Tag: US Military Cooperation

USGOV: 2010 Human Rights Report: Indonesia

BUREAU OF DEMOCRACY, HUMAN RIGHTS, AND LABOR

2010 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices

April 8, 2011

Indonesia is a multiparty democracy with a population of approximately 237 million. In July 2009 Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono was reelected president in free and fair elections. Domestic and international observers judged the April 2009 legislative elections generally free and fair as well. Security forces reported to civilian authorities, although the fact the Indonesian Armed Forces (TNI) continued to be partly self-financed had the potential to weaken this control.

Human rights problems during the year included: occasional incidents, primarily in Papua and West Papua Provinces, of arbitrary and unlawful killings by security forces; vigilantism; sometimes harsh prison conditions; impunity for some officials; official corruption, including in the judicial system; some narrow and specific limitations on freedom of expression; societal abuse against religious groups and interference with freedom of religion sometimes with the complicity of local officials; trafficking in persons; child labor; and failure to enforce labor standards and worker rights.

DOWNLOAD FULL REPORT HERE:

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2010/eap/154385.htm

Related Articles
1

Statement on Indonesia Intelligence Bill Drafting

Advocacy Coalition on Indonesia Intelligence Bill Joint Statement
http://idsps.org/english-news/pers-release/advocacy-coalition-on-indonesia-intelligence-bill-joint-statement-201104035746/ 

Indonesian parliament with the government plans to ratify the State Intelligence Bill draft to become the Law of Intelligence in 2011. Through a series of discussions that have been done by the parliament and government, Intelligence draft has undergone several changes.

From the beginning we give full support to the parliament and the government’s plan which will regulate intelligence institution through the establishment of the Intelligence Bill. However, discussion and ratification of the Intelligence Bill should become integral part of intelligence reform. In that context, the basic principles of democratic state should have been an inherent part of the Intelligence Bill.

We assessed that the draft of State Intelligence Bill that is being discussed parliament is not fully accommodate the principles of democratic countries and it raises serious issues against the values of democratic life of the country itself, including:

1. Intelligence definition
Article 1 point (2) states intelligence as a state government agency. Basically, the intelligence agencies are not government agencies but the instrument of the state. The definition has put intelligence position as tool of the ruler that works for the interests of rulers and not the instrument of the state which work for the benefit of its people. It’s very concerning since it is very likely intelligence can be used to spy on people in the interest of the ruler alone and not to the real enemy as Indonesia had experienced in the New Order era.

2. Intercept
The existence of refusal of court authorization requirement before conducting interception as mentioned in the explanation of Article 31 is not only potentially threaten citizens’ rights but also vulnerable to abuse (abuse of power) for the sake of economic and political power. Intelligence do need the authority to conduct tapping/interception, however, it must be done through a standardized and rigid mechanism and must have a clear prerequisite, such as the importance of getting court approval for conducting interception.

Referring to the decisions of the Constitutional Court No. 006/PPU-1/2003; No. 012-016-019/PUU-IV/2006; No. 5/PUU-VIII/2010, the Court believes it is necessary to establish specific regulation about interception on the level of State Law/Bill to prevent the possibility of abuse of authority for wiretapping and recording. Thus it is only appropriate that the discussion of the Intelligence bill conducted in parallel with the discussion of the bill on Interception in the interest of coordinating arrangements for intelligence ability to intercepts.

3. Secret Intelligence Information
Setting intelligence secret referred in Article 24 jo Article 39 of the Intelligence Bill draft still raises multiple interpretations and are vague. The multiple interpretations are threatening the freedom of information, freedom of the press and democracy itself.

4. Arrest (List of Revision given by Government)
Granting authority for the intelligence to arrest threatens human rights and damage criminal justice system mechanism. To grant the authority is tantamount to legalizing kidnapping using Intelligence Bill considering intelligence work is closed/covert and secret. It is important to remember that the state intelligence agency is part of the non-judicial agencies that are not included as part of law enforcement officers, such as police and prosecutors, therefore granting authority to arrest is wrong and can not be justified. In a country that respect rule of law, authority to arrest and detain is only obtained by law enforcement officials.

5. State Intelligence Coordinating Institution (Lembaga Koordinasi Intelijen Negara – LKIN)
State Intelligence Coordinating Institution (LKIN) as the new institution provided by this bill will be the agency that replaces the position of the State Intelligence Agency (Badan Intelijen Negara – BIN) that has very broad authorityy. In that case, LKIN should not have the operational authority and functions, such as making communication interception, checking flow of funds, and such. Implementation of operational functions should be handed over to existing intelligence agencies which have operational authority.

6. Oversight
Oversight mechanism in the National Intelligence Bill draft is only made in the form of parliamentary oversight by the House of Representatives held by the completeness of the House of Representatives in charge of intelligence oversight. There are no regulations governing internal controls, executive oversight, and legal supervision. At this point, the oversight conducted by the parliament should be performed by a separate intelligence committees within the parliament, namely by forming a new special commission overseeing the intelligence.

7. Organization and Role
From an organizational standpoint, the Bill draft did not adopt the State Intelligence structural differentiation and specialization of functions. State Intelligence Bill draft does not strictly divide the working area of foreign intelligence, domestic intelligence, military intelligence, and law enforcement intelligence.

8. Structure and Position
State Intelligence Bill draft also has not been able to separate accountability between the structures that is responsible for policy making with the structure responsible for operational in implementation of the policy. Ideally all security actors who serve as executors of the policy are under or become part of ministries/ministerial-level the structure, intelligence agencies are no exception.

9. Personnel and Recruitment
Associated with members of the intelligence, the State Intelligence Bill regulates vaguely of intelligence personnel. It is not regulated whether recruitment mechanism is either open or closed.

10. Code of Conduct and Prohibition
In addition, the State Intelligence Bill draft does not contain regulation or codes of ethic for intelligence that includes obligations, rights and restrictions for all activities and aspects of intelligence.

11. Making Intelligence a Civil Institution
This Bill draft has not incorporated the agenda of making intelligence as civil institution. Ideally in the era of democracy, all intelligence agencies are civilian and not active military, except for military intelligence. Until now, the State Intelligence Agency (BIN) is still filled by active military personnel despite the head of intelligence is civilian.

12. Rights of victims
State Intelligence Bill draft has not included the rights of victims, particularly those related to complaints of victims if there are intelligence actions that are deviate and caused serious problems for the implementation of the rights of people.

We urge the parliament and the Indonesian government not to rush in passing the State Intelligence Bill and provide space for the community to provide input and views on the efforts to improve the State Intelligence Bill draft, as provided in Law No. 10 Year 2004 on Procedures for Making Laws and Regulations.

We fully appreciate members of Parliament who rejected the plan on granting intelligence the authority to arrest in the Intelligence Bill. Ideally the formulation of the Intelligence Bill is to maintain a balance between the need for countries to guarantee and protect the freedom of civil society and human rights on one hand; and to guard and protect national security on the other.

Jakarta, March 28, 2011
Advocacy Coalition on Indonesia Intelligence Bill

Institutions:
Imparsial, Kontras, IDSPS, Elsam, the Ridep Institute, Lesperssi, Setara Institute, LBH Masyarakat, ICW, YLBHI, LBH Jakarta, HRWG, Praxis, Infid, Yayasan SET, KRHN, Leip, Ikohi, Foker Papua, PSHK, MAPI, dan Media Link

Individual:
Bambang Widodo Umar

http://idsps.org/english-news/pers-release/advocacy-coalition-on-indonesia-intelligence-bill-joint-statement-201104035746/

We hope international network can help monitor and push Indonesian government to create Intelligence Bill that is accountable and respect the value of democracy.

We welcome every feedback and support from your organization around the world.

Have a nice day,

—
Regards,
—
Mufti Makaarim al-Ahlaq
Executive Director
Institute for Defense Security and Peace Studies

Related Articles
0

Manipulation: Komnas HAM report on 2003 arms dump assault

JUBI, 5 April 2011 

Assault on arms dump in Wamena was a manipulation, says Komnas HAM member

The deputy chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, Papua branch  Matius Murib, has told the press that the solution to the assault on the arms dump of the Wamena district military command on 4 April 2003 now depends on the state and the attorney-general’s office.

‘The Komnas HAM, as a state institution, has completed its task of conducting a pro justicia investigation and has delivered its evidence and associated data to the attorney-general. But the attorney-general has responded, saying that the evidence is not strong enough,’ he said. ‘Our job is finished and we cant do anything more on the matter,’ he told JUBI.

The pro justicia report recorded that nine people were murdered, 38 people from 25 kampungs were forcibly evicted, 42 people died from starvation and fifteen others were treated unjustly.

With the Konmas HAM having done its work, it now depends on the goodwill of the state and the attorney-general’s office  to solve the case. In his opinion, this would mean bringing the case before the judiciary, and in this case, this would mean submitting it to the human rights court because, he said, ‘ this was a case of gross violation of human rights which must be heard before the human rights court.’

He went on to explain that this was not a case involving any bloodshed. It should be regarded as something that was deliberately manipulated. ‘I was at the location at the time,’ he said. ‘Just imagine, the arms dump is in the centre of town, yet even so an assault took place. This can only have been a deliberate manipulation,’ he said.

He also referred to the Wamena Tragedy of 6 October 2000 which resulted in many casualties and much spilling of blood. ‘Many ordinary (people) were tortured. This was also a case of serious human rights violations,’ he said.

Related Articles
4

West Papua Report April 2011: VP rejects dialogue, MSG, more

West Papua Report
April 2011

This is the 84th in a series of monthly reports that focus on developments affecting Papuans. This series is produced by the non-profit West Papua Advocacy Team (WPAT) drawing on media accounts, other NGO assessments, and analysis and reporting from sources within West Papua. This report is co-published with the East Timor and Indonesia Action Network (ETAN). Back issues are posted online at http://etan.org/issues/wpapua/default.htm Questions regarding this report can be addressed to Edmund McWilliams at edmcw@msn.com. If you wish to receive the report via e-mail, send a note to etan@etan.org.

Summary:

Indonesia’s Vice President Boediono has begun implementation of a Presidential decree calling for the establishment of an inter-governmental agency to examine problems in West Papua. The initiative falls far short of widespread Papuan calls for a senior-level, internationally mediated dialogue between Indonesian officials and Papuans. A senior Papuan civil society leader has spoken out against this continued failure of Jakarta to engage in serious dialogue. Papuan church leaders have charged the Indonesian government with “genocide” in West Papua. The Melanesian Spearhead Group again failed to invite representatives from West Papua to its annual summit, instead inviting the Indonesian government to send observers. Indonesian officials violated the labor rights of Papuans by jailing nurses who called a peaceful, legal strike. A leading Papuan NGO chief has called for elimination of provisions in the Indonesian criminal code that violate Indonesia’s obligations under international conventions to which it is party.

Contents:

     

  • The Indonesia Government Continues to Ignore Papuan Calls for Dialogue
  • Senior Papuan Faults Government Failure to Pursue Dialogue
  • Papuan Church Leaders Charge Indonesian with “Genocide”
  • Melanesian Spearhead Group Invites Indonesia as Observer, Continues to Bar Papuan Participation
  • Nurses Jailed in Labor Dispute
  • Demand for Elimination of Repressive Provisions in Indonesia’s Criminal Code

    •  

The Government of Indonesia Continues to Ignore Papuan Calls for Dialogue

The Jakarta Post reported that Indonesian Vice President Boediono planned to  convene a meeting on West Papua on March 28 in Jakarta. The meeting was to be the initial step in formulating a draft of a presidential decree to address issues regarding Papua. The regulation also aims to establish a special unit to accelerate development in Papua. According to the decree, the government will form a “delivery unit,” the Unit Percepatan Pembangunan Papua dan Papua Barat (UP4B/ Special Unit for the Acceleration of Development in Papua and West Papua). Significant aspects of the draft include the promotion of a cluster-based approach to development, and an increased integration of the activities of the central and regional administrations. The planned regulation follows a presentation made by Papua Governor Barnabas Suebu and West Papua Governor Abraham Ocktavianus Atnuri to the national Cabinet in January.

Indonesia Vice President Boediono The late March meeting was to have included Coordinating Economic Minister Hatta Rajasa and Finance Minister Agus Martowardojo, as well as unnamed Papuan representatives.

A March 9 interview by the Sydney Morning Herald’s Tom Allard revealed the Vice President’s intentions. Boediono told Allard that he rejected a bilateral dialogue, as called for by many Papuans, contending instead that his agency would assist multiparty communications. Boediono said he would welcome international donor aid money for West Papua but rejected any possible mediation role such as occurred in Aceh in 2005 when a peace accord mediated by internationally ended years of central government abuses carried out by security forces. Boediono told Allard that his new effort would aim at better communications, affirmative action for indigenous Papuans, and “more openness.” (The Jakarta government has long placed severe restrictions on journalists, UN and foreign government or NGO personnel seeking to visit West Papua.) Boediono offered no assurances that he would press for allowing Papuans the right to fly the Morning Star flag or that the heavy military presence in West Papua might be reduced.

Vice President Boediono made clear that this undertaking would not constitute a “dialogue.” There is no indication that this new body will address outstanding issue of human rights violations, impunity for those committing those abuses, notably in the military and police. This body will almost certainly not consider the civil, political, social, economic and cultural rights, especially the right of self determination.

WPAT Comment: Boediono’s “agency” falls far short of persistent appeals by Papuan officials, civil society leaders as well as Papuan, Indonesian and international NGOs for a senior level, internationally-mediated dialogue between the Indonesian government and Papuan leaders. Indeed, Boediono, in his Sydney Morning Herald interview, made clear that this undertaking would not constitute a “dialogue.” There is no indication that this new body will address outstanding issue of human rights violations, impunity for those committing those abuses, notably in the military and police. This body will almost certainly not consider the civil, political, social, economic and cultural rights, especially the right of self determination, which the central government has long denied Papuans.

Senior Papuan Faults Government Failure to Pursue Dialogue

Participation of Papuan provincial level officials in Vice Boediono’s meeting regarding West Papua (see report above) reflects the unwillingness of Papuan government officials to support the widespread call of their Papuan constituents for an internationally-mediated dialogue with the Jakarta government. Pastor Neles Tebay, coordinator of the Papua Peace Network – JDP discussed this failure of Papuan leadership candidly in a March 25 interview with JUBI.

Tebay noted frankly that neither of the provincial governments (Papua and West Papua) have reached agreement about the agenda of such a dialogue. Nor have either of the Papuan administrations issued statements officially supporting Jakarta-Papua dialogue. Tebay candidly assessed that the Papuan officials’ failure to endorse the popular calls for dialogue was because dialogue “is seen as being a separatist move and in opposition to what the Indonesian state is working for.” “Any individual who works for the government who expresses support for the idea of a Jakarta-Papua dialogue is in danger of losing his job because he is likely to be seen as a separatist. Anyone working for the government who expresses support for a dialogue places himself in danger and could lose his job,’ he said.

For his part, Father Tebay continues to pursue dialogue as a means of finding solutions to problems besetting Papuans. Tebay stressed that dialogue was not in itself a solution but rather would bring together the Papuan people and the Indonesian government to discuss the problems. The aim would be to discuss the problems and agree to the best possible solution.

Pastor Tebay said that so far, he has visited twelve districts in Papua to hold consultations. The districts he has visited so far include Merauke, Biak Enarotali, Timika, Wamena and Sorong.

He has also visited some other countries to discuss the question of dialogue including PNG, Vanuatu and Australia where he met Papuans in a number of cities. Everywhere he went, he encountered enthusiasm for the idea of finding a peaceful solution by means of dialogue between Jakarta and Papua.

Papuan Church Leaders Charge the Indonesian Government with “Genocide”

Papuan Church leaders in late March issued a “Theological Declaration of Churches in Papua.” The declaration includes one of the most forthright Papuan statements regarding genocide targeting Papuans. The statement which was forwarded by the Asian Human Rights Commission (see full document at A Statement from a Group of Papuan Church Leaders) contends:

Transmigration policy and unrelenting military operations are, in our view well-planned programs to eventually annihilate indigenous Papuans. Papuans are positioned as “the other” and as such warrant surveillance, control, and civilization. Papuans are not equal citizens of Indonesia. Some observers in Jakarta view this as an internal colonialism or disguised slavery against Papuans.

 

Papuans have undergone a ‘silent history of suffering’ or memmoria passsionis leading to genocide. … The term genocide perhaps does not meet the criteria set forth by the UN, or other nations, or by Indonesia. But from our own view as victims, genocide is indeed taking place through the conditioning staged by Jakarta in the forms of ideology and development policies that are against the indigenous Papuans. Transmigration policy and unrelenting military operations are, in our view well-planned programs to eventually annihilate indigenous Papuans. Papuans are positioned as “the other” and as such warrant surveillance, control, and civilization. Papuans are not equal citizens of Indonesia. Some observers in Jakarta view this as an internal colonialism or disguised slavery against Papuans. 

Melanesian Spearhead Group Invites Indonesia as Observer, Continues to Bar Papuan Participation
Melanesian Spearhead Group Leaders Summit
Melanesian Spearhead Group Leaders Summit members and observers.

The Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG), comprising Vanuatu, the Solomon Island, Fiji, Papua New Guinea and the Kanaky peoples of New Caledonia, invited Indonesia (and Timor-Leste) to join their annual meeting. MSG leaders met March 31 in Suva, Fiji, for the annual summit which followed a meeting of foreign ministers March 29. The MSG did not invite any representation from West Papua.

A conference of solidarity groups supporting West Papua that convened in Sydney in February had called on the MSG not to offer observer status to Indonesia and instead to offer that status to representatives of the Papuan people of West Papua.

For its part, the Australian West Papua Association (AWPA) welcomed a statement from the Chairman of the MSG meeting, Ratu Inoke Kubuabol who said that “The Melanesia Spearhead Group feels for their brothers and sisters in West Papua.” Joe Collins of AWPA said “we urge the MSG to grant West Papua membership at the leaders summit. They would have the support of the Melanesian people across the region in granting West Papua membership.”

Collins noted that 42% included West Papua as part of the Melanesian family in the first ever telephone poll conducted by the Pacific Institute of Public Policy (PiPP) across Melanesia.. An overwhelming majority (75.4%) of respondents said yes to the question “Do you support independence for West Papua.” PiPP in a press release reported that when asked who they considered part of the Melanesian family, clear majorities included the established members (PNG, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Fiji and New Caledonia) while 42% also included West Papua, 17.1% included Australia, 14.9% included Indonesia and 14.1% included Timor-Leste. PiPP also reported that when asked “Do you support independence for West Papua?” there was very high support in PNG (89.3%) and Vanuatu (88.2%).

Collins underscored that these numbers suggest a “disconnect between popular support and the position taken by governments in the region, except Vanuatu, which has long championed the West Papuan cause at the political level. He concluded, “we see that in the poll only 14.9% of respondents considered Indonesia to be part of the Melanesian family yet Indonesia has observer status but not West Papua. For the sake of the long term stability of the region we hope West Papua will be discussed at the leaders meeting.”

The meeting in Suva was controversial because Fiji is currently under military dictatorship.

WPAT Comment: West Papua is the largest Melanesian populated entity not represented within the MSG and the second largest Melanesian entity, after Papua New Guinea. Its continued exclusion from the MSG calls into question the legitimacy of the organization. Moreover, the MSG’s failure address the plight of Papuans, including ethnic cleansing under the rubric of “transmigration” and charges of “genocide” by credible organizations (see statement by Papuan church leaders above) exposes the lack of commitment among Melanesian leaders to the rights and welfare of Melanesian peoples. Vanuatu’s repeated and public expressions of concern about the plight of Papuans is a singular but noteworthy exception in this regard.

Nurses Jailed in Violation of International Convention

Mounting public pressure, including from members of the Papuan Provincial Assembly (DPRP), compelled the police to announce they would release eight nurses who had been jailed on charges of incitement (article 335 of the criminal code). However, purportedly because of the absence of a key police official required to sign the release order, it appears the nurses had not yet been released at the end of March.

These West Papuan nurses were pursuing their legitimate rights and it is obscene to think they are languishing in jail.

The eight had been jailed over their call for a strike by nurses at the DokII General Hospital. That strike, a peaceful, lawful labor action, was over promised but unpaid compensation. Letters have been sent to President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, as well as to Vice-President Boediono protesting the arrest of five nurses and midwives who work at the general hospital for organizing a strike.

The detention of the nurses violates their rights notably as set forth in International Labor Organization (ILO) Convention 87 (Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize), which was ratified by Indonesia in June 1998.

The issue of the unpaid compensation remains unresolved. The local daily Bintang Papua reported on March 23 that nurses and midwives had taken the issue to the DPRD and the provincial governor where hundreds demonstrated. They charged that the provincial secretary Constan Karmadi had deceived the public when he promised in December 2010 that incentives would be paid.

The medical staff are planning to make a formal complaint against the provincial secretary to the Administrative Court, pointing out that Instruction 125/2010 has been issued for the payment of the incentives, only to be cancelled by a later instruction that withdrew any such payments.

There is growing international attention to the arrests and the failure of the Indonesian government to meet is contract obligations to the nurses. Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) President Ged Kearney has described the detention of the nurses as “outrageous” and called for their immediate release. She noted as well that “the arrests of the nurses, including two officials of the National Union of Indonesian nurses, was a heavy handed response to nurses pursuing a legitimate industrial campaign in support of their contracted entitlements. ”

“These West Papuan nurses were pursuing their legitimate rights and it is obscene to think they are languishing in jail,” added Kearney.

Demand for Elimination of Repressive Provisions in The Indonesian Criminal Code

The Papuan publication JUBI published an appeal on March 31 by the executive director of the Institute of Research, Analysis and Development for Legal Aid (LP3BH) Yan Christian Warinussy to the Dewan Adat Papua (DAP, Papuan Customary Council) to submit articles 106 and 107 of the criminal code on subversion and incitement (the ‘makar’ or subversion articles) of the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP) to the Constitutional Court for a judicial review.

“I call on DAP together with the Papuan people to seek a judicial review of the makar article before the Constitutional Court because it is no longer appropriate for such a law to remain in force in a democratic country like Indonesia. Other democratic states around the world don’t have such a law,” he said.

Many international organizations, including WPAT and ETAN have long called for the removal of these provisions from the Indonesian criminal code. The provisions date to the colonial era and were frequently used during the Suharto dictatorship to repress peaceful opposition. Indonesian officials continue to employ them to repress popular, peaceful dissent, particularly in West Papua where Suharto era practices, including unjust prosecution, persist.

The provisions violate the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights to which Indonesia is signatory.

Back issues of West Papua Report

4

West Papua Report March 2011

http://www.etan.org/issues/wpapua/2011/1103wpap.htm

West Papua Report

March 2011

This is the 83rd in a series of monthly reports that focus on developments affecting Papuans. This series is produced by the non-profit West Papua Advocacy Team (WPAT) drawing on media accounts, other NGO assessments, and analysis and reporting from sources within West Papua. This report is co-published with the East Timor and Indonesia Action Network (ETAN). Back issues are posted online at http://etan.org/issues/wpapua/default.htm Questions regarding this report can be addressed to Edmund McWilliams at edmcw@msn.com. If you wish to receive the report via e-mail, send a note to etan@etan.org.

Summary:

Newly obtained video footage reveals Indonesian security forces, including U.S. and Australian-backed Detachment 88 personnel, brutality in operations in West Papua’s Central Highlands. Indonesian NGOs and prominent Papuans have faulted President Yudhoyono’s newly announced approach to dialogue with Papuans with criticism of Jakarta’s failure to end human rights violations and impunity by security forces as a basis for dialogue. Papuans criticized Jakarta’s selection of a limited range of Papuans as dialogue partners and have urged a role for international mediators. A prominent West African leader has announced support for West Papua’s self-determination. The chair of the Papuan Peoples Council (DAP) denounced the Indonesian government’s policy of transmigration. The Asian Legal Resource Center has appealed to the UN Human Rights Council to address continued security force abuse of human rights in West Papua. A Papuan political prisoner who is gong blind as a result of an attack by a prison warder needs urgent care. A report from within West Papua details land grabs by the Indonesian military and “developers” which have targeted Papuans in the Sorong area.  Hamish McDonald considers Papuans’ struggle for self-determination in the light of recent similar successful examples within the international community.

Contents:

New Video Footage Reveals Indonesian Military Brutality

Video footage released in early February reveals previously unseen Indonesian military brutality against Papuan civilians in Kapeso in 2009. The footage was released by West Papua Media and can be viewed here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VD0eFA4scTo

The video shows the late May 2009 raid on the Kapeso airstrip in the village of Kampung Bagusa in Mamberamo regency by troops from Indonesia’s elite police counter-terrorism unit Detachment 88  as well as other security personnel from BRIMOB and other units. Detachment 88 was created at behest of the U.S. government and receives significant U.S. and Australian Government funding and training assistance.

The footage, filmed by a Detachment 88 officer on his mobile phone, shows the immediate aftermath of a raid to retake the airfield which had been occupied for several weeks by a small armed group and a large number of villagers. The bodies of at least five dead are visible on the ground and sporadic gunfire is clearly heard. It appears that the footage was taken well after the killing took place. Footage depicting security personnel taking cover behind desks appears to have been staged to suggest the conflict was continuing.

Disturbing scenes at the end of the footage appear to show two Papuan children tied up and being forced at gunpoint to crawl along the floor by the Indonesian military. The footage continues to show them in apparent pain while the soldiers taunt them. In another scene troops are shown firing at civilians cowering in adjacent brush.

Indonesian authorities have not investigated events surrounding the Kapeso occupation and shooting of civilians by security forces.

West Papua media commented that such footage of brutal Indonesian security force actions, amounting to  ‘trophy footage,’ is rampant among troops operating in the region.

For all media enquiries please contact Nick Chesterfield at West Papua Media on wpmedia_admin@riseup.net or +61409268978

In September 2010, East Timor and Indonesia Action Network (ETAN) and West Papua Advocacy Team (WPAT) called for suspension of U.S. aid to Detachment 88 “pending review of charges leveled against the unit for systemic human rights violations, including use of torture.”

Government’s “Dialogue” Approach with Papuans Faulted

The “Alliance for Papua” on February 25 issued a press statement that critiqued a government plan for dialogue with Papuans. The statement called on the government to better synchronize its plans for the dialogue with the reality of politics in Papua.  (See below for composition of this NGO alliance.)

The initial government approach calls for two presidential assistants to engage in dialogue with Papuans who would be represented by the Papuan branch of  the National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM), the Papuan People’s Council (MRP), and the churches. The two presidential assistants are Bambang Darmono and Farid Husein.

The Alliance for Papua urged that the government to create appropriate conditions for dialogue by undertaking to “consistently protect and comply with the basic rights of the Papua people by ensuring that there is no repetition of violations of Papuan human rights.” The alliance also urged that the government review the presence of the TNI security forces and the undercover security operations “that continue to occur.”

According to the alliance, the government also should not proceed with the election of members of the MRP (Majelis Rakyat Papua, Papuan People’s Council). The MRP is an institution that was mandated by Papua’s special autonomy law (OTSUS). The vast majority of the Papuan people have declared that OTSUS has failed “because it has not taken sides with, given protection to, empowered and fulfilled the basic rights of the indigenous Papuan people.”

The alliance points out that the government has nevertheless pressed ahead with the election of a second-term MRP in 15 districts of Papua. The second-term MRP is due to be sworn into office soon. The alliance objects to proceeding with the seating of the MRP because the election of MRP members “has not been transparent and has failed to comply with the [mandated] electoral stages.”  The alliance also contends that the counting of the votes has been deeply fraudulent.

The alliance argues that seating the fraudulently elected MRP members “will only reinforce the Papuan people’s sense of  disappointment towards a government that lacks any understanding and has shown no respect for local Papuan feelings.”

For his part, the outgoing chairperson of the MRP, Forkorus Yoboisembut criticized the government approach to dialogue by arguing that those Papuan groups that the government has announced as dialogue partners are not representative of the people because they don’t fully understand the Papuan problem. He contended that the government approach to dialogue would amount to the government talking to itself ” because they are  all within the same system, and this would solve nothing.” He urged instead that the dialogue be with DAP (Dewan Adat Papua, Papuan Traditional Council)  , the Papuan resistance (OPM), the Papuan parliament, and other Papuan groups.

Separately, the executive director of LP3BH,Yan Christian Warinussy said a neutral party should mediate the Jakarta-Papua talks,  He suggested an international group such as the Henri Dunant Centre or a foreign country with experience in handling conflict resolution, including Aceh.

WPAT Note:  The Alliance for Papua in Jakarta was set up as an expression of solidarity with humanitarianism, in support of fellow human beings in their struggle for justice and truth. The Alliance includes KontraS, ANBTI, IKOHI, Imparsial, Foker LSM Papua, Setara Institute, HRWG, Komnas Perempuan, FNMPP, IPPMAUS, Forum Papua Kalimantan, PGI, Walhi, JIRA, LBH Pers.

West African Leader Supports Papuan Self Determination

WestPan, Canada’s West Papua Action Network, reports that the President of Senegal Abdoulaye Wade has become the first African leader to publicly back West Papua’s bid for self determination, stating that “West Papua is now an issue for all black Africans.”

His comments came in late January during a conference in Senegal’s capital Dakar, attended by Benny Wenda, a West Papuan activist who was granted political asylum by the British Government in 2003. Benny Wenda addressed the audience, telling them about the situation in his homeland. Following his address Wenda presented the President with a Papuan headdress, and was warmly embraced by him. The President then addressed the audience, urging all African nations to take attention to the West Papua issue and do whatever they can to help.

In 1969, when Indonesia, with the backing of the United States, sought UN approval for its annexation of West Papua through the fraudulent “Act of Free Choice,” it encountered significant resistance in West Africa where the memories of colonialism were still strong.

Papuan People’s Council Condemns Transmigration as Harmful to Local People

Responding to a report that the government plans to send more transmigrants to Papua, the chair of Dewan Adat Papua (Papuan People’s Council) Forkorus Yoboisembut https://lists.riseup.net/www/arc/reg.westpapua/2011-02/msg00051.html asserted that continuation of transmigration would transform the Papuan people into a minority in their own lands and trigger conflicts.  “‘As the representative of the adat (traditional) people in Papua, I reject the transmigration program which fails to safeguard the position of the local people,” he said.

Forkorus’s statement came after media reports that the central government has allocated Rp 600 billion to pay for the transmigration of people from Indonesia to a number of so-called “under-populated”  places in the Indonesian archipelago, including Papua. https://lists.riseup.net/www/arc/reg.westpapua/2011-02/msg00068.html

“I hope the central government will consider this matter carefully because the transmigration program to Papua has already resulted in the marginalization of the indigenous people in the context of (so-called) development work,” Forkorus stated.

Forkorus said that the location of transmigrants in many places in Papua has made it difficult for the local communities to preserve their own culture and lifestyles. Development of more luxurious migrant lifestyles, he explained, intensifies the marginalization of the local people.

In addition, because the government has lavished attention on the transmigrants, feelings of envy emerge.

Forkorus also noted that Papuans’  marginalization in their own homeland is evidenced by the cat that vast majority of those now running the economy are non-Papuans.  Forkorus added that Papuans are not yet able to compete with the newcomers in economic affairs.

(WPAT Comment:  Papuans rank at the bottom in Indonesia in terms of central government provision of health care, education services and employment creation. In the province of West Kalimantan, decades of central government driven “transmigration” has transformed the indigenous Dayak into a minority in their homeland and led to conflicts, particularly with Madurese transmigrants, along the lines of Forkorus’s concerns. The policy, abandoned during the Suharto dictatorship due to international condemnation, has been resumed under the Yudhoyono administration despite criticism that it is tantamount to ethnic cleansing.)

Human Rights Council Hears Urgent Appeal Regarding Human Rights Abuse in West Papua

On February 22, the Human Rights Council heard an urgent plea from the Asian Legal Resource Center (ALRC) regarding worsening human rights abuse in West Papua and the impunity accorded perpetrators of that abuse. The statement said in part:

The Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC) is seriously concerned by ongoing, widespread human rights violations and  violent acts being committed by the Indonesian security forces in the Papuan highlands in Indonesia. Impunity typically  accompanies even the most serious abuses, as shown by the lack of effective remedies in a case of severe torture that  the ALRC has documented recently. Despite institutional reforms in Indonesia, effective accountability for human rights violations in Papua is lacking, resulting in impunity that then engenders further atrocities.

Impunity and the sense of injustice that it engenders in society are having a strong impact on social stability and cohesion in Papua.  Repression, discrimination and human rights violations by the Indonesian security forces are adding to tensions. Papuans reportedly feel like second-class citizens in Indonesia, even within Papua itself, and face discrimination, poverty and injustice as a result. The military arbitrarily suspect Papuans of being linked with rebel groups and stigmatize them, subjecting them to abuse.

The ALRC statement recounts two of the more flagrant examples of abuse and impunity where military personnel were videoed beating and torturing Papuan civilians (see West Papua Report December 2010). Those prosecuted for this received minimal sentences. The ALRC statement comments:

The government of Indonesia continues to deny the widespread use of violence by the Indonesian military in Papua, and alleges that these violations are rare and isolated, individual cases. However, the ALRC continues to receive further cases of violence against indigenous Papuans, including killings by the police and military, arbitrary arrests, the burning of houses and killing of livestock, which point to a widespread pattern of the use of violence, as well as a policy of intimidation by the Indonesian military.

The statement underscores the inadequacy of the Indonesian military and civilian court systems for addressing the continuing abuses:

Human rights violations and other crimes committed against civilians by members of the military are still only tried by military courts, which lack independence, transparency, a comprehensive penal code incorporating human rights norms, and a system of punishments that are proportional to the severity of the crimes committed.  A military tribunal is not able to hold perpetrators of torture accountable in line with international law standards. Such tribunals cannot invoke any military regulations that prohibit the use of torture. Therefore, perpetrators cannot be tried for committing torture and no remedies can therefore be provided to victims.
Furthermore, the country’s penal code does not include torture as a crime. This means that members of the police that commit torture remain immune from criminal prosecution. Indonesia is therefore failing to comply with its obligations under the Convention Against Torture. Indonesia ratified the Convention against Torture in 1998, but the use of torture is still widespread and systematic…

The ALRC urgently calls for remedial action by the Indonesian government:

Jakarta must ensure that the security forces halt the use of excessive force and violence-based strategies in dealing with  security-related issues in Papua. Allegations of human rights violations must be investigated and any lacuna in legislation and due process must be addressed. For example, torture must be criminalized in line with Indonesia’s international obligations under the Convention Against Torture. Military personnel who are alleged to be responsible for human rights violations against civilians must be tried in civilian courts.

The ALRC also recommended that the Indonesian government undertake steps to reduce tensions and address outstanding injustice:

…the ALRC urges the Indonesian government to heed the call for dialogue made by the Papuan indigenous community and avoid a
further deterioration of the conflict in Papua. Finally, the ALRC calls on the Indonesian government to release all Papuan political prisoners,
in order to show its commitment to a new path towards peace, security and human rights in Papua.

The ALRC underscored the role and responsibility of the international community in addressing the ongoing abuses and impunity:

The ALRC invites the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers to recommend institutional reforms to the government of Indonesia to ensure that members of the military are held accountable by independent courts that uphold human rights and constitutional values and ensure that these are made available to legislators in Indonesia.
The ALRC also requests that the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment follow up with the Indonesian government to ensure the full implementation of the recommendations made to Indonesia during the UPR review regarding the review of the penal code and the full criminalisation of torture.

Note: The Asian Legal Resource Centre is an independent regional non-governmental organization holding general consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. It is the sister organization of the Asian Human Rights Commission. The Hong Kong-based group seeks to strengthen and encourage positive action on legal and human rights issues at the local and national levels throughout Asia.

Journalist Organization Chief Calls for Reporting on Human Rights in West Papua

The chair of the the Papua chapter Alliance of Independent Journalists (AJI) speaking in Jayapura, urged the press in Papua to regularly monitor cases of human rights violations in Papua, according to a report published in February 11 JUBI and translated by TAPOL.

AJI’s Victor Mambor emphasized the importance of the media reporting the human rights situation in Papua saying this can help reduce acts of repression against the civilian population.

He added that many reports about human rights in Papua were only available from NGOs active in the field, and these were frequently quoted in reports that appear in the media. He stressed the importance in ensuring  that these reports are accurate and credible. Journalists should provide the appropriate  references to make it easier for others to investigate the violations that occur.

WPAT Comment:  Reporting on human rights violations in West Papua, particularly in instances where the TNI or police were involved, pose risks for journalists. Manokwari area reporter Ardiansyah Matra was murdered in July 2010 following his investigative reporting regarding police and military coercion targeting civilians in the development of the MIFEE plantation project in Manokwari. AJI has been active in following up on this case. Government restrictions placed on foreign journalists and NGO personnel impede their access to West Papua and reporting on human rights in the region.

Papuan Political Prisoner Denied Adequate Medical Treatment

New concerns have been raised about the inadequate medical treatment afforded Papuan prisoners of conscience Ferdinand Pakage. He is going blind following a beating by prison authorities in 2010.

Peneas Lokbere, chair of SKPHP HAM Papua (Solidarity for the Victims of Human Rights Violations in Papua), told JUBI that his organization is continuing to press for medical treatment for Ferdinand Pakage.  “We will continue to fight for treatment after he was struck in the eye by an official of the Abepura Prison. This caused his eye to bleed and he is now not able to see any more with this eye” said Lokbere.

SKPHP is working with Pakage’s family to press the prison authorities to speed up medical attention to his condition. Lokbere explained that his organization has been demanding treatment for Pakage since last year, when they sought permission for him to go to Jakarta where treatment is available. However, according to Lokbere, Prison Director Liberti Sitinjak refused permission for any transfer of Pakage out of West Papua. Lokbere noted that in 2010, Pakage was told by a doctor at the West Papua General Hospital in Dok II say that he needed to have an operation in Jakarta. The doctor said that his eye was badly damaged and that even if he does get medication in Jakarta, he will continue to be blind.

Pakage was assaulted by prison warders Alberth Toam, Victor Apono and Gustaf Rumaikewi while in detention in Abepura. Toam struck the blow that injured Pakage’s eye. None of the warders has been held responsible for this assault. Pakage is now held in custody with common criminals, including those convicted of violent crimes.

Military and Military-Backed “Developers” Seize Papuan Lands

A Sorong-area leader has illegally transferred Papuan tribal lands to the Indonesian military (TNI) and to non-Papuans. The transferred land is vitally important, affording resources that are key to Papuan survival. Victims include Papuans belonging to various clans and tribes including the Osok, Mambringofok Idik and Fadan peoples in Klamono and Semugu and Kalaibin among others. The TNI has employed terror and intimidation targeting local Papuans to enforce the land transfers. The land sites are located along the Sorong to Klamono road at kilometer markers 16, 38 and 49 in the western end of the territory.

The military and non-Papuan developers will exploit the land for military base construction and oil palm plantation development.  Specifically, local District Chief (Regent) Stefanus Malak provided land to the navy at km 16  and to the army at Km 38 to build a bases (the latter land belongs to the Semugu clan).  Land was also transferred to the TNI, without tribal consent, at Km 49. This site will be used by the TNI to develop a palm oil plantation.

Seizure of land by the TNI, especially through use of force, violates various international obligations undertaken by Indonesia including the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People Article 30:

“1. Military activities shall not take place in the lands or territories of indigenous peoples, unless justified by a  relevant public interest or otherwise freely agreed to or requested by the indigenous peoples concerned.

“2. States shall undertake effective consultations with the indigenous peoples concerned, through appropriate procedures and in particular through their representative institutions, prior to using their lands or territories for military activities.”

Analysis Considers Papuan Self-Determination Struggle in Context of Similar Recent Successful Efforts

The Sydney Morning Herald on February 26 published an analysis comparing Papua’s struggle for self-determination with some recent anti-colonial struggles. “A Worm Inside the New Indonesia” by veteran journalist Hamish McDonald draws on the experiences of south Sudan and Kosovo, two emerging nation states as potential models for West Papua. McDonald, former Foreign Editor of the Herald with extensive experience in Indonesia, concludes that these developments have had the effect of rendering “respect for the territorial integrity of states and post-colonial boundaries somewhat tattered.”

Indonesia has long insisted that the international community affirmatively express public recognition of its “territorial integrity” in the context of West Papua. Similarly, Indonesia  once demanded international recognition of its territorial integrity to include its annexation of East Timor, though with less success.

McDonald cites Akihisa Matsuno of Osaka University as suggesting that between Kosovo and southern Sudan, the later would appear to offer a more applicable precedent for West Papua. Sudan became independent in 1956 from British rule, but has been in civil war most of the time since. A 2005 peace agreement finally conceded a referendum on independence by the south. This suggests to Matsuno that a lack of integration between territories ruled by the same colonial power can justify a separate state. McDonald writes that ”this means that colonial boundaries are not as absolute as usually assumed.”

There is a broad international consensus that the 1969 Indonesian annexation of West Papua was in violation of its UN mandate to administer the territory and entailed a transparently fraudulent referendum, the “Act of Free Choice.”  McDonald writes that  Richard Chauvel, an Indonesia scholar at Melbourne’s Victoria University, described West Papua as Indonesia’s ”Achilles’ heel” and the conference. Chauvel argued that, notwithstanding Indonesia’s democratic progress since the fall of the Suharto dictatorship, West Papua remains “Indonesia’s last and most intractable regional conflict.” As such, Chauvel contends,  ”Papua has become a battleground between a ‘new’ and an ‘old’ Indonesia. The ‘old’ Indonesia considers that its soldiers torturing fellow Indonesians in a most barbaric manner is an ‘incident’. The ‘new’ Indonesia aspires to the ideals of its founders in working towards becoming a progressive, outward-looking, cosmopolitan, multi-ethnic and multi-faith society.”

McDonald concludes that, as demonstrated by the ongoing developments in the Middle East, “the new media make it harder and harder to draw a veil over suppression. In the Indonesia that is opening up, the exception of West Papua will become more glaring.”

Back issues of West Papua Report

6

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑