Tag Archives: Hana Hikoyabi

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.]

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.

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.

MRP member Hanna Hikoyabi given 14 days to clarify her political position

Bintang Papua, 14 April 2011Abridged in translation by TAPOL

Hanna Hikoyabi is given 14 days  to clarify her political position of rejecting OTSUS

There were two persons whose swearing in as members of the new MRP did not take place, when the Indonesian interior minister Gamawan Fauzi swore in the members of the new MRP on 12 April. Of the 75 members, only 73 were sworn in.

One was Agus Alue Alua whose death was announced some days ago. The other was Hanna Salomina Hikoyabi. With regard to Ms Hikoyabi, she has been told by the interior minister that she must provide a ‘clarification’ within fourteen days before her membership of the MRP can be accepted. If she fails to provide this, another woman will take her seat in the MRP.

Didi Agus who is the acting head of the Unified Nation of the People of the Province of Papua refused to explain what conditions she would have to comply with nor why her swearing in was being delayed. But in an indirect fashion, he implied that it was connected with widespread actions rejecting special autonomy which took place during the run up to  the appointment of members of the new MRP in the early months of 2011.

Besides calling for the ‘return’ of OTSUS, they  also called for a dialogue between the Papuan people and Indonesia, mediated by a third party. These demands were drawn up at a mass assembly of Papuans that took place from 7 – 10 June 2010, which was held at the offices of the MRP. According to Didi, this could not be seen s a decision of the MRP and not all members were being held responsible for the decisions.

In a previous meeting that took place recently  between the minister of the interior and the governor of Papua in Jakarta,  it was stated that some candidates for the new MRP had constantly been talking about the ‘disintegration’  of the nation, whereas according to presidential regulation (PP) 54, 2004,  members of the MRP  must be loyal to the  Pancasila and to the Indonesian Constitution as a Unitary State.

If these problems were being raised, it would not only be Hanna Hikoyabi whose membership should be considered but others too who  also took part in the June 2010 meeting.