Tag: Bintang Papua

MRP waiting for decision from interior minister about its future

MRP waiting for decision from interior minister about its future

(Bintang Papua) The current term of the MRP – the Papua People’s Assembly – is due to  expire on 31 October. According to the chairman, Agus Alua, it depends
on a decision by  the minister of the interior whether the term will be
extended.

Agus Alua said that he had written to the governor to remind him  that
the term of the present MRP is almost at an end. If the term is
extended, he said, and the MRP goes on using state funds, that will
create problems. He explained that according to the mechanisms of the
law, the MRP cannot raise matters with ministers in Jakarta but they can
only raise it in writing with the governor while it is up to the
governor to take the matter forward to the minister.

According to Agus Alua, a draft regulation – raperdasus – on the matter
was now being discussed by the provincial assembly, the DPRP. but there
were apparently two versions of the regulation. One version was drafted
by the governor and the other version was being discussed at UNCEN but
there were differences between the two drafts.in particular with regard
to the number of members of the MRP.

The governor’s version states that size of the body should be two thirds
the size of the  DPRP plus the DPR West Papua which together consist of
100 members. This would mean that the MRP should consist of 75 members
[this is more than two thirds of 100] whereas the other version
provides for a smaller number of members.

Asked whether there would now be two MRPs, one for each of the two
provinces of West Papua, Alua said that according to information he had
heard from the governor, there would only be one MRP for the two provinces.

MRP waiting for decision from interior minister about its future

The current term of the MRP – the Papua People’s Assembly – is due to
expire on 31 October. According to the chairman, Agus Alua, it depends
on a decision by  the minister of the interior whether the term will be
extended.

Agus Alua said that he had written to the governor to remind him  that
the term of the present MRP is almost at an end. If the term is
extended, he said, and the MRP goes on using state funds, that will
create problems. He explained that according to the mechanisms of the
law, the MRP cannot raise matters with ministers in Jakarta but they can
only raise it in writing with the governor while it is up to the
governor to take the matter forward to the minister.

According to Agus Alua, a draft regulation – raperdasus – on the matter
was now being discussed by the provincial assembly, the DPRP. but there
were apparently two versions of the regulation. One version was drafted
by the governor and the other version was being discussed at UNCEN but
there were differences between the two drafts.in particular with regard
to the number of members of the MRP.

The governor’s version states that size of the body should be two thirds
the size of the  DPRP plus the DPR West Papua which together consist of
100 members. This would mean that the MRP should consist of 75 members
[this is more than two thirds of 100] whereas the other version
provides for a smaller number of members.

Asked whether there would now be two MRPs, one for each of the two
provinces of West Papua, Alua said that according to information he had
heard from the governor, there would only be one MRP for the two provinces.

UNCEN students raise referendum with new US ambassador

Abridged in translation.

Bintang Papua 6 October 2010

UNCEN students raise referendum with new US ambassador

During a visit to Jayapura, the new US ambassador to Indonesia, Scot
Marciel, visited the Padang Bulan health  clinic and a number of
government offices.

During a visit to Cenderawasih University, there was a one-hour dialogue
with the students at which the students raised their demand for a
referendum and called for merdeka a number of times during questions and
answers. They expressed their disappointment that the ambassador's visit
to the university was only one hour long and the newly appointed
ambassador  made no reference to the issue of a referendum or similar
matters.

[According to a report in JUBI posted earlier, UNCEN students had said
that they rejected the ambassador's visit if it was only to discuss
matters such as education.]

Ambassador Marciel who was accompanied by several staff members from the
US embassy said he had just be appointed to the job and did not yet know
much. 'I  still need to study a lot. I will study everything first,' he
said.

Speaking to journalists, he said that the purpose of his visit to Papua
was to visit UNCEN and the health clinic and a number of officials such
as the MRP and the governor and he would be discussing the question of
education with the Indonesian authorities.

Responding to questions about a referendum, he said that the US
government supports special autonomy status for Papua within the NKRI.
He said that his government had never supported separatism for Papua.

During his visit to the health clinic, he met midwives. 'I am visiting
Papua to take a look at development here and to meet health personnel
and other Papuan leaders.' During his meeting with midwives,  he
discussed issues related to pre-natal care and malaria which have been
funded by the US since 2006.

During his meeting with members of the MRP, the implementation of
special autonomy was discussed. MRP members told him that special
autonomy had been a failure. 'The Papuan people have said that special
autonomy has failed and we facilitated this,' they said. They said that
the failure of special autonomy was evident from the fact that there had
been very little improvement in the living conditions of the Papuan
people and moreover, the government had pressed ahead with a decision to
split up the province which was not in accord with the terms of special
autonomy.

According to Agus Alua, chairman of the MRP , the ambassador said only
that he first needed to study all this information.

US paying serious attention to Papua: Awom

US paying serious attention to Papua

(Bintang Papua)  According to the moderator of the Papuan  Presidium Council, Herman
Awom, the hearing held at the US Congress was of great significance for
the Papuan people. 'This was the first time in 48 years that Papua was
discussed on an international forum. In our dialogue  we urged the US to
press Indonesia to open dialogue on the question of the failure of
special autonomy, OTSUS and the Papuan people's rejection of  OTSUS.

A number of Papuan leaders said that they would continue to demand
dialogue as the solution to the Papuan problem, and the holding of a
referendum.

Awom said that OTSUS had failed to prevent the marginalisation of the
Papuan  people. It had led to large-scale migration which was
intensifying the marginalisation of the Papuan people. 'Dialogue with
Indonesia should be mediated by a neutral third party, with the two
sides recognised as equals, as was the case between Indonesia and Aceh.
'For us, there is no other way forward than freedom.'

Forkorus Yoboisembut said that genocide in happening in Papua.' While no
large-scale killings are occurring, genocide is occurring gradually.
Indonesia should allow foreign observers and  foreign journalists to
visit Papua to prove to them that genocide is not occurring,' he said.

As regard s the US position that supports the NKRI and regards OTSUS as
the best solution, he said he understands that this is in order for the
US to preserve good relations with Indonesia. 'But we called on the US
not to sacrifice the Papuan people for a second time. The hearing at the
US Congress was an important development, bearing in mind that we were
not yet a state that could enter into dialogue.

-------------------------

KNPB to continue to press for a referendum – plus comment

KNPB will continue to press for Referendum

Bintang Papua, 30 September 2010

Jayapura: The spokesman  of the Komite Nasional Papua Barat – National Committee of West Papua, Mako Tabuni, speaking at a press conference, said that political dynamics were moving fast at present at a time when calls for a referendum are spreading throughout  Papua. In a democracy, this is an issue that must be accepted by the Indonesian state and the Indonesian people, together with the Papuan people.

The KNPB, as a national medium of the views of the Papuan people will continue to press for a referendum as the final solution to resolve the political status of West Papua, because this can resolve all the problems in Papua and it represents the best possible solution for the Papuan people. Without a referendum, the Papuan people’s problems will never be resolved.

He said that since Indonesia calls itself a democratic state based on the Pancasila, it can surely understand why the Papuan people are calling for a referendum. Many human rights abuses have been committed in the past and have persisted for 48 years, during which time the military forces have directly or indirectly caused great suffering for the Papuan people.

With the issue of a referendum having become so heated, the KNPB will continue to struggle for this demand.

With regard to the hearing held recently (in Washington)  which was attended by a number of Papuan leaders, including the chairman of DAP, Forkorus Yoboisembu, Herman Awom and others,  nothing has been forthcoming from the US suggesting that it does not support a referendum.

Mako Tabuni said that he is still awaiting reports about the activities of Papuans such as Nicolas Messet and Albert Yoku who were also present at the congressional hearing, nor has there been any official report regarding the results of the hearings. [Note: Verbatim reports of all the discussion have been widely circulated.]

Regarding telephone communications that have been reported by irresponsible elements that have been reported by the media in Jayapura to the effect that the issue of referendum has been rejected, these are quite untrue and provocative, because there has been no official announcement from the US Congress to the effect that a referendum is unacceptable.

Even if that were the case, the KNPB and the  Papuan people will continue to struggle for their political demand because this is their right, and it is a matter that cannot be determined by the Indonesian elite.

[Comment:  If the KNBP says that it is waiting for the decision of the US Congress in response to the call for a referendum, this reflects a misunderstanding of how the US congressional hearing mechanism works. The hearing was itself an unprecedented event, the first time that a US congressional body held a public discussion on the question of West Papua. The verbatim reports of the hearing, including all the testimonies and the discussions between the chairman of the Asia-Pacific sub-committee and members of the audience have been widely circulated, as well as the views of the US government. Everything is in the public domain. The US Congress itself cannot be expected to make a statement on an issue that was discussed by one of its sub-committees.

It now depends on organisations like the KNPB which support the call for a referendum in West Papua to translate these documents into Indonesian so that they become widely known in West Papua and Indonesia. By doing this, they can strengthen support for a referendum in Indonesia and internationally while at the same time revealing the strength of feeling about the issue to the Indonesian government. Arguably, the sudden decision of the SBY government to dispatch a large team of ministers to West Papua for the purposes of making an  ‘evaluation’ is a sign that the government is beginning to understand the strength of feeling and support for the West Papuan people’s demand.  TAPOL]

Institute of Papuan Intellectuals calls for a referendum

Bintang Papua, 7 September 2010

[Abridged in translation]

The Central Council of the Institute of Intellectuls in the Land of
Papua has issued a statement which rejects any move to Revise and
Evaluate Special Autonomy. They said that the Special Autonomy Law – OTSUS – was adopted nine years ago but, they asked, what has the
government done in all that time?

When it was adopted, OTSUS was described as being an alternative move by the central government in response to the wishes of the indigenous people to secede from the Indonesian Republic. This was because of the huge disparity in many spheres, such as welfare, education, economic activities,.health, infrastructure and human rights violations.

In fact, OTSUS was introduced by the Indonesian government in order to ensure that West Papua remains with the Republic of Indonesia.

Implementation of the law should have involved the introducetion of
special regulations – Perdasus and Perdasi – but the central government along with officials of the two provinces, Papua and West Papua have turned OTSUS into a disaster for the people of the Land of Papua. So what can the central government be proud of achieving in its wish to revise and evaluate OTSUS?

The statement said in conclusion:

The Institute of Intellectuals of the Land of Papua and its members
throughout Papua, in other parts of Indonesia and abroad, hereby declare:

1. We reject any revision of OTSUS and any evaluation of the
implementation of OTSUS.

2.We call for a Referendum.

3. We call on the UN to facilitate the process for a referendum in West
Papua.

4. We call on the UN to take action to uphold the rights of the indigenous people of West Papua.

Signed by:

Pares L. Wenda, Chairman for Politics, Law and Human Rights

Natalsen Basna, General Chairman

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑