HRW: Indonesia: Free ‘Balloon Activists’ in Ambon

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH

Indonesia: Free ‘Balloon Activists’ in Ambon
Ill-Treatment of Political Prisoners in Earlier Episodes Raises Grave Concerns
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2010/08/10/indonesia-free-balloon-activists-ambon
August 10, 2010

Related Materials:
Prosecuting Political Aspiration
Indonesia: Stop Prosecuting Peaceful Political Expression
Indonesia’s Not-So-Well-Kept Secret

Sadly, free speech in Indonesia is about as sturdy as the detained activists’ balloons. The Indonesian government publicly claims that it respects freedom of expression, so it should live up to its word and free these peaceful protesters immediately.
Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch

(New York) – The Indonesian authorities should immediately release the activists for Moluccan independence arrested in Ambon at the beginning of August 2010, Human Rights Watch said today. The activists were allegedly planning to float banned Moluccan independence flags attached to balloons to protest an August 3 visit by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.

Local sources reported that between 7 and 15 activists were arrested in connection with balloon launch plans to express political opposition to Indonesian rule in the Moluccas Islands. The police reportedly confiscated as evidence 133 posters that read “Free Alifuru and Papua Political Prisoners,” two copies of the June 2010 Human Rights Watch report “Prosecuting Political Aspiration,” 17 separatist Southern Moluccas Republic (Republik Maluku Selatan or RMS) flags, and one 12-pound gas cylinder to be used to fill the balloons. Yudhoyono was in Ambon to open the “Sail Banda” event, organized by the Tourism Ministry and the Moluccas Islands government to promote tourism in the Banda Sea.

“Sadly, free speech in Indonesia is about as sturdy as the detained activists’ balloons,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The Indonesian government publicly claims that it respects freedom of expression, so it should live up to its word and free these peaceful protesters immediately.”

Human Rights Watch expressed grave concern that past torture and ill-treatment of political prisoners in Ambon puts the recently detained activists at serious risk. The detainees should have immediate access to family members and legal counsel, Human Rights Watch said.

Those arrested include Benny Sinay, Izak Sapulete, Andy Marunaya, Edwin Marunaya, Ongen Krikof, Marven Bremer, Steven Siahaya, and Ony Siahaya. Jacob Sinay, who lost his civil service job in December 2009 because of his political activism, is also being held. Most were arrested at their homes on August 2 and 3. Some were also arrested because they publicly unfurled the separatist RMS flag in some places in the archipelago, including on Ambon and Saparua islands.

Observers at the Sail Banda event in the Yos Sudarso seaport in Ambon described what they considered to be a very large deployment of police officers and military personnel. The security forces apparently sought to prevent a repeat of Yudhoyono’s June 29, 2007 visit, when 28 local Moluccan dancers were able to enter the Ambon stadium, dance the cakalele war dance, and unfurl the RMS flag.

More than 70 men were arrested after the 2007 dance. Many were tortured after being handed over to Anti-Terror Unit 88 forces based in Ambon. The Ambon district court convicted more than three dozen of them, including the dance leader Johan Teterisa, of treason and sentenced them to prison terms ranging from 5 to 20 years. Teterisa was sentenced to 15 years and is in the Malang prison in eastern Java.

Human Rights Watch expressed concern that Ambon authorities confiscated the recent Human Rights Watch report, “Prosecuting Political Aspiration,” as possible evidence in a case against the activists. The report profiles the cases of 10 prominent Papuan and Moluccan activists currently behind bars for expressing their political views, and details ill-treatment they suffered in detention and violations of their due process rights.

In June, Human Rights Watch discussed the findings of the report in Jakarta with officials from the Law and Human Rights Ministry, the Foreign Affairs Ministry, and the National Commission on Human Rights. At least 100 Papuans and Moluccans are in prison in Indonesia for peacefully expressing their political views.

“By arresting the Ambon activists, the Indonesian authorities are repeating the very mistakes that raised doubts globally about Indonesia’s commitment to improving human rights,” Robertson said. “The government should release these peaceful protesters immediately and spare the country further international condemnation.”

Background
Human Rights Watch takes no position on claims to self-determination in Indonesia or in any other country. Consistent with international law, Human Rights Watch supports the right of all individuals, including independence supporters, to express their political views peacefully without fear of arrest or other forms of reprisal.

Most of the current political prisoners in Indonesia were convicted of makar (treason) under articles 106 and 110 of the Indonesian Criminal Code.

However, freedom of expression is protected both in Indonesia’s constitution and international human rights law. The constitution in article 28(e) states, “Every person shall have the right to the freedom of association and expression of opinion.” Article 28(f) provides, “Every person shall have the right to communicate and obtain information for the development of his/her personal life and his/her social environment, and shall have the right to seek, acquire, possess, keep, process, and convey information by using all available channels.”

In December 2007, the Indonesian government issued Government Regulation 77/2007, which regulates regional symbols. Article 6 of the regulation bans display of flags or logos that have the same features as “organizations, groups, institutions or separatist movements.” Both the Papuan Morning Star flag and the RMS flag are considered to fall under this ban.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Indonesia ratified in 2006, also protects the right to free expression. Under article 19, “[e]veryone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.”

Journalist's death overshadows launch of Papua food project

TAPOL and DTE press release

Journalist’s death overshadows launch of Papua food project

11 August 2010 – The death of a local journalist has increased concerns about a giant food estate launched today in Merauke, Southeastern Papua by Indonesia’s Minister of Agriculture.

TAPOL and Down to Earth, the International Campaign for Ecological Justice in Indonesia are calling for a moratorium on the food project, known as MIFEE (Merauke Integrated Food and Energy Estate) until independent assessments of the political, economic, socio-cultural, environmental and gender impacts of the project have been undertaken.

The suspicious death of the journalist, Ardiansyah Matra’is, in late July, following threats against him, has been linked to his coverage of this week’s local elections for the district head in Merauke.

Other journalists have also been threatened in what appears to have been a concerted campaign to stifle free expression ahead of the elections. Current district head, Johannes Gluba-Gebze, has been instrumental in planning and promoting the food project.

“The potential adverse impacts of MIFEE for the local population are massive such that full transparency and accountability are required. A free media is essential to ensuring effective democratic oversight of the project,” say TAPOL and Down to Earth who are closely monitoring the project.

“President Susilo Bambang Yudhyono’s ambition to ‘feed Indonesia then feed the world’ may come at the expense of many Papuans, and could add to wider frustrations about the lack of political, social and economic autonomy in Papua,” they add.

The project is likely to contribute to the marginalisation of indigenous Papuans by taking over the customary-owned land and resources which provide their livelihoods. It is also likely to exacerbate existing human rights grievances, and accelerate environmental deforestation and degradation.

“The enhanced security presence likely to be associated with MIFEE will increase tensions and add to the vulnerability of Merauke’s inhabitants, especially as Indonesia’s notorious Kopassus special forces are active in the area”, warn TAPOL and Down to Earth.

Background and issues
MIFEE is a collection of commercial plantations, planned to cover 1.6 million hectares. The project is being promoted as a means of stabilizing Indonesia’s food security. It has received support from the Government of Indonesia, and Merauke has been designated a national ‘Special Economic Zone’ (SEZ) in order to attract the US$8.6 billion of investment needed for the project. Over 30 investors from Indonesia, Japan, China, Singapore, Korea and the Middle East have expressed an interest in MIFEE,[1] Their involvement appears to be part of a global trend to make money by buying up lands abroad for food production.

Tens of thousands more workers and economic migrants, mostly from outside Papua, are expected to settle in Merauke and the surrounding areas. The indigenous people of Merauke have already felt the impact of transmigration programmes, first implemented under Dutch colonial rule and continued under Indonesia’s Suharto regime. Population growth, changes in population demographics and the further loss of land and resources as a result of MIFFE could have a devastating and irreversible impact on the livelihoods of the local population, especially indigenous Papuans.

The huge number of newcomers may strain Merauke’s underdeveloped services and further marginalise an already minority indigenous population. The commercialisation of land and takeover of indigenous Papuans’ land will affect the livelihoods of Papuans and could prevent the transfer of knowledge, culture and language from one generation to the next.

Sustained local knowledge of tribal boundaries, land rights, land use, customary law and taboos are all dependent on having access to land and respect for traditional rights over the land. If MIFEE goes ahead, indigenous people will be faced with new boundaries and non-traditional crops such as oil palm, rice, sugar cane, corn and soyabean.

There has been strong opposition to MIFEE from local NGOs such as SKP-KAM, FokerLSM, SORPATOM and AMAN.[2] However, the death of Ardiansyah Matra’is and campaign of terror against journalists have closed down the space for criticism. These groups have emphasised on-going concerns about targeted surveillance and intimidation of NGOs and journalists. In 2009, a joint report by the Indonesian environmental NGO Telapak and the UK’s Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) stated that ‘irregular groups allied to [Johannes Gluba] Gebze’ operate in Merauke and ‘work in unison with the state security forces to monitor and intimidate any dissenters in the region.’

The security strategy for MIFEE is unclear, as is the resulting direct and indirect impact on the local population. Merauke is located near the Indonesia-Papua New Guinea (PNG) border and is already a highly militarized area. A 2009 Human Rights Watch report details abuses committed by Kopassus, who have close ties with Gebze.

In other parts of Papua where natural resources are being exploited, state security forces are routinely employed to protect commercial assets. There has often been an expansion in these areas of the sex and alcohol industries, which are run by migrants or the police and military themselves. The potential impact on the population’s health is made clear by FokerLSM which reports that Merauke has the highest number of HIV/AIDS cases after Mimika district, where the giant mining company Freeport operates.

The scale of MIFEE raises major environmental and ecological concerns. The conversion of protected forest for agricultural use seems likely, despite both Indonesia’s Forestry Minister and the Coordinating Minister for the Economy stating otherwise.

Widespread licensed deforestation in Merauke would contradict the Government of Indonesia’s commitment to reduce green-house gas emissions by 26% by 2020. It also raises questions over a recent billion dollar REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) agreement with the Government of Norway to preserve Indonesia’s rainforests, in particular in Papua.

ENDS

Contact: Paul Barber (TAPOL) on +44 1420 80153 or +44 7747 301 739 or Carolyn Marr (DTE) on +44 16977 46266

[1] Medco Group; Artha Graha Network; PT Bangun Cipta Sarana; Comexindo International; Sumber Alam Sutra; Korindo; PT Rajawali Nusantara Indonesia; Sinar Mas; PT Kertas Nusantara; Mitsubishi (Japan); Wilmar (Singapore); LG International (Korea).
[2] Office for Justice and Peace of the Archdicese of Merauke (SKP-KAM); Papua NGOs Cooperation Forum (FokerLSM); Solidarity for Papuans (SORPATOM); The Indigenous People’s Alliance of Indonesia (AMAN)

Al Jazeera report on the death of West Papua tribal leader

Al Jazeera
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia-pacific/2010/08/201083213426470365.html

The issue of Papuan independence has been thrown into the spotlight with the controversial death of an activist.

Graphic mobile phone footage of Yawan Wayeni’s final moments is being circulated on the internet.

It shows Indonesian police officers taunting him as he lies dying from the gunshot wounds they had inflicted upon him.

Al Jazeera’s Step Vassen reports from Jakarta.

*The video contains disturbing images*

http://www.youtube.com/v/wxHTpQho5es

Papua activist Filep Karma 'abused in prison'

BBC News
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-10854985

Papua’s most well-known pro-independence prisoner, Filep Karma, is serving 15 years in jail for rebellion. Amnesty International considers him a prisoner of conscience.

In a rare interview with a local radio station, obtained by the BBC, he claimed he had suffered physical and mental abuse while in jail. Filep Karma led hundreds of Papuan students in cries of “independence!” during a demonstration in the provincial capital in 2004. They then raised the banned Morning Star flag – the symbol of free Papua – in full view of military policemen. For this act of defiance he was jailed for 15 years for rebellion. Mr Karma says he was exercising his right to protest.

“They terrorised us in a nation that is meant to be a democracy, a nation where freedom of speech is meant to be protected,” he said.

‘Mental torture’

Foreign journalists are restricted from reporting in Papua, and the International Committee of the Red Cross was ordered out of the province last year after it visited political prisoners.In this rare interview conducted by a local radio station without the permission of the authorities, Mr Karma claims to have been regularly abused in jail.

“I have been punched, kicked, pulled. But what hurts more is the mental torture we are subjected to,” he said. “An officer once told me, when you enter here you lose all your rights, including human rights. Your rights are only to breathe and eat. He even went as far as to say that your life is in my hands.”

A fellow political prisoner being held in the same jail, Ferdinard Package, says he lost sight in one eye after a beating from one of the prison guards. The head of the Papuan branch of the Ministry for Law and Human Rights, Nasarudin Bunsan, confirmed the beating took place.

Mr Bunsan said they had a problem with guards who got drunk and then beat the prisoners. He said they were trying to stop the practice and three prison guards were currently facing police charges for abuse.

‘Rise up’

The government recently pardoned and released one Papuan political prisoner. Karma has been made the same offer as long as he apologises to the state, something he says he will never do.

“I predict by 2020 our people will be completely extinct,” he said. “So our people must rise up. We must fight for independence or be destroyed.”

Papua is rich in natural resources and is the home of the world’s largest gold mine, partly owned by the US company Freeport. Yet Papua remains one of the least developed provinces in Indonesia.

Benny Wenda – West Papua’s independence leader & a man on a mission

Article originally published by Inside Indonesia

‘While my people continue to suffer and continue to die, nothing will stop my campaign’

Benny Wenda is West Papua’s independence leader and an international lobbyist for the independence of West Papua from Indonesia. He lives in exile in the United Kingdom. In 2002 he was granted political asylum by the British Government following his escape from custody while on trial in West Papua. He is a leading figure on the international scene for the independence movement of West Papua and has been a special representative of his people in the British Parliament and United Nations.

Early Life
As a young child in the 1970s, Benny Wenda’s world was his village in the remote highlands of West Papua. Life consisted of tending gardens with his mother among the Lani people who, he says, ‘lived at peace with nature in the mountains’. In 1977 that life changed dramatically.
That year, the military appeared in his village. Now, every morning on the way to their gardens, Benny and his mother and aunties would be stopped and checked by Indonesian soldiers. Often the soldiers would force the women to wash themselves in the river before brutally raping them in front of their children. Many young women, including three of Benny’s aunties, died in the jungle from the trauma and injuries inflicted during these attacks, which often involved genital mutilation. Every day Papuan women had to report to the military post to provide food from their gardens, and to clean and cook for the soldiers. Violence, racism and enforced subservience became part of daily routine.
‘I asked myself ‘why?’ Who are these people? And why do they do this to us? Why do they kill my people? Why
do they rape my aunties?’
Later that year, and in response to military violence towards Papuans, 15,000 Lani people rebelled. In retaliation, Indonesian military aircraft bombed many Lani villages in the highlands, including Benny’s village. Benny remembers
an attack where their huts and crops were burned and many of his family were killed or injured. Benny too suffered in the attack: his leg was badly injured and left untreated because his family was forced to flee into hiding in the jungle, leaving him with one leg significantly shorter than the other and an awkward limp. More than twenty years later the scars, the pain and the difficulty in walking remain.

Childhood In the Jungle
Between 1977 and 1983 Benny and his family, along with thousands of other highlanders, lived in hiding in the jungle. Life was hard. Food and shelter were scarce, and the weak struggled to survive the harsh conditions. Violence from the military remained a constant threat. In one particularly harrowing incident, soldiers happened across Benny’s family in the jungle. The soldiers ripped Benny’s two year old cousin from his aunty’s arms and threw her to the ground with so much force that the child’s back was broken. They then raped his aunty, forcing Benny to watch. His small cousin died two weeks after the attack; his aunty sometime later from her own injuries. Benny could not understand why the Indonesian military was doing this and, still, he had no knowledge of the context in which this violence took place.
Benny says he could not understand. ‘I asked myself ‘why?’ Who are these people? And why do they do this to us? Why do they kill my people? Why do they rape my aunties?’
After five years in the jungle, everyone else from his village had succumbed to the conditions and surrendered to the Indonesians. Only his family remained in the jungle. To surrender, Papuans had to present themselves to the local military post carrying an Indonesian flag, which signalled their loyalty to Indonesia and their willingness to live in the community under Indonesian rule. When Benny’s grandmother died, largely due to conditions in their jungle hideout, their family decided it was time to surrender for the sake of the children. Having already lost so many, Benny’s grandfather insisted that the children be taken back, telling his mother that Benny’s well-being was important ‘so that one day he will know what happened to us and why…and one day he will act’.

Becoming ‘Indonesian’?
After his family surrendered, Benny went to school. His education was entirely about Indonesia. He learned about Indonesia’s independence from the Dutch and celebrated it on the anniversary of 17 August 1945. He learned about buffalos instead of pigs and of rice paddies instead of the Papuan-style gardens that he had grown up working in with his family. He was told to eat rice instead of sweet potato, the staple for Papuans. Indonesian teachers and students alike called Benny and the other Papuan students ‘stupid’, ‘primitive’, and ‘dirty’ because they ate pork and their parents were ‘indecent’, with the men wearing nothing but the traditional koteka (penis gourd).
Benny still could not understand why Indonesians treated him this way. He constantly went to his mother with questions. ‘Why did I grow up in the jungle? Why am I different to the others? Why do they call me stupid?’ he would ask. His mother refused to answer his questions. ‘One day I will tell you the whole story’, was all she would say.
In senior high school Benny was one of only two Papuan students in the class. The others were children of Javanese and Sulawesi transmigrants. One day, the teacher directed him to sit next to a Javanese girl. He smiled and respectfully greeted her as he sat down. She turned, scowled, and spat on him. He wiped her spit from his face, feeling terrible. ‘Maybe I really do smell’, he thought. ‘I disgust her. I must not be clean enough. That must be why she doesn’t like me.’ Assuming the problem was his, and desperate to please this girl, Benny went to the shop after school to buy an extra bar of soap. He washed himself three times over. The following day, he walked confidently into the class and sat down, smiling and greeting the girl with respect. But this time she stood up, attracted the attention of the entire class, and spat on him again. The class laughed.
Finally, it dawned on Benny: this had nothing to do with his cleanliness. This was racism. Benny stood up, enraged:
‘You think that because I am black, because I am Papuan, that I am dirty!?! I have eyes, I have hands…I am human –
just like you! We are both human and we both deserve to be treated the same. With respect.’
Finally, it dawned on Benny: this had nothing to do with his cleanliness. This was racism.

Events such as these drove Benny to take on a leadership role in the Papuan community. His motivation sprang not from politics, but from the desire to assert and celebrate Papuan identity, and to encourage other Papuans to do the same. Benny went on to complete a degree in sociology and politics in Jayapura. While at university, he initiated discussion groups for Papuan students in Jayapura – of all ages and from all tribes from both the highlands and coastal regions – so they could come together and talk about what it was to be Papuan. Above all, Benny wanted to change the mindset of Papuan children, children who had been brought up being told they were primitive, dumb and dirty, to teach them that they should be proud of being Papuan.

Searching for the truth
But for Benny, questions remained. While he could speak of his own terrible experiences, he still understood very little of the broader conflict and context in which his personal suffering – and that of his village – had taken place. Frustrated with the lack of information he was provided in school, and his mother’s refusal to answer his questions, he sought out information about Papuan history. He searched the school library, the public library, the university library. But he found nothing. ‘Why do we only study Indonesian history? The history of Java, Sumatra and Bali? Where is the history of Papua?’ he asked himself, and others.

During the 1980s, and even into the early 1990s, there was very little written history or discussion about the circumstances of Papua’s incorporation into Indonesia or the events that followed. Eventually, through story-telling, Benny came to learn how the Dutch had retained control of the province after 1945 and promised independence. He found out about the declaration of Papuan sovereignty on 1 December 1961, about the West Papuan flag (the Bintang Kejora), the national anthem (Hai Tanahku Papua), the Indonesian invasion and the 1969 ‘Act of Free Choice’ when a small group of hand-picked Papuans were intimidated into voting for integration with Indonesia.
Finally he understood the root causes of why the Indonesians treated West Papuans as they did. Yet at that time, Benny recalls that no one was allowed even to use the word ‘Papua’ or ‘West Papua’, only ‘Irian Jaya’, let alone discuss publicly Papuan history, culture or identity. Books were censored. But knowing the historical origins of the oppression was enough. Of the decades of violence, discrimination and oppression, Benny needed no written record: he had first hand experience.

Demmak and the ‘Papuan Spring’
After the fall of Suharto, the relaxation of military control and the independence of East Timor in 1999, demonstrations and flag raisings occurred across Papua, with Papuans demanding their own referendum on independence. In the period between 1999 and 2000, known as the ‘Papuan Spring’, Jakarta held dialogue with Papuan leaders and the Presidium of the Papuan Council (PDP) was formed to represent the Papuan nationalist movement and to negotiate Papua’s future.
It was during this period that Benny became leader of Demmak (Dewan Musyawarah Masyarakat Koteka), the Koteka Tribal Assembly. Demmak was established by tribal elders with the goal of working towards recognition and protection of the customs, values and beliefs of the tribal people of West Papua. It advocates independence from Indonesia, and rejects special autonomy or any other political compromise offered by the Indonesian government. As Secretary-General of Demmak, Benny represented the council of elders. The organisation supported PDP negotiations with Jakarta to the extent that they represented the aspiration of the Papuan people, which was independence from Indonesia.
But when Megawati became President in July 2001 policy on Papua changed. A compromised version of special autonomy was the only politically viable option. The Papuan Spring was over and the military crackdown on known ‘separatists’ began. In November 2001, Theys Eluay, leader of the PDP, was assassinated by soldiers. But Benny stood firm to Demmak’s aim: full independence.

Political persecution….and escape
The political freedom to express aspirations for independence quickly evaporated. Once again, it became dangerous to support independence. Secret documents later discovered by human rights organisations named specific organisations and individuals that had to be ‘dealt with’, including the PDP and Demmak. On 6 June 2002 Benny was
arrested and detained in Jayapura. His home was ransacked without a warrant and the police refused to inform him of the charges brought against him. He was tortured by police and held in solitary confinement for several months. Sometime later he was charged with inciting an attack on a police station and burning two shops in the small township of Abepura on 7 December 2000, which left a policeman and a security guard dead. For his political views, Benny was being charged with a crime he did not commit. These charges related to the infamous, ‘Abepura incident’, in which violent acts of retaliation by Indonesian police were committed against the Papuan community, resulting in the arrest of over 100 people, police violence and torture in detention and the death of at least three students in the days following. Two police officers were prosecuted for crimes against humanity before the Human Rights Court in 2005 for these events, but were acquitted. Benny faced criminal prosecution for the initial attack on the police station, for inciting acts of violence and arson and was likely to receive up to 25 years in prison. Yet he was not even in the country at the time the alleged planning and execution of the attacks took place. For his political views, Benny was being charged with a crime he did not commit.
His trial commenced on 24 September 2002 and lasted for several weeks. Armed policemen surrounded the courtroom each day, as Benny’s many supporters turned out in a show of support for their leader. Facing the judges he was stoic and resolute in proclaiming his innocence. To his supporters he was warm and encouraging, smiling and shaking hands with those who lined his path between the courtroom and police vehicle.
The trial was flawed from the outset. The prosecutor and judge requested bribes from Benny’s defence team, but were refused. The persons named as key prosecution witnesses could not be identified and failed to attend court to be cross examined on their statements. Defence counsel for Benny insisted that the witness statements be thrown out on the basis they were fabricated by police to implicate Benny in the attack. But the judge, who appeared biased and hostile to Benny throughout the proceedings, accepted the evidence. It was obvious that Benny would not receive a fair trial.
Rumours were rife that military intelligence would kill him in detention before the judge rendered a decision
Meanwhile, inside the prison, Benny was physically attacked several times by prison guards. On the advice of his lawyers, he did not eat the food provided in prison because of the risk of poisoning. Because the evidence against him in court was so weak, rumours were rife that military intelligence would kill him in detention before the judge
rendered a decision.
The court was adjourned pending a decision. Conviction – or death – seemed certain. Then, in miraculous circumstances that he does not want to explain for fear of endangering the persons who helped him, Benny
escaped from Abepura prison on 27 October 2002. The Indonesian police allegedly issued a shoot to kill order. But aided by West Papua independence activists, Benny was smuggled across the border to PNG and later assisted by a European NGO group to travel to the UK where he was granted political asylum. In 2003, Benny and his wife Maria were reunited in England, where they now live with their children.

Benny holds a deep and enduring belief that justice will eventually prevail, and he sees his remarkable escape from persecution in Indonesia as testament to that fact. He recognises that other freedom fighters, like Arnold Ap, Theys Eluay and Bill Tabuni, have not been so lucky. But this only strengthens his resolve. ‘While my people continue to suffer and continue to die, nothing will stop my campaign’, he says.

For him, there is only one way to stop the killing, and ensure that Papuans enjoy the same freedoms that people elsewhere in the world already enjoy: Papua must be independent. And to that end he continues his campaign.

For more information visit Benny Wenda’s official websites at:

www.bennywenda.org

www.facebook.com/bennywenda

www.twitter.com/bennywenda

www.freewestpapua.wordpress.com

www.freewestpapua.org

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑