Tag Archives: Yan Christian Warinussy

Warinussy: Stop ‘Otsus Plus’, reinstate original Otsus Articles 77, 78

January 31, 2014

By Yan Christian Warinussy (via Tapol)

Opinion

After reading the contents of the Draft Law (Rancangan Undang-Undang, RUU ) on Papuan Special Autonomy (recently known as ‘Otsus Plus’) – in particular the twelfth and thirteenth drafts – as a Senior Advocate and Papuan Human Rights Defender I would urge the Governor of Papua Lukas Enembe, and Governor of West Papua Abraham Octavianus Atururi, to immediately return to the mandate of Articles 77 and 78, Law No. 21/2001 on Papua Special Autonomy as amended by Law No.35/2008.

The Mandate of Article 77 No.21/2001 states: “Proposals for the amendment of this Law may be submitted by the people of the Papua Province through the MRP and DPRP to the House of People’s Representatives or the Government according to the statutory  regulations.”

While article 78 No.21/2001 reads: “The application of this Law shall be evaluated annually and for the first time at the end of the third year after this Law comes into effect.”

In my opinion, both governors should have been aware that the two draft laws that have been submitted to President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono were not rooted in the interests of the people of Papua, in particular indigenous Papuans.

This process has come about as a result of the desire of both provincial governments to amend the Papua Special Autonomy law without meeting the legal and mandatory constitutional requirements mandated in Article 77 and the 78.

This has been exacerbated further by the lack of understanding of the Papuan People’s Consultative Assembly (Majelis Rakyat Papua, MRP) about law making procedures and processes, and the failure of the institution to act as a cultural representation of the indigenous people and struggle for their aspirations; the people have already rejected Special Autonomy as a failure and they demand a peaceful dialogue facilitated by a neutral third party.

The draft ‘Governmental Law on Special Autonomy in the Land of Papua’ has now been submitted to the President, and if eventually used to formulate an Act to replace Law No.21/2001 on Papua Special Autonomy, then it will only open the floodgates to numerous judicial review applications in the Constitutional Court.

In addition, I am certain that the House of Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat RI) will not accept and approve the bill on the basis that the drafted Otsus Plus law fails to respect the procedures and processes required by our constitutional law.

Moreover, the Papua Special Autonomy Law was initiated by the House of Representatives in 2001; any changes to the scope of the legislation would require it to go through various stages of readings in the House of Representatives itself.

Yan Christian Warinussy is the Executive Director of LP3BH Manokwari,  Member of the Steering Committee of Foker LSM Papua, and Secretary of the Commission on Human Rights, Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation Working Committee, GKI Manokwari diocese.

Available online in Indonesian:

(Edited for clarity by WestPapuaMedia)

Warinussy: More makar cases in Papua

Comment by Yan Christian Warinussy, senior lawyer in West Papua, recipient of the John Humphreys Freedom Award, 2005
December 13, 2013

The latest treason verdict against seven West Papuans is yet another example of the serious human rights situation in West Papuan, in particular with regard to the right to freedom of expression. The seven men were headed by Isak Kalaiban.

Based on the facts revealed during the course of the trial, it is clear that there was a plan between the accused to freely give expression to their views in a way that is based on the rule of law.
This occurred on 1 May 2013 after Isak and his colleagues brought the families of the accused together on the previous day at their home  in Aimas-Sorong. While they were meeting together,  a police patrol in Sorong began to opened fire at the group of people, as a result of which four people were killed or wounded.
At the trial, the men were charged with treason (makar)  by the court in Sorong before a panel of judges headed by Maria Magdalena Sitanggung.
None of the witnesses questioned at the trial said anything about what had taken place on the day before, 30 April.
For the legal team defending the accused, the question is who indeed is it that perpetrated treason in view of the fact that none of the witnesses who appeared in the trial knew anything about the men who were being charged.
This is yet another case in which the accused were charged under Articles 106, 108  and 110 to prevent people in Sorong from giving free expression to their rights to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly  as provided for by Law 39/1999 on Human Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Translated by Carmel Budiardjo

Warinussy: Treason Charges against Aimas activists lack a proper legal foundation

COMMENT
by Yan Christian Warinussy,
Senior Lawyer and Executive-Director of LP3BH
7 September, 2013
The questioning of the five witnesses that has taken place during the trial of seven civilians in Papua in the Sorong  District Court who have been charged with Treason [makar] in accordance with Articles 106 and  108 of the Indonesian Criminal Code make it increasingly clear that the charges do not have a solid legal  foundation.

Yan Christian Warinussy (Photo: TabloidJubi.com)

This is evident from the  questioning of the five witnesses who were summoned by the Prosecutor on Tuesday, 2 September , namely Adjudant Commissioner [AKP]  Krisistya Artanto Octoberna ( Chief of Narcotics  Investigation at the police station in Sorong) and three others, as well as and a policeman from the same police station named Basuki Rahman.

During their questioning it is clear that they were all involved in the assault operation against the group of civilians from Aimas and they were all  in the vehicle which was on patrol  at the location of the incident. Furthermore, also travelling in the same vehicle was the Head of the Operational Unit of Sorong Police Force.

Two of the witnesses also said that they saw a group of people who arrived to attack a mobile patrol  who were armed with sharp implements but they had not seen the accused men [Isak Kaliaban and his colleagues].

When they  were asked by the legal counsel of the defendants from the Papuan Advocacy Coalition  for Justice in the Aimas Case  whether they possessed letters instructing them to appear, as is required by the Criminal Code, they said in reply that they did have the required documents.

This means that the five witnesses who were summoned by the Prosecutor on 26 August and on 2 September are all members of the Sorong Police Force and moreover, none of these witnesses produced any substantive legal facts which could be used as the basis for charging Isak Kalaiban and his colleagues.with Treason as stipulated in the indictments against the seven accused.

This means that the Investigation Report [BAP] which was drawn up by the Criminal Investigation Unit of the Sorong Police Force by the men being charged had not been correctly established as  required by law which means that their testimony should not have been considered by the panel of judges.which is headed by R.M Christian Kolibu.

Therefore, we, the members of   of the Papuan Advocacy Coalition for Justice in the Aimas Case, herewith state our determination to continue to defend the seven accused men in order to ensure that this case proceeds in strict accordance with the correct legal  procedures  and not in accordance with the manipulated charges being used to charge the seven accused  in accordance with the 1945 Constitution and Law 39/1999 on Basic Human Rights as well as other human rights provisions to which they are entitled in accordance with international  law which have been ratified and adopted by the Indonesian Government as a Member State of the United Nations.

In the forthcoming hearing which will take place on 9 September, the court will proceed to the stage of questioning each of the seven accused  each as witnesses of the other defendants, which is not permitted according to the laws in force and the principles of jurisprudence.

We are of the opinion that  the panel of judges should make it clear that the correct procedures will be adhered to in accordance with the Criminal Procedural Code, bearing in mind that this is what Papuan people would expect regarding the investigation procedures  as required by law in the case against Isak Kalaiban and his colleagues.

[Translated by TAPOL]

LP3BH Urges the President so Resolve the Papua issue by means of Dialogue

COMMENT by Yan Christian Warinussy,
Executive Director of LP3BH
8 September 2013
After carefully examining  theoretic aspects of the question of dialogue as the way of resolving several conflicts in various parts of the world, I wish to present a concrete proposal to Dr Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono [SBY], the President of Indonesia, regarding the question of resolving the conflict in the Land of Papua by means of dialogue.During a four-day visit to Geneva, I was able to become acquainted with efforts being made to resolve conflicts in other parts of the world such as South Philippines, Burma and Mali. It was clear to me that dialogue is an important method used in other conflicts in which Indonesia has been playing a positive role.

In my opinion, as we approach the end of the second term of he current presidency in 2014,  it is very important for SBY to resolve the  issue of Papua by involving all elements and components of the Papuan people.

As a defender of human rights in the Land of Papua, it is clear to me that as a consequence of resolving the issue of Papua, SBY would win acknowledgement as a world leader deserving widespread respect  for having resolved the issue of Papua, which will resonate also on his whole administration as well as the various political parties which support him.

The image of his administration  which is currently is  rather lopsided could be changed completely if he shows that he has a clear vision regarding the issue of Papua by using his authority to enter into dialogue with Papua before the end of 2013.

Moreover, it could have a positive impact in several of the major countries across the world and strengthen Indonesia’s position as a democratic country  which is respected by all the countries that are currently in close alliance with Indonesia..

[Translated by TAPOL]

LP3BH: Police and army chiefs must be held responsible for attacks on Papuan Congress participants

Statement by Yan Christian Warinussy, executive-director of LP3BH/Manokwari

The attack by members of the Indonesian Police/Polri  and the Indonesian Army against partiipants at the Third Papuan People’s Congress on  19 October was a gross violations of human rights because it was perpetrated against ordinary civilians who were unarmed  and were not involved in any acts of resistance.This is abundantly clear from video which I and the LP3BH-Manokwari have in our possession and which have been shown to  government officials and members of the European Parliament as well as to members of the German Parliament last week in Berlin.

The videos clearly show that the attacks that were launched by members of Polri and the TNI were acting under the command of the chief of police in Papua and in Jayapura. There were no acts of resistance whatever by members of the public or by any of the participants at the Congress, including members of the special defence group for the Congress, the PETAPA.

The videos also show a number of persons in civilian clothing, wearing short pants and shirts  who are clearly intelligence agents of the police and the army, who can be seen holding  pistols as well as rifles and who can be seen firing their weapons into the air, and even show some members of the security forces firing in the direction of the large crowd of people who were running away towards the mountains or to places in Abepura, in fear of their lives.

The discovery of six dead bodies following the tragedy of the Third People’s Congress is a clear indication of the use of ammunition being aimed against the mass of people.

As a human rights activist in the Land of Papua, I saw no actions aimed at dispersing the people or attempts to prevent chaos. The Congress was already over and  one hour later, members of the security forces who were under the command of  Police Commissioner Imam Setyawan SIK can be seen trying to prevent a  vehicle which was driving along Jalan Yakonde with the lawyer Edison Waromi on board, which  was damaged by the security forces who pulled the people of the vehicle and started beating them and then pushed them into a  police van to be driven to police headquarters where they are now being held in custody.

Following the arrest of Waromi, the security forces starting firing their weapons and chasing participants of the Papuan Congress as they were leaving the location of that event.

I herewith, as Executive Director of LP3BH/Manorkwari and a human rights defender in the Land of Papua, urge Komnas HAM, to investigate the matter and to bring formal charges against the Papua chief of police and the police chief in Jayapuara, as well as the commander of the 1702 military command in Jayapura  who were in command of the operation to be held fully accountable for the bloody incident that occurred on 19 October 2011