Jumat, 26 Juli 2013


UK Govt challenged over rights abuses in West Papua

Posted at 21:19 on 26 July, 2013 UTC

Members of the House of Lords held a debate about West Papua on Wednesday in which they raised serious concerns about the human rights situation and called on the British government to take a stronger stand.
Lord Harries, who initiated the debate, noted the alarming pattern of ongoing political arrests in the Indonesian province, citing evidence collected by the London-based human rights group TAPOL.
He also challenged the UK government about its funding of Special Detachment 88, the elite counter-terror squad which has allegedly been used in the arrest, torture and shooting of political activists in the Papua provinces.
He questioned whether the training provided by the UK and others was doing anything to improve the human rights record of the unit.
Lord Hannay called the Indonesian government’s policy of restricting access for foreign journalists and NGOs misguided, adding that where secrecy prevails, rumour and allegations flourish.
Lord Avebury suggested the situation in West Papua is almost certainly a lot worse because of the barriers to access.
Lord Harries criticised the Special Autonomy law as a total failure which fails to address the political aspiration of the Papuan people.
He called on the UK to request an inquiry into the Act of Free Choice and support an internationally-monitored referendum.
Lord Avebury noted the outstanding request of the Papuan people for self-determination, and called on the UK government to invite Indonesia’s President to visit the UK next year for the Scottish referendum on independence, to see how they deal with requests for self-determination.
Lord Hannay added the Indonesian government should demonstrate respect for the culture of Papuans, and that any attempt to homogenise or encourage migration into Papua will bring tensions.
The government response was given by the Senior Minister of State at the Foreign & Commonwealth Office, Baroness Warsi.
In responding to the concerns raised, Baroness Warsi noted the high level of concern about freedom of expression during the debate, and agreed that freedom of expression in West Papua is too often stifled.
She echoed statements of all those who spoke in the debate, that all those with a stake in Papua’s future need constructively to engage in peaceful dialogue.
News Content © Radio New Zealand International
PO Box 123, Wellington, New Zealand


British government concerned about situation in West Papua

JULY 25, 2013
Houses of Parliament, Westminster, London
The British government was questioned in the House of Lords last night about the ongoing crisis in West Papua. Baroness Warsi, speaking for the British government recognised that “the events surrounding the 1969 Act of free Choice continue to be a controversy”, whilst Lord Avebury suggested that Indonesian President SBY “should be invited to the UK in September 2014 ( for the referendum on self- determination in Scotland) so that he can see how we deal with demands for self-determination in this country”. Baroness Warsi said in her closing statement that “We all agree that the situation in Papua is of concern”.
The full transcript of the session can be accessed through a link at the end of this report.
Lord Harries of Pentregarth, former Bishop of Oxford opened the session by stating, “My Lords, violations of basic human rights in West Papua are not only continuing but becoming more frequent. In 2012-13 there were numerous incidents of West Papuans being shot, arrested and tortured simply for taking part in peaceful demonstrations. Leaders of the West Papua National Committee—the KNPB—are particularly targeted. To give just one example, at a peaceful demonstration on 1 May this year, three Papuans were shot—killings which were rightly condemned by both the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, and Amnesty International. A list of 30 such incidents involving arrests for peaceful protests in just two weeks in April and May this year was sent to the OHCHR in Geneva by TAPOL on behalf of eight international organisations concerned with West Papua.”
Lord Harries opened the session
Lord Harries opened the session
He continued, “The truth cannot be hidden forever. The 1962 New York agreement signed between the Netherlands, Indonesia and the United Nations guaranteed an “act of self-determination” for the people of West Papua. In 1969 that so-called Act of Free Choice took place.” Lord Harries then quoted Baroness, Lady Symons of Vernham Dean, who on behalf of the British government admitted on December 13th 2004 that, “there were 1,000 handpicked representatives and that they were largely coerced into declaring for inclusion in Indonesia”.
Lord Harries further continued, “Given that the former UN Under-Secretary-General, Chakravarthi Narasimhan, admitted publicly in 2004 that the 1969 so-called Act of Free Choice was in effect a sham, will the Government join with International Parliamentarians for West Papua and International Lawyers for West Papua in asking the UN to conduct an inquiry into what happened in 1969 and then to instigate a referendum on the issue in West Papua itself?
Lord Harries added, “Given the 2010/11 referendum on self-determination in South Sudan and the upcoming referendums on independence in New Caledonia—Kanaky, Bougainville and Scotland, and bearing in mind what happened in East Timor, would it not be prudent, as well as absolutely right, to press for a true, internationally monitored referendum? This issue is certainly not going to go away, however much the Indonesian Government might wish that it would.”
Lord Kilclooney
Lord Kilclooney
Lord Kilclooney then addressed the chamber. He stated, “This is a subject that I knew nothing about until I came to the House of Lords”. “It is a subject that is rarely mentioned in the press and the rest of the media or by the Government. It is not only a tragedy but, in the context of many tragedies around this world, one of the worst that I have come across” Regarding the Act of free Choice he stated, “there was no free choice. In fact, the Indonesians selected 1,000 chosen people to vote on behalf of the entire West Papuan population. They selected who could vote and more or less told them how to vote. They said that that was how democracy worked, that West Papua had expressed its opinion and that it wanted to be part of the Indonesian nation. Regrettably, there are now almost daily atrocities that are never reported in the media.”
He then continued, “The silence of the world on the tragedy of West Papua is amazing”. “The international bodies and the United Nations itself, with their disregard of what is going on in West Papua, have been shameful in their attitude.” He asked the British government, “Does the Minister agree that the people of West Papua—I stress “the people”—never voted to be part of Indonesia?” Lord Kilclooney went on to suggest, “I suggest that the Indonesian Government should start a dialogue with the church leaders under the chairmanship of an independent statesman drawn from outside.
Lord Hannay of Chiswick
Lord Hannay of Chiswick
Lord Hannay of Chiswick, who had previously been to West Papua as an advisor to BP then stated “That there have been and still are abuses of human rights in West Papua, mainly committed by members of the Indonesian armed forces and police, is really not in doubt. But because of what I regard as the Indonesian Government’s misguided policy of banning visits to the provinces by international journalists and NGOs, too little is known about these abuses, their nature and the background to them. Where secrecy prevails, rumour and allegations flourish, which is why I regard the Indonesian Government’s policy as misguided.”
He added, “the Indonesian Government need to demonstrate respect for the cultural particularities and identity of indigenous Papuans. These are real and based on centuries of history. Any attempt to homogenise the provinces to a kind of Indonesian norm, or to encourage substantial inward migration from other parts of Indonesia, would inevitably raise tensions and lead to the sort of incidents at which human rights abuses have occurred and are still occurring. As the example of East Timor showed, a policy of repression is only too likely to be counterproductive”
Baron Avebury suggested Indonesian President SBY should visit the UK during the Scottish referendum in 2014
Lord Avebury suggested Indonesian President SBY should visit the UK during the Scottish referendum in 2014
Lord Avebury then addressed the audience, “My Lords, the noble and right reverend Lord, Lord Harries, reminded us of the betrayal by the UN of the people of West Papua after Indonesia invaded and occupied the territory in 1961; it then connived with the so-called Act of Free Choice, when 1,000 handpicked men were coerced into ratifying the annexation. Today, unfortunately, the UN seems just as helpless in dealing with the gross and persistent violations of human rights” He continued, “Those who continue to speak about self-determination for the territory, as they have every right to do under Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, risk prosecution under Article 106 of the criminal code [of Indonesian], which prescribes life imprisonment for any attempt to separate a part of the state. I hope that the Prime Minister will invite President SBY to visit the UK in September next year so that he can see how we deal with demands for self-determination in this country.”
He added, “The Indonesians should recall their own experiences with East Timor, mentioned by the noble Lord, Lord Hannay, which achieved independence, and Aceh, which gained a substantial degree of autonomy, after long and bloody struggles. In both cases, the results were achieved through dialogue, as I remember from having been an adviser at the talks between the Indonesians and the Free Aceh Movement between 2000 and 2002. That process, and the agreement subsequently moderated by former President Martti Ahtisaari of Finland, could form a model for eliminating the causes of human rights violations in West Papua, rather than Indonesia pursuing futile attempts to eradicate the movement for self-determination by military force and draconian laws.”
Lord Collins of Highbury then stated, “. Indonesia’s treason laws continue to be used to punish free expression. Peaceful demonstrations are banned and attacked by the security services. In the past 12 months there have been numerous incidents of Papuans being shot, poisoned, arrested and tortured for taking part in peaceful demonstrations and other activities associated with independence aspirations.
Lord Collins of Highbury
Lord Collins of Highbury
Lord Collins raised the issue of,  “continued evidence of intimidation, threats and violence against local journalists. As the noble Lord, Lord Kilclooney, reminded us, the international media are barred from entry”.
He added, “As the noble and right reverend Lord, Lord Harries, reminded us, the most recent example was the peaceful demonstrations on 1 May 2013 to mark 50 years of Indonesian control over West Papua. Three Papuans were fatally shot. Following this, a demonstration was planned to commemorate the three people who were killed. The local police banned the demonstration, which took place anyway. The demonstration was repeatedly attacked by police, and four members of the West Papuan National Committee, including its chairman, were arrested and reportedly tortured.”
The Senior Minister of State, Department for Communities and Local Government & Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Baroness Warsi, then spoke for the British Government.
She stated, “I echo the concerns raised by the noble Lord, Lord Collins of Highbury, about journalists, NGOs and international organisations—including the International Red Cross, which has extremely limited access to Papua —and we have raised these with the Government of Indonesia at all levels. As the noble Lord, Lord Hannay, reminded us, without opening Papua up, there is a risk of misreporting or incidents being misrepresented. Incidents will remain hard to verify as long as Papua remains closed.
Baroness Warsi answered questions on behalf of the British Government
Baroness Warsi answered questions on behalf of the British Government
She added, “The Government are resolute in demanding that human rights be respected by all in Papua. We make this absolutely clear to the Indonesian Government at the highest levels. In the past 12 months alone, my right honourable friend the Prime Minister and President Yudhoyono discussed Papua when they met in November during the state visit—I can confirm that on the record. The human rights situation in Papua also features regularly in our discussions with the Indonesian Foreign minister”
Baroness Warsi stated, “Like the noble Lord, Lord Kilclooney, I recognise that the events surrounding the 1969 Act of Free Choice continue to be a focus of controversy” she also added, “We all agree that the situation in Papua is of concern and that we should continue to speak out against violations, whoever commits them, which contravene human rights and international law.”
A full transcript can be found via this link

Senin, 22 Juli 2013


We Want To Determine Fate of Our Own!

When the Papuans and Papuans in the land by force input by the Indonesian state in the country of Indonesia in 1963, the Papuans should be used as animal hunted by the Indonesian state through his legs and past military PORLI given by the government of Indonesia over Papua.
Day after day, Indonesian efforts to eliminate child lives of the people of Papua Melanesian family continues waged by the Indonesian people in the land of Papua, the TNI continues PORLI sent by the Indonesian state more and more rampant in all corners of the land of Papua.
Even when the land was still in the frame Homeland Papua, thousands of Papuans who lost their lives on the muzzle of the weapon by the Indonesian state. Papuans who used mental number 815 000, is now increasingly less. Is Papuan tribe died because of the war? Is Papuans died of illness?
If the Papuan people who are dying because they panyakit infectious diseases such as malaria, HIV / AIDS, cholera. The question is, whether Accordingly disease existed long ago in indigenous Papuans from the first hereditary?
Of all the questions reviewed above and answer the questions above, then I can say that the people of Papua, Papuan people are in occupation of Indonesia.
There must ask ko can ya, Papua Indonesia is being colonized by the state? Oo, yes! Indeed, the Papuans are being colonized by the Indonesian state, which before the Papua has formed and declared a state on December 1, 1961.
Form of invaders who recently conducted by Indonesian nation is segaja events created by unscrupulous Indonesian nation through the military henchmen PORLI recently in Papua Nabire boxing match held at the time, in order to Regents Cup on 14 July 2013.
Actual, security, in this case POLICE, should be in place when the match occurred to anticipate and provide security during the match occurred, but it was not done at that time and that there are only 4 people that Civil Service Police Unit secures the game.
One proof of occupation undertaken by the Indonesian nation is Dogiyai Dengue, which previously deliberately one Person who accidentally unleash Police Made Business toggle which ultimately eliminates Dogiyai victims in the district.
It also embarked on the same Tambrauw, Sorong, which deliberately states allow death to occur without any obvious way in which, when an outbreak of cholera.
And many also occur in various polosok land of West Papua to Merauke sliding. For example, the case of Bloody Wamena. Also Wasior Bloody and Bloody Biak. All of these cases revealed no RI. This omission RI proof against human rights pelanggaan made his own.
True words, how thieves want to prosecute him? Likewise here, how RI judge himself who has many Papuan human rights violation?
We Papuan people do not want to continue living in the occupation of Indonesia, where our people every day can be a target shoot TNI. Where our daughters be raped every time bias. Where our father and mother being tortured and killed.
We the people of Papua want self-determination as an independent nation, West Papuans!
Deserius Goo, Papuan students, college in Yogyakarta.

Minggu, 21 Juli 2013


The Standpoint of Papuan Freedom Political Prisoners

Clarification of the Standpoint of Papuan Freedom Political Prisoners
Abepura State Prison, 23 June 2013.
(As clarified by Selpius Bobii, one of the Papuan Freedom Political Prisoners)

The Papuan Freedom Political Prisoners in the Abepura State Prison of West Papua have received reports that certain printed and electronic news media reports from both within the Papuan nation and overseas have deviated from our statement on 23 May 2013 in rejection of the Indonesian President’s offer of clemency as published in the Cenderawasih Post on 23 May 2013. That statement was in response to the announcement by the Deputy Chairperson of DPRP Yunus Wonda that President SBY had made a commitment at the time he met with a contingent from Papua led by the Papuan Provincial Governor Lukas Enembe together with the Minister for Internal Affairs on 29 April 2013, to give all the Papuan Political Prisoners clemency at the time of the President’s upcoming visit to Papua in August 2013.
We the 26 political prisoners referred to, are most concerned to clarify that digression so that the public can understand the truth of our statement. Basically in that statement we announced our standpoint
1) That we reject the Indonesian President’s offer of clemency; and
2) That we do not need to be released from prison but rather we need and demand the release of the nation of Papua from the colonial domination of the colonial state of the Republic of Indonesia.
Whilst this first point is self explanatory, the second needs further comment as to our reasons. Firstly WE HAVE DONE NO WRONG! Accordingly we have never and will never make a plea for forgiveness in the form of clemency from the Head of the colonial Republic of Indonesia. We have also never asked our families or legal counsel to make such a plea for clemency to the Indonesian President. In fact we would firmly reject any such plea made by any party on our behalf. As to put forward a plea for clemency would be to acknowledge we were wrong, to indicate we regretted our wrong and to acknowledge Papua as being a part of the Republic of Indonesia thereby asking the President’s forgiveness. But who is it that is in the wrong such that SBY should give his forgiveness? We the Freedom Political Prisoners have committed no wrong and we are not in need of forgiveness from the Head of State of the colonial Republic of Indonesia (RI)! In fact exactly the opposite. We demand that RI apologizes to the nation of Papua for the annexation of the nation of Papua into RI. An act which has given rise to discrimination, marginalisation and making us a minority in our ancestors land; to the degree that we are now heading for ethnic annihilation. Secondly we demand that RI acknowledges the sovereign independence of the nation of Papua.
Papuan Political Prisoners are also not in the wrong due to the following:
a) The right to self-determination is the right of all nations in the same manner as is stated in the General Declaration of the United Nations (UN) and various international covenants including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights, the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and similarly even in the opening paragraph of the 1945 Indonesian Constitution.
b) The Nation of Papua has the same right to full sovereignty and accordingly on 19 October 1961 in the first National Papuan Congress the Papuan National Committee declared the ‘ Political Manifest of Independence of the Nation of Papua’ as the basis for receiving the status of full sovereignty. Since then the 1 December has been celebrated in Jayapura and throughout all major towns in the land of Papua.
c) In spite of the above the nation of Papua was annexed into RI with the ‘Three Community Commands’ (TRIKORA) by the then President Sukarno on 19 December 1961 which was followed up with a political and military invasion in 1962.
d) The political invasion was realized through the unilateral agreement known as the ‘New York Agreement’ on 15 August 1962 between the Dutch and Indonesia as mediated by UN and drafted by USA, without any involvement of indigenous Papuans.
e) The ‘Act of Free Choice’ was not implemented in accordance with the requirements of international law as provided for in the New York Agreement and in effect became implemented by Indonesia as the ‘Act of No Choice’ (or in other words the ‘Forced Community Opinion’). The so-called ‘Act of Free Choice’ was flawed both legally and morally.
f) The nation of Papua was at no time involved in the establishment of the Republic of Indonesia and neither did the nation of Papua ever freely agree to become a part of that Republic.
g) Accordingly the occupation by RI of the land of Papua is illegal and immoral.
h) Both the geographical location and culture of Papua are vastly different to that of the Malay race. The nation of Papua is of the Melanesian grouping of the Negroid Race.
We are being detained and imprisoned for the sake of the struggle to have the independence of Papua restored. The release of Papuan Political Prisoners from prison will never bring an end to the problems in Papua. It will never bring an end to the problem of the political history of Papua that has led to the consequences of discrimination, marginalisation, humanitarian evils, the creation of a minority in our ancestor’s lands and genocide against the ethnic Papuan race.
Even if we were to be released unconditionally we would once again return to be active in the struggle, we would once again raise the Papuan flag and RI through its armed forces would once again arrest and imprison us. So there is no point in releasing us. Rather release the nation of Papua from the colonial domination of the Republic of Indonesia.
For further details of the reasons for the rejection of the offer of President SBY’s offer of clemency see;
(www.majalahselangkah.com/content/mengapa-tapol-papua-tolak-grasi-#/2008) in Indonesian or for the English version (www.justiceinpapua.blogspot.com/2013/06/why-papuan-independence-political_118.html?m=1&zx=564946ed40cf2447).
To all media personnel whether from the printed media or electronic media, to the general community, those in the human rights area and all those who stand in solidarity with us whether inside Papua or overseas, we appeal to you to please publish this clarification so that the public can receive information that is accurate and reliable. For further information readers are referred to:www.majalahselangkah.com/content/tapol-papua-tolak-rencana-grasi-minta-bebaskan-papua#
For your anticipated help to spread this information widely and to include this clarification in both printed and electronic media we express our most sincere appreciation.