement agencies. He said that they would act with all speed via the judiciary in cases where people in the community alleged that corruption had occurred.and would make regular reports to the general public on the matter.
‘The chief of police of the province also called on local police chiefs at the sub-district level to report at least three cases of corruption a year that were under investigation..’
And for the current year, he said, we would call for at least five cases to be handled.
Related articles
- DPRP condemned for failing to keep its promises (westpapuamedia.info)
- West Papuans in KRPBK determined to reject OTSUS (westpapuamedia.info)
- MRP dualism threatens the existence of the Papuan people (westpapuamedia.info)
