No letup in security approach spells trouble in Irian Jaya

Treating forms of protests as a crime may be outdated, but it is still the more popular, fatal practice in Irian Jaya, rights activist John Rumbiak told The Jakarta Post. The following is an excerpt of a recent interview in Jayapura with the supervisor of the Institute for Human Rights Studies and Advocacy in Irian Jaya.

Question: Papuans (Irianese) sporadically raise the West Papua Morning Star flag, often leading to violent situations. Is this an indication of separatism?

Answer: Many in Jakarta regard the flag raising as a sign of separatism. It has been considered a threat to the Republic's territorial integrity, so the military and police, in the name of maintaining Indonesia's unity, have been treating it as a threat to security.

For over three decades of Soeharto rule, this approach led to the deaths of many Papuans, and many others jailed without trial.

Instead of looking for a political solution as recommended by United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan, the raising of the Morning Star flag has been treated as a crime. And as long as (this persists), many more will become victims.

Papuans know quite well that they will be arrested, jailed and maybe even killed by security forces if they raise the flag -- but they keep doing so. Obviously, there must be something wrong.

Q: What do you see as the main problem?

A: The main problem is crimes against humanity in West Papua (still officially Irian Jaya -- Ed.). The Papuans have been victims of such crimes for years, resulting in frustration, disappointment, anger and helplessness.

After the fall of Soeharto, Papuans began protesting against these past crimes through peaceful demonstrations and by raising the Morning Star flag in several cities in West Papua.

Q: What do you mean by "crimes against humanity"?

A: It is more than the killing. It is widespread and systematic attacks against the civilian population, with prior knowledge of the attack (by the perpetrators). The specific acts, according to the International Court of Crime, include murder, extermination, enslavement, and deportation; also imprisonment, torture, rape, and persecutions on political, racial and religious grounds.

Q: Could you explain more about the crimes?

A: There are so many in West Papua. I'll just highlight three general indications.

First, the ignorance of the international community on the Papuan's right of self determination, due to their economic and political interests. The process and implementation of the 1969 UN-supervised act of free choice was held without truly respecting justice, democracy, and human rights of the Papuans.

Second, all kinds of human rights violations committed systematically in West Papua since May 1, 1963. Many Papuans have been victims of killings, rape, arbitrary detention, torture, intimidation and other forms of injustices. Virtually all Papuans have been suspected as being supporters or members of the Free Papua Movement (OPM) and are therefore watched closely.

Once Papuans demand their rights, for instance to ancestral land, they are labeled as separatists, justifying the use of force by police and military. The security forces have never been blamed for killings carried out to maintain territorial integrity or to create national stability.

This has led to a feeling of helplessness among Papuans ... they have to choose between accepting whatever is imposed by the government, with the consequence of continued oppression and victimization; or demanding justice with the possibility of being killed or jailed.

In the name of development, forestry, mining, and other private companies, safeguarded by security forces, have been exploiting natural resources for years, while giving little or no attention for the betterment of social welfare of the locals.

Many of those living around the company sites have been victims of rights violations. Traumatized by past experiences, many suppress their grievances.

Third, the threat of extinction of the Papuan identity. This is caused by racist government policies that are ignorant of local culture and leads to genocide. The policy of family planning has supported the extinction of West Papuans.

Q: What should be done towards a peaceful settlement?

A: First, the government, the Indonesian Military (TNI) and police should change their paradigm towards West Papua. They should look at demands for independence from a humanitarian perspective.

The government would then be able to settle problems in a democratic and peaceful way without bloodshed. It would then realize that the reasons for the demands for independence are crimes against humanity.

Q: What has been the government's response to such charges?

A: Instead of holding dialogs with locals, the government continues its security approach. The central and local government, police and military have never discussed with people here why they have been insisting on independence, through peaceful demonstrations or by raising the Morning Star flag.

The government under Soeharto or Abdurrahman Wahid has given little attention to settling crimes against humanity in West Papua. It seems the ignorance is deliberate.

Three main churches, the Catholic Church of Jayapura diocese, the Evangelical Christian Church (GKI), and the Indonesian Bible Camp Church (GKII) in West Papua and the Institute for the Human Rights Studies and Advocacy (IHRSTAD) have reported a number of rights abuses.

The reports show that all abuses in West Papua were caused by military and police presence aimed at protect mining firms, forest concessions and timber estates exploiting natural resources.

The National Commission on Human Rights has also visited the province several times and has given some recommendations to the government. However, the government has given little attention to West Papua compared to Aceh and Maluku. The government seems to be deliberately ignoring crimes against humanity in West Papua.

Instead of talking with Papuans, they have been labeled as separatists, so many here have come to view Indonesians as enemies.

Former president B.J. Habibie, announced the division of Irian Jaya into three provinces without prior discussion with Papuans. Following strong objections, the government then offered an unclear status as a special autonomous region.

With all available means -- the main one being stalling -- the government has ignored the human rights problems of West Papua, hoping they will be forgotten.

If the government had any political will to resolve the situation, the first thing that should be done is to hold dialogs with the Papuans. Otherwise all parties will have their own perceptions of the problems and solutions.

Q: Officially the security approach has been replaced with the "loving approach" (pendekatan kasih) and welfare approach. Military operations have officially ended. Has there been progress?

A: The Irian Jaya Police Chief is indeed promoting what they call the "loving approach" but it seems only lip service.

In reality the use of force continues; in Timika on Dec. 2 one was killed after being tortured by police (55 were also injured following protests against police lowering Morning Star flag -- Ed.). Another was killed by police in Merauke unrest on Feb. 16.

Zones of military operations have been changed to "securing of vulnerable areas" (PDR) which is essentially the same. The government continues to deploy members of the military in the name of PDR. A lot of military personnel have been assigned to the villages in the name of development; while it has been this very presence that has led to human rights violations in West Papua.

Q: Why do Papuans reject the offer of wide-ranging autonomy?

A: There were no prior discussions with locals. When Papuans protested against crimes against humanity for so many years there was no response from the government; instead it offered autonomy.

Locals have never been given a chance to express their grievances. It seems that all communication channels are closed. The Papuans do not know to whom they can talk to. Thus, they have resorted to seeking their own way through protests, and one led to the vandalizing of government offices in Merauke on Feb. 16.

In this case do not blame the Papuans, but ask if the government gave them a chance for self-expression.

So the rejection against the offer of autonomy is because of the ignorance of the crimes against humanity in West Papua and the absence of a chance for self-expression.

Q: When do you think locals will be ready for talks about autonomy?

A: I think Papuans will be ready to discuss any agenda, including the offer of autonomy, if the government meets three requirements.

First, the government should settle crimes against humanity in West Papua prior to talks on autonomy. Conduct investigations on alleged rights abuses, announce the results, and bring those involved to court.

Second, hold dialogs with Papuans to hear their grievances, disappointments, anger and feelings of helplessness caused by crimes against humanity. Otherwise, such feelings could be exploited by irresponsible people to create vertical (people against authority) and horizontal (among people) conflicts.

Third, involve Papuans in decision making on policies that would influence and effect their lives. Do not repeat the attitude of the New Order regime that imposed everything from the top and forced Papuans to accept decisions unequivocally.

This requires a change of the top down approach by the government, military and police and a change in the tradition of monologue to one based on principles of dialog and human rights protection.

If the three requirements are fulfilled, the government and Papuans will be able to discuss any topic in a peaceful and democratic way. (Neles Tebay)