Dari Dialog Interaktif Muktamar Majelis Muslim di Kotaraja

Jayapura Cepos - Sampai kemarin, pelaksanaan Muktamar Majelis Muslim Papua masih terus berlangsung. Di hari kedua itu, Muktamar itu dilanjutkan dengan diskusi panel dan dialog interaktif yang dihadiri sejumlah tokoh agama, intelektual dan politik.
Banyak Kasus Pelanggaran HAM di Papua Belum Tuntas *Dari Dialog Interaktif Muktamar Majelis Muslim di Kotaraja JAYAPURA- Sampai kemarin, pelaksanaan Muktamar Majelis Muslim Papua masih terus berlangsung. Di hari kedua itu, Muktamar itu dilanjutkan dengan diskusi panel dan dialog interaktif yang dihadiri sejumlah tokoh agama, intelektual dan politik. Terlihat diantaranya, Ketua Komisi F DPRP, Ir Weynand Watori, Ketua ICMI Mohamad Mosaad, Ketua Sinode GKI di Tanah Papua Pdt C. Berotabuy dan Ketua Umum Badan Pelayan Pusat Persekutuan Gereja - Geraja Baptis Papua Socrates Sofyan Yoman, MA. Pada kesempatan itu, para nara sumber menyajikan berbagai persoalan yang mengemuka di Papua, mulai dari persoalan pelanggaran HAM hingga persoalan pembangunan yang belum merata hingga saat ini. Weynand Watory misalnya, dalam materinya yang berjudul Tanggung Jawab dalam mewujudkan keadilan dan perdamaian di Tanah Papua itu, ia memaparkan bahwa betapa sampai saat ini ternyata masih banyak kasus pelanggaran HAM di Papua yang belum tuntas. Ia menilai, banyaknya kasus pelanggaran HAM yang belum diselesaikan melalui mekanisme hukum yang adil dan benar disebabkan prosedur dan mekanisme peradilan HAM yang berbelit-belit dan memakan waktu lama. "KKR (Komisi Kebenaran dan Rekonsiliasi) diharapkan menjadi salah satu alternatif untuk turut mewujudkan penegakan HAM," paparnya. Watori melihat adanya kekhawatiran rakyat Papua bahwa dengan KKR hanya seolah - olah memberikan 'maaf' kepada pelaku pelanggaran HAM. "Oleh karena itu strategi kerja KKR harus diletakan sebagai pilihan dalam penyelesaian kasus pelanggaran HAM yang lebih mendekatkan pada konteks Papua," katanya. Sementara Socrates Yoman antara lain mengemukakan seputar sejarah integrasi Papua di dalam NKRI. Dalam paparnnya dikatakan, sudah menjadi rahasia umum bahwa akar permasalahan di Papua ialah sejarah integrasi yang tidak adil dan tidak benar. "Masalah sejarah integrasi ialah persoalan pelik yang belum pernah menemukan titik temu antara bangsa Indonesia dan Papua Barat untuk mencari jalan penyelesaiannya," paparnya. Dikatakan, Indonesia mengklaim bahwa Papua sah di dalam NKRI karena PEPERA 1969 ialah sah. Sementara 'bangsa Papua Barat' mempertanyakan keabasahan Papua dalam NKRI, hal ini tunjukkan dengan hasil penelitian Prof P.J.Drooglever tentang PEPERA. Kata Yoman, hasil penelitian itu mengukuhkan posisi orang asli Papua sebagai pihak yang benar. Pada bagian lain paparannya, Socrates juga mengatakan bahwa Muktamar Muslim itu telah menghapus paradigma 'tamu asing' dengan sebutan Islam Papua dan Kristen Papua yang sebelumnya istilah ini tidak pernah ada. "Perjumpaan kita dalam muktamar ini membawa kita bersama bahwa kita adalah anak adat Melanesia yang memiliki hak yang sama untuk melanjutkan dan menentukan arah hidup di Tanah Papua Barat di Pasifik ini," tandasnya. Acara itu juga diselingin sesi dialog dimana setiap kabupaten wajib mengajukan beberapa pertanyaan atau hal - hal lainnya yang terkait dengan upaya kemajuan umat.(ta)__________________________________________________

WEST PAPUA: Voice of the West Papuan Church seeking protection for native West Papuans (Report by Revd Socratez Sofyan Yoman)

VOICE OF THE WEST PAPUAN CHURCH seeking protection for native West Papuans


By Revd Socratez Sofyan Yoman (President of the Fellowship of West Papuan Baptist Churches West Papua), 24th June 2008

To respected Governments of nations, churches and international institutions, families and individuals all over the world Dear all, On behalf of God’s people who have been oppressed for 45 years since 1st May 1963, I would like to use this opportunity to give an up to date report on the latest situation in West Papua. This appeal is an important voice from the Church which seeks to defend the native West Papuans who are speechless and silent as a result of Indonesian government’s cruelty and violence committed by military, police, and law and regulation forces.The native Papuans are Melanesian people who own the land of West Papua and who have their own history, languages and culture. God has given all these to their ancestors and gave them a responsibility to create things and to take care of the Melanesian land. God put them there without consulting any states in the world to approve their existence (on their land). God said, “Let’s create human being according to our own image”.God blessed the native people of Papua and they lived and experienced God’s blessings until the arrival of the Dutch government in 1828. The Dutch people lived with the native Papuans and educated the native Papuans. The Dutch never hurt the feelings of the native Papuans. Although Indonesians call the Dutch “colonialists” who colonised the Indonesian Malay people, however, history had proved that not even one bullet from Dutch soldiers ever touched or injured the body of any native Papuan. Along with the Dutch presence, the Church arrived in West Papua on 5th February 1855 in Mansinam Island, Manokwari, which is now the capital of West Irian Jaya province (the Indonesian puppet province). The Church came to bring new civilisation, humanitarian vision, truth, justice, peace, equality, freedom, and independence which source from Christ’s cross as God’s power. Thus, God is the Creator of all human beings which include the native West Papuans and our native Melanesian ancestors.The Dutch government since 1828 and the Church since 5th of February 1855 never stigmatised the native Papuans as OPM (Organisasi Papua Merdeka/Free Papua Movement), separatists, or with any other subversive’s labels or showed any actions that disrespected the native Papuans dignity. However, the Indonesian government immediately seized and occupied West Papuans with its military power since 19th December 1961. On that day, Soekarno, the first Indonesian president issued TRIKORA (three commands to seize West Papua from the Dutch) and through the New York Agreement on the 15th August 1962, the United Nations UNTEA administration was handed over to Indonesia on 1st May 1963 without the agreement of the native West Papuans.Then in 1969, the undemocratic 1969 Act of Free Choice was carried out under Indonesian military oppression, forcing only 1,025 selected Papuans to vote for joining Indonesia. Later, the Indonesian government, military and police labelled the native West Papuans as separatists, subversives and OPM (Free West Papua Movement) members. This label or stigma justifies Indonesian government, military and police brutally to commit cruel human rights violations in various forms such as chasing, arrests, torture, kidnapping and rape. All these are done for the sake of preserving “the territorial integrity of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia” without ever considering human rights values. The Indonesian government does this to fulfil its four main agendas: economic, political, security and systematic ethnic cleansing of the native West Papuans. So this is a serious problem. The native West Papuans have suffered for 45 years now and are really experiencing a systematic process of ethnic cleansing in every aspect of their lives. The basic problems in West Papua are as follows: The native West Papuans are not free and safe on their own land. Their lives are threatened. The establishment of military and police bases in all West Papuan lands was done without considering the security, the safety and the survival of the native West Papuans. It seems that military and police personnel that were once operating and killing Timorese in East Timor and Acehnese in Aceh are now in West Papua. Most of the Indonesian intelligence agents are disguised as fast food and ice cream traders, motorbike riders, hotel waiters, drivers and other forms of disguises. They are in every corner of the West Papuan land. There are government regulations and presidential decrees that really destroy the future of native West Papuans and also destroy the Special Autonomy law. These government regulations are: Presidential decree No. 1 year 2003 about the West Irian Jaya province, Presidential instruction No. 5 year 2006 about the acceleration of development in West Papua, government regulation no. 27 year 2007 about the prohibition of using Papuan regional symbols, and presidential decree no. 1 year 2008 about the division of the Special Autonomy fund between Papua province and West Irian Jaya province. The Indonesian government and parliament try to block or cancel and even try to stop the province special and regional regulations which were designed to implement the Special Autonomy Law no 21 year 2001, the Indonesian government’s own legal product. Thus, the government and its parliament are very keen and very quickly producing (various) government regulations and presidential decrees. The government extended provinces and regencies without considering geographical locations, population number, natural and human resources and without ever evaluating the already extended regions. The head of regencies in the newly extended regions are dominated by Indonesian Malay people. For instance, a migrant caretaker regent named Pribadi was appointed to lead Lanny Jaya regency where 100 % of the population are Christian and 100 % are from Baptist church. However, a local man (a Lani man) named Wiklif Wakerkwa who has fulfilled all of the requirements to be a caretaker regent was rejected by the government. The extension of regencies and provinces is a government political approach. The grouping of people according to its tribes is a way to divide and conquer the native West Papuans. In addition, military operations and transmigration are the government’s new systematic ethnic cleansing methods. The conclusion is that all extension of regencies and provinces in West Papua is the Indonesian military’s method of regional conditioning in order to have effective and efficient military operations. Compared with the quality of education during the Indonesian era, the quality of education in the Dutch time was very good and spread out not only in towns but also in remote areas. However, after Indonesia occupied West Papuan land, educational institutions that belong to the church such as YPPK (Catholic Education and School Foundation), YPK (Christian Education Foundation), YPPGI (Evangelical Churches Education and School Foundation), and Adventist School Foundation (who have long provided education to native West Papuans in all regions of West Papua) are ignored by the government. The government of Indonesia neglect the church educational foundations that have existed in West Papua for nearly 100 years. Health services for the native West Papuans are the worst. The mortality index rate of mother and child’s is very high. The Indonesian government is not serious in taking care of the health of the native West Papuans. The worst situation is that during the Special Autonomy time, chemists or drug stores have developed quickly, but Indonesian doctors who are migrants, have exploited the native West Papuans by buying good quality drugs with Special Autonomy funds and then selling the drugs in their private chemists or drug stores. Any patients who consult the doctors will be given a prescription for which the patients will pay later in the doctors’ private drug stores. This type of health service was opposite to the health services practised in the past especially during the Dutch and the Churches time in West Papua. The Dutch government and the church opened health services in all West Papuan lands from the coast to the remote areas. All these health services at present are not maintained by Indonesian government but are ignored and destroyed. The native West Papuans are marginalized economically. The economy has been occupied by Indonesian Malay migrants because they are more educated and trained. The native West Papuans sell their agriculture produce on the ground outside modern buildings in all Papuan lands. The migrants are now selling Papuan traditional food such as bananas, sago and coconuts. The migrants dominate and monopolize the economy in West Papua. Other examples are the Papuan batik clothes that are now sold by migrants. In addition, all shop assistants, restaurant and hotel waiters and waitresses, bank staff, officers at sea, land and air transportation are Indonesian Malay people. It is crucial to have a census of West Papuan native population by an international organisation to find out the exact number of the native West Papuan population. Since Special Autonomy law no 21 year 2001, the number of Indonesian Malay people in West Papua increases almost every day, week, and month. The number of military personnel also increases. However, the number of the native West Papuans decreases sharply. The Indonesian government has clearly committed a systematic ethnic cleansing of the Melanesian race. The Indonesian government also prohibits foreign diplomats, journalists, international human rights workers, humanitarian organisations and Churches from visiting West Papua. What is the Indonesian government seeking to hide in West Papua? The Indonesian government also limits and even prohibits missionaries who have served the native West Papuans since 1855 before the Indonesian government seized and occupied West Papua through the illegal Act of Free Choice in 1969. From April 18th to 19th May 2008, a team from the Fellowship of West Papuan Baptist Churches had a pastoral visit and a documentary film show in Jawajaya, Tolikara and Puncak Jaya regencies. The team faced real intimidation and terror from the Indonesian military (TNI) and Special Forces (KOPASSUS) who are posted in the highlands of Papua. They asked questions such as: Where are you from? Who ordered you to show this film? What is the purpose of showing the film and why there are so many people gathering here? The Indonesian government, military and police came to seize the Papuan land and have occupied the native West Papuans for 45 years but without any shame are still questioning the land owners and the Church that has been there on Papuan land for hundreds of years. This is the face of violence. The native West Papuans and the Churches in West Papua are not free. They are constantly threatened. Conclusion: The Indonesian government is not consistent and is not serious in implementing Special Autonomy. Special Autonomy has turned into a disaster and destroys the future of the native West Papuans. Thus, the special autonomy law no 21 year 2001, which was supposed to be the final solution for political status of West Papua has become a Total Failure. Recommendations: The Papuan land from Sorong to Merauke must be maintained as a Land of Peace and united as one whole. A total evaluation of the Special Autonomy law no 21 year 2001 must be carried out involving all important components such as the native West Papuans, the Indonesian government and the international community. An honest and just dialogue, must take place, mediated by international community, similar to the Aceh case. Withdraw all organic and non-organic TNI troops from West Papua. Allow open access to foreign diplomats, human rights workers, foreign journalists and international Churches to enter West Papua. BackgroundThe Indonesian government offered Special Autonomy Law No. 21 Year 2001 to the native Papuans because all the native Papuans demanded independence based on the following reasons: The New York Agreement of 15th August 1962 did not involve the native West Papuans as owners of the Land of West Papua.

1. The Act of Free Choice was not conducted democratically. Under Indonesian military pressure, the Indonesian government and TNI (Indonesian National Army) selected only 1.025 people and forced them to vote for joining Indonesia.
2. The Indonesian government, military and police commit cruel human rights crimes in the form of chasing, arrests, torture, kidnapping, killing and raping only for the sake of defending the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia. At the same time, human rights values are neglected.
3. In the name of development, the native Papuans’ lands have been taken away and given to migrants through the government transmigration programme. Land has also been seized by the Indonesian military to build their military bases and posts in all West Papua. The native Papuans have lost many of their lands.
4. Destructions and exploitations of natural resources, forests are being cut down, mountains and rivers are polluted, sea resources are raped. All of these are backed by the military and people in power in Jakarta. They do all these things without ever considering the future of native West Papuans and their future generations.
5. Native Papuans are marginalized and became strangers on their own land because all economic resources are occupied by migrants.
GOD BLESS AND PROTECT US ALL

Socratez Sofyan Yoman

President of Fellowship of West Papuan Baptist Churches

Address: Jl. Jeruk Nipis Kotaraja, PO Box 1212Telp. 62-967-583462HP: 08124888458

..............

Kepada Yth.

Pemerintah (Negara-Negara), Gereja-Gereja dan Lembaga-lembaga Internasional, Keluarga dan Perorangan Di Seluruh Dunia.

Perihal: Suara Gereja Memohon Perlindungan Penduduk Asli Papua Barat.

Papua Barat, 24 Juni 2008

Semua Yang Terkasih dan Terhormat,Ijinkanlah saya atas nama umat Tuhan yang tertindas selama 45 tahun sejak 1 Mei 1963 sampai sekarang ini, saya mau menggambarkan situasi terkini di Tanah Papua Barat yang dihadapi dan dialami oleh penduduk asli Papua.

Seruan ini bagian yang terpenting dan tak terpisahkan dari suara Gereja dari Tanah Papua Barat bagi rakyat yang tak bersuara dan yang membisu akibat kekejaman dan kekerasan Pemerintah Indonesia melalui kekuatan TNI, POLRI, dan Perangkat Hukum, PP dan Keppres. Penduduk asli Papua, orang Melanesia adalah pemilik Tanah Papua Barat yang memiliki sejarah, bahasa, kebudayaan sendiri, karena Tuhan sendiri telah memberikan leluhur dan nenek moyang mereka untuk berada, hidup dan berkaya serta memelihara Tanah dan Negeri Melanesia ini. Mereka ditempatkan oleh Allah sendiri melalui rencana dan kehendak-Nya tanpa persetujuan seseorang atau suatu Negara di dunia ini,”Tuhan Allah berkata: Marilah Kita menjadikan manusia sesuai gambar dan rupa kita”. Dalam keberadaan penduduk asli Papua di negeri dan tanah mereka sendiri dalam kasih, anugerah, berkat serta pemeliharaan Tuhan, datanglah Pemerintah Belanda sejak 1828 dan tinggal dan hidup bersama penduduk asli Papua. Belanda membangun, mendidik dan memajukan penduduk asli Papua. Belanda tidak pernah mencederai dan melukai hati penduduk asli Papua bahkan sejarah mencatat bahwa satu peluruh tentara Belanda tidak pernah mengenai tubuh orang asli Papua, walaupun Belanda disebut Penjajah oleh orang-orang Melayu, Indonesia. Selain Belanda, Gereja datang ke Tanah Papua sejak 5 Februari 1855 di Pulau Mansinam, Manokwari, sekarang ibu kota Provinsi Irian Jaya Barat (Provinsi Boneka Indonesia).

Gereja datang membawa peradaban baru, misi kemanusiaan, nilai-nilai kebenaran, keadilan, perdamaian, kesamaan dejarat, kebebasan, kemerdekaan yang bersumber dari SALIB Yesus Kristus merupakan kekuatan Allah.Jadi, Tuhan Allah sendiri sebagai Pencipta dan Pemilik umat manusia, termasuk penduduk asli Papua, Leluhur dan Nenek Moyang orang Melanesia atau penduduk asli Papua, Pemerintah Belanda sejak 1828, Gereja sejak 5 Februari 1855 tidak pernah memberikan stigma anggota OPM (Organisasi Papua Merdeka), Gerakan Separatis, Pembuat Makar yang melecehkan dan merendahkan kehormatan dan martabat penduduk asli Papua. Tetapi sayang, Pemerintah Indonesia secepatnya merampas dan menduduki Tanah Papua Barat dengan kekuatan militer sejak 19 Desember 1961 melalui Maklumat TRIKORA (Tiga Komando Rakyat) dari Ir. Suekarno, Presiden RI pertama dan melalui rekayasa Perjanjian New York 15 Agustus 1962, penyerahan administrasi dari UNTEA kepada Indonesia pada 1 Mei 1963 tanpa diketahui penduduk asli Papua, melalui Pelaksanaan PEPERA 1969 (Act of Free Choice) di Papua Barat yang tidak demokratis dan dibawa tekanan kekuatan militer Indonesia dan hanya dipilih 1.025 orang oleh Pemerintah dan TNI untuk menyatakan bergabung dengan Indonesia. Selanjutnya, Pemerintah Indonesia dan TNI dan POLRI langsung memberikan stigma penduduk asli Papua dengan stigma anggota OPM, gerakan separatis, dan pembuat makar. Dengan stigma-stigma yang tidak manusiawi itu, Pelanggaran Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM) yang kejam dan brutal dilakukan oleh Pemerintah, TNI dan POLRI dalam bentuk pengejaran, penangkapan, penyiksaan, penculikan, penyiksaan, pembunuhan dan pemerkosaan atas nama menjaga keutuhan wilayah Republik Indonesia tanpa mempertimbangkan nilai-nilai manusia. Itu hanya dengan empat agenda dan kepentingan besar pemerintah Indonesia yaitu: ekonomi, politik, keamanan dan pemusnahan penduduk asli Papua secara sistematis.Jadi, masalah serius dan kesukaran serta penderitaan yang dialami oleh penduduk asli Papua sekarang selama 45 tahun ini adalah penduduk asli benar-benar dalam proses pemusnahan secara sistematis dalam segala aspek hidup mereka.Masalah-Masalah Mendasar di Papua Barat sebagai berikut: Keamanan hidup dan kebebasan penduduk asli Papua di negeri dan tanah mereka sendiri terancam. Pembangunan basis-basis TNI dan POLRI di seluruh Tanah Papua Barat tanpa memikirkan keamanan dan keselamatan serta kelangsungan hidup penduduk asli Papua. Kelihatannya, anggota TNI dan POLRI yang dulu beroperasi dan membunuh orang-orang Timor Leste dan Aceh itu semua di kirim ke Tanah Papua Barat. Mereka lebih banyak dikirim dalam berbagai bentuk profesi. Sebagai contoh ialah tukang baksa, penjual es krim, tukang ojek, penjaga hotel, penjaga tokoh, sopir dan berbagai bentuk penyamaran di seluruh sudut Tanah Papua Barat. Ada berbagai PP (Peraturan Pemerintah) dan KEPRES (Keputusan Presiden) yang benar-benar menghancurkan masa depan penduduk asli Papua Barat dan juga menghancurkan UU No. 21 Tahun 2001 tentang Otonomi Khusus seperti: Keppres No. 1 Tahun 2003 Tentang Provinsi Irian Jaya Barat (IJB), Inpres No. 5 Tahun 2006 Tentang Percepatan Pembangunan, PP 27 Tahun 2007 yang melarang menggunakan simbol-simbol daerah Papua Barat, Kepres No. 1 Tahun 2008 tentang Pengganti UU untuk pembagian dana Otsus dari Provinsi Papua dan Provinsi Irian Jaya Barat (IJB). Pemerintah Indonesia dan DPR RI lebih cepat dan rajin serta lancar mengeluarkan PP dan Keppres tetapi pemerintah Indonesia menghambat dengan berbagai cara dan alasan untuk menghambat atau membatalkan bahkan menggagalkan rencangan Perdasi dan Perdasus sebagai penjabaran dari UU Otsus No. 21 Tahun 2001 yang adalah buatan UU pemerintah Indonesia dan DPR RI sendiri. Pemekaran Provinsi dan kabupaten dilakukan di seluruh Tanah Papua Barat tanpa mempertimbangkan letak geografis, jumlah penduduk, sumber daya alam (SDA), sumber daya manusia (SDM) dan juga tanpa mengevaluasi kabupaten-kabupaten yang sudah dimekarkan sebelumnya.

Para Pejabat dan pengambil keputusan di wilayah pemekaran kabupaten benar-benar dikuasai dan didominasi oleh orang-orang Melayu, Indonesia. Contoh terbaru adalah Kabupaten Pemekaran Baru Lanny Jaya, dimana warga 100% Kristen dan juga 100% umat Baptis, Pejabat Bupati Caretakernya seorang pendatang yang nama Pribadi, sementara anak asli daerah yang bernama Wiklif Wakerkwa sudah memenuhi syarat tetapi ditolak. Pemekaran kabupaten dan Provinsi adalah pendekatan politik, pengelompokan penduduk asli Papua sesuai dengan suku dan daerahnya sendiri untuk mengadu domba penduduk asli Papua, perampasan tanah dan penyingkiran penduduk asli Papua dan operasi militer, operasi transmigrasi, operasi pemusnahan etnis gaya baru secara sistematis. Kata kuncinya seluruh pemakaran Provinsi dan kabupaten di Tanah Papua Barat adalah kerjanya TNI sebagai upaya pengkondisian wilayah dan operasi militer yang lebih efektif dan efisien. Kemajuan dalam bidang pendidikan pada saat jaman Belanda dan Gereja di Tanah Papua Barat sangat berkualitas dan terus maju serta berkembang di kota-kota maupun di pedalaman. Tetapi, setelah pemerintah Indonesia menduduki Tanah Papua Barat, lembaga pendidikan yang dimiliki Gereja seperti: Yayasan Pendidikan dan Persekolahan Katolik ( YPPK) Sekolah Yayasan Pendidikan Kristen (YPK), Yayasan Pendidikan dan Persekolahan Gereja-gereja Injili (YPPGI), Sekolah Yayasan Advent yang berada di seluruh Tanah Papua Barat selama hampir 100 tahun sebelum pemerintah Indonesia merampas dan menjajah Papua tidak diperhatikan bahkan dibiarkan oleh Pemerintah Indonesia. Pelayanan kesehatan terhadap penduduk asli Papua sangat memprihatinkan. Kematian ibu, anak-anak bahkan penduduk asli Papua dalam indeks yang sangat tinggi. Pemerintah Indonesia tidak serius mengurus kesehatan penduduk asli Papua. Sangat memprihatinkan adalah dalam era Otonomi Khusus apotik-apotik berkembang secara pesat dan cepat di seluruh Tanah Papua Barat. Para dokter pendatang, orang Indonesia benar-benar mengeksploitasi penduduk asli Papua karena obat-obat yang berkualitas, bermutu baik yang dibeli dengan dana Otonomi Khusus diambil oleh para dokter dan dijual di opotik-apotik pribadi mereka. Setiap pasien yang datang hanya diperiksa dan diberikan resep untuk membeli obat di apotik milik dokter. Pelayanan kesehatan ini sangat berlawanan dengan pelayanan bidang kesehatan pada masa Belanda dan Gereja di Papua Barat.

Pemerintah Belanda dan Gereja membuka pos pelayanan kesehatan di seluruh Tanah Papua Barat dari pesisir pantai sampai di daerah-daerah terpencil. Semua aset balai pelayanan kesehatan itu dibiarkan dan dihancurkan oleh pemerintah Indonesia.Secara ekonomi penduduk asli Papua benar-benar tersingkir karena kaum pendatang, orang Melayu lebih siap dan terampil. Penduduk asli Papua menjual hasil bumi mereka di atas tanah beralaskan daun pisang di tengah-tengah atau di pinggir gedung-gedung megah di seluruh Tanah Papua.

Di Pasar-pasar sekarang di seluruh Tanah Papua Barat, pisang, sagu, kepala yang dimiliki oleh penduduk asli Papua itu dijual oleh para pendatang. Kaum pendatang benar-benar mendominasi dan monopoli dalam bidang ekonomi di Papua Barat. Contoh lain adalah penjualan kain batik bercorak Papua dkuasai dan dijual oleh para pendatang. Seluruh pelayan toko, rumah makan, hotel, karyawan bank, tarnsportasi darat, laut, udara, karyawan tiket semuanya dikuasai oleh orang-orang Melayu, Indonesia. Sejak Otonomi Khusus No. 21 Tahun 2001 berlaku di Papua Barat jumlah orang Melayu, Indonesia terus meningkat hampir setiap hari, setiap minggu, setiap bulan. Dan jumlah anggota TNI juga terus meningkat di seluruh Tanah Papua Barat. Jumlah penduduk pribumi semakin merosot tajam. Pemusnahan etnis Melanesia benar-benar terajdi secara sistematis yang dilakukan oleh Pemerintah Indonesia. Karena itu, perlu ada pendataan penduduk asli melalui lembaga internasional untuk mengetahui secara pasti penduduk asli Papua Barat.Pemerintah Indonesia juga melarang masuknya diplomat asing, wartawab asing, pekerja Hak Asasi Manusia, dan lembaga-lembaga kemanusiaan Internasional dan juga Gereja-gereja. Apa yang disembunyikan oleh Pemerintah Indonesia di Tanah Papua Barat? Pemerintah Indonesia juga membatasi bahkan melarang para misionaris yang sangat berjasa melayani dan membangun penduduk asli Papua sejak 5 Februari 1855 sebelum Pemerintah Indonesia merampas dan menjajah Papua melalui Rekayasa PEPERA 1969.

Pada tanggal 18 April -19 Mei 2008, Tim dari Badan Pelayan Pusat Persekutuan Gereja-gereja Baptis Papua melakukan pelayanan kunjungan pastoral dan pemutaran film sejarah Gereja Baptis di kabupaten Jayawijaya, Kabupaten Tolikara, Kabupaten Puncak Jaya, kami benar-benar diintimidasi dan diteror oleh TNI, Kopassus yang bertugas di pegunungan pedalaman. Kami ditanya dengan pertanyaan: kamu darimana? Siapa yang menyuruh putar film ini? Tujuan apa memutar film dan mengapa banyak orang yang berkumpul ini? Ironis benar, Pemerintah Indonesia, TNI dan POLRI datang merampas tanah Papua dan menjajah penduduk asli Papua hanya 45 tahun, tetapi tampa rasa malu saja bertanya kepada pemilik dan gereja yang berada beratus-ratus tahun di Tanah Papua. Ini wajah kekerasan militer dan ketidakbebasan dan terancamnya penduduk asli Papua dan gereja-gereja di Tanah Papua Barat.Kesimpulan: Pemerintah Indonesia sendiri tidak serius, tidak konsisten melaksanakan UU Otonomi KHusus. Otonomi Khusus menjadi alat malapetaka dan penghancuran masa depan penduduk asli Papua. Jadi, Otonomi Khusus No. 21 Tahun 2001 sebagai alat solusi final masalah status politik Papua telah GAGAL TOTAL.

Rekomendasi:

Tanah Papua Barat dari Sorong sampai Merauka tetap dijaga sebagai Tanah Damai dalam satu kesatuan yang utuh. Evaluasi Secara total UU No. 21 Tahun 2001 melibatkan seluruh komponen penting dari penduduk asli Papua, Pemerintah Indonesia termasuk masyarakat Internasional. Diadakan dialog yang jujur dan adil antara masyarakat asli Papua, Pemerintah Indonesia yang dimediasi masyarakat Internasional seperti kasus Aceh. Menarik semua pasukan TNI Organik dan Non Organik di Papua Barat. Membuka kesempatan seluas-luasnya diplomat asing, pekerja hak asasi manusia, wartawan asing dan gereja-gereja internasional masuk ke Papua Barat. Latar Belakang Otonomi Khusus No. 21 Tahun 2001 lahir dan ditawarkan Pemerintah Indonesia kepada penduduk asli Papua karena seluruh penduduk asli Papua menuntut kemerdekaan penuh di atas tanah dan negeri leluhur mereka sebagai orang Melanesia. Tuntutan mereka berdasakan alas an-alasan sebagai berikut:

• Pembuatan Perjanjian New York 15 Agustus 1962 tidak pernah melibatkan penduduk asli Papua sebagai pemilik dan ahli waris Tanah Papua Barat.
• Pelaksanaan PEPERA 1969 (Act of Free Choice) di Papua Barat tidak demokratis dan dibawa tekanan kekuatan militer Indonesia dan hanya dipilih 1.025 orang oleh Pemerintah dan TNI untuk menyatakan bergabung dengan Indonesia.
• Pelanggaran Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM) yang kejam dan brutal dilakukan oleh Pemerintah, TNI dan POLRI dalam bentuk pengejaran, penangkapan, penyiksaan, penculikan, penyiksaan, pembunuhan dan pemerkosaan atas nama menjaga keutuhan wilayah Republik Indonesia tanpa mempertimbangkan nilai-nilai manusia.
• Perampasan tanah milik penduduk asli atas nama pembangunan yang diserahkan kepada penduduk pendatang yang dikemas dengan Program Transmigrasi dan juga tanah pengembangan sayab militer di seluruh Tanah Papua Barat. Sudah banyak tanah yang hilang dari tangan penduduk asli Papua.
• Penghancuran dan eksploitasi sumber daya alam (SDA) dan hutan-hutan dijarah, gunung-gunung, air dicemarkan, hasil laut diambil dirampas dan semua ini didukung oleh aparat militer dan penguasa di Jakarta. Semua ini tanpa mempetimbangkan dan memperhitungkan nasib dan masa depan kelangsungan hidup penduduk asli dan anak serta cucunya.
• (6) Pengusaan sumber-sumber ekonomi oleh para pendatang dan akibatnya penduduk asli Papua benar-benar tersingkir dan menjadi penonton dan menjadi orang asing di negeri sendiri.

TUHAN MEMBERKATI, MELINDUNGI DAN MENJAGA KITA SEMUA

Socratez Sofyan Yoman

Ketua Umum Badan Pelayan PusatPersekutuan Gereja-gereja Baptis Papua

Alamat: Jl. Jeruk Nipis Kotaraja, PO Box 1212Telp. 62-967-583462

Indonesian military intelligence forbids banned West Papuan author from meeting with Indonesian Vic

English translation
14 February 2008

Commander of BAIS [Indonesian military intelligence] TNI in Papua, Colonel Bangun P, has restricted the freedom of movement for Sendius Wonda.

Colonel Bangun P hassent a warning to the Head (Bupati) of the Puncak Jaya Regency, Lukas Enembe, via SMS message:

“Mr Bupati, I advise you that your staff member Sendius Wonda must not join the co-ordination meeting of all the Regencies”

The Co-ordination meeting involves all the Regencies from all over Papua and the Vice President of Indonesia Moh Yusuf Kalla.

Sendius Wonda is the author of the book “The sinking of the Melanesian Race”. This book is banned by the Indonesian government Attorney General. Sendius Wonda is the head of a government department in Puncak Jaya regency.

Message from Rev Socratez Sofyan Yoman, President of the Baptist Church in West Papua.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Malay Version Report by Rev Yoman

TNI membatasih kebebasan dan ruang gerak Sendius Wonda pd tgl 14 february 2008 Komandan BAIS TNI Papua, Kolonel Bangun P Menekan Bupati Puncak jaya Lukas Enembe melalui SMS sebagai berikut :

” Papk Bupati, Saya sarankan Stafnya bernama Sendius Wonda tidak usa diikutkan dalam rapat kordininasih para kepala Daerah”

Rapat Kordinasih antara papra Bupati seluruh Papua dan wakil persiden indoensia , Moh,Ysuf Kalla.

Sendius Wonda adalah penulish buku berjuadul “ Tengelamnya Rumpun Melanesia Buku ini dilarang oleh Kejaksaan Pemerintah Indonesia Sendius Wonda adalah kepala bagian pemerintahan Kapupaten Puncak Jaya juga. Socratez Sofyan Yoman,Ketua umum persetujuan Gereja-Gereja Bapaptis.

=================
Benny Wenda
West Papuan independence leader in the United Kingdom & Chair of the Koteka Tribal Assembly
P.O Box.656,Oxford,OX3 3AP England UK
Mobile:+44(0)7766875009
bwenda@infopapua.org
http://www.westpapua.net http://www.infopapua.org/
=========================================

Richard Samuelson

Free West Papua Campaign, Oxford, UK.

http://freewestpapua.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=535&Itemid=2

WEST PAPUA (report by Revd Socratez Yoman): The killing of OMANGGEN WONDA on 31.1.08

SPECIAL AUTONOMY LAW NO 21 YEAR 2001 or

THE INDONESIAN MILITARY KILLING FIELD OF THE NATIVE WEST PAPUANS:

TNI BATALLION 756 KILLED

OMANGGEN WONDA

Jayapura – West Papua, 11 February 2008

Reported by: Rev. Socratez Sofyan Yoman, President of the Fellowship of West Papuan Baptist Churches

Omanggen Wonda, 22 years old, was killed by a soldier of TNI battalion 756 on January 31, 2008 at 21.00pm in Tingginambut village, Tingginambut district, Puncak Jaya regency, West Papua.

Chronology:

1. The murder of Omanggen Wonda

On January 31, 2008 ten people were playing cards. Nine of them were playing cards seriously. Omanggen Wonda was not seen playing cards. He just observed the others playing.

At 21.00pm, three military personnel from battalion 756 in Tingginambut village came to the house where the people were playing cards. The military post in the village is within 300 metres from the house.

Two military personnel were walking around and were watching the house with their weapons ready to fire. One soldier knocked at the door with a weapon in his arm ready to shoot. Omanggen Wonda opened the door and welcomed the visitors politely. However, the military personnel from battalion 756 shot Omanggen Wonda to death. Omanggen cried and shouted “Oh Mama.... I am shot”. These were his last words before he died.

His friends who were playing cards were shocked and frightened. The military personnel came inside and ordered them to carry Omanggen’s body to the military post in Tingginambut. They were arrested and were ordered to stay in the military post until the next morning.

The Indonesian military commander of the battalion 756 when interviewed commented: “Well.... this child is still young “.

On the morning of the 1^st February 2008, Yopinus Wonda, Head of the Tingginambut tribe came to the battalion 756 military post. He was very angry and spoke to the Indonesian military commander. He said:

a. Commander! Did this child steal your belongings?

b. We are just farmers. Why did you kill him?

c. The security here is the responsibility of the police, not the Indonesian military. This is not a war zone. The military came and destroyed our gardens. You have already committed heavy human right abuses. You do not have any right to kill anyone without (legitimate) reasons.

d. I am sad and disappointed that your personnel always come, kill us and disturb us.

e. Is the special autonomy law no 21, year 2001 for killing the native West Papuans?

The head of the tribe, Yopinus Wonda, asked one of the Indonesian military personnel and the Indonesian military personnel said: ‘It was the commander that ordered us to kill this man’.

The main reasons for the killing were:

(1) Civilians threw stones at a passing car.

(2) There were shootings (heard three times).

(3) At every thanksgiving in memory of the death of a loved one, people always sing and pronounce the word ‘Papua’

2. My visit (Rev. Socratez Sofyan Yoman) to Puncak Jaya

Having heard about the incident of the shooting of an innocent civilian, I went to Puncak Jaya on the 6^th February 2008. I arrived at 15.30 and went to the Chairman of the Indonesian Evangelical Church’s house. Unfortunately, he was in Jayapura (and was in mourning) following the death of his child who had been sick. Praise the Lord I could get the information that has been reported above. The community are the eyewitnesses of the incident.

On the morning of February 7^th, 2008 at 8.30 am I met Elly Wenda, the regional secretary of Puncak Jaya to get more information on the incident. However, the regional secretary said: ‘I don’t know anything about it. We haven’t got any report yet from the community’.

At 09.00am on the same day the head of tribe, Yopinus Wonda and I went to the Indonesian military post in Mulia town, Puncak Jaya. I met the post commander Lieutenant Triono and the deputy commander, Sergeant Rafi. Lieutenant Triono said: ‘We do not know about the incident in Tingginambut post. In fact, we were distributing aid to the community and to the regional government’. The deputy commander, Sergeant Rafi added: ‘We are from KOMPI B, Arso 6. We are appointed to work in Puncak Jaya, the total of our personnel is 126’.

3. My suggestions to the military commanders

“Gentlemen, if you are assigned here, you are obliged to defend the sovereignty of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia, (it’s not only that) you should also defend the sovereignty of the human being. If you defend the sovereignty of the human beings, in return, the human beings will defend the unitary state of the Republic of Indonesia. However, if you hurt and injure the heart (the feelings) of the human beings, certainly they will fight to defend their dignity and their right to live. This includes me as well. I will fight against any actions that betray and violate human rights and justice values. I suggest that you plant and invest the values of kindness and justice and do not hurt the people’s feelings. Thus, when you live this country after you completed your appointment, your kindness will be remembered in people’s hearts. Here in West Papua, there is no OPM nor separatists and subversives. There are only God’s people who own the country and the land.”

4. Military operations and the Puncak Jaya security situation in general.

A very organized military operation in different forms is very obvious in Puncak Jaya:

a. Military Posts in the centre of town, Puncak Irinmuli, Tinggginambut, Yambi, Mebagaluk, and Puncak Kumipaga.

b. Special Teams.

c. Vehicle intelligence operations are very obvious and very organized in every corner of the town and in every small and big road.

d. Intelligence operations (in disguise) in the form of traders and workshops.

5. The people’s demand:

Except ordinary police personnel, withdraw all non-organic military personnel such as special teams, battalions, mobile brigade from Puncak Jaya, because Puncak Jaya is not a war zone.

Jayapura – West Papua, 11 February 2008

Reported by: Rev. Socratez Sofyan Yoman, President of the Fellowship of West Papuan Baptist Churches

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Richard Samuelson

Free West Papua Campaign, Oxford, UK.

www.freewestpapua.org

WEST PAPUAN CHURCHES & OTHER RELIGIONS APPEAL FOR AN INTERNATIONAL DIALOGUE

Catholic & Protestant churches, Muslims, Hindus & Buddhists together made this appeal:

WE

1. declared West Papua as ‘Land of Peace’ on the 5^th February 2002.

2. made an appeal to the international community to have ‘an honest and peaceful dialogue similar to Aceh peace process. The dialogue will be mediated by a neutral third party who is approved by both the native West Papuans and the Indonesian government. This appeal was made on the 3^rd May 2007 in a report from (various) churches about the failure of the Special Autonomy Law no 21, Year 2001.

3. recommended that ‘ a solution to the difference of ideology in West Papua must be dealt with immediately between the central [Indonesian] government and the native West Papuans which is facilitated by a neutral third party which is approved by both parties’. This recommendation was a result of a workshop attended by West Papuan churches and religious leaders in West Papua at Sentani Indah Hotel on 7^th December 2007.

4. On the 1^st February 2008, before the celebration of the arrival of the first missionaries in West Papua (5^th February 2008), Churches and other religious leaders made a statement that ‘ there are different ideological perceptions about the integration of West Papua into the unitary state of the republic of Indonesia which hinder development and become a destructive conflict. Thus, we expect that although the matter is complex and sensitive, it could be solved through dialogue and reconciliation’. The churches and religious leaders also stated that the number of military personnel in West Papua is too many. In addition, the military personnel did not understand nor try to learn local culture; in fact they are suspicious of the people and treat them as enemies. This creates worries everywhere.

The religious leaders’ reasons for the appeal to have an international dialogue are as follows:

1. There is no willingness to implement the Special Autonomy Law no 21 year 2001 at various levels; the central government of the Republic of Indonesia, the house of parliament of the Republic of Indonesia, the provincial government, the regional house of parliament, and the Papuan People’s Assembly [MRP]. The very obvious thing is that there is no equal distribution of educational, health, and economic services throughout all Papuan regions.

2. The regional extensions which have illegally violated the Special Autonomy law no 21 year 2001 have created new conflicts in all Papuan regions. Papuan tribes have been divided, there are no employment opportunities for Papuans because there is not any good employment planning and there is no balance in human resource development, and the traditional rights have been removed and development is money-oriented.

3. The policy of establishing military posts and the stationing of Indonesian military personnel in West Papua has violated Law No 34 year 2004 about the Indonesian Armed Forces (TNI). The presence of military armed force posts, Indonesian Navy posts & Indonesian Air Force posts in all regions of Papua has disturbed the people’s peace. The decision to establish and station military personnel was made only from one side. In addition, the personnel appointed do not understand the native West Papuan culture and use militaristic approach in dealing with the Papuans. The military personnel used separatist issues [as an excuse] to deal with any Papuans who are critical of the military.

4. Militarism has entered and destroyed the civilian’s ways of life by forming militias such the Red and White front. The militias not only live a militaristic life but also use military uniforms and practice militaristic actions.

5. Massive illegal exploitations of the natural resources such as illegal logging, illegal fishing, illegal hunting and illegal distribution of alcoholic beverage which is assumed to be backed by police and military personnel. Because the actors are military or police personnel, the criminal actions were ‘allowed’ to happen and there is no legal action to punish the actors.

6. The different ideological perceptions between the native West Papuans (and the military) have legitimized the use of violence against the people. The people’s different ideology was perceived as a legitimate reason to label them as separatists or OPM (Free Papua Movement). The labelling of the Papuans as OPM or separatists by the government, the military and the police has created conflicts between the Papuans and the government. There is no separatism in Papua. The “OPM (Free Papua Movement) issue” is kept and maintained and used by the government for their own interests. In fact, there is a strong assumption that those who claimed themselves as members of OPM were trained and prepared by the Indonesian military and police.

7. Evidence of the failure of the Special Autonomy law no 21 year 2001 was proven by the following which have all taken place under Special Autonomy:

· The killing of Theys Hiyo Eluay and the disappearance of Theys’ driver, Aristoteles Masoka by the Special Forces (Kpoassus) on November 10, 2001.

· The formation of the West Irian Jaya province based on the presidential decree no 1 year 2003.

· The murder of Yustinus Murip on April 4, 2003 and the military operations in Kuyawagi that killed 73 people and destroyed peoples’ churches, schools, houses and gardens.

· The murder of Yustinus Murip on April 4, 2003 and the military operations in Kuyawagi that killed 73 people and destroyed peoples’ churches, schools, houses and gardens.

· The murder of Revd. Elisa Tabuni and military operation in Puncak Jaya.

· The government’s decree no 77 year 2007 about the acceleration of developments in Papua.

· The restrictions on the visit of US Congressman Eni Faleomavaega’s meetings with the native Papuans on his visit to Papua.

· The Indonesian government’s regulations about the banning of the Morning Star flag as the regional symbol of Papua.

· The approval of new proposed law that extended Papua provinces into several new provinces; South Papua Province, Central Papua, North-West Papua and several new regencies.

· The murder of Omanggen Wonda in Tingginambut village, Tingginambut district – Puncak Jaya regency on January 31 2008 at 21.00pm by Indonesian military personnel from battalion 756.

· There are many more incidents during the Special Autonomy Law no 21 year 2001.

The conclusion is: The Special Autonomy law no 21 year 2001 is indeed a TOTAL FAILURE and has brought DISASTERS TO HUMANITY AND THE DESTRUCTION OF THE FUTURE OF NATIVE WEST PAPUANS .

Jayapura – West Papua, 11^th February 2008

Reported by: Rev. Socratez Sofyan Yoman, President of the Fellowship of West Papuan Baptist Churches.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Richard Samuelson

Free West Papua Campaign, Oxford, UK.

www.freewestpapua.org

WEST PAPUA: UK Government: "I will applaud the day that West Papuan flag can be flown"

26 Feb 2008 : Column 620

West Papua: Human Rights

7.52 pm

Lord Harries of Pentregarth asked Her Majesty’s Government how they intend to respond to human rights abuses in West Papua.

The noble and right reverend Lord said: My Lords, I am grateful for the opportunity to raise an issue that is of such life and death significance to the suffering people of West Papua.

When I go round to our local shops, I almost invariably carry over my shoulder a handmade bag. On this bag is a star against a red background with some blue and white stripes. If I shopped in West Papua with that bag, I would immediately be labelled a separatist and treated with brutality, as a woman was recently who was found making such a bag. Similarly, on 1 December last year, seven West Papuans were arrested for raising this morning star flag in the Catholic Church compound at Kwamki Baru village. Again, when the editor of a West Papuan newspaper was asked what would happen to him if he called for independence, he said quite simply, “Go to jail. Go to jail”. Perhaps this total lack of freedom—the freedom of the press and the freedom to form political parties—does indeed fall into the category of what the Minister said on 13 November last year were abuses,

“of a relatively small kind”,—[Official Report, 13/11/07; col. 346.]

even though we regard such freedoms as fundamental to the life of this country.

I wonder about torture. Two hundred and forty two cases of torture have been recorded in the past nine years in West Papua. All are well documented and set out in the recent report of Franciscans International. As that report put it:

“Torture is regarded by Indonesian security services as one of the most effective methods to obtain forced confessions and instil a climate of fear and is conducted repeatedly and systematically. Torture in Papua is also used strategically as a means to control the whole community”.

If this is still regarded as abuse “of a relatively small kind”, will the Minister say how many more cases of torture have to be recorded before it is admitted that there are abuses of a very grave kind indeed—abuses that the Government need to address with great seriousness and urgency?

This systematic brutality is of course all in support of the 1969 “act of no choice”. On 14 January this year, the Minister in the other place wrote to a Member describing the act in these words:

“A group of 1,000 Papuan representatives, who were given the responsibility to make the choice on behalf of the Papuan people, voted to remain part of Indonesia”.

The bland disingenuousness of that statement is almost unbelievable. Let us remind ourselves of the facts. Suharto sent this clear order to his military forces in West Papua: “See that the” act “on West Irian’s”—that is Papua’s—

“future status will yield a clear pronouncement in favour of Indonesia”.

The forces were duly obedient. As Brigadier-General Ali Murtopo put it to those selected to take part in the so-called “act of free choice” on August 1969:

26 Feb 2008 : Column 621

“This is what will happen to anyone who votes against Indonesia. Their accursed tongues will be torn out. Their full mouths will be wrenched open. Upon them will fall the vengeance of the Indonesia people. I myself will shoot them on the spot”.

So it was that the then Minister in this House, the noble Baroness, Lady Symons, referring to this on 13 December 2004, said that,

“1,000 handpicked representatives ... were largely coerced into declaring for inclusion in Indonesia”.—[Official Report, 13/12/04; col. 1084.]

Later, the noble Baroness, Lady Royall, described the 1969 process as “extremely flawed”. Will the Minister therefore say, in the light of the recent letter from the Minister in the other place, whether the Government are now back-tracking from the truth which they previously admitted? The acknowledgement of the truth of the 1969 travesty by the British Government has been one of the few crumbs of comfort offered to the suffering West Papuan people in recent years. Is even that crumb of truth now to be snatched away?

If all this is not serious enough, I have yet to come to the most devastating fact of all. In 1971, there were 887,000 Papuan people and 36,000 Asian Indonesians in West Papua, so even after eight years of Indonesian control, Papuans comprised 96 per cent of the population. On the basis of the latest figures, it is estimated that in 2005 Papuans comprised 59 per cent of the population and others 41 per cent. On present trends, by 2030 Papuans will comprise only 15.6 per cent and non-Papuans 84.8 per cent. These figures speak for themselves. Papuans are becoming a minority in their own country. Juan Mendes, UN Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, described West Papua as being among those countries whose populations were “at risk of extinction”.

The most decisive statement to date on the subject of genocide in West Papua has come from the Allard K Lowenstein International Human Rights Clinic at Yale Law School, which published a paper in 2005 entitled Indonesian Human Rights Abuses in West Papua: Application of the Law of Genocide to the History of Indonesian Control. It said:

“Although no single act or set of acts can be said to have constituted genocide, per se, and although the required intent cannot be as readily inferred as it was in the cases of the Holocaust or the Rwandan genocide, there can be little doubt that the Indonesian government has engaged in a systematic pattern of acts that has resulted in harm to—and indeed the destruction of—a substantial part of the indigenous population of West Papua. The inevitability of this result was readily obvious, and the government has taken no active measures to contravene it. According to current understanding of the Genocide Convention, including its interpretation in the jurisprudence of the ad hoc international criminal tribunals, such a pattern of actions and inactions—of acts and omissions—supports the conclusion that the Indonesian government has acted with the necessary intent to find that it has perpetrated genocide against the people of West Papua”.

West Papua is a small country a long way away. Indonesia is a big player with which we have major trade deals. West Papua is rich in natural resources, and major international companies such as BP, Rio Tinto and BAE Systems, among others, are active in utilising them.

There are those who think that if only they stall long enough the problem will go away, solved by

26 Feb 2008 : Column 622

demography if nothing else. But I should like to assure the Government and reassure the West Papuan people that this issue will not be dropped and already momentum is gathering round the world. Recently two US congressmen, Donald Payne and Eni Faleomavaega, have taken up the issue with the UN Secretary-General. They were particularly concerned with the way that human rights defenders were harassed after the visit of Mrs Jilani, the UN special envoy, last year.

Mrs Jilani concluded that a climate of fear prevails in West Papua, which has been borne out by the way in which those who sought to contact her have been singled out for special intimidation. The human rights abuses in West Papua are very grave and I ask the Government to pursue that issue with very great seriousness, conviction and urgency. In particular, human rights defenders need special protection, so I would ask the Minister to work for an international presence in West Papua to ensure that those who are raising human rights issues can do so without the present fear of intimidation, torture and death.

8.01 pm

Lord Archer of Sandwell: My Lords, the House is indebted, not for the first time, to the noble and right reverend Lord, Lord Harries of Pentregarth, for calling attention to this tragic situation. This is not the first occasion on which we have discussed the appalling events in West Papua. Sadly, our debates have failed to lead to any improvement for the people of West Papua, or, apparently, to impress on our Government the magnitude of the suffering. The last occasion on which we spared a thought for this situation was on 13 November 2007, when the noble and right reverend Lord asked a Starred Question. My noble friend Lord Malloch-Brown replied with an undisguised candour that the Government do not propose to raise the matter in the Security Council and do not support Papuan independence.

We have not been privy to the Government’s reasoning which led to that conclusion, but if there are two propositions which defy reputation they are, first, that if they were permitted to express a view, the overwhelming majority of the population would choose independence. As the noble and right reverend Lord has said, the so-called act of free choice was a blatantly transparent charade. We know that the American ambassador reported at that time that 85 to 90 per cent of the population were in sympathy with the Free Papua Movement. Secondly, West Papua passes all the tests in international law for a right to the free choice of its own destiny. I shall not weary your Lordships by repeating what I said on that issue on 8 January 2007.

However, the subject of today’s debate is not about the right of self-determination, but about the consequences of leaving West Papuans to the mercy of a brutal, alien regime. During our exchanges on 13 November, my noble friend stated as the Government’s view that, while they are concerned by continuing human rights abuses in Papua, they believe that they are,

“of a relatively small kind”.—[Official Report, 13/11/07; col. 346.]

26 Feb 2008 : Column 623

That is hardly the impression which emerges from what we have just heard from the noble and right reverend Lord.

It is hardly the impression that emerges from the 2007 annual report of Amnesty International, which records that the torture and ill treatment of detainees is widespread, and we recall of course that many detainees are imprisoned for peaceful protests. The report continues that prison conditions fall short of international standards. It speaks of extra-judicial executions and records that in 2007, there were at least six occasions when security forces opened fire on civilians. It tells us that the perpetrators appear to enjoy immunity.

Nor did my noble friend’s characterisation of the human rights infringements accord with the recent Human Rights Watch country summary on Indonesia, which said that, in West Papua, peaceful political activists continue to be classified as “separatists”, which is a criminal offence. The report speaks of village “sweeping operations” carried out with great brutality by the army, the police and paramilitary units. It mentioned too that the regional military commander appointed in 2007, Colonel Siagian, was indicted by the United Nations for crimes against humanity in East Timor.

The Government’s view was not supported by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination in Geneva last August, which commented that at last Indonesia had complied with its reporting obligations under the convention. The report—six years overdue—refrained from commenting that this road-to-Damascus conversion may be connected with Indonesia’s ambition to be re-elected to the United Nations Human Rights Committee. The report adds that Indonesia has still not implemented the convention in its domestic legislation.

Nor is the Government’s assessment in accordance with the report by Franciscans International, which notes that,

“in the Province of West Papua, the steadfast pattern of human rights violations, including torture, repression of the freedom of expression, unfair trials, arbitrary detention and the denial of social, economic and cultural rights, have created a culture of fear and have resulted in a stagnated development, which has made Papua the least developed province of Indonesia”.

I leave it to other noble Lord to comments on the rape of Papua’s mineral wealth, which is now being shared between the Indonesian Government and foreign investors, but not by the Papuan people.

In at least one respect, I sympathise with the Government’s problem. It is not easy in the present state of international law, and in the absence of charter reform, to suggest a simple remedy. Of course, no one would recommend an invasion as anything but a final resort when diplomatic approaches, appeals from human rights organisations and sanctions have failed to provide a solution. But a reference to the Security Council by a Government who carry the international respect of the United Kingdom could be a beginning and could reassure the West Papuan people that someone cares.

I suspect that history will not understand how human suffering on such a scale continued year after year while the world looked on complacently and

26 Feb 2008 : Column 624

Governments in more fortunate countries pronounced the atrocities as “of a relatively small kind”. What a pity that we cannot ask the people of West Papua whether they agree.

8.08 pm

Baroness Cox: My Lords, I congratulate my noble and right reverend friend Lord Harries on giving us this opportunity to speak on the important subject of human rights in West Papua. Since Indonesia took over the administration of the territory nearly 45 years ago, the plight of the indigenous Melanesian population has deteriorated and been largely ignored by the international community. I have been involved in some of the other tragic situations in Indonesia in recent years, especially the bitter conflict initiated in 1999 by Lasker Jihad in Maluku and Sulawesi. I was present during some of the most severe violence there and witnessed the suffering of both the Christian and the traditional Muslim communities. I was in Ambon when 4,000 to 5,000 Lasker Jihad warriors were stationed there and I visited Poso in Sulawesi shortly after Lasker Jihad carried out brutal attacks on the Christian and Hindu communities.

I was also privileged to respond to a request by the Christian and traditional Muslim leaders to help to promote reconciliation between the communities and reconstruction of the devastated infrastructure by helping to establish the International Islamic Christian Organisation for Reconciliation and Reconstruction, a title that mercifully abbreviates to IICORR. Noble Lords will see the relevance of this in a moment. The organisation was launched in Jakarta with former President Abdurrahman Wahid as its president, and we were delighted when Her Majesty’s Government used IICORR to bring an interfaith delegation to the United Kingdom to develop principles and policies for reconciliation and reconstruction away from the conflict zone. We were also very pleased when, on its return to Ambon, a resurgence of conflict was quickly contained as a result of the good faith that had been established between the leaders of the two communities while here in Britain.

I refer to these events for two reasons. First, they might provide a precedent for helping to resolve the tensions and conflicts in West Papua and, secondly, they are one example of Indonesia’s progress in trying to improve its record on human rights and the development of democracy and civil society. The situation is therefore all the more a tragic blot on Indonesia’s record of endeavours to achieve improvements. I hope that this debate, which will highlight the problems, may prompt the Indonesian authorities to address them as a matter of great urgency.

Religious faith is at the very centre of West Papuan life and identity. Christianity arrived in West Papua in 1855. I understand that now approximately 95 per cent of the indigenous population is Christian. The remaining 5 per cent includes a small Papuan Muslim population, whose conversion to Islam predates the current period of Indonesian rule. As my noble and right reverend friend has said, the demographic change is extremely serious. In 1970, indigenous Papuans made up 96 per cent of the population but,

26 Feb 2008 : Column 625

as the result of state-sponsored and spontaneous Indonesian immigration into West Papua since 1963, by 2005 indigenous Papuans made up only 59 per cent of the population, with 41 per cent non-Papuan, mostly Javanese Muslims. According to recent research by Dr Jim Elmslie of the West Papua Project at the University of Sydney’s Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, if present demographic trends continue, West Papua will be a majority Indonesian, predominantly Javanese Muslim population by 2011, while by 2030 the indigenous Melanesian, predominantly Christian Papuans will be a dwindling 15 per cent minority.

With 1,500,000 West Papuan Christians in an Indonesian state of 230 million mostly Muslim Indonesians, it would be an easy mistake to portray this conflict in terms of Christian versus Muslim, but that would be a misleading and dangerous oversimplification. The conflict is primarily political—a struggle for West Papuan independence—with the West Papuans seeking their internationally recognised right to self-determination in a UN-administered, one-person-one-vote referendum. The so-called “Act of Free Choice”, to which reference has already been made, is now generally recognised as state-managed by Suharto’s Indonesia. It was an affront to democratic values. Moreover, the events of 1969 must not be seen by the international community as an acceptable, just and final situation.

There is, however, a significant religious dimension to the conflict. Christianity is officially recognised under the Indonesian constitution, and the provisions in the Pancasila have been generally honoured throughout most of Indonesian society. Christians have by and large been allowed to settle and flourish, until the intrusion of militant forces in recent years and the emergence of significant elements within Indonesian society that have sought to use Islam as a vehicle for Indonesian nationalism and the forcible extension of authoritarian control to outlying regions such as West Papua. This facet of the West Papua conflict was highlighted by an Australian Special Broadcasting Service television report in 2005, which featured an interview with a Papuan who claimed to have infiltrated a Lasker Jihad training camp in the town of Sorong. These are his words:

“The sort of activities Lasker Jihad were involved in, in Sorong, were firstly, intimidating and killing Papuans who were involved in the Papua Independence Movement, and secondly, spreading rumours in various places, to create fear”.

As recently as 23 February—only a few days ago—the West Papuan Baptist leader, Reverend Socratez Sofyan Yoman, stated:

“Jihadists are now operating in every aspect of [West Papuan] society, including in the military and police, business, and throughout the government”.

West Papuans are primarily persecuted by Indonesian security forces simply for being Papuan, but within that persecution are significant anti-Christian elements. Papuans report regularly being abused by Indonesian soldiers and police with terms such as “kaffir” and “pig eater”. West Papuan Christian leaders who bravely speak out about human rights abuses regularly report being subjected to intimidation and threats from Indonesian intelligence agents, police and soldiers. For example, Reverend Benny Giay, leader of the

26 Feb 2008 : Column 626

TabernacleChurch, Kingmi, has received threats and is regularly accused of being a separatist. Also, a Roman Catholic priest, Father John Jonga, from Waris, has been forced into hiding because of death threats from a local commander, who accused him of,

“spreading false allegations about conditions in Waris to local and international NGOs and of being a provocateur and betraying the Indonesian state”.

Seven religious leaders made a statement on 7 February this year calling for international dialogue for West Papua. They included leaders of the Roman Catholic, Baptist and Pentecostal churches, as well as leaders of the Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist communities. Entitled West Papuan Churches & Other Religions Appeal for an International Dialogue, their statement included an appeal to the international community to have,

“an honest and peaceful dialogue similar to the Aceh peace process”.

They recommended that,

“a solution to the difference of ideology in West Papua must be dealt with immediately by a dialogue between the central [Indonesian] government and the native West Papuans ... facilitated by a neutral third party approved by both parties”.

While they recognise that there are many sensitive issues, they believe that these could be solved through dialogue and reconciliation.

The church and other religious leaders also catalogued numerous concerns, including the excessive number of military personnel in West Papua; the military personnel’s failure to understand or try to learn the local culture; their suspicion of the people, treating them as enemies, creating widespread tensions; the authorities’ unwillingness to implement the special autonomy law resulting in an inequitable distribution of educational, health and economic services throughout all Papuan regions; widespread unemployment, leading to tensions and divisions between Papuan tribes; massive exploitation of the region’s natural resources; and numerous examples of killings and destruction of religious buildings. The conclusion of their report, signed in Jayapura, West Papua, on 11 February 2008, is that the special autonomy law No. 21/2001 is a total failure, which has brought disasters to humanity and destroyed the future of native West Papuans. The fact that this appeal was signed by leaders of the different faith communities is evidence of the deep concerns of people of different faiths that their future as West Papuans is under threat.

In an earlier debate in the House on West Papua, the noble Baroness, Lady Royall, said:

“Papua is in many ways the last blot on Indonesia’s global reputation”.—[Official Report, 8/1/07; col. 104.]

I therefore ask the Minister whether Her Majesty’s Government will take a more active and urgent interest in the problems associated with the violations of human rights in West Papua and urge the Indonesian Government to undertake urgently needed measures to lead ultimately to a peaceful resolution of the conflict in accordance with the democratic will of the West Papuan people. In particular, would the Government consider facilitating Indonesian-West Papuan dialogue without preconditions under UN or EU auspices? Alternatively, I am sure

26 Feb 2008 : Column 627

that IICORR would be very willing to assist in ways similar to those used in the successful initiative in Maluku.

Unless an effective intervention is undertaken urgently, the people of West Papua may be condemned to such continuing oppression and violations of fundamental human rights that their cultural identity and physical survival will be threatened. That is why I passionately hope that they will hear some reassuring message from Her Majesty’s Government tonight.

8.18 pm

Lord Avebury: My Lords, the last time we debated West Papua on an Unstarred Question, that, too, was initiated by the noble and right reverend Lord, Lord Harries. He was looking at the issue then primarily from the standpoint of self-determination, which has been referred to by both the noble and learned Lord, Lord Archer, and the noble Baroness. Now the noble and right reverend Lord is asking us to focus on human rights more generally, although he set that in the context of the right to self-determination.

I begin by reminding your Lordships of the observation by the special rapporteur on self-determination, Hector Gros Espiell, at the Human Rights Commission in 1975, repeated in the report that he made to the General Assembly of 1980. He said that the right of self-determination is of fundamental importance as the prerequisite for the enjoyment of all other human rights. It may be too late to rectify the unlawful transfer of sovereignty from the Netherlands to Indonesia in 1969, but the international community could make some amends for being accomplices in that fraudulent act if we made far greater efforts to persuade Jakarta to follow the pattern wisely adopted in the case of Aceh, to which the attention of your Lordships has been drawn by the noble Baroness, of negotiating a genuine local autonomy.

As the noble Baroness said, West Papua and Aceh were both covered by local autonomy laws, but while Aceh proceeded to free elections—in which members of the Free Aceh movement achieved high office in the case of Governor Irwandi Yusuf and Deputy Governor Muhammad Nazar—in West Papua the people continue to be in the iron grip of the military and Brimob, the paramilitary police. Surely there is a lesson to be drawn from the comparative experiences of Aceh and West Papua. Several years of painstaking negotiation over Aceh, in which I was involved for some time as an adviser to the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue in Geneva, which was the facilitator at that time, led to a successful outcome, and the same could be true of West Papua.

As has been said, there have been several authoritative reports on West Papua over the past year, notably that of the UN special rapporteur on human rights defenders following her visit in June. She was deeply concerned by the evidence that she received of the harassment and intimidation of defenders and the restriction of their access to victims and sites of human rights violations throughout Indonesia, but she found that the trend was more pronounced in West Papua, where she received credible evidence of arbitrary detention,

26 Feb 2008 : Column 628

torture, harassment through surveillance and interference with freedom of movement and with monitors’ attempts to investigate human rights abuses. As has been said, these were not the minor infringements of human rights that they had been portrayed as by the Government on a previous occasion.

There were cases where the defenders themselves were threatened with prosecution. Despite assurances given by the authorities that there was no institutional policy of targeting defenders, the concerns of the special rapporteur persisted and she made recommendations for improvements to the mechanisms of oversight and accountability of the police, the military and the intelligence agencies. Can we in the European Union ask the Government of Indonesia what steps they are taking to implement the special rapporteur’s proposals, and can we ensure that this matter is on the agenda for the Human Rights Council at its forthcoming meeting in Geneva? I hope that the Minister will be able to answer that.

The US State Department records a number of cases where the Brimob military has killed civilians at demonstrations. In one case a man was actually beaten to death. The State Department says that, although there are always promises of investigations of these abuses, no member of the security forces has ever been charged. There has been a climate of impunity more generally in Indonesia going back very many years, as we were reminded last month by the death of former President Suharto, who was largely responsible for the institutionalised violence against popular opposition. That included the demand for cultural autonomy in West Papua in the mid-1980s. Today the security forces in West Papua behave as if Suharto were alive and well; they get away with it because large areas of the province are closed to outside scrutiny. I agree with the proposal that has been made that there should be an international presence there to monitor what goes on.

One of the factors that have led to gross human rights abuses in the past has been the operations of the international resource companies, particularly Freeport-McMoRan, the copper and gold mining company at Timika, which brought in military units that have clashed periodically with local people, leading to a number of deaths and serious injuries. Now, as we have heard, BP is investing $5.5 billion in its LNG plant at Tangguh. That has already led to an influx of 10,000 non-Papuans and to the displacement of local inhabitants. BP says that it is not going to repeat the mistakes made by Freeport, but Carmel Budiardjo of TAPOL, in an article in the February issue of Liberation, says that there were no consultations whatever with local people who lost their occupations and territory, and no compensation was offered to them for their displacement.

The noble and learned Lord, Lord Archer, mentioned that there are a good many political prisoners in the territory. They have been convicted on charges of subversion for participating in peaceful demonstrations or raising flags asserting Papuan identity. In a directive that was issued by the chief of police in December 2005, it was ordered that anyone engaged in commemorative activities on certain dates,

26 Feb 2008 : Column 629

but particularly 1 December, was to be charged with subversion. This was revealed by TAPOL, the Indonesian human rights campaign, of which I have had the honour of being president for many years. I declare my interest.

Human Rights Watch documents a number of these cases, although because of the lack of transparency in the courts and the widespread fear among witnesses and relatives of being charged themselves there may be many others that are not in the public domain. For example, Linus Hiluka was given a 20-year sentence and, in the most notorious case of all, Filep Karma and Yusak Pakage got 15 and 10 years respectively for their activities in peaceful demonstrations.

Human Rights Watch makes a number of recommendations for dealing with this situation. It asks that international donors and Governments raise concerns about regressive policies and curtailing free expression in meetings with President Yudhoyono and government officials; that we regularly monitor trials and meet defendants; that we support comprehensive training in international human rights standards and applicable international law for all members of the judiciary; and that we support comprehensive training in international human rights standards and, again, applicable international law for all members of the police force. I hope that our close friendship with Indonesia will enable us to raise all these matters. Knowing President Yudhoyono, as I do, I am sure that he will listen to us.

8.26 pm

Lord Astor of Hever: My Lords, I thank the noble and right reverend Lord, Lord Harries, for bringing to the House tonight the important issue of human rights abuses in West Papua. While these abuses have been ongoing, a year has passed since West Papua was last debated in this House. It is important that we do not lose sight of the atrocities committed there, despite its geographical distance from Westminster.

Human rights violations in West Papua are frequent. The Government of Indonesia repress the freedom of expression, enforce arbitrary detention and deny the social, economic and cultural rights of the Papuan people. The noble and right reverend Lord, Lord Harries, set out very eloquently some of the other abuses, as did the noble Baroness, Lady Cox, the noble and learned Lord, Lord Archer of Sandwell, and the noble Lord, Lord Avebury.

Torture is a central pillar of West Papuan rule. It is deemed by the Indonesian security services to be one of the most effective methods of keeping order. According to the few charities that do have access to the country, the police paramilitary unit, the Brigade Mobile, is responsible for raping, killing and beating unarmed civilians in Papua. Despite this, with one exception, no one from the unit has been convicted of any crime. This is a chilling place, where there is no jury, no judge and no verdict that is not Indonesian Government-controlled. Merely to fly a West Papuan flag or sell a West Papuan souvenir can merit a life sentence. The murder of 200,000 people in East Timor is the dark precedent that looms behind this picture. Let us not forget that the Indonesian Government stand

26 Feb 2008 : Column 630

to lose even more than they did with East Timor through West Papua’s independence, possessing as it does the largest reserves of gold on the planet.

We on these Benches seek to avoid unnecessary bloodshed at all costs. I therefore believe that Her Majesty’s Government should work with the Indonesian Government to establish an inclusive and frank discussion forum to try to achieve a basic standard of human rights. What discussions have Her Majesty’s Government had with Jakarta about Papua? Has the Foreign Secretary met his Indonesian counterpart since his appointment?

In March 2006, the BBC website reported widespread protests against the Indonesian Administration. The UN special representative of the Secretary General on human rights defenders, Ms Jilani—mentioned by the noble and right reverend Lord—observed after her visit that nearly every West Papuan she talked to expressed high levels of dissatisfaction with the Indonesian Government. The Papuan People’s Council does represent an attitude of the West Papuan people. Does the Minister agree that any solution must include this political voice alongside the central Government of Indonesia? Not only will this give the West Papuans some sense of involvement in their Government, it will also give the independence groups a peaceful means of making themselves heard and, one hopes, go some way to ending the current culture of violence. Does the Minister agree that the Papuan People’s Council must be involved in any negotiation with the Indonesian Government if an adequate solution is to be reached?

Have Ministers had any discussions with the international community on how it might apply pressure on the Government of Indonesia to harmonise their laws in line with the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment? Are there any plans to enter into talks with other members of the international community so that a unified and properly considered diplomatic plan can be negotiated with regard to West Papua?

I very much look forward to reading the published findings of the UN special rapporteur on torture, Dr Manfred Nowak, on the state of West Papua. I hope that this House will have an opportunity to debate the report and recommendations that he gives to the UN Human Rights Council. I am pleased to see that the first informal signals show that while Nowak was concerned about abuses in a number of areas, there were some improvements. He noted an improved openness to prisons in West Papua, including for those charged with political offences, who are normally the worst treated. While the Indonesian President and his Government’s attitude towards human rights may still be very far from our own, requests for improved conditions for the West Papuan people seem not to have fallen on entirely deaf ears.

As was explained earlier, part of the difficulty of monitoring exactly what is going on in West Papua, and the level of injustice that people suffer, is its geographical location. As one half of an island that guards its border from the glare of international journalists, with many of its inhabitants tribes people living in the thick of the rainforest, it is difficult to establish quite what goes on. Therefore, I should be interested to know whether any foreign diplomats are

26 Feb 2008 : Column 631

residing in West Papua. Do the Government have any idea when was the last time that a British journalist was allowed to report on the country? Can the Minister tell the House how much aid Her Majesty’s Government are giving to West Papua and do they have any indication how this money is being spent?

The difficulties of West Papua are great but they are not insurmountable. It is only through continued attention and serious debate around the world that we might be able to pave a path to some sort of solution.

8.34 pm

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Malloch-Brown): My Lords, I am grateful to the noble and right reverend Lord, Lord Harries, for introducing this debate. It is an important issue in which he has a longstanding interest. In many ways I am embarrassed to be on the other side of the argument tonight. Certainly, I recognise much of what he says about West Papua. He raises issues that are not acceptable anywhere—not there or anywhere else that we were to find them. Yet if I can recognise and feel a common shame and concern at what has happened in West Papua, I do not recognise what the noble and right reverend Lord or other speakers have described tonight as Indonesia. The noble Lord, Lord Avebury, who knows President Yudhoyono, will also know that there has somehow been an enormously unfair characterisation of that country in this debate.

Indonesia is a country that has changed enormously over the past decade, including making significant improvements in the field of human rights. It is a country that now has an active parliament, an effective and outspoken civil society and a lively free press. Although your Lordships would not know it from tonight’s discussion, it has one of the most effective human rights commissions in the region, and played a key role in pushing for a human rights element in the Association of South-East Asian Nations charter.

The military, which dominated the country under Suharto, has evolved away from its traditional role. The formal participation of the military and the police in parliament ended in 2004. The peace agreement signed in Aceh in 2005 has been acknowledged in our debate, which, critically, continues to hold and is a major achievement. Certainly, we judge that the Indonesian Government are committed to further improvements in human rights. Like other speakers, I welcome the visits to Papua by Hina Jilani, the UN special representative on human rights defenders, in June of last year and Professor Manfred Nowak, the UN special rapporteur on torture, last November. Both, I might say, went at the invitation of the Indonesian Government. That openness to international scrutiny reflects the progress that Government have made in addressing human rights concerns.

However, I certainly acknowledge the points made by the noble and right reverend Lord and by the noble Baroness, Lady Cox, and others, since both reports obviously acknowledge real concerns—notably the one on detainees and their conditions. Similarly, in her visit and report, Hina Jilani highlighted the continued challenges for human rights defenders. She

26 Feb 2008 : Column 632

detailed her concerns at their situation and noted their lack of access to justice and the restrictions on human rights monitors entering Papua. Yet she balanced that against the positive steps taken by the Government, since 1998 to strengthen the legal and institutional framework for the promotion and protection of human rights. As her report also covered Aceh, it noted the improved situation of human rights defenders there.

I could go on with the institutional improvements that Government have made: accession to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as that on economic, social and cultural rights in 2006. Equally, however, I agree with those who have spoken in this important debate that many challenges remain. We share their concerns about the human rights situation in Papua, including allegations of human rights violations by the Indonesian armed forces, restricted access to Papua for journalists and NGOs and, indeed, a number of cases of prisoners being convicted of treason for displaying the Papuan flag.

Again, however, let us put that concern in context. The new special autonomy legislation for Papua makes provision for that flag to be flown. It has not been translated into local legislation, however, so at this point that change is half-pregnant or in abeyance, or whatever the appropriate metaphor would be. I would urge your Lordships to bear in mind that flags are provocative things even in democracies that put an absolute premium on freedom of speech. The confederate flag in the United States continues to cause eruptions in every presidential campaign that I can recall. So please let us show some understanding for a country, Indonesia, which is in a transition of its own as it moves towards being a full democracy.

Lord Avebury: My Lords, you do not go to prison for 20 years for flying the confederate flag in the United States.

Lord Malloch-Brown: My Lords, my point is that there is now legislation on the books in Jakarta that would allow the flying of the Papuan flag. But this is a process where there has to be continued political pressure as there was in Aceh to make sure that the spirit and letter of the special autonomy allowed in that legislation is met. Flags are, if you like, a good indicator of whether or not there is progress. So like the noble Lord, Lord Avebury, I will be watching for and will applaud the day that this flag can be flown.

I have followed Papua from outside and followed, as an international development official, the dramas around the exploitation of its gold resources that make it the richest part of Indonesia, and watched before that the massive migrations into Papua from other parts of Indonesia. This region has faced a turbulent development and has been left behind in terms of its political development and, indeed, the well-being of its citizens. These are issues that the central government in far-off Jakarta, which I suspect to some in Papua seems nearly as far away as Westminster, need to address and overcome. What I want to challenge is not the claim that there are major human rights abuses, and if my remarks in November were taken in any way as seeking to diminish or demean the suffering of the people of Papua, I apologise. My disagreement with other speakers is not about the realities of the human rights situation, it is just on whether we can put confidence in Indonesia and work with it to see it improve the conditions in Papua and to respect its special autonomy legislation.

In terms of our tracking of this, the noble Lord, Lord Astor, asked about the international presence there. I do not know whether there are permanent embassy staff there. I shall certainly seek to give him an answer. Our own embassy in Jakarta follows the situation closely. An official from our embassy visited Papua last week and held discussions with local officials, NGOs and representatives of religious organisations on many issues, including, very centrally, human rights. We have sought to work through the United Nations envoys and local NGOs, and through our strong and good relationship with the Government of Indonesia, to press them on the agenda that all of us in the House tonight share.

When Hina Jilani was there last June, she raised with the Indonesian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and chief of police threats against human rights defenders. Our embassy in Jakarta has raised the same issues with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which has confirmed that it has taken this up directly with the security forces and local authorities. Supporting the work of human rights defenders is a priority for the Foreign Office. That is reflected in our annual human rights report, which in 2006 was dedicated to human rights defenders. There is evidence that the Indonesian Government are focusing on not just words, new institutions and signing international covenants, but really on bringing justice home to Papua itself.

On 25 January this year, the Indonesian Supreme Court reinstated the conviction against the former Garuda pilot Pollycarpus for conspiracy to murder the human rights activist Munir Said Thalib in 2004. Pollycarpus was sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment. On 11 February—just a couple of weeks ago—the former President of Garuda, Indra Setiawan, was sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment for his part in the murder of Munir. So we are seeing real progress.

I was asked whether our Foreign Secretary has met his counterpart, Hasan Wirajuda. He has spoken to him twice on the telephone, although I am told it was not about Papua. I have also met with Hasan Wirajuda for the same reason that the Foreign Secretary has spoken to him. The modern Indonesia is one of our great allies in our efforts in Burma. It is a fellow member of the Security Council at the moment, not a small issue in terms of some of the tactical suggestions tonight. It is also, as it happens, a member of the Human Rights Council. Nevertheless, I imagine that Manfred Novak, in his report to the council the week after next, will be raising his visit to Indonesia. I will myself be at the council next week and hope to see Manfred Novak on the sidelines of that.

I was asked what we are doing in terms of development support. We look at the governor of Papua who visited recently and saw the Minister in the Foreign Office who covers this region, Meg Munn. He is very involved in development activities

26 Feb 2008 : Column 634

and we have been supporting him as much as we can. We have funded human rights training for the police in Papua and supported security training for human rights defenders through the NGO Peace Brigades. In addition, DfID is providing funding for four development advisers to the governor of Papua. Their work will focus on poverty alleviation, public finance and infrastructure. DfID is also funding HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment activities in Papua as well as focusing on improving forest governance livelihoods to address poverty reduction and deforestation.

I think that we are as engaged as all the noble Lords who have spoken tonight would wish us to be. It is true that we are putting our confidence in this new democratic Government of Indonesia to live up to their responsibilities to their people. It is true that we continue, as have every British government, to accept the outcome of what happened in 1969. We recognise their shortcomings, but we believe that the way forward is an internal dialogue between the people of Papua and the Government in Jakarta. This is a process which delivered results in Aceh. We hope it can similarly deliver results for Papua. I will certainly express to my other colleagues in the Foreign Office the need that we continue in our dealings with the Government of Indonesia and President Yudhoyono to press the case for the people of Papua for human rights and justice and their right to a peaceful, prosperous development.

Baroness Crawley: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do adjourn during pleasure until 8.52 pm.

Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.

[The Sitting was suspended from 8.47 to 8.52 pm.]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Richard Samuelson

Free West Papua Campaign, Oxford, UK.

www.freewestpapua.org