Jakarta erects barriers to Papua's autonomy<\/p>\n
Kanis Dursin, Staff Writer, The Jakarta Post, Jayapura<\/p>\n
The decision to split up Papua into three provinces has eroded
\nwhat little trust the Papuans had developed toward the government
\nsince the implementation of the special autonomy law on Jan. 1,
\n2002.<\/p>\n
This decision also sends out a strong message to other
\ntroubled provinces, particularly Aceh, that the central
\ngovernment has no intention to honor agreements into which it
\nvoluntarily enters.<\/p>\n
President Megawati Soekarnoputri issued Decree No. 1\/2003
\ndividing Papua into the three provinces of Papua, Central Irian
\nJaya and West Irian Jaya. Dated Jan. 27, the decree serves the
\npolitical interests of the central government and power-hungry
\nopportunists in Papua more than the well-being of its people.<\/p>\n
Dividing Papua, home to 2.3 million people, into several
\nprovinces will surely bring the government closer to the people,
\naccelerate development, and boost indigenous Papuans' involvement
\nin developing the province. In comparison, Java, which is one-
\nthird the size of Papua, is divided up into six provinces,
\nincluding the capital of Jakarta.<\/p>\n
But the decree -- a copy of which was faxed to the Papua
\ngovernor's office from a telephone kiosk in Jakarta instead of
\nthe office of the home affairs ministry -- violates Law No.
\n21\/2001, article 76 of the special autonomy law, which clearly
\nstates that any move to divide Papua into several provinces must
\nbe with the approval of the Papuan People's Assembly (MRP).<\/p>\n
The Papuan People's Assembly, the highest legislative body in
\nautonomous Papua, has not yet been established, but the central
\ngovernment has already divided the province. This leaves Papuan
\nleaders and intellectuals wondering whether Jakarta is serious
\nabout implementing the special autonomy law there.<\/p>\n
The Papuan administration, fully backed by its legislature,
\nhas set up a joint team to look into legal flaws in the decree
\nand to file a judicial review with the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n
"We want to show that we Papuans understand how law works,"
\nPapua legislature (DPRP) chairman John Ibo told The Jakarta Post.<\/p>\n
However, the Presidential Decree goes far beyond the legal
\nwrangle. By unilaterally dividing Papua into three provinces, the
\ngovernment has taken over the function of the Assembly and has
\nraised questions as to the government's sincerity in granting the
\nspecial autonomy status to Papua.<\/p>\n
Under the special autonomy law, the Assembly has the authority
\nto approve candidates for the positions of governor and deputy
\ngovernor. It also has the final say in the selection of the
\nPeople's Consultative Assembly (MPR) members representing Papua,
\nand enacts bills submitted by the Papuan House of Representatives
\n(DPRP) and the Papuan governor.<\/p>\n
The absence of the Papuan People's Assembly has deprived DPRP
\nand the governor their rights to submit badly-needed regulations
\nof the special autonomy law. The law has never been implemented
\nsince it came into effect in January 2002, thanks to Jakarta.<\/p>\n
The draft of a government regulation on the establishment of
\nthe Assembly was submitted to the home affairs ministry six
\nmonths ago, but has not yet been approved. Jakarta has clearly
\nsabotaged the implementation of the special autonomy law by
\ndelaying the establishment of the Papuan People's Assembly.<\/p>\n
This explains, at least partially, why Papuan leaders and
\nintellectuals reacted angrily to Presidential Decree No. 1\/2003.<\/p>\n
John Ibo accuses the government of duping Papuans into
\naccepting the special autonomy law. "We have been cheated
\nrepeatedly and even now, we are being deceived," John said.<\/p>\n
The special autonomy law -- drafted by Papuan leaders and
\nintellectuals -- was adopted to accommodate the Papuans' strong
\naspirations toward independence, which emerged following the
\nforced resignation of former dictator Soeharto in May 1998.<\/p>\n
The law allows Papua to have "its own government", complete
\nwith the MRP people's assembly, the House, an anthem, a flag and
\nsymbol, as well as a local political party. The role of the
\ncentral government is limited to foreign policy, defense and
\nsecurity, monetary and fiscal matters, religion and the judicial
\nsystem.<\/p>\n
The province is also allowed to retain up to 90 percent of its
\nland and building tax, 80 percent of its revenues from forestry,
\nfishery and general mining industries, and 70 percent of receipts
\nfrom the oil and natural gas sector.<\/p>\n
Papuans had now finally begun to feel that they were "masters
\nin their own land". Indigenous Papuans have taken over almost 90
\npercent of all key positions in the province, from the
\ngubernatorial office and the provincial legislature down to the
\nvillage level. Under the special autonomy arrangement, Papua was
\nbasically "an independent province within a sovereign country".<\/p>\n
The law somewhat successfully muffled the demands for
\nindependence among indigenous Papuans. Since the autonomy law
\ncame into effect, pro-independence rallies were conspicuously
\nabsent from Jayapura streets, including at the Papua legislature
\ncompound -- until the announcement of the above Decree.<\/p>\n
Papuan leaders and intellectuals suspect that the division of
\nthe province into three smaller provinces stems from "groundless
\nfears" that the special autonomy law, if fully implemented, would
\nlead to Papuan independence; a consequence Indonesia cannot
\nafford, following the loss of East Timor in a United Nations-
\nsponsored referendum in 1999.<\/p>\n
Jakarta is particularly suspicious of the Papuan assembly,
\nwhose members are to hail from tribal societies, religious
\nleaders and women's groups. Most leaders, if not all, of the
\nLembaga Masyarakat Adat, or tribal communities, are members of
\nthe Papua Presidium Council, a loose organization that has
\ncampaigned for and independent Papua. This explains why Jakarta
\nhas not endorsed the draft of a government regulation on the
\nestablishment of the Papuan People's Assembly.<\/p>\n
The government seems to think that dividing the province would
\nweaken the secessionist movement and give Jakarta free reign to
\nmonitor and control the leaders of the poorly-organized Free
\nPapua Movement (OPM). If this is true, then the government has
\nnot learned its lesson: A small population does not prevent a
\npeople from fighting for and achieving independence, as proved by
\nthe East Timor experience.<\/p>\n
In any case, the welfare of its people seems to have taken a
\nback seat. Papuans were not consulted, and their social and
\ncultural conditions were not taken into account in splitting up
\nthe province. In some parts, borders run through ancestral lands
\nand divide people from the same minor ethnic groups into two
\ndifferent provinces. This, according to local leaders, would
\nsooner or later create horizontal conflicts resulting from land
\ndisputes along provincial borders.<\/p>\n
Consulting Papuans before splitting up the province is
\nnecessary, not only because Papua is an autonomous province, but
\nalso because the division concerns their lives. Involving the
\nPapuans in decision-making is part and parcel of its right as an
\nautonomous province. Denying them of such an opportunity is
\ntantamount to negating their existence as an integral part of the
\ncountry, which has fueled renewed demands for independence.<\/p>\n
The controversial decree has clearly served as a wake-up call
\nfor indigenous Papuans, that not everything is fine with the
\nspecial autonomy status.<\/p>\n
"This (the decree) will harden our struggle for independence,"
\nsaid a prominent youth leader in Jayapura last week, expressing
\nhis conviction that, sooner or later, Papua would be independent.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/jakarta-erects-barriers-to-papuas-autonomy-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}