Delegasi ULMWP (West Papua) yang sempat di hambat oleh Indonesia melalui New Zealand dan Australia dalam perjalanan telah berhasil tiba di Funafuti, Tuvalu. Delegasi West Papua dipimpin oleh; Benny Wenda ketua ULMWP, bersama juru bicara Jacob Rumbiak. Mereka didampingi oleh Lora Lini, utusan Vanuatu untuk urusan dekolonisasi West Papua di PBB.
Lora Lini adalah anak dari Bapa bangsa Melanesia di Vanuatu, Father Walter Lin̄i.
Foto: Ruang registrasi peserta pertemuan PIF 2019 di Tuvalu.
A coalition of Pacific Island nations has delivered an emphatic call to the African, Caribbean and Pacific group of states to back West Papuan self-determination.
Vanuatu, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Nauru, Palau and the Marshall Islands delivered a joint statement at the ACP’s Council of Ministers in Brussels.
It condemned Indonesian human rights violations in Papua, including alleged crimes against humanity and called for an eventual resolution that includes support of the right of West Papuan political self-determination.
Delivering the statement, a Vanuatu government envoy Johnny Koanapo told the Council that “apartheid-like colonial rule” was “slowly but surely” going to wipe out West Papuans as a people “while… the world stood by.”
African and Caribbean countries in the the 79-member group of mainly former colonised territories have voiced strong support for West Papuan self-determination at subcommittee and ambassadorial level during the past two months
Mr Koanapo said that the day’s discussion “now sets up the great likelihood of a resolution on the full range of West Papua issues at the next ACP ministerial council meeting”, scheduled for November.
It’s the latest in a string of high-level representations by the International Coalition for Papua since last year that have taken the issue of West Papua to a new level of diplomatic activity.
The seven Pacific nations, who are in coalition with Pacific regional church bodies and civil society networks, raised concern about West Papuan human rights at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva two months ago, and also at the UN General Assembly last September.
Indonesia’s government has rejected criticism at the UN level, accusing the Pacific countries of interference and supporting Papuan separatism.
Jakarta says human rights abuses in Papua are largely historical, and that the incorporation of the western half of new Guinea into Indonesia is final.
However, support from other governments for resolution of ongoing human rights infringements in Papua is gaining momentum.
Criticism of the flawed plebiscite by which the former Dutch New Guinea was incorporated into the young state of Indonesia in the 1960s has effected renewed calls for a genuine self-determination process.
At yesterday’s Brussels meeting Papua New Guinea’s ambassador, whose country shares a 760km-long border with Indonesia at West Papua, was the only delegate to speak against ACP moving forward on a resolution on the matter.
Joshua Kalinoe said that “no one is denying that the human rights violations are going on” but suggested that a fact-finding mission to West Papua might be necessary for the ACP to get an accurate picture of the situation.
Guinea-Bissau’s Ambassador Alfredo Lopez Cabral spoke next, comparing the plight of West Papua to East Timor, which Indonesia occupied for 24 years before a mounting legacy of conflict gave way to an independence referendum in 1999.
Republik Vanuatu
Pernyataan disampaikan oleh Hon. Ronald K Warsal (MP)
Menteri Hukum dan Pengembangan Masyarakat, Republik Vanuatu
Sesi Ke 34 Dari Dewan Hak Asasi Manusia
1 Maret 2017, Jenewa, Swiss
Bapak Presiden Mulia, Distinguished Delegasi Hadirin sekalian. Republik Vanuatu sangat senang untuk mengatasi pertemuan ini.
Hari ini, saya berbicara atas nama kedua Vanuatu dan enam negara lain di kawasan kami Pasifik: Tonga, Nauru, Palau, Tuvalu, Kepulauan Marshall, dan Kepulauan Solomon
Bapak Presiden, kami tujuh negara telah datang bersama-sama hari ini – dan dalam pernyataan tertulis bersama terpisah – untuk menarik perhatian para anggota terhormat dari Dewan HAM PBB untuk situasi makam di Papua Barat.
Bapak Presiden, khusus, kita fokus perhatian Anda pada sejumlah pernyataan terbaru oleh pemegang mandat dari Dewan ini tentang pelanggaran Indonesia yang serius pada hak asasi manusia orang asli Papua:
• Surat bersama yang dikeluarkan oleh Pelapor Khusus PBB tentang promosi dan perlindungan hak atas kebebasan berpendapat dan berekspresi;
• Pelapor Khusus tentang hak atas kebebasan berkumpul secara damai dan berserikat;
• Pelapor Khusus tentang hak-hak masyarakat adat;
• Pelapor Khusus tentang luar hukum, atau sewenang-wenang;
• Dan Pelapor Khusus tentang penyiksaan dan lain yang kejam, tidak manusiawi atau merendahkan martabat atau hukuman.
Kami juga menarik perhatian ke rekening lain dari kekerasan negara Indonesia di Papua Barat, termasuk:
• Komunikasi dari Komite PBB tentang Penghapusan Diskriminasi Rasial, mengacu pada pembunuhan dan penangkapan dari Papua;
Kami mencatat bahwa dalam lima belas tahun terakhir Komisi Nasional Hak Asasi Manusia Indonesia telah mengumpulkan bukti-bukti pelanggaran HAM berat oleh aparat keamanan Indonesia dalam tiga bidang utama dari Papua Barat: Wasior, Wamena, dan Paniai. Komisi menggambarkan set kasus di dua tempat pertama sebagai kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan, yang dihukum di bawah hukum Indonesia dan internasional.
Kami ingin lebih menyoroti aspek lain yang luas dari pelanggaran hak asasi manusia – kebijakan pemerintah Indonesia selama beberapa dekade dan berlanjut sampai hari ini dari migrasi non-penduduk asli Papua untuk Papua Barat, mengarah ke penurunan dramatis dalam persentase penduduk asli Papua.
Bapak Presiden, sampai saat ini, pemerintah Indonesia telah, bagaimanapun, tidak bisa membatasi atau menghentikan berbagai pelanggaran luas. Baik memiliki bahwa pemerintah mampu memberikan keadilan bagi para korban. ada juga telah tindakan nyata untuk mengatasi pelanggaran ini oleh pemerintah Indonesia, yang, tentu saja, tanggung jawab langsung dan akuntabilitas utama.
Selanjutnya, pemerintah Indonesia secara konsisten telah dapat menyampaikan laporan yang diperlukan periodik manusia yang tepat dan ulasan, yang merupakan norma internasional penting dimana sekretariat PBB dan anggota negara memantau hak asasi manusia di seluruh dunia. Penilaian yang ditulis sangat penting untuk mengidentifikasi dan menghapus penyiksaan, diskriminasi rasial dan pelanggaran hak asasi manusia pada umumnya.
Bapak Presiden, dalam terang pelanggaran ini dan kelambanan pemerintah Indonesia, kita sebut di Dewan Hak Asasi Manusia PBB untuk meminta Komisaris Tinggi Hak Asasi Manusia untuk menghasilkan laporan konsolidasi dari situasi aktual di Papua Barat.
Laporan Komisaris Tinggi perlu mempertimbangkan informasi dalam Perjanjian yang ada, Prosedur Khusus, dan Universal Periodic Review, serta laporan dari organisasi internasional dan regional lainnya dan organisasi non-pemerintah.
Laporan ini juga harus rinci berbagai hak di bawah Bill Internasional tentang Hak Asasi Manusia dan konvensi terkait, termasuk hak untuk menentukan nasib sendiri.
Dan laporan harus membuat rekomendasi untuk tindakan segera untuk menghentikan pola pelanggaran HAM seperti yang dibuktikan oleh banyak Prosedur Khusus dan badan-badan lain disebutkan sebelumnya.
Akhirnya, kami meminta kerjasama penuh dan dicadangkan dengan Komisaris Tinggi dalam pemenuhan mandat ini, termasuk penyediaan oleh pihak berwenang Indonesia akses lengkap untuk setiap orang di Papua Barat yang dianggap tepat untuk memenuhi dalam penyusunan laporan ini.
Bapak Presiden, seperti yang saya tutup, kami percaya bahwa tantangan dari Papua Barat harus dibawa kembali ke agenda PBB.
Terima kasih sekali lagi untuk kesempatan untuk mengekspresikan pandangan saya di forum ini. Panjang Allah Yumi Stanap. Dalam Tuhan kita berdiri. Terima kasih.
JENEWA, SATUHARAPAN.COM – Tujuh negara Pasifik kembali mengangkat isu pelanggaran Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM) di Papua pada sesi reguler ke-34 sidang Dewan HAM PBB di Jenewa, hari ini (1/03).
Tujuh negara tersebut adalah Vanuatu, Tonga, Nauru, Palau, Tuvalu, Marshall Islands dan Solomon Islands.
Suara tujuh negara itu disampaikan oleh Menteri Kehakiman dan Pembangunan Masyarakat Vanuatu, Ronald K Warsal saat mendapat giliran untuk berpidato pada segmen ke delapan sidang. “Kami, tujuh negara secara bersama-sama hari ini –dan dengan sebuah pernyataan tertulis bersama yang terpisah — ingin meminta perhatian para anggota yang terhormat atas situasi di Papua,” kata dia membuka pidatonya yang dapat juga disaksikan lewat siaran streaming televisi PBB.
Dalam pidato tersebut, Warsal antara lain mengingatkan kembali berbagai temuan pelanggaran HAM di Papua yang telah dikemukakan berbagai pihak yang mendapat mandat dari Dewan HAM PBB. Di antaranya adalah surat bersama yang diterbitkan oleh Pelapor Khusus PBB tentang Perlindungan dan Promosi dan Hak Kebebasan Berekspresi, Berkumpul dan Berserikat secara Damai, Pelapor Khusus PBB untuk Hak Penduduk Asli, Pelapor Khusus PBB tentang Eksekusi Ekstrajudisial dan Pelapor Khusus PBB tentang Penyiksaan dan Kekerasan.
Lebih jauh ia juga menekankan bahwa Komnas HAM Indonesia telah mengumpulkan bukti-bukti pelanggaran HAM oleh militer Indonesia di tiga area di Papua yaitu Wasior, Wamena dan Paniai. Menurut dia, Komnas HAM telah mengungkapkan kasus pelanggaran HAM di dua tempat sebagai kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan dan dapat dihukum berdasarkan hukum Indonesia maupun hukum internasional.
Ditekankan pula bahwa bahwa pelanggaran HAM masih terus berlangsung hingga saat ini dan pemerintah RI dinilai gagal mencegahnya.
Tidak hanya itu, Warsal juga mengatakan bahwa pemerintah RI telah secara konsisten gagal memasukkan laporan peirodik tentang situasi HAM di Papua, yang sangat esensial bagi sekretariat PBB dan negara anggota untuk memonitor keadaan HAM di seluruh dunia.
Oleh karena itu, ketujuh negara tersebut meminta Dewan HAM PBB menugaskan Komisioner Tinggi HAM PBB membuat laporan konsolidasi tentang situasi aktual di Papua.
Mereka meminta agar laporan tersebut memuat informasi tentang pelanggaran HAM yang telah ada pada perjanjian-perjanjian, prosedur khusus dan Universal Periodic Review (tinjauan berkala universal) serta laporan dari organisasi internasional, regional maupun LSM.
Laporan itu, kata dia, juga harus secara detail mencatat berbagai hak bagi rakyat Papua, yang ada dalam hukum HAM internasional, termasuk hak untuk menentukan nasib sendiri.
“Laporan itu harus membuat relomendasi untuk tindakan segera dalam upaya menghentikan pelanggaran HAM yang sudah disebutkan oleh berbagai Special Procedures dan badan lainnya sebelumnya.”
Untuk membuat laporan tersebut, tujuh negara Pasifik juga meminta agar pemerintah Indonesia menjamin akses kepada Komisioner PBB untuk menemui siapa pun di Papua dalam rangka membuat laporan tersebut.
Editor : Eben E. Siadari
A regional meeting to consider key Pacific priorities and responsibilities for advancing commitments under international and regional policy frameworks on climate change migration and displacement opened in Suva today.
Senior Pacific island government officials from Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, Republic of the Marshall Islands, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu, as well as representatives of development partners and various experts will be discussing issues at the three-day meeting such as:
The meeting is a key activity of the European Union funded PCCM project which aims to develop the capacity of Pacific Island countries to address the impacts of climate change on migration through well-managed, rights-based migration schemes and policy frameworks, supported by comprehensive research and knowledge building.
It is a joint collaboration between the European Union funded Pacific Climate Change Migration Project (PCCM) implemented by the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP), the International Labour Organisation (ILO), the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat (PIFS) with support from International Organisation for Migration (IOM) and the United Nations University (UNU).
‘Highly disruptive’
Delivering the keynote address at the opening of the meeting, Tuvalu Prime Minister Enele Sosene Sopoaga said: “Climate change displacement and unplanned relocation are highly disruptive to livelihoods, culture and society and require proper, well-planned interventions to support people in their efforts to adapt to the challenges, particularly in securing access to decent livelihoods.
“Maintaining sovereignty, self-determination, cultural identity and territorial rights are of primary concern to Pacific Islanders in any form of climate change-related migration.
“The international response must also include adequate strategies to deal with persons displaced because of climate change, and their human rights must be protected.”
Speaking on behalf of the European Union, Christoph Wagner said: “It is clear that climate change, and the impact climate change has on the environment, will become an increasingly important driver of migration from rural to urban areas within Pacific island countries and to other countries.
“The European Union is supporting the PCCM project to help prepare our partner countries for migration. Those who are going to be leaving their countries, either temporarily or on a permanent basis, need assistance from their governments, Pacific regional organisations and development partners.
“We also want to help those Pacific island countries who are going to be receiving migrants to maximise the opportunities that the additional labour, expertise and experience can offer.”
Collective strategy
Dame Meg Taylor, Secretary-General of the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, said: “The movement of people in the Pacific due to the effects of climate change is sadly a growing issue that needs our collective attention.
“The region must come together and work out a strategy for how to best ensure that the rights and wellbeing of our Pacific sisters and brothers who are facing displacement and relocation are protected and nurtured. This must include those who do not want to move”
The UN Resident Coordinator for the Pacific based in Fiji, Osnat Lubrani said the UN considers this complex issue requires greater attention in the context of the Pacific region’s journey to achieve the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda.
The head of UNESCAP Pacific Office, Iosefa Maiava, noted that the need to address climate change and mobility issues is recognised in the newly-adopted Framework for Resilient Development in the Pacific (FRDP) by Pacific leaders.
The regional meeting will build on existing global and regional policy directions to promote alignment and coherence, including the FRDP, the Paris Agreement, the Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage (WIM), the Samoa Pathway and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
Debbie Singh is Pacific communications specialist for the UNESCAP Pacific Climate Change and Migration Project.
“It is a great honour to speak at this Regional Meeting on Climate Change and Migration in the Pacific. I am particularly pleased to be invited to speak at this Meeting, as the issue of climate change and migration is very present in our minds.
At the World Humanitarian Summit in Turkey earlier this year, I called for a UN General Assembly resolution to commence work to develop a legal regime to protect people displaced by the impacts of climate change. The problem of people displaced by climate change is a growing global problem. Recent studies suggest that over the last 7 years, an average of 62,000 people have been displaced by climate related events, every day. These people are not refugees as defined under the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees as they have not suffered political persecution.
So we need to find a way of guaranteeing climate change displaced people basic rights under international law. The Tuvalu government has drafted a UN General Assembly resolution and I hope copies can be made available at this meeting so that we can receive feedback on this proposal.
I have no doubt that this will not be an easy campaign; but it has to be done. I believe that with your support; the team work and navigating together through the regional and United Nations forest of processes would no doubt will result in a good outcome.
At this juncture I would like to make it very clear that it is very important that we differentiate between migration due to employment and economic opportunities and migration due to the effects of climate change, as these are totally different issues altogether and require different approaches to address them. I believe that today’s meeting will provide more concrete understanding on migration and climate change.
As people in this region know very well, the issue of migration, refugees and displaced people touches on very sensitive issues. In this context we are very aware of the tragedy and suffering that surrounds the migration policies of some of our regional neighbours.
For this reason alone, this regional meeting is very timely. I understand that it is the culmination of activities and lessons learned from the Pacific Climate Change and Migration Project. I want congratulate the European Union for taking up this initiative in the Pacific region. I also want to thank UNESCAP and the International Labour Organisation for their role in implementing this initiative.
I understand that this meeting will build on existing work under the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, the Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage, the Pacific Island Forum Leaders Communiques, the Framework for Pacific Regionalism and other international and regional initiatives. Its purpose is to identify key priorities and responsibilities for advancing commitments under key international and regional policy frameworks concerning climate change migration and displacement.
It’s very important that we have this discussion on migration and climate change in a sensible and forward thinking manner. Climate change displacement and unplanned relocation are highly disruptive to livelihoods, culture and society; and require proper, well-planned interventions to support people in their efforts to adapt to the challenges.
While we talk of migration, we should not give the impression that people want to leave their homelands. Maintaining sovereignty, self-determination, cultural identity and territorial rights are of primary concern to Pacific Islanders in any form of climate change-related. Forced displacement is a last option.
There is no chance that I as a Leader of an Atoll nation who is at the fore front of climate change, could accept a tag or a label of a climate change refugee. All of us gathered here today should strive to do all we can to protect and save our atoll islands from drowning due to the effects of climate change and sea level rise.
Nevertheless migration is an option for many Pacific islanders. Many Pacific island countries have a proud history of labour mobility. In Tuvalu’s case this labour mobility issue is always focusing on providing employment and economic opportunities, hence we have merchant seamen working on ships all over the world. We have students studying in Cuba to become doctors and others studying in Taiwan and Morocco to become engineers. We live in a truly globalised world. So we need to plan for migration as an economic option and at the same time, plan to address climate change displacement.
I certainly hope that this meeting will come forward with a clear set of strategies to address migration issues. As a start, we must develop regional arrangements for greater labour mobility. We should also be expanding the Pacific Access category visa system. I understand the World Bank released a report earlier this year calling on Australia to introduce an Australian Pacific Access category visa. I certainly hope that Australia carefully considers this. While we welcome the system of temporary visas for fruit pickers, it is no substitute for a more permanent arrangement.
Saying that, guaranteeing a safe future for our citizens must be our first priority. We must build strategies to adapt to the impacts of climate change and find ways of building back better after climate related disasters have struck.
In Tuvalu’s case, my government has enacted legislation to create a climate change and disaster survival fund as a means of ensuring that funds are set aside for when they are needed. The 36 million US Dollars GCF approved project on Coastal Adaptation, contributes to our efforts in holistically building Tuvalu resilience against the effects of climate change.
My government has also proposed a Pacific Climate Change Insurance Facility as a means of providing support to countries in our region after a climate related disasters. This is a further step to building our own resilience and I hope that all of you will support this long-needed initiative.
One last point, there is a dire need for effective coordination at all levels. You will agree with me the sudden plethora of interests in climate change, which is inundating SIDS/SIS. So let us also coordinate better internally, regionally, and globally.
So I look forward to hearing about the outcomes of this meeting. I certainly hope that it comes forward with a regional action plan that will deliver concrete option to address climate change and migration.
Finally I wish to reiterate my gratitude to the European Union for supporting this initiative and certainly hope that the EU will continue to engage in this critical issue.”
I thank you. Tuvalu Mo Te Atua.
‘Being a young, female Indonesian myself, I expected myself to celebrate Nara Masista Rakhmatia’s UN General Assembly speech. Instead, I was gravely disappointed.’
Several weeks ago, a young, female diplomat named Nara Masista Rakhmatia made a speech that dazzled the Indonesian public. In a video that went viral, she denied accusations from 7 Pacific country leaders about human rights abuse in Indonesia’s Papua province at the 71st Session of United Nations General Assembly in New York last September.
She further shamed their attempt to interfere with Indonesia’s sovereignty. The video gathered over 188 thousand views on Facebook, along with hundreds of comments from Indonesian citizens expressing how proud they are of Nara’s intelligence and bravery to ‘teach those foreign country leaders about how to respect Indonesia’—especially given her young age.
In their remarks, delegations from Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Nauru, the Marshall Islands, Tuvalu, and Tonga criticized Indonesia’s human rights records in Papua. Nara in particular argued that these sentiments were largely misplaced, given that the main agenda of the Assembly was Sustainable Development Goals and a global response to climate change.
Furthermore, she claimed, these countries needed to self-reflect upon their own domestic issues before pointing their fingers to how Indonesia handles the province’s push for self-determination.
Being a young, female Indonesian myself, I expected myself to celebrate her speech. I should have been inspired and impressed by how sharp she was. Instead, as someone who studied International Relations and currently a Public Policy student, I was gravely disappointed.
Disappointed
First of all, Nara based her entire rebuttal on the obsolete definition of the sovereignty principle. While sovereignty is a crucial foundation to the United Nations, since 2005, the international community has extended its definition under the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ commitment, which stipulates that absolute sovereignty does not hold when a government fails to protect its people.
Although the concept was developed specifically as a framework for humanitarian interventions to prevent atrocity crimes and this situation has arguably not brought us that far, this core principle stands.
In other words, should these allegations stand, it is justifiable for the international community to express their concerns about the possibility of ongoing crimes against humanity.
Therefore, it is more urgent to argue about whether Indonesia has indeed violated human rights in Papua.
The speech failed to address, for example, the progress of President Joko Widodo’s promise to investigate the killing of 4 Papuan high-school students in 2014. No reports have been made available to the public around this and other pressing matters such as killings in Wasior in 2001 and Wamena in 2003. A recent op-ed contended that these were not ordinary crimes but crimes against humanity.
Nara also did not talk about the 4,587 individuals who were arrested by the police for expressing their political views in regards with the Papua issue in 13 cities, as documented by the Jakarta Legal Aid Institute.
On top of that, she spent a lot of air time explaining how Indonesia has been a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council for significantly longer periods compared to these 6 countries. She leveraged that membership status as a validation to the country’s ‘human rights commitment’.
This is a logical fallacy. In reality, Jakarta continues to maintain restrictions for human rights organizations such as Amnesty International and International Committee of the Red Cross from entering Papua. Becoming a member of a certain council hardly proved these allegations wrong. If anything, it should become an additional reason as to why the country needs to feel embarrassed about the hypocrisy at home.
Some of my friends asked me to give Nara a break. After all, she was only representing her country. If anything, such response is far from surprising and rather predictable. Throwing in phrases like ‘territorial integrity’ and ‘sovereignty’ sounds like something that any other country would do in responding to such accusations at an international stage.
However, the issue goes beyond this. Even if we look past the messenger, the problem in Papua still exists, and the fact that the government of Indonesian preferred not to deal with it should alert us.
Thus what added to my disappointment was how mainstream media in Indonesia covered the issue. Instead of playing its role as the ‘fourth pillar’ that criticizes the government, many news outlets practically made her a heroine by echoing the flattering Facebook comments and further highlightsing how she looks.
It seems like nationalist sentiments—fueled by an ‘external threat’ from these Pacific countries’—distracted them from addressing the elephant in the room. Except for The Jakarta Post, most news seemed to avoid highlighting these allegations and instead talked about how beautiful and brave Nara was. In effect, social media discussions regarding this event rotated primarily around unproductive debates about her physical qualities.
Although concerns regarding Papua were expressed by only 7 small Pacific countries now, how will Indonesia—represented by Nara or anyone else—respond in the future, should they come from other geopolitically more powerful countries?
President Joko Widodo’s administration must know by now that something has to be done in Papua, and it should be done immediately.
Surely, we could not just continue deflecting every question with a ‘sovereignty’ card. – Rappler.com
Andhyta Firselly Utami graduated from International Relations program at Universitas Indonesia, and is currently a Master of Public Policy candidate at Harvard Kennedy School.
Liza Yosephine, The Jakarta Post
apua’s place in the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia is not up for negotiation, a minister has said in a response to allegations of human rights violations conveyed during a recent UN General Assembly (UNGA) session.
“In diplomacy, several things are negotiable but some others cannot be negotiated. When it comes to the issue of support toward separatism, I think not only diplomats, but all of us, know that this is a point where we should stop,” Foreign Minister Retno LP Marsudi told journalists on Tuesday.
The minister was responding to criticism of Indonesia’s strong response to six Pacific Island heads of state, who conveyed their allegations of human rights violations in Papua and West Papua provinces during the recent UNGA in New York.
Retno asserted that Indonesia strongly upheld the principles of the UN Charter, which include non-interference and respecting other nations’ sovereignty. At the same time, she continued, Indonesia was committed to maintaining friendly relations with all countries.
“We will never act with hostility toward other countries and will continue to engage with them. But, again, when it comes to the issue of sovereignty and non-interference, once those [principles] are violated, that’s where we will stop [negotiating],” Retno said.
Nara Masista Rakhmatia, the second secretary at Indonesia’s permanent mission to the UN, called speeches made by the heads of state of the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Nauru, Marshall Islands, Tuvalu and Tonga “interference” and said they aimed to encourage separatism in the two provinces.
The reported failure of Papua’s special autonomy has led to a rise of support for Papuan independence movements across the globe, particularly from Pacific nations. (ebf)
Budi Hernawan, Jakarta | Thu, September 29 2016 | 08:07 am
In an unprecedented move, seven UN member states from the Pacific raised their concerted voices on Papua during the prestigious 71st session of the UN General Assembly in New York this week.
Nauru started the intervention by highlighting the issue of human rights violations in Papua, followed by a newcomer in the discourse of Papua: the Marshall Islands.
Vanuatu, Tuvalu and the Solomon Islands followed suit and went one step further by specifically highlighting the issue of the right to self-determination for Papuans. Tonga emphasised the gravity of the problem and Palau, another novice, called for constructive dialogue with Indonesia to solve the Papua issue.
This was a historic moment for us as we have never had such unified high-profile intervention when it comes to the issue of Papua at the UN. Perhaps the only lone ranger used to be Vanuatu, which tried to break the silence of the UN fora.
This week’s debate at the UN General Assembly might remind us of a similar but much more colorful debate on Papua at the assembly in 1969, when the forum decided to close the chapter on Papua by accepting the result of the Act of Free Choice.
If in 1969 some African countries expressed opposition to the assembly’s decision to adopt the result of the 1969 Act of Free Choice for Papuans, today the Pacific nations are taking the lead.
Indonesia’s response, however, was highly predictable. Repeating the slogan of territorial integrity and sovereignty, the government’s response unfortunately does not provide us with facts and evidence of the improvement in the human rights situation in Papua.
It may be remembered that President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo promised to solve the killing of four high-school students in Paniai on Dec. 8, 2014. The investigation into the case has been delayed for almost two years and we have not seen much progress.
The families of the victims recall that at least eight government institutions sent their respective fact-finding team to interview victims on the ground and personnel of the Army, the Papua Police, the National Police, the Air Force, the Papua Legislative Council, the Witness and Victim Protection Agency (LPSK), the Office of Coordinating Security, Political and Legal Affairs Minister, the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM). None of these teams, however, has ever published their report for public consumption.
Similarly, the dossiers on the Wasior killings of 2001 and the Wamena case of 2003 have been pending for more than a decade at the Attorney General once Komnas HAM finished its investigation. These were not ordinary crimes but crimes against humanity, one of the most serious crimes punishable by Indonesian and international law. Unfortunately, both Komnas HAM and the Attorney General’s Office have argued over evidence and procedure for years.
Komnas HAM insists that it has provided conclusive evidence and has followed proper procedure. On the other hand, the Attorney General’s Office has argued that Komnas HAM has not met the requirement of a pro-justice investigation as investigators did not take an oath as required by the Criminal Law Procedures Code. Both institutions have overlooked the fact that victims continue to suffer.
Memories are still fresh on the surge in the arrests of Papuan youth when they took to the streets to express their opinions in public despite a constitutional guarantee of the right to do so.
The Jakarta Legal Aid Institute (LBH Jakarta) documented that at least 4,587 individuals, men and women, were arrested by the police for expressing their political views in 13 cities, namely Dekai, Fakfak, Jakarta, Jayapura, Kaimana, Makassar, Malang, Manado Manokwari, Merauke, Sentani, Wamena and Yogyakarta.
While most of the arrestees were released within 24 hours, the deployment of police in 13 jurisdictions across the country would not have been possible without the blessing of the National Police top brass.
While we were grappling with human rights conditions in Papua, we were shocked by the President’s decision to appoint Gen. (ret) Wiranto as the coordinating political, legal and security affairs minister.
In February 2003, the UN-sponsored Special Panels for Serious Crimes of the Dili District Court, Timor Leste, indicted Gen. Wiranto, then the Indonesian defense and security minister and Indonesian Armed Forces (ABRI) commander for crimes against humanity in connection with the events in Timor Leste in 1999.
As we were yet to recover from the President’s unfathomable choice, we were presented with another unprecedented decision when the Indonesian Military TNI chief named Maj. Gen. Hartomo to lead the military’s Strategic Intelligence Agency (BAIS).
Hartomo was the commander of the Army’s Special Forces (Kopassus) Tribuana X unit assigned to Papua when Theys Eluay was murdered. Hartomo and six other Kopassus officers were charged with Theys’ murder on National Heroes Day in 2001. He and his team were found guilty and sentenced to three years in prison by the Surabaya Military Court and discharged from the Army.
These all are simple facts that tell us the way our government commits to human rights in Papua and elsewhere, which the Indonesian delegation to the UN General Assembly describes as “robust and active”.
______________________________
The writer, who obtained his PhD from the Australian National University, lectures in international relations at the Paramadina Graduate School of Diplomacy, Jakarta.
Penulis: Reporter Satuharapan 19:41 WIB | Senin, 05 September 2016
HONOLULU, SATUHARAPAN.COM – Para diplomat Indonesia tampaknya belum dapat tidur nyenyak. Gerakan yang menyuarakan penentuan nasib sendiri Papua belakangan ini menggeliat lagi.
Setelah sempat melemah pasca tertahannya permohonan United Liberation Movement for West Papua (UMWP) untuk bergabung dengan Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG), gerakan ini mencoba bangkit. Kali ini melalui apa yang disebut sebagai Pacific Coalition for West Papua (PCWP) atau Koalisi Pasifik untuk Papua Barat.
Menurut siaran pers dari sekretariat pers PM Kepulauan Solomon, PCWP yang diprakarsai oleh PM negara tersebut, Manasye Sogavare, yang juga ketua MSG (Melanesian Spearhead Group), terbentuk beberapa bulan lalu di Honiara, ibukota Kepulauan Solomon. PCWP terbentuk pasca terhentinya ULMWP bergabung ke MSG.
Menurut penjelasan resmi Sogavare, PCWP bertujuan untuk menggalang dukungan negara-negara Pasifik untuk menyerukan Perserikatan Bangsa-bangsa (PBB) melakukan intervensi atas pelanggaran HAM dan penentuan nasib sendiri bagi Papua. Anggota awal PCWP terdiri dari Pemerintah Kepulauan Solomon, Pemerintah Vanuatu, kelompok Front de Liberation Nationale Kanak et Socialiste(FLNKS), ULMWP dan kelompok Lembaga Swadaya Masyarakat (LSM) Pasifik, Pacific Islands Association Non Govermental Organization (PIANGO).
Dalam pertemuan mereka di Aloha, Honolulu, pada hari Jumat lalu (2/9), dukungan terhadap koalisi ini bertambah dengan bergabungnya dua negara Pasifik lain, yaitu Pemerintah Tuvalu dan Republik Nauru. Kedua negara ini masing-masing diwakili oleh Perdana Menteri Tuvalu, Enele Sopoaga dan Duta Besar Nauru untuk PBB, Marlene Moses.
Tidak hanya dua negara ini yang memberikan dukungan. Dua pihak lain juga sudah menunjukkan dukungan, ketika inisiatif ini diperkenalkan di Honiara. Keduanya adalah Kerajaan Tonga dan Republik Kepulauan Marshall. Dukungan kedua negara ini juga telah terkonfirmasi pada Jumat lalu (2/9) dengan kehadiran Perdana Menteri Tonga, Akilisi Pohiva dan Menteri Pekerjaan Umum Republik Kepulauan Marshall, David Paul.
Pada pertemuan di Aloha itu, semua anggota PCWP hadir, kecuali Republik Vanuatu yang tidak mengirimkan wakil. Sekretaris Jenderal Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) –sebuah forum negara-negara Pasifik lain yang keanggotaannya lebih luas dan akan bertemu pekan ini — Dame Meg Taylor, turut pula hadir pada pertemuan tersebut.
Pada pertemuan itu, Sogavere berpidato dan mengatakan negara-negara Pasifik memiliki tugas mengatasi masalah-masalah yang dihadapi Papua, sebagai kerabat terdekat. Dia kembali menekankan bahwa referendum atau ‘menentukan nasib sendiri’ adalah hak Papua, yang sejak 50 tahun terakhir telah dituntut. Hak itu, kata dia, juga merupakan prinsip dasar Piagam PBB.
Ia menekankan bahwa tujuan dari PCWP benar-benar sejalan dengan prinsip-prinsip HAM dan demokrasi, dan semua negara PBB harus mematuhi dan melindunginya.
Di bagian lain, Sogavare mengakui apa yang diinisiasi oleh PCWP bukan tugas yang mudah. Bangsa-bangsa di Pasifik, kata dia, memerlukan pendekatan kolaboratif dan strategis untuk mengantisipasi masalah yang akan datang. “Hanya dengan bekerja secara strategis dan bersama-sama, kita bisa menangani masalah di Papua Barat,” tuturnya.
Sekjen PIF, Dame Taylor, ketika mendapat kesempatan berbicara pada pertemuan itu. mengatakan bahwa pada pertemuan puncak PIF ke-46 di Port Moresby pada tahun 2015, telah diputuskan untuk mengirim tim pencari fakta ke Papua. Namun, kata dia, Pemerintah Indonesia menganggap istilah ‘pencari fakta’ terkesan ofensif.
Dame Taylor mengatakan sampai saat ini pihaknya masih menunggu respon dari Presiden Joko Widodo atas rekomendasi PIF. Ia mengatakan sudah bertemu dengan Ketua PIF yaitu PM Papua Nugini, Peter O’Neil dan juga dengan Presiden Indonesia, Joko Widodo. Proses sedang berjalan untuk memenuhi resolusi PIF, kata dia, dan ia mengharapkan Ketua PIF dan presiden Joko Widodo akan bertemu.
Sementara itu, Sekjen ULMWP, Octovianus Mote mengklaim bahwa ULMWP mewakili gerakan kemerdekaan Papua dan akan terus mengejar hak-hak rakyatnya untuk menentukan nasib sendiri dan semua hak-hak lainya yang tercantum dalam Piagam PBB.
Perdana Menteri Sapoaga dari Tucalu mengatakan negaranya menghargai dan bersimpati sepenuhnya dengan aspirasi dan keinginan rakyat Papua untuk mempunyai hak otonomi sendiri.
Sementara Menteri Republik Kepulauan Marshall mengatakan negaranya melihat masalah Papua dari perspektif kemanusiaan dan masalah kemanusiaan berada di garis depan mereka.
Perwakilan dari FLNKS, Rodrigue Tiavouane, mengatakan bahwa FLNKS mendukung penuh inisiatif PCWP dan strategi yang akan dilaksanakan.
Ia menambahkan bahwa FLNKS juga melalui proses yang sama dalam ‘penentuan hak otonom sendiri’ dimulai dari bergabung dengan MSG lalu ke PIF dan akhinya ke Komite 24 PBB (Komite Khusus Dekolonisasi).
Perdana Menteri Pohiva dari Tonga mengatakan adalah kewajiban moral untuk mengatasi pelanggaran HAM di Papua dengan adanya seruan ‘penentuan nasib sendiri’.
Dia mengatakan pada Sidang Umum PBB ke-70 tahun lalu, ia berbicara tentang tujuan dan pertanggung jawaban pemerintah atas semua hal yang tidak mungkin terwujud tanpa dukungan penuh kepada HAM di daerah konflik di seluruh dunia termasuk di Kepulauan Pasifik.
Sementara itu Duta dari Tuvalu mengatakan adalah penting bahwa masalah Papua akan dibawa ke Komite 24 PBB. Namun ia juga mengatakan apa yang berhasil untuk beberapa orang tidak selalu berhasil pada orang lain.
Anggota PIANGO dari Tonga, Drew Havea mengatakan PIANGO mengakui penderitaan yang dialami rakyat Papua adalah juga penderitaan Pasifik dan mendesak para pemimpin Pasifik untuk bersepakat menghentikan kekerasan di Papua dan selanjutnya menemukan jalur damai ‘menentukan nasib sendiri’. (kav)
Editor : Eben E. Siadari