By: Zely Ariane*)
I speak on behalf of
Indonesian civil society living outside Papua, who are very much disappointed
for Indonesian government’s approach to Papua. I have to say to Indonesian
government’s representative here that we cannot fool ourselves any longer for
the state of human rights violation in Papua. I have to ask DROI committee of
European Parliament for your attention of the situation in Papua.
Democratization in Indonesia is praised by the world. But we
should know that after 15 years of Indonesian reform, there is no
fundamental change on approach by the government to deal with the Papuan
issues, especially on civil and political rights. Military deployment and
repression coined during the Suharto dictatorship in order to crush pro
independence groups and to secure corporate power is continuing without real
civilian control. A peaceful dialogue as a mean to negotiate and find a
solution and compromise, as proclaimed by President Yudhoyono in 2010 and proposed
by many stakeholders in Papua, is less and less popular within Jakarta’s
administration.
For
Jakarta, dealing with injustice and poverty in Papua is to eradicate, often
arbitrarily labelled pro independence groups and dividing civil society through
intelligence operations, dividing administrative regions against the law and
the consent of the Papuan people, and pouring in money that spurs corruption
and benefits mostly elites and transmigrants. Jakarta’s approach to Papua so
far is widely considered as having failed due to its lack of participatory
design and the focus on elitist economic than rights aspects.
Jakarta’s approach to
Papua today has failed and shouldn’t be continued. The approach is closely tied
to the old development paradigm of seeing Papua people as “enemy” rather than
family. Do not merely blame Papuan elites for the failure of development.
There’s also need to evaluate the policies itself and the way central
government seeing Papua.
The
implementation of special autonomy law (No.21/2001) and the division of the
Papuan Provinces through Presidential decree no.1/2003 have worsened the
Papua-Jakarta relations. Without any participatory evaluation of the current
policies, the government has formed the Unit for the Acceleration of Development
in Papua and West Papua (UP4B) in 2011 and later agreed to the suggestion of
Lucas Enembe, Papua governor, to special
autonomy plus (2013) which merely
means the expansion of the governors’ authority. Democratic rights and
participation are lacking in this process.
Until
today Papua comprises the resource richest provinces but shows the highest
poverty rates and the lowest Human Development Index (HDI) of the country.
Jakarta claims that addressing the economic problem through infrastructure,
health and education sector development would sufficiently address the
grievances of Papuans. However the uncontrolled inflow of development project
funds in the widely military controlled province has only spurred corruption
and widened the gap between rich and poor.
All eyes are on Eastern part of Indonesia nowadays,
and Papua is the star. More investments are expected to go there through the
latest economic investment scheme, the Master plan for Acceleration and Expansion of Indonesia's Economic Development (MP3EI). The European Union as Indonesia’s 4th
largest trading partner after Japan, China and Singapore and as the second
largest investor in the Indonesian economy is likely one of them.
We need to push
Indonesian government to have more political openness. Openness in market
economy should be followed by openness in political approach to conflict.
Dialog is still very much relevant, since it’s never started. EU support and
pressure for dialog is important. And in the mean times military deployment
should be evaluated and monitored, special UN repertoire should be able to pay
visit, human rights defenders and journalists should be protected, political
prisoners should be freed—and ones who got very sick and mentally ill are
priority—and the rights to assemble and organize protest action should be
guaranteed.
A
solution to the conflict and violations in Papua can only be sustainable if it
is drafted in consultation with the majority of the people, civil society
organizations, religious and indigenous groups and leaders, legal provincial
bodies such MRP and DPRP.
Jakarta
is in a position of no or low interest to the proposed Jakarta-Papua dialog for
two reasons: the framework of 'NKRI (Indonesian Unity) not being negotiable'
and an increasing climate hostile to human rights highlighted by the absence of
fair investigation and trial to any human rights violations cases. Wamena and
Wasior human rights violation are two examples of investigated cases of gross
human rights violation by National Human Rights Commission but is in a deadlock
with the Attorney General.
These
are indicators to see the possible change of approach by the central government
to Papua. Even though President Yudhoyono has in the past promised his support
for a dialogue, these statements have so far not substantiated to a process
that Papuans see a progressing.
A growing international concern for the situation in
Papua was voiced at the Universal Periodic Report (UPR) in 2012, and from the
Pacific nations through the Melanesian Spearhead Groups (MSG).
It is therefore important to continue encouraging the
central government side to honour its commitments and to show a visible
progress in resolving the conflict peacefully in light of the upcoming national
elections between April and August 2014.
An end to
human rights violations are the pre-condition to a peaceful and sustainable end
of the conflict in Papua that continues to cause the suffering of civilians.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar