Tag: independence rallies

SMH: Papuans' Future an Open Question After Failure of Autonomy

MEDIA INFORMATION:

The Sydney Morning Herald
September 4, 2010
http://www.smh.com.au/world/papuans-future-an-open-question-after-failure-of-autonomy-20100903-14ucc.html

Papuans’ Future an Open Question After Failure of Autonomy

by Tom Allard

JAKARTA: A broad consensus is emerging in Indonesia that special
autonomy for the country’s fractious provinces of Papua and West
Papua has failed miserably.

> From military advisers to the President, Susilo Bambang
Yudhoyono, to respected think tanks and the indigenous
population of the resource-rich region, there is near unanimity
that the policy introduced almost 10 years ago to placate
separatist sentiment has resulted in only deeper discontent.
However, there is little agreement on who, and what, is to
blame, or how to repair the situation.

As part of a dialogue to address simmering discontent in the
region, the Indonesian government would have to acknowledge and
apologise for the manipulated vote in 1969 that led to its
inclusion in the republic, said the Jakarta-based analyst for
the International Crisis Group, Sidney Jones, the author of two
recent reports on the provinces.

Ms Jones warned that ”increased radicalisation is likely” if
reconciliation efforts are not pursued by Dr Yudhoyono.

Jakarta’s failure to address human-rights abuses in Papua and
West Papua, the two Indonesian provinces that make up the
western half of the island of New Guinea, the continuing heavy
presence of security forces, an influx of migrants, rampant
corruption and persistent poverty are all undermining the
”special autonomy” offered to the region almost a decade ago.

Violence has worsened in the past two years, and the Papuan
People’s Council, the body set up under special autonomy to
represent indigenous values, decided to symbolically ”hand
back” special autonomy to the provincial parliament as part of
a wave of mass rallies that took place in June and July.

Ms Jones said Dr Yudhoyono must begin talks as a matter of
urgency, starting discussions informally to avoid ”posturing on
both sides” before engaging in a public reconciliation. New
governing arrangements must then follow for the region, which
remains the major source of separatist agitation across the
sprawling multi-ethnic nation.

”They are going to have to address the Act of Free Choice and
acknowledge that there was a manipulated process,” Ms Jones
said. ”An apology and an acknowledgement about it is needed to
get over the hump.”

The region, with its Melanesian indigenous population, was
initially excluded from the fledgling Indonesian state during
negotiations with the former Dutch colonial government,
remaining under the control of the Netherlands until the 1960s.

Western powers ceded to Jakarta’s long-standing demands for the
region’s inclusion in the republic, but only after a United
Nations sponsored vote of Papuans. Rather than a broad
referendum, a hand-picked group of just over 1000 Papuans voted
unanimously in the 1969 plebiscite to join Indonesia. The vote
was widely derided as farcical and unrepresentative, and it
remains a potent source of rancour among Papuans and their most
powerful weapon in challenging the legitimacy of Jakarta’s rule.

While Ms Jones does not advocate a new referendum on Papuan
independence, or view it as likely, it remains a central demand
of a coalition of Papuan groups and the Papuan People’s Council,
or Majelis Rakyat Papua, a body with authority to speak for the
Melanesian population under the special autonomy arrangements.

Jakarta has declined to even respond to the demands. Even so, it
may well be a disappointing exercise for independence advocates
as the two provinces’ population is now reckoned to be split
evenly between the indigenous people and migrants from elsewhere
in Indonesia.

Dr Yudhoyono, in his only concession to the unrest, agreed to
begin an ”audit” of the region’s special autonomy next year.

Jakarta is dissatisfied with special autonomy because the Papuan
provinces get more money from the central government than any
other – $1 billion a year, or about 10 times more than provinces
in Java – but have yet to see much economic progress.

A leading Papuan activist in the main city of Jayapura,
Frederika Korain, said the special autonomy funds were going to
non-Melanesian Papuans who dominate the economy.

”In some areas, all the shops belong to non-Papuans,” she said.

Ms Korain said any reconciliation would have to be preceded by
the end to abuses by Indonesian security forces, curbing the
growth of pro-Jakarta militias and a sincere effort to give
Papuans back their ”dignity”.

She flagged a continuing campaign of mass mobilisation by
indigenous Papuans. While most are determined to pursue
non-violent means to achieve their ends, there is a small but
growing element who support taking armed action.

AIIA ACCESS 'West Papua's Search for Self-Determination' – Dr Scott Burchill and Herman Wainggai

http://blip.tv/file/4012065

Enjoy the viewing of parts 1 & 2 of the AIIA ACCESS ‘West Papua’s Search for Self-Determination’

Many thanks again to Dr Scott Burchill and Herman Wainggai for speaking, and of course the AIIA Victoria for hosting this event amid the diplomatic controversy.


Dr Scott Burchill


Herman Wainggai, WPNA

Part 1 | Part 2
At this Australian Institute of International Affairs event – which Indonesian Government officials tried to stop – political commentator and academic Dr Scott Burchill and West Papuan organiser Herman Wanggai talk about West Papua’s fight for self-determination.
The Indonesian province of West Papua has witnessed a struggle between Indonesian security forces and West Papuan resistance fighters since the 1960s. Tensions remain high today because of the cultural distinctiveness of the Melanesian Papuans, repression by the Indonesian military which observers have likened to the force once used against the East Timorese, and the richness of the province’s resources base. Burchill argues that Australia’s lack of concern is an ongoing effect of the Jakarta lobby’s discredited argument about the fragility of Indonesian territorial integrity, which continues to trump human rights concerns.
Melbourne, August 2010

Vanuatu's sellout to Indonesia disappoints West Papua at PIF

Opinion

August 17, 2010

Peter Woods

The conclusion of the Pacific Islands Forum has left a great sense of disappointment. There was every reason to think that Vanuatu would be the prominent voice in the forum for the West Papuan demand for a seat at the table. As recent as June 19 the Vanuatu Parliament passed a motion to bring the matter of West Papua to the UN this year.

All the public reports leading up to the forum, and the private assurances to the lobbying being done by the Vanuatu Free West Papua Association even up to the Prime Minister, gave every indication that West Papua  would be high on the agenda, and even that the representative West Papua delegates would at least be given observer status.

In his opening speech, incoming forum chairman Vanuatu Prime Minister Edward Nipake Natapei, said: ‘‘We need to be talking much more about how we can bring hope to the Pacific citizens who are struggling to find employment; who are without political freedom . . .’’

What happened? Nothing. Silence. No delegate raised any matter publicly concerning West Papua. All the talk was that politically, the matter of Fiji dominated, and that this shut down any further debate about West Papua. Three questions arise from this: Is this the real reason why West Papua was not promoted? If not what was the reason? Does this failure mean that Vanuatu’s sponsorship is now a lost cause for the West Papuan independence movement?

The real reason West Papua became the elephant in the room at the forum is that Natapei is obviously under great pressure from foreign powers — especially Australia, Papua New Guinea and Indonesia. Australia continues to advocate the territorial integrity of the Indonesian republic and the necessity of Special Autonomy working for West Papua. Australia is also the major development donor for the country, and that must come with some loyalty tag.

PNG, together with Solomon Islands, supports Fiji, contrary to Vanuatu who is taking the Australian/New Zealand stance. Indonesia, for its part, is increasingly muscling into the Pacific – it just supplied Vanuatu with new uniforms for its police force, and increased its presence from the usual six to 48 members at the most recent forum. These came in two waves, on August 1 and August 5, the last delegation including a West Papuan, Dr Felix Wainggai, an adviser to Indonesian President Susilo Bambang  Yudhoyono on development on East Indonesia.

This probably proved too much fire-power for the Vanuatu PM, who afterwards on radio claimed that his silence on West Papua was due to procedural matters to do with the Melanesian Spearhead Group.

Another angle on Vanuatu’s silence may have to do with the internal or external manifestations of the West Papuan independence groups themselves. A delegate to the PIF told Jacob Rumbiak, foreign affairs spokesman for the West Papuan National Authority (WPNA) and myself that the perception from inside the Vanuatu Foreign Office is that the West Papuan independence movement is still divided.

The reality on the ground, however, is that there is a growing consensus from among the majority of activist groups, and more importantly between the Presidium and the WPNA — the transitional government increasingly recognised across West Papua as a credible political next-step to the current frameworks within West Papua.

The ire has been raised, however, of the pro-West Papua council of chiefs and various members of the coalition. They see this as a cave-in and Natapei and his government may not last.

All may not be lost then regarding Vanuatu’s advocacy role for its Melanesian fellow countrymen in West Papua. PIF 2010 may prove a Pyrhhic victory for the countries leaning on Vanuatu. The groundswell of opposition is rising within Vanuatu.  This will either galvanise the Natapei government or replace it with a coalition really dedicated to proceed on the West Papuan issue. Vanuatu’s reluctant neighbours could indeed end up with a little mouse that is roaring in the Pacific.

Peter Woods spent five years in West Papua from 1978 to 1983.

West Papua is Indonesia’s Palestine.

West Papua is Indonesia’s Palestine.

Opinion
August 16, 2010

John Ondawame is right. West Papua is on the verge of a “total intifada” (Ben Bohane, ‘West Papua warns of intifada against Jakarta’, Sydney Morning Herald, August 7 2010). Intifada means to “shake off” in Arabic. It has become a word used to describe the desire by Palestinians to free themselves from foreign occupation. The question is what kind of intifada is and will take place in West Papua? Will it be like the recent Palestinian intifada, led by a resurgent Hamas? An uprising of fury waged through political terror. Or will it be like the 1987 Palestinian intifada, a largely unarmed insurrection?

West Papua is the Indonesia’s Palestine. Papuans consider that their land has been occupied without their consent. Freedom of expression is prohibited, foreign journalists banned, migrants continue to pour into the country, and the police and military keep a repressive lid on boiling Papuan anger. It is also a modern day Avatar. Papuans are defending their land form the exploitative practices of resource extractive industries. For the Papuans theirs is a struggle for survival.

However, unlike Palestine and the film Avatar, resistance to the Indonesian government’s rule has overwhelmingly been through civilian based movements. Only last month, for instance, 20,000 plus people – students, women, young people, religious leaders, NGO activists, traditional chiefs, farmers and even members of the Majelis Rakyat Papua, West Papua’s indigenous senate – all converged on the capital and occupied the provincial parliament for two days to pressure the Papuan political elite to hand back Special Autonomy, a package or policy, finance, and legislation designed to give Papuans a measure of self-rule. After ten years of broken promises and still born hopes, Papuans concluded Special Autonomy had failed. It is a news story that should have been covered by every major media outlet. But here in Australia we heard next to nothing.

Now, as Bohane writes, Papuans are feeling abandoned by their Melanesian kin. At the recent Pacific Island Forum, Vanuatu tried to raise the West Papua issue but Papua New Guinea’s political leaders blocked the discussion. Again. The Australia and New Zealand governments also failed to raise their voice for on behalf of Papuan rights. Again.

Some Papuan leaders are now talking about making the territory ungovernable through mass civilian based non-cooperation with Jakarta. How long civil resistance continues depends not only on the tactical and strategic choices made by Papuan leaders. In part it also depends on whether solidarity movements in the region, including inside Indonesia, can raise the political and economic costs so that political leaders and foreign companies feel compelled to agree to what Papuans have been demanding for years: political dialogue with Jakarta and the international community about their grievances.

Will the international community support the Papuan’s right to rise up for freedom? Or will they send the same message they sent to the Kosovo Albanians? That international intervention and the goal of independence will only come about when there is armed struggle and mass violence. Surely we can all do better than that.

Jason MacLeod

(The writer lectures in political science at the University of Queensland.)

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.”

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑