Papuan demand more than just autonomy

Papuan demand more than just autonomy

Ridwan Max Sijabat, Staff Writer, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The recently endorsed law on special autonomy for Papua
suggests a real social contract between its people and the
government. The pact dictates the transfer of the bulk of
authority in numerous fields by the government to the people.

The endorsement reinforces confessions by the central
government and the House of Representatives, that their past
policy on the country's easternmost province had been wrong. It
also gave a concession for Papuans to run an autonomous
administration, to be to catch up with other provinces in almost
all fields.

Following a three-month deliberation, the government and the
House eventually met the people's demands for special authority
in the social, cultural, political and economic fields in running
their autonomous government.

The new law rules that the province, which has recently had
its name officially changed from Irian Jaya, has special autonomy
in the social, political, economic and cultural fields, except
for defense, foreign policy, monetary affairs and the courts.

Despite the national tributes, the province is allowed to have
its own flag, symbol and anthem representing its own cultural
identity and it will have a bicameral council. The council
comprises the Papua People's Assembly (MRP) and Papuan Provincial
Legislative Council (DPRP), and is authorized to make bylaws and
policies, and to control the executive.

The Papuan assembly of tribes, religious communities, women
and nongovernmental organizations, will create a constitution to
guarantee the political and cultural rights of indigenous people.
It will set up a truth and reconciliation commission to explore
the painful history of integration with Indonesia. The commission
will be authorized to carry out a thorough and fair investigation
into past human rights abuses in the province.

In the handling of security, both the local military and
police are subordinated to the governor. In the hopes to address
a major grievance, 70 percent of the government's revenue from
oil and gas mining now goes to Papua.

However special autonomy has not won much support from those
claiming to represent the Papuans. They question, are problems
over with the endorsement of the law? Numerous groups, especially
the proindependence Papuan Presidium Council, the Free Papua
Movement (OPM) and students, have rejected special autonomy while
many others are still skeptical of the government's goodwill in
enforcing the law.

So what do the Papuan people really need?

Symbolizing their pride, self-respect and existence, Papuans
say they cannot do much with unfamiliar constitutional
terminologies. They need real changes and dialog to seek a
comprehensive solution to prolonged problems, as well as to gain
honest recognition of their cultural and ethnic identity.

Papua, which earlier names ranged from Ilhas dos Papuas,
Nederlandse Nieuw Guinea, New Guinea, West Papua and Irian Barat
(West Irian), has been claimed as an integral part of the
Indonesian unitary state.

But Papuans say that the two-million plus people living on the
425,000-square-kilometer island have experienced more hardship
than progress since their integration into Indonesia in 1963.

Many pro-Jakarta groups doubt that special autonomy can
overcome their problems. Others including those supporting OPM
say Papuans must be allowed to hold a self-determination
referendum.

This is what many in Jakarta feared following East Timor's
separation and calls for independence in the other restive
province of Aceh, where the government has also mismanaged a
prolonged, complicated conflict.

Papuans, known for their generosity and honesty, have been
disappointed over the government's failure to meet its promises
during their 38-year history under Indonesia. They have lost
trust in Jakarta because of its continued discrimination.

Following the controversial referendum held in Irian in 1963,
former president Sukarno gave special autonomy to the province --
which was never implemented. Instead, revenues from natural
resources, especially oil, gas, copper and gold deposits, did not
reach the people, who have said they remain left behind and in
poverty compared to other provinces.

Those who fought against prolonged injustice faced guns,
especially under former president Soeharto's military-style
regime for 32 years. The National Commission of Human Rights says
human rights abuses in Papua that have claimed thousands of lives
remain unresolved.

Until the end of the New Order in 1997 two million out of a
population of 2.4 million were still living under the poverty
line in areas with no access to public services. The infant
mortality rate has remained high at 79 per 1,000 births.

The latest data at the provincial administration shows that 50
percent of Papuans are without education or were elementary
school dropouts, only 24 percent are elementary school graduates,
10 percent are from high school and only two percent are
university graduates. Only three percent of the indigenous people
have been employed in the local bureaucracy and private
companies, including the American copper and gold mining company
PT Freeport McMoran Indonesia.

Another source of deep resentment towards the government is
its ignorance of tribal land ownership. While concessions for
forest areas have been given to some private companies, land
disputes remain unresolved. Among disputes involving the
government are those with Hanoch Hebe Ohee in Sorong, the Moy
tribe, also in Sorong, with the Arfak tribe in Manokwari and with
the Amungme and Komoro tribes in Mimika.

Of the 250 tribes in the province, 25 have yet to make contact
with modern technology.

With such complicated problems, the provincial Papuan
government will be unable to implement all aspects of special
autonomy simultaneously. It will have to set priorities.

One would be to intensify education and to develop
transportation, particularly in isolated areas. The Papuan
administration's recent decision to spend Rp 1.8 trillion on
schools and traninig centers in 2002 is laudable.

Papuans do not only need an autonomous or federal-like
administration. They insist on the restoration of their dignity.

They have not only been aware of discriminatory treatment
toward them, and are mainly looking toward the potential cultural
and ethnic recognition brought about by the new law.

Governor Jaap Salossa once said that Jakarta had so far looked
down on Papuans because they were "black, poor and primitive".
The reform movement has brought increased enlightenment among
Papuans to fight for equality, fraternity and progress, while
clearly expressing that they no longer tolerate discrimination;
not unlike the blacks in the United States, the Aborigines in
Australia and the Maori in New Zealand.

More importantly, both the government and the Papuans must be
on the alert for possible infringements of the new pact. The
people should monitor the possible introduction of government
regulations deviating from the law. Meanwhile if Jakarta is
committed to address the people's grievances it should also
ensure that special autonomy is not manipulated to develop a new
momentum for the province's separation from Indonesia.