Jumat, 30 Oktober 2009

Perilous Path to Special Autonomy

Papuan Fault Lines: Part III
By John M. Gorrindo
Indonesian Correspondent

In the wake of World War II’s ashes Indonesia rose like a Phoenix, blazing forth in the vanguard of the new world order that emerged. It established itself as the first major colony to throw off its age-old yoke of servitude and in many cases, slavery. In doing so Indonesia inspired and became a leader amongst a fast growing number of new, non-aligned nations, most of which like Indonesia had been former European colonies. With the coming of the 1950’s, countries like India and Egypt with large population and ancient cultures now stood together with Indonesia as new and vital members of the international community.
Indonesia’s brand of nationalism was rooted in a five point philosophy embodied in a state ideology called the Pancasila. Core to defining the new republic’s secular nationalism was the Pancasila’s ethos of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (Unity in Diversity) which acknowledged and celebrated the archipelago’s multicultural and pluralistic nature. The founding fathers believed that for the nation to succeed, Indonesia had to at once embrace its ethno-linguistic and religious diversity but at the same time seek to unify its vast array of constituent populations.

Insurrections and separatist movements that continually threatened Indonesia’s first quarter century of existence reflected the country’s vast regional differences in terms of ethnicity, language, religion, customary traditions (adat), geographical displacement, and historical ties to former Dutch rule. Though most parts of Indonesia participated in the independence movement, some regions were much less enthusiastic about the prospects of an Indonesian Republic than were others.

Indonesia’s struggle for suzerainty was first and foremost spearheaded in Java. Not everyone under the former territorial control of the Dutch was confident that rule in mainly Javanese hands as centralized in that more highly developed island would benefit them. The fear of Javanese hegemony was a deal breaker at times for even entire regions, such as the Malukus.

In the case of all those peoples subject to the Dutch in what was then called Western New Guinea, there existed split allegiances and significant disagreement as to who should rule the territory. This made the region no different than the neighboring Malukus. What did set West New Guinea apart in terms of common experience was the fact that very few of the island’s peoples- whether indigenous Melanesian or émigrés from outside- ever did participate in the Indonesian revolution.

Indonesia’s shrewd diplomatic persistence that played one Cold War faction off the other resulted in its successful wresting of control over Western New Guinea, or what Sukarno would rename Irian. In that victory of territorial dispute, Indonesia faced the long term responsibility to both develop and assimilate respectively the vast wilderness tract and its population of over three hundred ethno-lingual groups.

Four decades after assuming power in West Papua, Indonesia has fallen very short in terms of both these vital missions. And particularly for the thirty years Suharto’s new order prevailed, an isolate cloud both obscured any transparency as to visible progress to the outside world and hid the brutal repression visited upon many of the Papuan people.

There exists in many cases a gaping black hole as to what actually happened to the peoples of West Papua between “The Act of Free Choice” in 1969 and the passing of a Special Autonomy law in 2001. Even most hard line Indonesian authorities past and present would likely agree to the following observations, though:
The OPM, or Operasi Papua Merdeka, was formed in 1964 and began a sustained campaign of armed struggle against Indonesian security forces for an independent Papua.

After two decades of often violent resistance to Indonesian rule, Papua was declared a “daerah militer” (militarized region), and Indonesian security forces were given even greater authority to plan and execute military attacks against those Papuan groups considered treasonous, rebellious, armed, or otherwise threatening and dangerous. Military reprisals were taken against not only alleged freedom fighters but often by extension their home villages and families.
Human rights abuses committed by Indonesian security forces- including illegal detention, torture, murder (often indiscriminant and including women and children), rape, extra-judicial killing, and wholesale destruction of villages- have been widely documented since West Papua’s incorporation in Indonesia in May 1963. Legally they amount at least to a collective case of Crimes Against Humanity as defined by the United Nations in its landmark Law of Genocide (1948). That these large scale crimes have been committed with impunity and absence of accountability is even admitted to- at least in part- by the Indonesian government itself. President Megawati’s official apology to the Papuan people for abuses made it clear that many of the allegations made by numerous human rights groups such as Amnesty International, TAPOL, and the United Nations Commission on Human Rights were at least in part true.

Through powers of eminent domain the Indonesian state appropriated land from indigenous groups without honoring or considering customary land laws and traditions that had been in effect for in many cases, thousands of years. The mineral, gas, and logging rights of large tracts of government appropriated land have been leased to mainly foreign development interest. A fair return of revenues on profits was never distributed to local peoples. As in the case of the Freeport Mine, some tribal groups- much like many American Indians- were displaced entirely off their land and resettled in unsuitable and often unhealthy surroundings. Unfair compensation for natural resource extraction was a key negotiated term in the Special Autonomy law of 2001.

The rush to develop West Papua economically benefited only the Jakarta power elite, the Indonesian security forces stationed in West Papua, a small administrative Papuan elite in place, foreign business interests, and to some degree, transmigration populations. Leading indicators measuring quality of life for the vast majority of the one million indigenous Melanesian Papuans have in many cases suffered a reversal. This includes levels of income, health, nutrition, education, and job opportunity. On the whole, the original peoples of Papua have been discriminated against and treated as second class citizens. There has been very limited attempt to prepare them for assimilation as Indonesian citizens.

Irresponsible development leading to environmental degradation- especially in the forms of mining, logging, and palm oil plantation development- has been an ongoing reality of life in West Papua. For example, many countries- including China, several in Europe and the U.S.- have glutted themselves on cheap and rare Papuan lumber without giving proper attention to certifying whether forestry yields have been legal or not.

Unaccountability for the trillions of lost rupiahs in developmental funds the central government has poured into West Papua is due to negligence, cronyism, patronage, and corruption. Papuans themselves have participated in such activities, including elected officials.

Almost all humanitarian aid and monitoring organizations have been barred from entrance into West Papua. This includes the foreign press, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, and the International Red Cross.

One historical twist of Indonesia’s sixty-four year existence as a nation is that its inherent fragility when combined with its recent emergence as a democratic state has served to often shield it from human rights accountability in West Papua. Neither the United Nations nor most democratic nations around the world were eager to hold Indonesia’s feet to the fire on human rights when the country was attempting to throw off its militarism in favor of democratic principles. While a collective blind eye had been cast towards West Papua, East Timor was able to escape the same fate. But given twenty-five years of tacit U.S. support for Indonesia’s militarism in Timor it is doubtful the East Timorese could have gained international recognition and gain independence without the intervention of Australian troops which helped document the horrible civilian casualties and create a bridge of access for UN inspectors. Active international response made all the difference in East Timor.

As real politik gave greater priority to the Cold War between the Free World and the Sino-Soviet bloc rather than the nationalist struggle of West Papua during the years of negotiation leading to the 1962 New York Agreement, the West Papuan cause has continued to suffer low international recognition. Overshadowing has been the rise of democracy in greater Indonesia.

Internationally, with the Cold War having become an historical footnote, Indonesia could no longer take advantage and draw upon knee-jerk support from world powers such as the United States. Suharto’s fervent anti-communism was no longer a calling card that served as a blank check for military and economic aid from former Cold War allies. Indonesia’s rapid economic development had been made possible by a real politik that no loner existed. Once this modus operandi had been made void, the very foundation of New Order political economics shattered, the rupiah crashed, and a radical reformation was given birth. Suharto along with his New Order policies had run their historical course- or at least so it seemed.

State disintegration appeared on the brink as separatist struggles in Aceh, the Malukus, West Papua, and East Timor coincided with an economic-political crisis that toppled Suharto in 1998. In the face of these tumultuous events, the international community has been careful to help shepherd Indonesia’s turn to democratic governance and has participated in brokering agreements as successful in Aceh and East Timor. This includes forbearance of Indonesia’s human rights record on the part of the UN, and aid or loans of various types from the U.S., the IMF, and the World Bank.

Under great international pressure during the wake of Suharto’s fall, Indonesia conceded to East Timorese independence and suffered its first real blow to its self-perceived territorial integrity. Post-Suharto, the sudden democratic opening provided an unprecedented political space which was quickly crowded with long-suppressed demands from a bewildering array of interest groups from around Indonesia.

President Habibie, Suharto’s immediate and short-lived successor, ushered in this era of sudden liberalization as the Indonesian government felt compelled to redress many grievances on the part of not only limited interest groups but entire regions of the nation. In many cases good faith, successful efforts were made to initialize democratization in Indonesia. Aceh and West Papua were of special concern as both provinces had long standing histories of disaffection and armed independence struggle against the Indonesian state.

The fall of Suharto meant the fall of some key New Order policies- at least temporarily. The harsh repression Suharto used to counter separatism in both Aceh and West Papua had only served to further polarize- creating growing body counts and exacerbating hostilities. Shaken by the loss of a twenty-five year old war in East Timor, Indonesia’s government began to contemplate more peaceful alternatives in both Aceh and West Papua. The loss of East Timor resurrected Jakarta’s greatest fear- balkanization of the archipelago. With little show for it, military means had unilaterally failed, having left some 200,000 dead in East Timor (most of them civilian), 35,000 fatalities in Aceh, and undetermined thousands swept away in West Papuan violence. For the first time in its short history, a shell-shocked Indonesia began to show signs of shirking off a uniform militarist approach to regional separatism as it finally began mounting peace initiatives through diplomacy.

Following Suharto, the three brief presidencies of Habibie, Abdurrahman Wahid (Gus Dur), and Megawati Sukarnoputri struggled with pacification of separatist forces within the country and Special Autonomy was offered both Aceh and West Papua. The 2004 tsunami dealt such large scale destruction that Acehnese separatists and the Indonesian government were mutually compelled to come to terms. The implementation of that agreement has moved forward in significant degree satisfactorily for the Acehnese. During Megawati’s presidency, the West Papuans were handed their own version of Special Autonomy, known as the OTUS agreement of 2001.

In principle and on paper, OTUS initially held out great hope. The main provisions as follows coincide in most part to the list of grievances already previously enumerated:
1. Revenue Sharing: Seventy to eighty percent of revenues generated from natural resource extraction will be given back to the province.
2. A truth and reconciliation process will be established in order to clarify the grievances surrounding West Papua’s incorporation into the state of Indonesia.
3. The Indonesian government will establish special courts and a provincial rights commission to review human rights policies and grievances.
4. The Indonesian government will recognize customary land rights as practiced by the Papuans and oblige land use operators to negotiate terms of use with traditional landowners.
5. Comprised of adat communities, women’s organizations, and religious institutions in equal number to be representatively elected, OTUS mandates the establishment of the Papuan People’s Assembly (MRP). MRP will be legally granted the power to review and hold veto authority over the selection of candidates for governor as well as reviewing government policy that effect indigenous communities.

Ethnic and indigenous rights were finally given official recognition by Jakarta, but Indonesia was not willing to concede maintaining a strong security apparatus in the province. Most pro-independence activities were still to be considered illegal if not treasonous. This included seditious acts such as raising the Morning Glory flag.

Jakarta also conceded the need for creating new Papuan institutions which would better involve discrete Papuan interests, including intellectuals, political officials, and even some activists.

But seven years after the signing into law of the OTUS agreement, few concerned observers in Jakarta, Papua or the greater international community consider the thrust of OTUS to have made any substantial beneficial difference in West Papuan’s lives. Many of the same grievances are on the table, especially concerning fair compensation for natural resource development and human rights.

In Part IV of this series, a closer look at current conditions inside West Papua as referenced by the OTUS agreement will be explored.

NOTE: This article is part of a series. Part IV is soon to follow

Source: theseoultimes.com

Congress Demands Action on West Papua Political Prisoners as Human Rights Violations Persist

For Immediate Release

Contact: Tom Ricker, 301-922-8909
John M. Miller, National Coordinator, +1/718-596-7668

August 7 - The East Timor and Indonesia Action Network (ETAN) today congratulated U.S. congressmembers for their letter to Indonesian president, Dr. H. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono urging him to work for the “immediate and unconditional” release of West Papuan political prisoners Filep Karma and Yusak Pakage.

“We are pleased that Congress is taking this important stand for human rights in Indonesia. Karma and Pakage have been in prison for three and half long years for merely exercising their right of political expression. We hope the letter coupled with increasing pressure from the human rights community will gain their release,” said Tom Ricker, advocacy coordinator for ETAN

The letter was signed by 40 members of the U.S. House of Representatives. The letter with a complete list of signers can be found below.

Karma and Pakage are serving 10 and 15 years respectively for raising the Morning Star flag during a peaceful protest in December of 2004 in Jayapura, Papua. According to Amnesty International and other reports, Indonesian police who arrested . Karma at the site of the demonstration subsequently beat him en route to the police station. Karma and Pakage were sentenced in May 2005 and have been in prison since. Amnesty International has declared Karma and Pakage to be prisoners of conscience.

The letter also points to the deteriorating human right situation in Papua: “The unjust imprisonment of Mr. Karma and Mr. Pakage occurs in the context of a crackdown on Papuan human rights defenders, which has included general public threats by senior military officials and intimidation directed at individuals by anonymous figures.”

“This letter from Congress comes at a crucial time. Peaceful protesters continue to be arrested in West Papua. Just two weeks ago nearly 40 people were arrested for demonstrating. Six of the organizers now face the same prison terms as Karma and Pakage,” said Ricker.

“The U.S. government has once again become a major supplier of military assistance to Indonesia despite the deteriorating circumstances in West Papua. We hope this action by members of Congress signals a renewed willingness to promote respect for human rights as a condition of any future assistance,” he added.

The congressional letter was coordinated by Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI)
ETAN was formed in 1991. The U.S.-based organization advocates for democracy, justice and human rights for Timor-Leste and Indonesia. For more information, see ETAN's web site: http://www.etan.org.

Sebuah Lampu Kuning Bagi Indonesia

oleh Professor Donald E. Weatherbee

Selama enam tahun pemerintahannya, George W. Bush telah mendorong pemulihan hubungan dengan Indonesia. Amerika Serikat memandang Indonesia sebagai mitra utamanya dalam berurusan dengan masalah yang menjadi prioritas yakni counter-terrorism. Lebih penting lagi, Amerika Serikat melihat peranan besar Indonesia dalam membentuk terjaminnya wilayah Asia Tenggara yang stabil dan damai dalam jangka panjang di mana Amerika Serikat akan berpartisipasi sepenuhnya.

Titik balik kritis hubungan USA - Indonesia, pasca-Timor Timur, dan pasca-Clinton terjadi pada November 2005 ketika dicabutnya semua pembatasan legislatif yang tersisa atas bantuan militer Amerika Serikat kepada Indonesia. Bagi Amerika Serikat, inilah waktunya untuk melihat ke depan pada kerja sama dengan Indonesia yang demokratik dan bukannya menempatkan hubungan-hubungan dalam konteks masa lalu. Pada tahun 2006, kedua pemerintah pada tingkat tertinggi bisa berbicara tentang kemitraan strategis.

Namun, hasil pemilihan kongresional Amerika Serikat November 2006, memberi lampu kuning bagi hubungan bilateral kedua negara di masa datang. Penguasaan Partai Demokrat atas dua lembaga perwakilan telah membawa kembali kursi-kursi komite penting, anggota (dan staf) yang mungkin tidak memiliki tingkat perasaan yang sama nyamannya dengan Jakarta, seperti yang dirasakan Presiden Bush dan pembantu-pembantunya. Isu-isu HAM, reformasi militer dan Papua akan muncul lagi ke permukaan. Seandainya isu-isu tersebut tidak membuahkan aksi, mencuatnya masalah-masalah itu tetap akan mengganggu ketenangan hubungan bilateral di saat Presiden Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono sedang mempersiapkan diri menghadapi kampanye pemilihan kembali 2009.

Ketua baru dari the Sub-komite Kepantasan Senate Amerika Serikat mengenai Negara, Operasi Luar Negeri dan Badan-badan Sejawat adalah Senator Patrick Leahy yang mewakili wilayah Vermont. Leahy adalah salah seorang yang paling gigih mengritik militer Indonesia. Amendemen Leahy pada tahun 1999 berhasil membekukan hubungan militer Amerika Serikat dan Indonesia. Sebagai anggota golongan minoritas dari subcommittee itu, pada tahun 2005, dia sangat marah atas pencarian kembali hubungan militer tersebut, ia menyebut hal ini sebagai penyimpangan atas keputusan yang baik dan penghinaan terhadap Kongres dan berkata bahwa hal itu telah mempermainkan proses dan mengirimkan pesan yang sangat buruk. Matanya juga tertuju pada pembunuhan aktivis HAM Munir Said Thalib pada tahun 2004. Leahy menyuarakan kecurigaan, sebagaimana yang juga disuarakan banyak pihak, bahwa badan intelijen nasional Indonesia terlibat. Dia menyusun amendment bagi rancangan undang-undang operasi luar negeri FY 2007 yang meminta laporan HAM termasuk tentang pembunuhan Munir. Penutup-nutupan yang terus terjadi, dalam kata-kata Leahy, menunjukkan bahwa budaya kebal hukum masih sangat melekat pada masyarakat Indonesia. Dapat diharapkan bahwa ketika tiba pada appropriations FY 2008, Leahy akan mengirim pesan berbeda dari apa yang pernah dikirim oleh mayoritas Republikan.

Di sisi Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, ketua baru Subkomite Hubungan Luar Negeri urusan Asia, Pasifik dan Lingkungan Global adalah Rep. Eni Faleomavaega, perwakilan dari American Samoa sejak 1989 dan anggota penuh keempat yang paling senior dari Komite Urusan Luar Negeri DPR AS. Subkomite ini memiliki pengawasan yang luas atas kebijakan luar negeri Amerika Serikat di wilayah Asia-Pasifik. Faleomavaega telah menunjukkan bahwa pengawasannya yang terus menerus atas Indonesia. Dalam sebuah pernyataan tanggal 23 Januari, dia mengumumkan bahwa dia bermaksud meninjau kembali Hak Asasi Manusia dan usaha-usaha demokrasi di Indonesia.

Lebih lanjut, dia menyatakan bahwa "Aku terus prihatin dengan situasi di Papua Barat dan berusaha mencari solusi baik yang bisa mewujudkan perdamaian." Sebagai anggota dari Kelompok HAM di DPR Amerika Serikat, anggota kongres ini memiliki kepentingan pribadi di Papua; dia memiliki sanak-keluarga yang melaksanakan karya misionari Kristen di sana. Pesannya tentang perdamaian di Papua dinyatakannya lebih terperinci dalam sebuah wawancara di mana ia berkata, "Jika anda ingin berbicara tentang keadilan, berikan pada rakyat Papua Barat hak menentukan nasib sendiri." Dia merencanakan dengar pendapat umum mengenai tindakan-tindakan Indonesia di Papua yang akan menyorot dukungan-dukungan terhadap kemerdekaan Papua Barat.

Maksud-maksud dan perilaku Faleomavaega telah dicatat di Jakarta di mana signal luar apa saja yang mempertanyakan kedaulatan Indonesia atas provinsi-provinsi Papua Baratnya akan menaikan bendera merah. Hal ini merupakan topik yang sangat sensitif bagi hubungan bilateral. Australia mendapati hal itu pada bulan Maret 2006 ketika Indonesia memanggil kembali duta besarnya di Canberra karena masalah 42 orang Papua pencari suaka. Isu ini tidak membuahkan kepuasan Indonesia hingga Australia pada November 2006 memberikan komitmen tertulis pada pakta keamanan Lombok yang akan menghormati integritas teritorial Indonesia. Pemerintahan Bush secara kategoris telah selalu menyatakan posisi yang sama. Hal ini akan dipertanyakan oleh seorang anggota kongres Demokratik yang senior yang mendukung jaringan ORNOP-ORNOP yang pro-kemerdekaan Papua dan merupakan alarm bagi Jakarta. Posisinya dapat mempengaruhi kebijakan pemerintah Amerika Serikat, jika dihadapkan pada konteks presiden dari Partai Republik yang sudah lemah dan kemungkinan naiknya presiden dari partai Demokrat pada tahun 2008.

Sebagai seorang nasionalis, serangan baru dari anggota kongres Amerika Serikat, akan memaksa Presiden Yudhoyono untuk berada pada posisi defensif berhadapan dengan Amerika Serikat. Dia sudah bersiap-siap menghadapi ekonom-ekonom nasionalis, dengan menyatakan pembubaran Consultative Group on Indonesia. Dia juga telah mencegah tokoh-tokoh Islam radikal yang menuduhnya mendukung perang Amerika pada kaum Muslim. Postur publiknya yang berpihak pada Amerika Serikat setidak-tidaknya akan berpengaruh pada lingkungan politik dalam negeri Indonesia, yang akan berubah ketika lawan-lawan politiknya menyudutkannya atas hubungan Amerika. Kita hanya bisa berharap agar lampu tidak berubah menjadi merah, mengganggu kerjasama bilateral, dan hubungan ekonomi, keamanan dan politik yang produktif, yang sejauh ini sudah terjalin selama menjabatnya Presiden Yudhoyono.

Professor Donald Weatherbee is a Donald S. Russell Distinguished
Professor Emeritus, University of South Carolina.
Diterjemahkan oleh a West Papuan citizen.

Source: WestPapua.ca

Australia bends over for the ‘Indonesia Solution’

by Damien Kingsbury

As we learned from foreign minister Stephen Smith last night, there is now an agreement between the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, and Indonesia’s President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono for Indonesia’s to accept asylum seekers bound for Australia. Move over John Howard’s “Pacific Solution”, and make way for Rudd’s “Indonesia Solution”.

Rudd will take considerable satisfaction from his visit, formally to mark Yudhoyono’s swearing in for a second term, producing what he will no doubt regard as a diplomatic coup.

Australia’s sometimes difficult relations with Indonesia are travelling fairly well at the moment, in large part due to Yudhoyono’s democratic reformist tendencies. That Rudd is also comfortable with regional leaders, and has taken an active interest in Indonesia since at least 1997, further assists the relationship.

Smith hesitated to put a dollar figure on Australia paying for this new arrangement, but there is little doubt that funds will be diverted from existing humanitarian projects to help support Indonesia holding the asylum seekers.

Smith indicated this when he discussed the range of humanitarian projects that Australia currently supports in Indonesia, identifying the government’s new Indonesia Solution as also based on humanitarian principles.

The second “price” issue for Australia will be what diplomatic concessions will have been granted in order to secure Indonesia’s co-operation. In this, there is little doubt that the Lombok Treaty will have been invoked, in particular that part that refers to non-interference in Indonesia’s internal affairs.

For this, read that Australia has been told to butt out of any lingering concerns about the continuing abysmal human rights situation in West Papua and not to accept any further West Papuan refugees. Oh, and the Australian government might want to reconsider its approach to the Australian Federal Police investigation into the 1975 Balibo murders while we’re at it.

Australia, always more than a little obsequious to Indonesia, has prostrated itself even further.

Given that this Indonesia Solution reflects Australia’s much-vaunted humanitarian concerns, as a third issue, one wonders why Smith has put so little effort into the humanitarian crisis in Sri Lanka, which is pushing so many people into boats.

Not only has the predominantly ethnic Sinhalese Sri Lankan government won the war against its Tamil separatists, it is keeping a quarter of a million Tamils in concentration camps, from which outside access is barred.

The reports that do filter out from the camps tell of regular extrajudicial murders, rape and torture. And then there is the expropriation of tens of thousands of Tamils from their homes. The Palk Straights with India, too, are heavily patrolled, so the Indian Ocean and Australia is the safer option.

In short, the “sailing season” combined with “push” pressures in Australia’s part of the world have led to an increase in asylum seekers getting into boats. Compared to the early 1980s, however, and certainly by current international standards, the number of asylum seekers remains small. This, then, is not an issue of border control or illegal immigration, which is far more taxed at Australia’s airports.

The fourth, domestic political issue, then, is that the motivating factor for this Indonesia Solution is not the government’s supposed humanitarian concerns, but the “dog-whistle politics” of racism in the immigration debate.

Australia’s politicians arguing about who is the toughest on immigration is simply code for who will sink to this lowest common denominator.

Labor promised a more humanitarian approach to asylum seekers. What we now have is just a shift of its geographic focus.

Associate Professor Damien Kingsbury is with the school of International and Political Studies at Deakin University.

Source: www.crikey.com.au

Indonesia: Police and soldiers burn houses and destroy resources in Papua's Bolakme district

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) continues to receive reports of violence being wrought by soldiers and police against civilians in remote West Papuan villages. In the latest case a joint operation responded to an illegal flag raising by the banned Free Papua Movement with indiscriminate violence against civilians. Soldiers have reportedly burned 30 houses, killed livestock and shot threateningly around local residents, many of whom took refuge in the forest for a few weeks out of fear. In another case a man was shot in the stomach and died before reaching the hospital. Complaints to the local and central offices of the national human rights commission have not been taken up.

CASE DETAILS:
In July members of the Free Papua Movement (OPM) reportedly raised the West Papuan flag and the United Nations (UN) flag in the yard of a house in Jugum village, which is in the Bolakme district of the Jaya Wijaya Regency. The Papuan flag is known as the Morning Star (pictured here) and is banned in Indonesia due to its association with pro-Independence resistance groups (see more on this below).
On 3 August local OPM members were approached by representatives of the government, religious leaders and the Jaya Wijaya district police to discuss lowering the flag, and a meeting was held with members of local human rights NGOs and the local tribal council. However no compromise was reached.

On 5 September at around 5am, armed soldiers and police officers arrived in the village from Wamena to conduct a 'sweeping operation' (a targeted operation to intimidate, usually involving the destruction of property) against the OPM, but they found neither the members nor the flags. However according to witnesses they proceeded to set 30 houses alight (pictured above, right and here), seemingly at random, and shot four pigs. They then threatened villagers with bursts of gunfire, scaring many of them into the surrounding forest. Some of the residents remained in the forest for two weeks out of fear, and many fell sick due to the lack of food and medical treatment. The bullets were later collected by the residents as evidence.

The AHRC has recorded various violations that have occurred during these kinds of sweeps, and continues to hear of others. On 11 July 2009 in Mantembu and Yapen villages (Yapen regency) civilian houses were also reportedly burned, and one local resident was shot in the stomach. Yawan Wayeni (39) was suspected of being involved in a ceremony in which the Morning Star was raised, and he died before reaching the hospital.

Several local human right organisations have protested and submitted complaints to the National Commission for Human Rights (Komnas HAM) and the Papuan Branch of the Commission for Human Rights. However no thorough investigations have been conducted into any of these incidents.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Tens of thousands Papuans are reported to have died in military operations since the province was annexed by Indonesia the sixties (some sources claim up to 200,000 have been killed – around 10% of the Papuan population), and there is a widespread fear of soldiers among indigenous villagers. Papuan villages are remote and their residents enjoy little access to institutions of justice. However violations are also taking place in towns and cities. On 16 March 2006 a sweeping operation was carried out against university students in Abepura by police and the military and students from several Pegunungan Tengah regencies were evicted from their dormitory because they were suspected of being involved in an attack against a local police office. Operations were conducted in 2003 and 2005 in several districts (Tinginambut, Yamo, Mapenduma, Kywagi, Bolakme and Serui) resulting in the burning of homes and churches and the destruction of crops.

These kinds of actions lead to chronic food shortages and other hardships and have resulted in increased calls for autonomy - and independence - in this resource-rich province. Inequality remains a pressing issue. The autonomy law has been in effect since 2001 but has not resulted in an improvement of living conditions or political freedoms for Papuans. Efforts by the administration in Jakarta to better the situation tend to flounder due to the strong grip the military holds on the area's resources, and because of corruption on the local government level.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
It is evident from the cases above that the Indonesian government is not following through with its guarantees to protect human rights in West Papua. As a member of the UN, Indonesia is committed to respecting the international human right instruments, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR: particularly article 3, article 8, article 9) and the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which it is a state party. Article 2.3 entitles everyone to effective remedy, while the AHRC would like to highlight article 6, the right to life; article 7, freedom from torture; article 15, presumption of innocence; article 16, equality before the law; and article 18, freedom of expression, freedom of religion and freedom of choice.
On a national level, the right to protection is protected by the constitution, especially in article 28 B p.2 and article 28 G p.1, and in domestic legislation such as article 29 p.1 and article 30 of law no. 39 of 1999.

Furthermore, earlier this year the Chief of the Indonesian National Police enacted the new Regulation of the Chief of Indonesian National Police Number 8 of 2009 which deals with the implementation of human rights principles and standards in the discharge of the duties of the Indonesian National Police. Indonesia also has Law number 34 of 2004 for the Indonesian National Army (TNI), particularly article 2 p.d (on TNI professionalism and respecting of democracy, civil supremacy and human rights) and article 5 (on the roles, functions and duties of the army).

Furthermore it should be noted that for a short time in 1961 and 62 the Morning Star was the national flag of West Papua, and has emotional significance for many Papuans. Under international law the expression of political opinions – in the display of a flag or any other non violent form – should not be considered a crime. The AHRC condemn the imprisonment of political activists and their continued persecution, as reported in previous appeals: UAU-004-2009, FUA-008-2009 and UAU-071-2008.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please send letters to the authorities listed below to call for an immediate investigation regarding TNI and police violence during raids, urging disciplinary and legal action against those found to be involved.
The AHRC has written to the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples, UN Special Rapporteur on the right to housing and the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
To support this appeal, please click hereAbout AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984

Source: Asian Human Rights Commission

Two shot in mine ambush

GUNMEN have shot and wounded two employees of US company Freeport as their bus travelled along a road to the world's largest gold mine in eastern Indonesia.
The two miners were hit yesterday when the security-escorted bus carrying 60 employees was attacked in restive West Papua province, police spokesman Agus Rianto said. The injured men were in stable condition after being taken to a hospital.

''A group of unidentified men ambushed Freeport's bus,'' said Mr Rianto.

''Police are still searching for the perpetrators who ran into the dense jungle.''

Freeport has been targeted in a string of shootings since mid-July that have left three dead.

On July 11, gunmen using military-issue weapons killed Freeport's Australian project manager, 29-year-old Melbourne man Drew Grant.

Source: AP

Sabtu, 24 Oktober 2009

Giliran Anggota TNI Ditembaki di Freeport

Armada Freeport Mulai Beroperasi Lagi

JAYAPURA–Aksi penembakan orang tidak dikenal (OTK) di areal PT Freeport Indonesia, masih terus terjadi. Setelah sebelumnya, iring-iringan kendaraan yang pengangkut karyawan ditembaki, mangakibatkan 2 karyawan tertembak, kini giliran salah satu anggota TNI menjadi sasaran penembakan.

Penembakan itu terjadi Rabu (22/10) sekitar pukul 15.00 WP di mile 38 dan mile 39 Kali Kopi Timika, Papua.

Kali ini penembakan diarahkan pada truk milik TNI Angkatan Darat seusai mengantar logistik bagi Satgas TNI AD yang sedang berjaga di areal tersebut.

Kabid Humas Polda Papua, Kombes Polisi Drs Agus Rianto, mengatakan, penembakan yang dilakukan orang tidak dikenal itu, mengenai salah satu anggota TNI, hanya saja tidak sampai mengancam nyawa korban.

Pasca penembakan tersebut, kata Rianto, polisi bersama aparat gabungan dari TNI langsung melakukan penyisiran di sekitar lokasi.” Hanya saja pelaku sangat menguasai medan,” ungkapnya kepada wartawan

Ditambahkan, pelaku penembakan diduga memiliki keterkaitan dengan kasus penembakan lainnya yang terjadi beberapa waktu lalu di areal PT Freeport. Pasalnya motif penembakan yang dilakukan tidak jauh berbeda dengan kejadian sebelumnya.

Hal senada diungkapkan Kapolda Papua Irjen Pol FE Bagus Ekodanto.

"Memang ada insiden tersebut dan dari laporan, saat korban terkena tembakan di bagian paha dan saat ini masih dirawat di RS Mitra Masyarakat, Timika," ujar Kapolda Papua kepada wartawan, Kamis.

Dikatakan, dari laporan yang diperoleh, terungkap bahwa insiden itu terjadi saat korban bersama rombongan kembali dari Kali Kopi seusai berpatroli.

Ketika ditanya tentang meningkatnya penyerangan yang dilakukan OTK, Kapolda Papua menduga itu dilakukan kelompok OTK guna menunjukkan keberadaan mereka apalagi saat ini menjelang 1 Desember.

Walaupun terjadi peningkatan penyerangan yang dilakukan OTK, belum berencana menambah pasukan. Pasukan yang ada masih dirasa dirasa cukup, apalagi dalam melaksanakan operasi Polri didukung TNI.

"Kami terus melakukan patroli gabungan, dan menambah pos-pos di sepanjang ruas jalan Timika-Tembagapura terutama kawasan yang dianggap rawan namun karena medan yang cukup sulit menyebabkan OTK masih dapat melakukan penyerangan," ungkap Kapolda Bagus Ekodanto.

Kasus penembakan di kawasan PT Freeport terjadi sejak 11 Juli itu telah menewasakan empat orang, dua di antaranya karyawan PT Freeport dan dua anggota Polri, serta mencederai puluhan orang baik anggota Polri, TNI maupun karyawan PT.Freeport. Kendaraan Freeport sendiri dibatasi hanya boleh melintas di siang hari mulai pukul 06.00 WIT hingga 18.00 WIT, itupun harus berkonvoi dan dikawal aparat.

Sementara itu, setelah dua hari pascainsiden penembakan terhadap bus karyawan PT Freeport Indonesia di Mile 42 ruas jalan Timika-Tembagapura, pada Selasa (20/10), hari ini ratusan karyawan kembali ke tempat kerja mereka di Tembagapura.

Yanus Msen selaku perwakilan manajemen Freeport mengatakan, hari ini karyawan yang berangkat ke Tembagapura dari terminal Gorong-gorong Timika mencapai lebih dari 500 orang.

Para karyawan menumpang 21 bus, 9 bus berangkat pukul 08.00 WIT dan 12 bus lainnya baru berangkat siang hari sekitar pukul 14.00 WIT dengan pengawalan ketat aparat keamanan.

Pada saat bersamaan, karyawan dengan jumlah yang sama bertolak dari Tembagapura menuju Timika untuk istirahat kerja (off). "Mobilitas karyawan yang naik maupun turun dari Tembagapura disesuaikan dengan situasi keamanan. Jika kondisi keamanan rawan, maka operasional bus karyawan dihentikan sementara waktu sampai situasi pulih," jelas Yanus saat berdialog dengan anggota DPRD Mimika dan perwakilan isteri karyawan Freeport, Kamis siang.

Rekan Yanus, Adolf Ansaka mengatakan selama insiden penembakan terhadap kendaraan perusahaan sejak Juli-September operasional perusahaan tambang emas dan tembaga itu tetap berjalan seperti biasa.

Sementara itu para isteri karyawan Freeport menuntut DPRD Mimika menghadirkan Presiden Direktur & CEO PT Freeport, Armando Mahler dalam pertemuan lanjutan membahas situasi keamanan di areal Freeport, Senin pekan depan.

"Kami minta Pak Armando harus hadir untuk memberi jaminan kepada kami istri-istri dan anak karyawan Freeport yang selama ini turut menjadi korban aksi kekerasan di areal perusahaan," kata Lilik K Abbas.

Rekannya, Yosefina Wosiri mendesak SPSI dan Tongoi Papua agar meminta manajemen Freeport menghentikan sementara aktivitas perusahaan jika situasi keamanan masih rawan.

Ia mengatakan, aksi teror yang terjadi selama empat bulan di areal Freeport seharusnya bisa ditangani aparat keamanan lantaran lokasi penembakan hanya di sekitar Mile 40-50.

Di sisi lain, kata Yosefina, jumlah aparat keamanan sudah sangat banyak yang mencapai 1.320 personel dan pos-pos aparat gabungan TNI dan Polri telah dibangun di sepanjang ruas jalan Timika-Tembagapura.

Namun ironisnya, aksi penembakan terus terjadi hingga saat ini dengan target para karyawan Freeport. (cr4/ant)

DISTRIK TINGGINAMBUT BERGEJOLAK


Jayapura - Ratusan masyarakat di distrik Tingginambut kabupaten Puncak Jaya jumat (23/10) dilaporkan telah mengungsi ke hutan-hutan setelah gabungan aparat TNI/Polri melakukan penyisiran.
Dilaporkan operasi yang dilakukan aparat gabungan dari satuan Angkatan Darat (AD) Tentara Nasional Indonesia dan Kepolisian Republik Indonesia menyebabkan puluhan keluarga mengungsi pasalnya rumah mereka di bakar serta sweping aparat yang membuat warga ketakutan.
Diricinkan, sejumlah Honai (rumah) dibakar aparat, empat tempat ibadah ikut hangus terbakar, serta puluhan ternak milik warga setempat di bunuh. sementara jumlah korban jiwa yang diperkirakan meninggal dalam aksi tersebut belum diketahui secara pasti.
Sementara berdasarkan data korban terakhir yang diterima, menyebutkan bahwa korban tewas akibat aksi tersebut berjumlah 3 orang, satu korban merupakan pemimpin gereja yang oleh masyarakat setempat di panggil bapa.(lis)
 

English News

Loading...

Kekerasan Militer

Kekerasan Militer
Ada kesalahan di dalam gadget ini

CNN.com International News

Kekerasan Militer

Kekerasan Militer

Daily Inspirations

Followers

Site Info

My Blog List

Top 10 Members

Ads Banner

Berita dari Papua Copyright © 2009 BeMagazine Blogger Template is Designed by Blogger Template
In Collaboration with fifa