JUBI, 26 January 2012Three political prisoners from Papua , who were arrested for their alleged involvement in the case of the assault on the ammunitions dump of Kodim 1702, Wamena on 4 April 2003, are now ill. Their names are: Enos Lokobai, Jefrai Murib and Numbunggan Telenggen.
Wirya, the co-ordinator of the NGO Foker in Biak Numbir, said that Enos Lokobal and his colleagues have been suffering from lumbago and have been taken to hospital for treatment but they are still in pain.
According to Wirya, Jafrai Murib went to hospital to be treated for malaria. [Several types of malaria are mentioned here.] As a result of his condition, he has become very pale. Apok Lakobal has been ill since November last year. His right side is paralysed and he is unable to move; the doctor at the hospital said that he has had a stroke.
After the ammunitions dump was attacked, Enos Lakobal was sentenced to fifteen years, while Jafrai Murib and Numbangga were given life sentences.
[This has been abridged in translation owing to our inability to identify some of the illnesses mentioned in the article. TAPOL]
In the days before the special autonomy law for Papua (OTSUS), identity politics in Papua was focussed primarily on culture. It was his awareness of the richness of Papuan culture that encouraged Arnold Ap to set up his Mambesak group in the 1970s. [Not to mention the fact that he paid with his life for his activities.]
Brother Budi Hernawan, a human rights activist, said that the identity politics movement had made some progress and was in the process of further development. ‘In fact,’ he said, ‘there are certain impacts of the inconsistency of the central government’s attitude towards the identity politics movement among the Papuans.’
He said that Papuan identity politics emerged alongside the Indonesian identity politics movement in the 1940s. But the way of defining Papuans referred to their tendency to being slender in build, dark skinned and with fuzzy curly hair as part of the Melanesian race; this led to the stagnation of this process. At the core of the issue is the interaction between cultural and social issues, according to Brother Budi.
Cressida Hayes writes, in the 2007 Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, that identity politics has a far broader definition and the theory has a far broader definition with regard to injustices that are encountered by people in certain social groups.
Rather than their being organised on the basis of ideology or party affiliation, identity politics is related to the group’s identity and of its not being marginalised as a group as well as the question of belonging to the group in a much broader sense.
Demographically speaking, Papuans are no longer dominant in the land of Papua. This has been reinforced by the role of capital and limitations within the political sphere. While procedures are set in place to ensure that the head of region is an indigenous Papuan, no affirmative action has been taken by any legislative body to protect the interests of the indigenous Papuan people.
Apart from this, he said, Jakarta always bases its policies on economics and politics.The result is that there has been no comprehensive or ‘calm’ definition. ‘The word “calm” is used here in the sense that the Dewan Adat Papua should be able to draft a definition of Papua-ness without being accused of being separatist or accused of subversion.’
Back in the days of President Abdurrachman Wahid, the space being given to identity politics was broadening. Gus Dur, as he was affectionately known, granted permission for the Morning Star flag to be flown, which is regarded by Papuans as a cultural symbol, while at the same time stipulating that it should be held ten centimetres lower that the Red-and-White flag. But this has never been backed up by any government regulation.