Tag: failure of Special Autonomy

Numerous problems in Papua since OTSUS was enacted

JUBI. 15 May 2011Since the enactment of OTSUS, the special autonomy law for Papua, a pile of problems have hit Papua. There has been no decline in the number of problems; on the contrary, they have steadily increased.Many buildings have been constructed that are of no benefit to the indigenous population. Take for instance the construction of commercial premises and the fate of Papuan businesspeople. ‘These buildings are for other people,’ said Olga Helena Hamadi, Director of the Commission for Disappearances and the Victims of violence, KontraS, on Saturday.

As for the demands for permanent business premises for Papuan businessmen, they are still struggling for this to happen. Their future is still very much in the air. The kind of premises they have been calling for have not been built by the government. The premises that have been built do not last long even though they have been calling for this since 2004., she said.

OTSUS makes provision for a Commission of Truth and Reconciliation to be set up but all that has happened since OTSUS has been the creation of a National Human Rights Commission which means that human rights violations, acts of violence and shootings are only dealt with by the Komnas HAM. The result is that many cases have got stuck, some of which got no farther than a court hearing. There has been no follow-up.

Furthermore, there has been no proper accounting for OTSUS funds. No procedures are in place to control the use of these funds. There is no accountability because no procedures have been put in place.

She said that all these things point to the failure of OTSUS, which has failed because no procedures have been put in place.

She said that she was making these clarifications because  of a previous news report  that OTSUS had not failed.. ‘We dont agree that OTSUS has not been a failure, because since the enactment of OSUS, a number of problems have emerged.’

Translated by TAPOL

Related articles
3

DPRP condemned for failing to keep its promises

JUBI, 12 May 2011

DPRP never keeps its promises

The chairman of Papuan Anti Militarism Solidarity, SRPAM, Elias Petege,
has called the DPRP, the provincial legislative assembly, a body that
always breaks its promises. So no one should be surprised that many of
the people’s aspirations have not been met. He said that to this day,
the DPRP has failed to keep its promise to meet the SRPAM in order to
discuss ways of solving the violation of human rights in Dogiyai.

‘Yesterday the DPRP accepted a request by our demonstration and promised
to meet us today but they didn’t keep their promise, without explaining
why.’

Petege said that during an action that took place yesterday, 11 May,
SRPAM called on the chief of police to dismiss the chief of police in
Papua, the chief of police in Nabire and the chief of police in
Moenamani because they had done nothing to halt the gambling that is
believed to have the support of the police in Moenamani.in the
sub-district of Dogiyai.

As a result, a fight broke out between the local police and the local
community during which several members of the community were killed.

The DPRP was also called upon to immediately mediate between the two
sides in order to solve the problem. Via the intermediary of the deputy
chairman of commission A, the DPRP promised to hold a meeting with
SRPAM to discuss measures that need to be taken, but unfortunately this
turns out to have been nothing more than lip service.

In the opinion of Petege, the DPRP is simply not bothered about the
matter and has failed to respond to the aspirations of Papuan people.
The DPRP just allows human rights violations to go on happening in Papua
without lifting a finger,’ he said.

‘We feel very disappointed indeed and have lost all confidence in the
DPRP. Just imagine, we arrived at their office at 9am and stayed there
until 3pm, but there was no one at all at the office and no one there to
explain why they were absent.’

Related articles
1

Hana Hikoyabi formally challenges interior minister for rejecting her membership of the MRP

From Bintang Papua 1 May 2011,[Abridged in translation by TAPOL]

By Hana Hikoyabi

Although I was elected democratically as a member of the MRP – Majelis Rakyat Papua – from election constituency 1 and my election was confirmed by the  the district chief and the governor, my membership has been rejected by the Interior Minister, like someone who has been found guilty though nothing has been proven in a court of law, I wish herewith the challenge the minister’s decision which is quite without any justification.

I fully conformed with all the procedures as required. including police requirement, for the district  of Jayapura district, the Keerom district for the period 2011 – 2016.

According to informed from the MRP secretary I was referred to  as being  a person not suitable for membership because I do not conform with the requirements.

According to government decision 64/2008, anyone whose membership is not acceptable can seek clarification.

I object to the decision of the interior minister to the effect that the membership of Dra Hana Salomina Hikoyabi and Drs Agus Alue Alua cannot be confirmed as members. as we do not conform with the requirements under article 4 (c), (d)  and (h). This article  says that members must be loyal  to the  Pancasila and have a strong commitment  to protecting the community and loyalty to the Indonesian Constitution, should be a person of high moral standing and be a model to the community.  and has not been found guilty of anything under law. These requirements are set down clearly under law.

According to PP54/ 2004 regarding the MRP,  the person shall not have been found guilty in a court of law for committing a crime and receiving a sentence of five year or more.

In accordance with the above,  it is clear that the decision to reject my appointment as  member of the MRP is in conflict with the law, because it is not based on any court verdict.

This places me in the difficult position of  having been responsible for an act of treason – makar – whereas at the time that I nominated myself for member of the MRP form 2011 – 2016, I received an official confirmation from the local police and from the local court of law that I am well-behaved and have never been found guilty of anything or convicted of anything

The minister’s decision means that the statements issued by the police and the Jayapura district court are unlawful. It also means that the administrative procedures regarding personnel cannot be relied upon as the way of handling the governance. in accordance with the rule of law.

[Note: The MRP consists of Papuans from three groups, women, youth and traditional clans.]

Related articles
1

Hana Hikoyabi advised to withdraw from MRP and struggle from outside

Bintang Papua, 17 April 2011Jayapura: Now that the deadline of 14 days set for MRP member Hana Hikoyabi [to produce a clarification of her position] has passed since the swearing in of members of the new MRP, it would be better if she were to withdraw as a member of the MRP.

Political commentator Lamadi de Lamato told Bintang Papua that  she should withdraw her name as a member  rather than sit as a member of the MRP and keep having her critical remarks pounced on by the central government. According to the logic of the Indonesian state, the policies of the state must be accepted  even though they fail to take the side of the Papuan people, he said.

In his opinion, Hana should withdraw her name and wage her struggle from the outside without having to make compromises.

Many Papuans would have far greater respect for her outside the MRP than if she were a member  According to Lamadi, insisting that Hana should produce a clarification was virtually an act of terror  against an MRP member, warning her not to be critical  or consider the aspirations of the Papua people.

‘This is just like what happened under the New Order (of Suharto) and its demands for special investigations ((Litsus) towards people who were regarded as enemies of the state,’ he said.

There are many things that are going wrong in Papua; any protest  should not necessarily result in restrictions being imposed on people.

‘Hana  should not be treated like an enemy  and be forced to be loyal to whatever the state demands. Some people believe that the former chairman of the MRP Agus Alua  died because of his disagreements  with things coming from central government, but he should not be blamed for that.’

With regard to the recruitment of members of the new MRP, many people feel very disappointed. ‘The state can act as it likes, but these acts of terror should end,’ he said.

As already reported, the new MRP should have 75 members but only 73 were sworn in because two names had been struck off the list, Agus Alua and Hana Hikoyabi. It was said that if these two had delivered written statements of verification, they could both have been appointed as members of the MRP.

Related Articles
1

Interior Minister accused of exceeding his powers in excluding Hikoyabi

Bintang Papua, 14 Apil 2011
Abridged in translation by TAPOLJayapura: The statement by the interior minister, Gamawan Fauzi, that Hana S. Hikoyabi, member of the first-term MRP must deliver a clarification about her position within 14 days before being sworn in as a member of the new MRP was described  by Budi Setyanto SH as being beyond his authority and in breach of the law.

Since that person was chosen by the people, the interior minister should have sworn her in on 12 April.

If he declares that Hana does not agree with Special Autonomy (OTSUS) or with the way of recruiting of members of the MRP, this is simply a difference of opinion but the fact is that she was chosen by the Papuan people means that she clearly does not reject OTSUS because the MRP was set up because of OTSUS, and without OTSUS, there would be no MRP.

Budi said that the interior minister’s statement is against the law.

A member of the first MRP, Simon Simunapendi, said that the failure to swear in Hana Hikoyabi was because she had been told to produce a clarification with regard to the grand assembly held from 7-10 June 2010 and reveals a misunderstanding  about the role of that assembly because Law 21/2001  Article 20  makes it clear that members of the MRP must promote the aspirations of the Papuan people. Bearing in mind that these aspirations were expressed by representations of 254 ethnic groups  who had come together to express their aspirations, it meant that Agus Alue Alua and Hana Hikoyabi were duty-bound to present these aspirations to the DPRP.

They were only acting in accordance with the provisions of the MRP, expressing the wishes of 254 ethnic groups, and there was no other motive for what they did.
.
Since the news that Hana Hikoyabi had not been sworn in as a member of the MRP, no one has been able to make contact with her, including people from the media. The failure to swear her is seen as being directly connected to the many actions rejecting OTSUS that have taken place since the beginning of 2011.

The decisions taken at the grand assembly in June 2010 were not the product of the MRP and the individual members of the MRP cannot be held personally responsible for those decisions.

Related Articles
2

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑