Tag: Impunity

PDP leader on dialogue: Don’t forget the OPM

[Slightly abridged in translation by TAPOL]

Bintang Papua, 27 March 2011

Jayapura: Thaha Alhamid, secretary general of  Papuan Presidium Council, (PDP),has welcomed the initiative taken by the Papuan Peace Network, the JDP, to seek to solve the Papuan problem by means of a Jakarta-Papua dialogue, and says this should include all the leaders of the struggle for Papuan independence, here in the Land of Papua as well as abroad. He was responding to a report in Saturday’s issue of Bintang Papua’s report regarding the initiative taken by Pastor Neles Tebay regarding dialogue.

But he said that the failure to include representatives of TPN/OPM in the JDP was a serious matter, bearing in mind that the OPM is still struggling in the forests of Papua. ‘I realise that there are problems of communication but that doesn’t mean that they should not be represented in the JDP.’ He said he was sure that the JDP would deal with this, bearing in  mind the fact that the TPN/OPM was present at the Grand Papuan Congress in 2001.

He said that the TPN/OPM consists of a considerable number  of groups but this does not mean that it should be excluded. Moreover there was once a UN resolution which made the point that geographical problems should not result in the exclusion of any communities. ‘I am sure that by means of a process of communication, the TPN/OPM will be represented in the  dialogue.’

He said that all sides should understand that dialogue or peaceful struggle has been the agreed platform of the Papuan people since the time of the IInd Papuan Congress when it was  decided that the Papuan struggle must be pursued by peaceful means and this means prioritising dialogue.

‘What we should focus on is not war but dialogue or peaceful struggle,’ he said.

He said that he welcomed the network, the communications, the role of civil society and the good initiative taken by LIPI, the Indonesian Institute of Sciences, to press for  dialogue He also recognised that it will not be easy.

In the first place, there needs to  be an internal Papuan dialogue, which should include all Papuans, including those  who are in the forssts, those who are living abroad or wherever they may be, for they are all entitled to have their say regarding the question of dialogue.

Secondly, for all those Papuans here in the Land of  Papua, there’s no need to consider what their background is because all Papuans have the right to say what they think the dialogue should discuss.

In the third place, the JDP has entered into communication with various groups at home as well as abroad in order to start preparing for the dialogue process, and  have agreed to a joint approach towards the central government in Jakarta.

‘If we intend to move towards the process of dialogue, bridges will need to be built  even if this brings in voices of people who are in favour or against, as all this must be part of the discussion. I am convinced that the JDP is not in any way subordinated to the central government; they are all leaders of civil society who are trying to find a middle way. Dialogue with those everywhere in the world is something that all of us should appreciate,’ he said.

Related Articles
0

AJI Papua Presses Police About Lack of Progress Over Stabbing

Media information FYI

The Jakarta Globe
Sunday, March 27, 2011

AJI Papua Presses Police About Lack of Progress Over Stabbing

The Papua chapter of the Alliance of Independent Journalists has
expressed frustration with the sluggish pace of police investigations
into the stabbing of local journalist Banjir Ambarita.

“The investigation is taking too long, that is why we are monitoring
the case closely,” said Viktor Mambor, chairman of the Papuan branch
of the alliance also known as the AJI. “We are going to do something
to pressure the police, like hold a protest rally.”

“The new [Papua] police chief was once in Densus [the National
>Police’s counterterrorism unit], investigating a case like this should
be easier than capturing terrorists,” he said.

Banjir, a freelance reporter and contributor to the Jakarta Globe, was
attacked in Jayapura by two men on a motorcycle as he was riding his
own motorcycle home shortly after midnight on March 3.

The Jayapura Police’s detective unit questioned Banjir on Friday, more
than three weeks after the stabbing. “Because Banjar Ambarita’s
condition has improved, we formally asked him for information in
relation to the stabbing,” said First Adj. Insp. Widodo, an officer in
the unit. “A total of 37 questions were posed and were answered well.

“We have already questioned five witnesses, but we have yet to find a
lead,” he added.

Viktor said the AJI appreciated the police’s efforts but said: “Even
though they are working quite well in carrying out their job, this does not guarantee that they are taking the case seriously.”

Poengky Indarty, director of external relations at rights group Imparsial, said that as a defender of human rights in Papua, it was
vital that Banjir be protected.

“Until today, the perpetrators responsible for the violence have not
been identified,” she said. “We urge the Papuan Police to make every
effort to catch the offenders and legally process them.”

She said Banjir had provided police with information to make a sketch
of his attackers. “We want them to investigate based on this sketch
and look into police officers who may be involved in the case,” she
said.
Nurfika Osman

Related Articles
0

The Observatory: Indonesia: Brutal attack against journalist Banjir Ambarita

URGENT APPEAL- THE OBSERVATORY

IDN 001 / 0311 / OBS 049

Attack

Indonesia

March 25, 2011

The Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, a joint
programme of the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) and the
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), has received new
information and requests your urgent intervention in the following
situation in Indonesia.

Description of the situation:

The Observatory has been informed by reliable sources of the brutal
attack against Mr. Banjir Ambarita, journalist, after the publication of several of his articles in the local newspaper Bintang Papua of Jayapura, Papua province, and in the Jakarta Globe, denouncing sexual abuses committed by police officers in Jayapura.

According to the information received, on March 3, 2011, Mr. Banjir
Ambarita was riding his motorcycle in front of the Jayapura Mayor?s
office, when two unknown men on a motorcycle reportedly approached him, stabbed him twice in the chest and stomach and fled. As he began to bleed, Mr. Banjir Ambarita drove to the nearby police station. Police officers took him to the Marthen Indey Hospital in Aryoko, Jayapura, where he underwent surgery. He has reportedly recovered since then.

The Papua Regional Police and the Jayapura Police have set up a joint
force to investigate the case, but to date, perpetrators remain unknown.

Mr. Banjir Ambarita had recently written articles in the Bintang Papua and in the Jakarta Globe about two alleged rape cases involving the police.

In the first article, he had written that four police officers and three
civilians allegedly raped and tortured a 15 year old girl in February
2011, in Biak, Papua province. The last article, dated February 27,
2011, covered a second case in which three police officers forced a
woman detainee to perform oral sex on them from November 2010 to January 2011 at the Jayapura Police Detention Centre in Papua province. The media coverage of this incident led to the resignation of the Jayapura’s Police Chief, Mr. Imam Setiawan, and to the sentencing to 21 days of jail for the officers involved.

The Observatory expresses its deepest concern about the attack on Mr. Banjir Ambarita, which seems to merely aim at sanctioning his
denunciation of human rights violations, and urges the authorities to
ensure his protection and to promptly investigate into the
above-mentioned facts.

Actions requested:

The Observatory urges the authorities of Indonesia to:

i. Guarantee in all circumstances the physical and psychological
integrity of Mr. Banjir Ambarita, as well as all human rights defenders
in Indonesia;

ii. Carry out a prompt, effective, thorough, independent and impartial
investigation into the above-mentioned events, the result of which must be made public, in order to prosecute and try the perpetrators of these violations before a competent, independent and impartial tribunal;

iii. Conform in all circumstances with the provisions of the Declaration
on Human Rights Defenders, adopted on December 9, 1998 by the United Nations General Assembly, in particular:

– Article 1, which states that ?Everyone has the right, individually or
in association with others, to promote the protection and realization of
human rights and fundamental freedoms at the national and international levels;

– Article 6, which provides that: “Everyone has the right, individually
and in association with others: (a) to know, seek, obtain, receive and
hold information about all human rights and fundamental freedoms (?);
(b) freely to publish, impart or disseminate to others views, information and knowledge on all human rights and fundamental freedoms”;
(c) to study, discuss, form and hold opinions on the observance, both in law and in practice, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms and, through these and other appropriate means, to draw public attention to those matters”,

– Article 12.2 which provides that “The State shall take all necessary
measures to ensure the protection by the competent authorities of
everyone, individually and in association with others, against any
violence, threats, retaliation, de facto or de jure adverse discrimination, pressure or any other arbitrary action as a consequence
of his or her legitimate exercise of the rights referred to in the present Declaration”;

iv. Ensure in all circumstances the respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in accordance with the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights and with international and regional human rights
instruments ratified by Indonesia.

Addresses:

  • HE. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, President of the Republic of Indonesia, Presidential Palace, Istana Merdeka, Jakarta 10110, Indonesia; Fax: +6221 345 2685/526 8726
  • Mr. Gamawan Fauzi. Minister of Home Affairs, Jl. Medan Merdeka Utara No. 7, Jakarta Pusat, Indonesia, Fax +62 21 385 1193 / +62 21 384 6430, Email: pusdatinkomtel@depdagri.go.id⁢mailto:pusdatinkomtel@depdagri.go.id>
  • Mr. Patrialis Akbar, Minister for Justice and Human Rights, Department of Justice and Human Rights, Jl. H.R. Rasuna Said Kav No. 4-5, Kuningan – Jakarta Selatan 12950, Indonesia,
    Fax: + 62 21 525 3095/ 310 4149/ 522 5036,
    Email: rohumas@depkehham.go.id
  • Indonesian National Commission on Human Rights, Jl. Latuharhary No 4B, Menteng, Jakarta Pusat 10310, Indonesia, Fax : +62 21 392 5227, Email: info@komnasham.go.id
  • Permanent Mission of the Republic of Indonesia in Geneva, Rue de Saint-Jean 16, Case Postale 2271, 1211 Geneva 2, Suisse, Fax: +41 22 345 57 33, Email: mission.indonesia@ties.itu.int
  • Embassy of the Republic of Indonesia to the Kingdom of Belgium, Boulevard de la Woluwe 38, B-1200, Brussels, Belgium, Fax +32 27 72 82 10, Email: primebxl@skynet.be

Please also write to the diplomatic representations of Indonesia in your
respective countries.

***
Geneva-Paris, March 25, 2011

* *

Kindly inform us of any action undertaken quoting the code of this
appeal in your reply.

The Observatory, an OMCT and FIDH venture, is dedicated to the
protection of Human Rights Defenders and aims to offer them concrete
support in their time of need.

To contact the Observatory, call the emergency line:

· E-mail: Appeals@fidh-omct.org

· Tel and fax OMCT + 41 22 809 49 39 / + 41 22 809 49 29

· Tel and fax FIDH + 33 1 43 55 25 18 / +33 1 43 55 18 80

Related Articles
0

Broadcasting Papua’s Songs of Freedom: Why the international community must support West Papua’s citizen media development

FREE THE PEOPLE? FREE THE MEDIA!

by Nick Chesterfield

A Paper presented at the University of Sydney Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies “Comprehending Papua Conference”, February 22-23, 2011.    This paper will form a chapter of the forthcoming book “Comprehending Papua”, to be published in early 2011 by the University of Sydney Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies.

———

It is almost a cliché today that peoples wishing to free themselves from tyranny are turning in huge numbers to citizen journalism both to tell their stories to the outside world, and to put a formidable brake on the out of sight, out of mind mentality that allows state organs to conduct constant abuse with impunity. The rise of citizen media is giving mainstream journalism the kick it needs to remember its core business of giving voice to the voiceless.  In West Papua, the Voiceless are slowly discovering they can roar.

Just a few weeks ago an event occurred in Tunisia that was to be the spark for the pan-Arab awakening which has just seen yet another dictator ousted, now in Egypt.  After a local trader immolated himself in protest against the Tunisian regime, citizen media succeeded in viralizing the news of this event.  “We could protest for two years here, but without videos no one would take any notice of us,” said a relative of the martyred 25-year-old.

For media activists and journalists reporting Papua, this truth is self-evident, and its acceptance hopefully could ignite the spark of uprising in Papua.  The opportunities presented by the Pan-Arab (and other) awakenings are not being lost on the young generation in Papua.  Social media in Papua is buzzing, unafraid, with vibrant discussions of implications for Papua of the pan-Arabic revolutionary success.  The reality is that a spontaneous awakening and mass politicisation of ordinary Papuans is completely inevitable, and it is being ably assisted by switched-on local people developing their capacity to tell the story to the world.

In researching for several stories over the last few months, my sources have told me in no uncertain terms that they are all ready for a trigger to explode the situation.  The only thing holding back sustained mass action – revolution even – across occupied Papua is the constant bickering between exile groups, the actions of the collaborator elites, desperate to cling to the illusion that Jakarta is not there just to steal their land and send them to the moon, and for those who will put their own interests ahead of those surviving under occupation.

What is a mystery is how this mass consciousness will survive the elite and exile power games that are evident in most transitional polities throughout recent history (and is certainly present in West Papua today); whether those exiles will hijack the efforts of the young generation or listen to the actual wishes of their people; and if Jakarta can be trusted not to unleash the truly evil and deeply entrenched habitual brutality that is its only constant in becoming the new colonialists; or that they will claim their place amongst the civilised by not slaughtering those who want peace. History is a wise teacher, and its lesson is never trust the evil or greedy to reform of its own accord.

To keep these ugly realities in check, West Papua (and the international community) needs a determined, effective, vibrant and fearless citizen and professional media to deliver real-time accountability both internally and internationally.

Real time advocacy is vital for the international community to act to end Papua’s suffering.  Human Rights advocates conduct scientific research into abuses, but because this information does not get out easily, the problems in Papua are only now getting known to the world.

I need to ask you all today an honest question:  without the hard work of journalists in Papua and those outside assisting them to get their voice to international media, would Papua even be in people’s consciousness today?   So why is the international arena concerned with West Papua falling prey to the disease of factionalism and Big Man syndrome, and not in assisting WestPapuan people to get their stories into the living rooms of the world?

Many loud mouthed exiles claim significant legitimacy, but baulk and splutter when asked to prove it.   This has developed a culture of opacity across the exile movement.  A strong and diverse citizen based media across Papua can easily counter exile’s game playing and false claims by ensuring credibility and honesty in social movements. It benefits and strengthens social movements too by giving the skills and practice for sharpening their message, and creating a powerful argument for international support for their aims.  Strong domestic media also removes international government’s excuses for inaction, by seriously raising the credibility and verification bar.

If the international community is serious about improving the lives of Papuan people, it will help develop the capacity of the West Papuan media to tell the story of what is going on, and press Jakarta hard to allow immediate international media access.  After all, with full accountability, what is there to be afraid of?

Largely in response to years of wilful ignorance and self-censorship of the Indonesian created horrors in West Papua by international media, many sectors of Papuan society spontaneously and independently began a dramatic take-up of social media technology, exponentially increasing since 2008. Blogs, social networking and online media outlets are being utilized all over the country, by a young generation of Papuans impatient for real change.  Today’s mass Papuan movement is mainly urban, educated, innovative, nonviolence based, and embracing significantly the power of citizen and social media as a key plank of civil resistance strategy.

Very occasionally West Papua does get in the news, but only through the co-ordination between committed journalists and human rights workers working together and ear-bashing news editors.

Due to the ongoing ban by Indonesia on international media and humanitarian organisations having access to Papua, allegations of abuse are notoriously difficult to verify.  While this ban remains in place, only the most dedicated journalists make the effort to go in undercover.   West Papua Media has been proud to facilitate undercover trips into occupied territory to meet with many West Papuan people prepare to tell their own story. This is getting more difficult by the day so local people are working for a solution.

Live images, videos and online activism by Papuan people have already created tremendous momentum in action and awareness of Papua.  By creating their own media, and their own narrative, Papuan people are reclaiming self-determination denied for so long.

Reporting in West Papua is a highly risky business.   Journalists, Papuan and outsiders alike, are under constant threats for reporting West Papua, with four journalists dying in suspicious circumstance in 2010 alone.  Anywhere journalists report fearlessly they are targets, but most journalists in West Papua simply put up with it, they have no other option.  What can we do to lessen their risk?

Partly in response to this danger and partly to give local journalists a voice globally, West Papua Media (WPMA) (WestPapuaMedia.Info) was started. It aims to provide a professional service to international media covering West Papua, ensuring high quality, verifiable reporting gets into the international media, directly from the ground, and not from those who seek to distort the truth of daily experience in Papua.  By reporting Papuan campaigns to end human rights abuses and bringing these unreported Papuan issues to the front page, we hope to hold the abusers to account. With an ever growing stable of committed and disparate voices from citizen media to professional journalists, West Papua Media is proud and excited to be part of this movement.

Some of our real time work has assisted directly in the prevention of mass acts of violence by the Indonesian security forces, such as our coverage and media advocacy fixing of the July 8-9 Otsus Gagal demos and occupation of the Jayapura DPRP.

Less than ten minutes before the deadline for dispersal of the 2 day rally of over 45,000 people, Indonesian security forces were forced to back down after a BBC report aired, organised by WPMA, which brought international attention the explosively dangerous situation.  Extensive international diplomacy occurred in that 15 minutes and, together with the extreme discipline of the mass protest, enabled the protestors to peaceably leave the scene of the protest without violence.

WPMA has worked very hard raising the media profile of West Papua, with significant joint investigations with major media outlets breaking several key stories in 2010.  None of this would be possible without deep trust from the people of Papua in reporting their stories.  West Papuan citizen media, in conjunction with several colleagues here today, played a key role in alerting the world to deeply heinous cases of abuse.

One was the sourcing, verification and release of the deeply shocking leaked Kostrad torture videos of civilians in Puncak Jaya. The Kiwo incident neatly captures why the Indonesian military cannot be trusted to reform themselves from the inside, and why the role of a robust media is so critical in Papua.

The other was footage of Indonesian BRIMOB police taunting a former political prisoner Yawan Wayeni, having disembowelled him moments before for arguing with them. Both these videos showed the power of citizen media in activating international human rights networks to effectively raise the issue of Papua. Of course, there are many more videos in preparation for release.

A swarm movement cannot have a single media strategy, but media need to understand that it will get media out in its own way too.  The media that had wilfully ignored West Papua’s voice for so long really has no right to dictate how information disseminates, and if it wants to get the stories before others, then it just has to move faster.  Because it is new media techniques that have already, and will propel Papua onto the front page, to make people choke on their cornflakes.

Likewise, evidence dissemination also needs multiple, failsafe distribution routes: Single dissemination routes can easily be shut down or silenced.  West Papuans have tailored their mechanisms to this very effectively; yet this is significantly frustrating outside journalists.  According to many in mainstream media, West Papuans can be their own worst enemy when it comes to disseminating information.  People on the ground do need to get smarter about media distribution strategies, but the media also must adapt to a social and cultural reality.  West Papuan human rights and citizen media are not chaotic: they are maximising the potential audience  for their information.

It is important to understand that no one faction or sector in West Papua can claim dominance or leadership of this mass movement. This is not Congress in India and there is no single Gandhi figure. Rather, this is a movement with thousands of Gandhis.  The civil movement refuses to be based around a single leadership group, and instead features multitudes of groups and tribes all acting autonomously and independently (where everyone knows their role and works their hardest) but which is nevertheless unified under its collective goals.

Such a swarm structure can occasionally present difficulties for those who cannot think outside traditional top-down strategies for national change, which includes traditional media. Rather than being shut out of dialogue by the game playing of unaccountable elites, this type of structure encourages a longer lasting peace by enabling all actors to have their voices heard. It is also a natural strategy to employ in a nation where it is,  for the most part, illegal to congregate in groups.

Other barriers for West Papuan media are much more easily solved with a bit of training, and understanding the enemy (this time the enemy being the unreasonable expectations of media executives far removed from reality).

One issue is the lack of speed with which many West Papuan media activists work, and whilst improving, an event on a day has to be filmed, edited, packaged and disseminated as fast as possible. There are issues of journalistic discipline and professional journalistic practice in new media; safe information gathering, abuse documentation and investigative journalism methodology; information quality assurance; protection of sources, and more.

Effective citizen and professional media training is required to develop awareness of major current and future challenges to safe information dissemination – these are all programs that the West Papua Media network is currently engaged in and it needs help to increase its capacity.

All of this costs money, and requires the international community to understand that the development of indigenous journalism in West Papua is crucial to the protection of human security and peace across the entire Asia-Pacific region.  It requires international institutions in media and academia to get out of their cloisters and get muddy, to actually pool resources and help identify new sources of sustainable funding to start training journalists in innovative new media reportage techniques, and to support their work for the global human interest.  As I said before, West Papua Media already has training programs ready to go, we just need the funds to make them happen.

In West Papua, as across the world, accountability is always the simplest solution to combatting impunity. An aggressive culture of investigative journalism must be encouraged, and the skills to enable it must be developed, to deliver that accountability, be it in human rights, against military business mafias and corruption, human security, environmental protections, etcetera, and to cover (and protect) the desires of a population to determine their own future, in both the current occupation and in any situation for the future.  Both academia and international media must take a strong role in its development, to embed international protections to enable West Papua’s journalists and citizen media to report without fear, hindrance or threat, the stories that are important to West Papuan people and their freedom.

Our hope is that we have a really robust citizen media that can deliver accountability.  We want to stop people from being afraid of speaking out, and we want West Papua’s voice to be its weapon, to broadcast its songs for Freedom.

Nick Chesterfield, editor at westpapuamedia.info, is a human security journalist and activist with extensive experience of the Papua issue through refugee protection, human rights, environmental protection, and citizen media work and safety training. He has conducted many field investigations in the West Papuan region since 1999. Together with citizen media and human rights workers from inside Papua, Chesterfield helped set up West Papua Media in 2008, to counter the wilful lack of coverage of West Papua by the international press.

 

2

The Indonesian Government: closing window for peace in West Papua

This article originally appeared at
Jason MacLeod

Just as Indonesia’s president Susilo Bambang Yudhuyono was being feted globally for being a democrat, the Indonesian government was entrenching Papua’s reputation as Indonesia’s last bastion of authoritarian military rule. Now Peace Brigades International has finally been forced out.

The latest casualty in the Indonesian Government’s efforts to seal off West Papua from international scrutiny is Peace Brigades International (PBI). In January this year the international non-government organisation was finally forced out of Indonesia. Since 1981 at the invitation of local people, PBI has been providing unarmed protection to human rights defenders at risk in conflict zones around the world. International accompaniment is literally the embodiment of the international community’s concern. The presence of internationals increases the cost of attacking human rights workers and expands the political space for local activists. All this is made possible by an elaborate communication network. PBI staff meet with local police and military personal as well as their superiors in regional and national capitals to let them know exactly who is being accompanied. This acts as a deterrent. The PBI volunteers are the eyes and ears of the international community, communicating the human rights situation on the ground to an international network of governments and civil society actors. It is a tried and tested approach that has worked in places as diverse as El Salvador, Guatemala, Colombia, Haiti, Sri Lanka and Nepal.

Members of the PBI Indonesia Project were invited by Acehenese activists to accompany them through the darkest days of martial law. Acehenese civil society organisations like Flower Aceh and Koalisi HAM (the Human Rights Coalition) were able to continue their work because of PBI protective accompaniment. It gave local workers a sense that the international community cared about their situation and sent a clear message to the Indonesian army that they were being watched. PBIs protective accompaniment helped expand the space for peace in Aceh in the lead up to the historic Helsinki Peace Agreement. But in West Papua, home to Indonesia’s longest running separatist conflict, the world’s oldest international nonviolence organisation has finally met its match. After years of harassment from the Indonesian security forces the PBI Indonesia Project was closed down.

My colleagues and I helped set up the PBI West Papua project in 2003. I left the organisation in 2004 but kept in close contact with many of the organisers and staff members. One of the reasons PBI responded to an invitation from Papuan human rights defenders was because for years the Indonesian government has closed off access to West Papua to humanitarian organisations, journalists and even diplomats. It is important that Papua is opened up to the international community if human rights are to be addressed. But while the rest of Indonesia moved towards greater democracy, Papua slid back into an authoritarian backwater ruled by the Indonesian security forces as if it was their own private fiefdom. Since PBI established a presence in West Papua Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the Dutch NGO CordAid and even the Red Cross have all been denied access. This level of hostility by a State to international scrutiny of a human rights situation is unusual. Even during the height of apartheid, the South African government permitted the Red Cross access to political prisoners. Not so in West Papua.

Prior to being forced out of West Papua, PBI was the only international human rights organisation with a permanent presence in Indonesia’s restive Pacific periphery. A group of long-term international volunteers based in Jayapura, the capital and in Wamena, in the troubled highlands, provided unarmed protection for Indonesian and Papuan human rights defenders and monitored the situation on the ground. PBI helped protect human rights defenders and lawyers trying to expose police brutality during the ‘Bloody Abepura’ trial in 2004. PBI also protected Papuan human rights defenders who were investigating the security forces after they cracked down on Papuans in the wake of the March 16 2006 blockade of the main road outside the University of Cendrawasih in Jayapura.

PBI is governed by a strict mandate. The organisation only supports unarmed actors, they do not take sides and they do not tell Papuans how they should run their struggle. Despite this the Indonesian government was petrified of PBI. I experienced this personally. When I was taken in for questioning in West Papua in 2007 after observing a demonstration in Papua, the very first question the Indonesian police intelligence agent asked me – even before enquiring whether I was a journalist or spy – was “Are you PBI?” By then I had left the organisation but it revealed the depth of the intelligence services concerns about PBI.

Almost from the moment PBI started work in West Papua the Indonesian government acted to restrict PBI’s access and ability to work. In 2009 the organisation was pressured to close the Wamena office in West Papua’s remote highlands, the scene of frequent human rights violations by the Indonesian military. PBI staff were refused permission to work as the police and intelligence services launched an official investigation into the organisation’s status. National Indonesian staff started to receive threatening phone calls. They felt increasingly vulnerable.

By late 2009 all one-on-one protective accompaniment had ceased. In an effort to stay in Papua protective strategies were reduced to regular check-in calls with PBI clients who felt threatened by state security forces. Then on 30 July 2010 Ardiansyah Matra’is’s naked, handcuffed body was found in the River Gudang Arang. His arm had been tied to a tree to prevent his body from floating downstream. Matra’is was a journalist working for Papua’s only national independent paper, Jubi. Matra’is had been critical of illegal logging operations run by the Indonesian military in Merauke and had taken photos of their activities. Matra’is was also a PBI client. His murder was the first time in Indonesia that a current PBI client had been killed.

The writing was on the wall: PBI was no longer making space for peace in Papua. In fact the opposite was happening. The Indonesian government was closing space for peace in Papua, and PBI appeared powerless to halt the slide into greater military impunity. Just as Indonesia’s president Susilo Bambang Yudhuyono was being feted globally for being a democrat, the Indonesian government was entrenching Papua’s reputation as Indonesia’s last bastion of authoritarian military rule.

But the Indonesian government’s restriction of access to West Papua is not just confined to grassroots international nonviolence organisations. Jakarta is even willing to snub the US government. In late 2010 the US Ambassador, Scott Marciel asked the Indonesian government if staff from the Embassy could observe the trial of three soldiers involved in torturing Papuan civilians. The torture, which including burning a man’s genitals with a stick, was filmed on a mobile phone camera and leaked to transnational human rights networks. When the footage was uploaded on to YouTube and featured on domestic and international news networks it generated massive moral outrage not just internationally but inside Indonesia as well. When the trial went ahead last month, Mr. Marciel was notified by the Indonesian government only 24 hours beforehand, not enough time to apply for a surat jalan, a letter of permission to travel to West Papua required by the Indonesian government. It was not an official denial from the Indonesian government but it may as well have been.

The Indonesian government is blocking access for all those who want to shine a light into West Papua. The problem for the Indonesian president, Susilo Bambang Yudhuyono is that he has allowed the Indonesian intelligence services to dominate decision-making processes in West Papua. The intelligence services determine who gets access into West Papua and who does not. They are the ones who assess the applications of foreign NGOs, journalists and even diplomats who want to travel to West Papua. Access to West Papua should be subjected to the rule of law and not to surveillance principles. If democracy and rule of law was present in West Papua, the surat jalan regime would be abolished altogether.

The Indonesian government cannot have it both ways. The human rights situation in West Papua cannot be fine while at the same time the Indonesian government and its intelligence and security forces insist the territory is off limits to foreigners. Either human rights are respected in West Papua or they are not. The closure of PBI in Indonesia only sharpens the international community’s perception that the Indonesian government has something to hide in West Papua.

Jason MacLeod worked for the PBI Indonesia Project from 2000 to 2004. He teaches civil resistance at the University of Queensland.
Related Articles
4

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑