Category: News alert

Key Findings of the Biak Massacre Citizens Tribunal

http://www.biak-tribunal.orgBiak Massacre Citizens Tribunal

WaterTowerCrop1

December 16, 2013

Key Findings

  1. 1.      The massacre followed a flag-raising led by Filep Karma, an Amnesty International Prisoner of Conscience

Filep Karma testified at the tribunal via prerecorded video since he is currently in prison.  He told the tribunal: “In my oratory [at the flag-raising] I said that Papuans must fight peacefully.” “The flag appeared on the top of the tower on July 2, 1998, at about 5:00 a.m. Some seventy-five people gathered beneath it, shouting freedom slogans, singing songs and dancing traditional dances” (Human Rights Watch 1998: 6).

At 2:30 in the afternoon of July 2 “a joint police and military operation attempted to disperse the crowd at the base of the water tower.  They launched canisters of tear gas into the crowd with no apparent effect.  When a low-ranking police officer, a second-class sergeant, beat an elderly demonstrator named Thonci Wabiser, the crowd spontaneously retaliated, demolishing a truck belonging to Indonesian security forces” (Kirksey 2012: 44).  A standoff ensued for days.

 

  1. 2.      Local and regional officials were involved in the planning of the attack

Tineke Rumakabu testified that two officers of the Indonesian security forces were at the water tower on July 3rd.  These commanders—namely Colonel Agus Hedyanto, who was Biak Military Commander (Dandim) and Colonel Johnny Rori, the Biak Police Commander (Kapolres)—negotiated with the crowd and asked that the flag be lowered.  These same commanders were later involved in planning the attack.  “At 1:00 a.m. on July 4, the local military brought nine village heads together to discuss a strategy for attack, and both the subdistrict head (camat) and the subdistrict military commander told the village heads that each man was responsible for bringing thirty men into the city.” (Human Rights Watch 1998: 8).

Octovianus Mote, former Bureau Chief of the Kompas daily newspaper, gave testimony based on his interviews of regional military and police commanders in July 1998.  Major General Amir Sembiring, the Regional Military Commander (Pangdam Trikora), was in a direct command and control position during the attack.  According to direct evidence tendered by Mr. Mote to the Tribunal, Sembiring “gave permission to conduct the attack.”  Mr. Mote also corroborated reports that Colonel Agus Hedyanto, who was associated with the Special Forces and who served in East Timor, was the key local official involved in Biak.  “This was a very well-organized military attack, you know police, navy, and armed forces.  All of them organized the attacking of civilians,” continued Mr. Mote.  Brigadier General Hotman Siagian, the Regional Police Commander (Kapolda IrJa), was quoted by Antara news agency as saying “the police had ‘tolerated’ the actions of the Biak group since July 2 and finally had to order a crackdown” on July 6th (Prakarsa 1998).  Vice Admiral Freddy Numberi, who was then Governor and is currently Indonesia’s Minister of Transportation and Communications, described the victims a members of a “separatist movement that is headed towards treason” (Suara Pembaruan Daily, 8 July 1998).  General Wiranto, Commander of Indonesia’s Armed Forces, told reporters when asked about the massacre: “If there is a power that raises a flag, and it is not the Red and White flag [of Indonesia], then this is a betrayal of the military and of the entire nation.  This constitutes a betrayal and this is what we must stop!” (Suara Pembaruan Daily, 7 July 1998, punctuation in original).

  1. 3.      Scores of unarmed civilians were killed, buried in mass graves, and dumped at sea

A video testimony, by a woman named “Sarah”, described how the security forces initially surrounded the protestors in a giant letter U.  “The military and the police were lined up from the police compound around to the Inpress market.  The mobile brigade police (Brimob) that had flown in from Ambon were stationed at the petrol station.  Navy troops were down at the harbor.”  She describes how they were all shooting, “from four directions,” including the sea.

One woman, who testified to the Tribunal on condition of anonymity, described the first moments of the attack at dawn on July 6th: “The army and police were everywhere.  Bullets were raining down.  The sky was on fire.  We could hear them shooting people at the tower.”

Another witness, who testified under the pseudonym Raymond, described how he rushed to the water tower along with scores of other civilians as the shooting began.  After watching as many women and men were gunned down, Raymond was herded with other survivors towards the harbor.  He described how he was forced to stare at the sun, kneel in gravel for hours, along with dozens of others.

Sarah gave corroborating testimony: “My family and others were directed down to the harbor…We followed the other families with our hands up over our heads.  You could feel the bullets starting to fly over our heads…I could see so many children who had been killed.  They were shot on the wharf.  They died right there.”  Shortly after she arrived at the wharf, she overheard a Sergeant shouting out to the commander of a navy vessel: “Dock the ship!  Dock the ship!  Carry these people!”  She also overheard the reply from the captain: “I cannot dock, the ship is full of bodies.”  Sarah said that two ships then went out to sea.  “They were there at the harbor in the morning, there to take the bodies away.”  Later on “in front of the wharf a blue truck pulled up and took 28 bodies away,” Sarah said.  “I was sitting and counting, silently.  People who they had shot, they threw their bodies on the truck.  Later another container truck came in and took more bodies away.  We don’t know where they were taken.”

Ferry Marisan, Director of the human rights organization ELS-HAM Papua, investigated the killings in the weeks after the massacre and was a lead author of the subsequent report, “Names Without Graves, Graves Without Names.”  Mr. Marisan described how a fisherman first encountered dead bodies in the sea, off shore of Biak, on July 10th, four days after the massacre: “The fishermen discovered four bodies floating, but these fishermen were scared to take the bodies on shore…The bodies were mutilated, some of them lost their legs or their genitals were not there.  They were broken bodies. These bodies were found in the eastern part of Biak, but also in the western part of Biak people found other bodies.”  Mr. Marisan also gave direct testimony about a body he helped recover: “Near Biak city, just around the park, we found a female body without a head and genitals that was badly bruised and broken, damaged.  Another body we found was just a boy from junior high in his uniform.  Most bodies we found were badly damaged.  Either they lost their legs, the heads or their genitals.”

  1. 4.      People were beaten, tortured, arbitrarily detained, sexually abused, and executed

Raymond presented testimony about indiscriminate beatings by police at the harbor.  He was taken with six truckloads of people to the regional police station (POLRES).  Fourteen people were crammed with Raymond into a cell.  Raymond was detained for two weeks and in the middle of the night guards routinely doused him with water during his detention.

Statements from Tineke Rumakabu, describe graphic scenes of sexual violence and torture after she was detained by Indonesian forces.  Mrs. Rumakabu described how she was tossed into a yellow truck on the morning of July 6, on top of people who were already dead or seriously wounded.  She was then taken to the military compound (KODIM).  Mrs. Rumakabu showed the Tribunal scars on her arms and described what was done to her while she was blindfolded and cuffed: “They cut my arm with a sharp bayonet and then they poured acid. When I screamed they burnt me with cigarettes.”

The blindfold was later removed and she was stripped naked in a room with twelve other women and girls.  “Then I saw a man [a soldier] showing me a little knife, the one that you use to shave, and he said ‘We are going to use this to cut off your vaginas, from above and below, and from the left to the right.’”  “I saw a little girl and they raped her and she died,” Mrs. Rumakabu told the Tribunal. “All over the place it was blood everywhere because women, their vaginas and clitoris’ had been cut out, and they had been raped many, many times.”  One of the women in detention, Marta Dimara was a friend of Mrs. Rumakabu.  “Martha said, ‘I would rather be killed than you rape me.’ They put a bayonet in her neck and then her vagina and also cut off her breasts and beheaded her.”  Mrs. Rumakabu told the Tribunal: “I was also tortured, a lit candle was penetrated inside me, they cut off my clitoris and they raped me.”  Out of the twelve women in detention with her, she reported: “Eight women were killed and four of us stayed alive.”


 

  1. 5.      Weaponry and equipment from international donors was used

At least two Navy ships were involved in the attack:

KRI Teluk Berau (534), Type 108. Source: Human Rights Watch Report, page 9 and corroborated by Eben Kirksey in a 2003 interview with an eyewitness. This ship belonged to the former German Democratic Republic (East Germany) and was manufactured in 1977 by VEB Peenewerft in Wolgast.  It was purchased, along with 12 other units of the same type, by the Indonesian Navy and transferred on August 25th 1993.  Formerly named the GDR Eberswalde-Finow (634), this ship was 90.7 meters long and weighed 1,900 tons.  It was used as an amphibious landing ship by the Indonesian marines (Marinir TNI AL).  The KRI Teluk Berau was armed with “a double barrel cannon with a caliber of 37 millimeters, a Bofors 40mm anti-aircraft gun and multipurpose autocannon, and two double barrel cannons with a caliber of 25 millimeters.”  (Source: Koramatim 2012)[i]

KRI Kakap (811), Source: Eben Kirksey’s photograph from July 6th, 1998.

The KRI Kakap-811 is a Fast Patrol Boat that was manufactured by PT. Pal Indonesia and has been in service since 1988.  It is armed with a Bofors 40mm and 20mm anti-aircraft guns and multipurpose autocannons as well as 12.7 mm machine guns.  This ship can carry one helicopter (Source: Koramatim 2013).

Sources Cited

Human Rights Watch (1998) “Indonesia: Human Rights and Pro-Independence Actions in Irian Jaya” Vol 10, No. 8 (C)

Kirksey, Eben (2013) Freedom in Entangled Worlds: West Papua and the Global Architecture of Power (Durham: Duke University Press).

Koarmatim (2012) “KRI Teluk Berau-534 Mengakhiri Pengabdiannya,” Available on-line: http://koarmatim.tnial.mil.id.  Updated: 28 September, 2012, 11:34.  Accessed: 12 November, 2013, 12:53

Koarmatim (2013) “KRI Kakap-811 Siap Amankan Perairan Perbatasan RI-Philipina,” Available on-line: http://koarmatim.tnial.mil.id.  Updated: 11 November, 2013, 13:51.  Accessed: 25 November, 2013, 23:18.

Prakarsa, Patrisia (1998) “Indonesian Troops Wound 24 in Irian Jaya Shooting” Agence France Presse, July 6.

Suara Pembaruan Daily (1998) “Menhankam/Pangab Jenderal TNI Wiranto: Pengibaran Bendera Bukan Merah-Putih Tindakan Makar” Suara Pembaruan Daily, 7 July.

Suara Pembaruan Daily (1998) “Akibat Kerusuhan di Irja” Suara Pembaruan Daily, 8 July.

Related articles
2

POLICE ACCUSED OF USING OTHER PRISONERS FOR THE ILL-TREATMENT OF YASON NGELIA

From our partners at Tabloid Jubi

by Benny Mawel

December 15, 2013

 

Aksi Pengalangan Dana Pegobatan Yazon
Raising money for treatment for Yazon Ngelia (Photo:Jubi/Mawel)

 

Jayapura,15/11— The Student Representation Council of the Politics and Civil Faculty at Cenderawasih University (DPM-FISIP-UNCEN) harshly condemns the parties responsiblefor  the imprisonment of Yason Ngelia, Chairman of the Executive Student Body (BEM) of the FISIP department, in Jayapura. Yason’s current condition brings a flood of disappointment as he is not in a good (physical) state as a result of the imprisonment.

The parties responsible for the imprisonment of Yason are the Papuan Governor and the Papua People Assembly.  The Cenderawasih University, with the involvement of 29 lecturers, have written an academic draft of the Special Autonomy Plus for Papua (or called for a Special Autonomy Papuan Government (for Papuans to run the provincial government). However, an individual student has reported he was physically abused by Yason which led to his arrest.

The recognition of the abuse against the student is the reason police have detained Yason, which led to the refusal of the students’ draft Otsus Plus.  Yason’s struggles to protect Papuan People from murder is systematically criminalised by the government through the acts of the police.

“The rector does not yet appear to be handling this problem,” said Septi Medoga, the head of the Student Representation Council of FISIP at Cenderawasih University to a reporter in front of the university gate in Waena-Abepura in Jayapura. (12/12)

The individual who claimed to be a victim of abuse from Yason, according to Septi, has never wanted to meet with members of BEM FISIP who want to solve this problem internally. “The student doesn’t want to meet with us.” He said.

Until today, according to Septi, Yason’s physical condition is declining rapidly as a result of his incarceration. “The police are using three other prisoners to beat Yason. His right temple has ruptured, his cheeks are bruised, his bones are broken and his back has been kicked hard,” said Septi, who spoke with Yason when he visited him in jail. This beating occurred on 20th November 2013 in the detention room of the police station in Jayapura.

Yason’s condition is rapidly deteriorating and he has not yet received any medical treatment. “We assess this to be neglect from the police, the e university, and of those who claim to be a victim of abuse from Yason, those who have dragged him behind bars” said Septi.

Because of this situation, Septi has taken the initiative to lead his friends to raise funds for the medical treatment Yason needs. “We will give the funds raised to Yason to give him the medical treatment he needs.” Early demonstrations occurred in front of the Cenderawasih University gates on Thursday. (12/12)

The fundraising will go from Monday (16/12) and will be placed at various central locations, like Expo taxi terminal, Abe Circle, and other universities in Jayapura.

The right to medical treatment is a fundamental human right for Yason, regardless of his status as a suspect. Septi is urging the Papua Emergency Health Unit (UP2KP) to take a step towards helping Yason. “We ask for Dr Alo Giyai to lend a hand to check Yason’s condition” he said.

When we asked about Yason’s release, Septi claims the head of BEM FISIP should be freed today, but the reason why not is still unclear. “The power of the law to send a letter of suspending the detention on 24th November, then until today there is still no reply from the police” he said.

Meanwhile, Pontius, the coordinator of fundraising for Yason’s medical treatment, hopes his activist friends from GEMPAR will stop demonstrations demanding for Yason’s freedom by blocking the gates of the universities, because this will slow down the process for his release. “Friends, please demonstrate without blocking the gates to campus, if they are kept shut, Yason’s release will take longer” he said.

This is definitely an internal problem that only the rector has no intention of solving a problem as trivial as this. “I am amazed with us having this institution. This institution has the authority to solve this problem alone, however the rector is hiding from it” said Pontius.

Editor : Victor Mambor

Translated by West Papua Media Translation team

Related articles
1

Warinussy: More makar cases in Papua

Comment by Yan Christian Warinussy, senior lawyer in West Papua, recipient of the John Humphreys Freedom Award, 2005
December 13, 2013

The latest treason verdict against seven West Papuans is yet another example of the serious human rights situation in West Papuan, in particular with regard to the right to freedom of expression. The seven men were headed by Isak Kalaiban.

Based on the facts revealed during the course of the trial, it is clear that there was a plan between the accused to freely give expression to their views in a way that is based on the rule of law.
This occurred on 1 May 2013 after Isak and his colleagues brought the families of the accused together on the previous day at their home  in Aimas-Sorong. While they were meeting together,  a police patrol in Sorong began to opened fire at the group of people, as a result of which four people were killed or wounded.
At the trial, the men were charged with treason (makar)  by the court in Sorong before a panel of judges headed by Maria Magdalena Sitanggung.
None of the witnesses questioned at the trial said anything about what had taken place on the day before, 30 April.
For the legal team defending the accused, the question is who indeed is it that perpetrated treason in view of the fact that none of the witnesses who appeared in the trial knew anything about the men who were being charged.
This is yet another case in which the accused were charged under Articles 106, 108  and 110 to prevent people in Sorong from giving free expression to their rights to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly  as provided for by Law 39/1999 on Human Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Translated by Carmel Budiardjo
Related articles
1

Wilmar’s New ‘No Deforestation, No Peat, No Exploitation’ Policy: What will it mean in Merauke?

From our partners at awasMifee

First Published: December 11, 2013

Apologies for the delay in republishing:  No donations mean no internet for West Papua Media

On 5th December, Wilmar International, one of Asia’s biggest agribusiness corporations and the world’s biggest palm oil trader, announced a broad new environmental and social policy, including a commitment to no deforestation and the principle of Free, Prior Informed Consent when dealing with indigenous communities.

As these new ethical criteria would apply not only to Wilmar’s own plantations but also other companies who supply the palm oil, sugar and soy that Wilmar trades, it would seem that this pledge might have a big effect on the plantation industry’s environmental record – especially for palm oil where Wilmar controls 45% of world trade.

The question is, will it be implemented? This new policy was launched at the same time as a deal between Wilmar and food and household products giant Unilever, which has its own target to only use traceable palm oil by the end of 2014. As more multinationals come under pressure to use less environmentally-damaging ingredients, the commercial benefits to Wilmar of appearing to be an environmental leader are clear.

However the company has frequently been accused of violating ethical standards that is has signed up to in the past – for example as a member of the Round Table on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) and recipient of funding from the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation(IFC). That means many groups with experience of the company’s track record are sceptical about this new commitment.

PT Anugerah Rejeki Nusantara: a test of whether the new policy is serious.

In West Papua Wilmar has plans for two 40,000 hectare sugar-cane plantations in Merauke and two more in neighbouring Mappi regency, and these could be a key test for the company’s new policy. If these plantations for ahead, they will clearly contravene the ethical standards. Let’s take a look at the situation with PT Anugerah Rejeki Nusantara (PT ARN), one of those plantations:

  • No deforestation. Wilmar has committed to end deforestation in High Carbon Stock and High Conservation Value forest. The definition is quite broad and includes most forest that has not been cleared within the last ten years. PT ARN’s concession is an ecologically-rich area, largely forested, with some grassland and swamps.
  • No peat. Wilmar says it will not start plantations on peat of any depth. Data from Wetlands International shows intermittent shallow and medium peat within PT ARN’s concession.
  • Respect the rights of local and indigenous people to give or withhold their Free, Prior, Informed Consent (FPIC). PT ARN has been trying to convince communities in the area to hand over their land for two years now, but many people are still determinedly opposed. A recent study in four villages affected by PT ARN revealed that the company was falling far short of FPIC principles. Where people have clearly not consented, the company keeps making its approaches, until the community feels it really has no choice. Often Wilmar only speaks with community and clan leaders individually, which was causing the seeds of conflict within the village. Security forces brought to discussions also have an intimidating effect. There are other tools of deception too – in one village PT ARN’s Public Relations Manager even pretended to be a priest to get the people’s support.

Wilmar’s policy covers a number of other areas, such as workers’ rights and dealing with land conflict. The full text can be read here.

What about the Ganda Group?

Wilmar commits itself to stop deforestation and development on peat immediately, and will not start buying from any suppliers who are deforesting or developing peat. Existing suppliers have until the end of 2015 to comply. Of particular interest is to see how this will affect the Ganda Group (Agro Mandiri Semesta Plantations), a palm oil company which sells its produce to Wilmar.

Wilmar has a special relationship with Ganda Group, which is owned by Ganda Sitorus, the younger brother of Wilmar founder Martua Sitorus. In recent years the Ganda Group have taken over plantations which do not meet Wilmar’s previous ethical commitments to the RSPO and IFC. The most notorious case is in Jambi, Sumatra, where after going through the motions of two years of IFC-facilitated mediation to resolve a land conflict with the indigenous Suku Anak Dalam Batin Sembilan, Wilmar suddenly sold it’s subsidiary PT Asiatic Persada to the Ganda Group, rather than abide by any agreements produced by that mediation. On Saturday 7th December, the Ganda Group once again violently evicted Suku Anak Dalam communities which had reoccupied their ancestral land in the plantation.

The Ganda Group also has plans for two plantations in Merauke: PT Agrinusa Persada Mulia and PT Agriprima Cipta Persada. These companies are also accused of deceiving local villagers and paying shockingly low compensation rates, as well as clearing forest for an oil palm nursery before receiving a plantation permit. The plantations, which also involve clearing natural forest, would clearly not meet the RSPO standards which Wilmar has signed up to in its bid to be seen as a responsible company, but the Ganda Group is unencumbered by such commitments.

However now Wilmar’s policy states that it it won’t be buying from companies that are clearing forests. Does that mean the Ganda Group are going to have to look elsewhere to sell their tainted palm oil?

AwasMIFEE wrote to Wilmar on 6th December to ask whether its new ethical policy would mean that it would be cancelling its plans in Merauke. No response was received by the time this article was published.

Related articles

 

1

Police say exchange of shots with armed civilians, the family say it was the police who shot Eduard

by Victor Mambor, Editor, Tabloid Jubi

December 1, 2013

Jayapura 1/12 [Jubi]- The statement of the Vice-Captain of Papua Police Region, Police Brig-Gen Paulus Waterpauw to a national media source about the incident that killed a citizen of Depapre has been refuted by locals from Yongsu village, Depapre District, Jayapura Regency.

The Police Vice-Captain said that there had been armed contact between a mobile brigade [Brimob] of the Indonesian Police with an armed civilian group in the Depapre area of Jayapura, killing one of the civilians on Saturday. Apart from that it was claimed that a Brimob member was shot in the hand. However when Yongsu villagers were contacted by Jubi on Sat 30/11 evening, they said there had been no armed contact in Depapre. A villager who didn’t want to give their name said that a villager named Eduard Okoseray [40] who worked as the village secretary of Yongsu, Depapre District had died from being shot by Brimob Papua forces.

Another Yongsu villager who wanted his name concealed who was contacted by Jubi Sat 30/11 night said the same thing. ‘The event happened on 29 Nov 2013. Eduard was not looking after the operational aid money for the village. The District head facilitated police from Brimob. The Papuan police arbitrarily shot Eduard’.

The event was also noted by Matius Murib, Director of Baptist Voice. Matius said, ‘the victim Eduard, male 40, was village secretary of Yongsu, a victim of Brimob brutality at Yapsi village, Depapre [29/11].

The police’s different version of the incident as exchange of fire was declared by Kabid Humas Papuan Police AKBP  Sulistyo Pudjo Hartono, Sat 30/11 afternoon. He said one police was hit by a bullet that exploded by itself before the exchange of fire. To this journalist, Pudjo said it happened during an ambush by an armed group calling themselves Cycloop King Group [Kelompok Raja Cycloop]

‘The bullet was too active, it went off as soon as it was put in the gun and someone was hit. But that happened on top of the vehicle. The soldier was hit in the cheek and shoulder but is in a stable condition, still at Bhayangkara Hospital’

Pudjo also claimed that the police seized some evidence.

But the Yongsi villagers said it was not true there was armed conflict. ‘The police make up false opinions, please help to advocate for the people of Depapre who are scared. There was no police victim. He shot himself when holding the rifle loosely on the very bumpy road to Yongsu’ explained the Yongsu villager [Jubi]

Related articles
5

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑