Connect with us

Politics, Government & Security

Indonesian Government Versus ULMWP



Melanesian show the support for ULMWP in Honiara, July 14, 2016 - Jubi/Victor Mambor

Melanesian show the support for ULMWP in Honiara, July 14, 2016 – Jubi/Victor Mambor

Jayapura, Jubi – The ‘fight’ between Indonesia and ULMWP has ‘continued’ in dialogue framed in the Papua Lawyer Club (PLC) broadcasted on a commercial TV in Jayapura City, Papua on Wednesday evening (10/8/2016). At least it was attempted to present by the Papua Peace Networks (JDP) in dialogue titled “The Government of Indonesia versus the United Liberation Movement of West Papua (ULMWP).

Attended in the event were the representative of both sides, Victor Yeimo and Edison Waromi to presented ULMWP, the church leader the Rev. Sofyan Yoman and the representative of the Government of Indonesia, the Assistant Deputy for Special Autonomy Department of the Coordinating Ministry of Politic, Legal and Security Affairs Brigadier General Herwin Suparjo. While Adriana Elizabeth from the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI) and Septer Manufandu from JDP acted as mediators to the both sides.

However, the intermediation of mediators in the forum was looked not able to connect the differences between two sides: ULMWP is struggling for self-determination, while the Government of Indonesia is engaged in the scopes of Development and Special Autonomy.

For that reason, Sofyan Yoman thought the Papua issue has become the international issues since the beginning, so through this frame, the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) could take its role. While Victor Yeimo thought the enforcement in the MSG was raised because of the Melanesian countries have desire to restore the West Papua into Melanesian spearhead fraternity. “Without West Papua, Melanesia wouldn’t complete,” he said.

From the beginning, the MSG was designed to lead anti-colonialism, said Yeimo. Further he explained the mission has not get understanding from the Government of Indonesia by prioritizing the economic diplomacy, and tried to stop the ULMWP by forming the Melanesia Indonesia (Melindo) based on claim of 11 million of Melanesian population in Indonesia. While, he cited the statement of MSG leaders, the population of three provinces of Melindo (East Timor, Maluku and North Maluku) is categorized into Polynesian. “So Indonesia built a wrong strategy,” he said.

The Rev. Sofyan Yoman said the foreign governments have been long involved in Papua. “When West Papua took its problem to the UN, it has been involved the Government of the United States, Netherlands and Indonesia to solve the Papua issue. So the involvement of foreigners is not a new thing, including when Ottow and Geissler came to Mansinam Island on 5 February 1855.”

Furthermore, he compared the democracy in Scotland, Great Britain and Papua, Indonesia. “When Scottish did referendum and raised their flag, the British police just escorted the security, no order to arrest. It was different with Indonesia, especially in Papua. The security forces have blocked the people while they conducted rally in protesting their rights. It’s democracy in Indonesia,” he said.

Meanwhile, the Coordinator of JDP, Pater Neles Tebay in his article ‘The Fight between Indonesia versus Papua’ published in Koran Tempo said the Papua issue is no longer the Indonesian Government’s domestic affairs, but has become the common issue of Melanesian. In consequence, according to him, the government must work hard to convince the leaders of Melanesian countries. And for a while, the government succeeded for getting support from the Government of Papua New Guinea and Fiji through the economic aid and partnership.

“We don’t know how long the two countries would support Indonesia. But clearly, both Indonesia and ULMWP would fight in the MSG Meeting that would be held in September,” wrote Tebay.

Former Coordinating Minister for Politic, Legal and Security Affairs Luhut Binsar Pandjaitan considered the delay of decision in the forum is the Indonesian diplomatic victory and the lost for ULMWP. However, Tebay wrote, this victory is not the end of the fight of the government and ULMWP. It’s just one round victory. “There’s another fight to continue that should anticipated by the government,” wrote Tebay.

ULMWP also brings the Papua issue to other Pacific countries, so the leaders of 25 Pacific countries already had schedule and discussed about Papua issue in the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) 2015 in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea. During the meeting, Papua is already established as one of main agenda to be discussed by the leaders of Pacific countries.

Therefore, Indonesia and ULMWP would fight once again in PIF 2016. There are many rounds should be anticipated by the government because ULMWP would continue to bring the Papua issue to many countries and international forum. If it wasn’t anticipated in the right way, it’s not impossible the Papua issue could be developed into the international issue and Indonesia would be judged in various regional and international forums.

The government does not need to be trapped, further to be dragged into the international forums. Instead of conducting the offensive diplomacy, the government needs to focus on addressing the settlement of issues that raised the conflict between the government and Papua for more than five decades.

Research conducted by the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (2008) has identified four main issues behind the conflict in Papua. There are (1) the development failure in education, health, people economic, and infrastructure; (2) discrimination and marginalization against the Papua indigenous people; (3) State’s violence against Papua indigenous people that producing the human rights violation, and (4) different perception on history of the integration of Papua to the Republic of Indonesia.

The four issues were clear since the Road Map Papua was made in 2009. However, said Septer Manufandu, the government has ignored it since the beginning. Papua nationalism was denied, not recognized. It made the problem becomes more difficult. “Now, Papuans wisely have appointed their representatives in Papua, they are well-defined and getting stronger now, namely ULMWP. The Government could not act as if doesn’t exist.” (*)


KNPB supports Kanaky for self-determination




KNPB and Gempar Papua activists at the Secretariat of Central KNPB. – Jubi / Hengky Yeimo

Jayapura, Jubi – Central West Papua National Committee (KNPB) held a limited discussion to support FKLNS (Organization of the Liberation Struggle of the Kanaky Tribe in New Caledonia) which has been well received by the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) to conduct a referendum in November 2018.

The First Chairman of Central KNPB Agus Kosay said it’s time for Kanaky to get self-determination from French colonialism.

“Kanaky must declare their self-determination. If Kanaky gets their independence, it would be able to give their support to West Papua because we share the same situation, which lives under the colonialism,” he said on Wednesday (08/12/2018) in Jayapura.

Meanwhile a member of Gempar (Papuan Youth and Student Movement) Nelius Wenda said as a nation oppressed by Indonesia, West Papua fully supports the referendum agenda of New Caledonia.

“Kanaky must determine their destiny. It must be far better than being under the French colonialism. In the future we Papuans are just like Kanaky,” he said. (*)


Reporter: Hengky Yeimo

Editor: Pipit Maizier

Continue Reading


In Papuan human rights context, Jokowi considered no different from Prabowo




Papuan students and youth are arrested by the police on Tuesday (4/9/2018) in a rally to support Vanuatu to bring up the issue of West Papua in the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF). – Jubi / Doc.

Jayapura, Jubi – The current president of Indonesia Joko Widodo is considered to be no different from Prabowo in Human Rights violations in Papua.

If Prabowo recognised as a perpetrator of human rights violations in Papua, Widodo considered allowing violent conflicts and human rights violations in Papua to continue. Now both will compete in the Indonesian presidential election 2019.

“For us from Mimika District, Jokowi is no different from Prabowo. Why? If Prabowo is a perpetrator of human rights violation in Papua, the current president Jokowi knows about these violations but let it happened repeatedly,” said Odizeus Beanal, the Director of Amungme Tribal Society (Lemasa) told Jubi on Tuesday (11/9/2018) while mentioning some cases of human rights violations occurred in Paniai, Timika, Ndugama and other regions.

Today the allegations of human rights violations in Papua still continue. Some violent incidents against civilians that resulted in casualties and arrests of random people still occur under the current administration.

The Amnesty International Indonesia has recorded 38 cases of extrajudicial killings from 2014 to mid-2018 that confirmed 51 victims. This report launched in mid-July 2018.

Government efforts and victims rejection

The Indonesian government through the Coordinating Minister for Politics and Security has formed an integrated team whose task to collect data and information, make analyses and report to the president. The team who consist of 39 members from Papua and Jakarta established in May 2018 as an integrated team to resolve cases of alleged human right violations in Papua. However, it obtained rejection from many Papuans to consider them as not neutral.

“It is impossible to accept those who suspected as perpetrators to become referees. Furthermore, we know this team facilitated by the Coordinating Minister for Politics and Security who has a military background. From the beginning, the Police has supported this team. So how could we believe them?” said Peneas Lokbere, the Coordinator of United for Truth (BUK).

According to Lokbere, who continuously are accompanying victims of Papuan human rights violations, the team only maintained the strategy of former minister Wiranto who at that time suggested that the alleged human rights violations in Papua resolved through the customary law.

Moreover, he said until now there are hundreds of victims of human rights violations in Papua who still fight for justice. For instance, the family of victims of the Bloody Paniai incident of December 8th, 2014. The number of victims might be up to thousands because these alleged human rights violations have occurred since Indonesia annexed Papua in the 60s.

“Jokowi once expressed in front of five thousand more Papuans at Mandala Stadium in Jayapura that he would immediately resolve the Bloody Paniai case. But it was only a promise, “said Tinus Pigai, a relative of Apinus Gobai who was the victim of the incident at Karel Gobai Square, Paniai.

According to him, Jokowi’s visits to Papua were in vain, because he had not been able to fulfil his promise to resolve the Bloody Paniai case. (*)


Reporter: Victor Mambor

Editor: Pipit Maizier

Continue Reading


Migration is a factor of increasing poverty in Papua




Indigenous Papuans. – Jubi / Doc

Jayapura, Jubi – Septer Manufandu, the former Executive Secretary of Non-Governmental Organization Working Forum of Papua (FOKER LSM Papua), stated stakeholders in Papua need to the right solution to strict the flow of migration into Papua.

So far, he said that Papua is an open region and anyone is free to come to Papua without strict control. Therefore he urges the authority to establish a proper mechanism to control the migration, but respect everyone’s right at the same time.

“In the Special Regulation about Population, it does not prohibit people outside of Papua to enter Papua, but rather to control it. So migrants must have a clear purpose coming to Papua,” Manufandu told Jubi on Friday (9/9/2018).

Meanwhile, a Papua Parliament Member Mustakim said a factor that causes the increase in the percentage of poverty in Papua is the rapid influx of migrants.

“No matter how hard the government tried to reduce the poverty rate in Papua, it becomes difficult to work as people from the outside continue to come,” said Mustakim.

Furthermore, he said a proper solution to regulate the influx of population in Papua is the government should stipulate the provincial regulation (Perdasi) or special regional regulation (Perdasus) on migration. (*)


Reporter: Arjuna Pademme

Editor: Pipit Maizier

Continue Reading