Human
Rights Watch: Human Rights Actions and Pro-Independance
Actions In Irian Jaya December 1998
I. Introduction
In the aftermath of President Soeharto's resignation
in May 1998, political tension in Irian Jaya, Indonesia's
easternmost province, has increased. The province,
called West Papua by supporters of independence,
occupies the western half of the island of New Guinea.
Unlike the rest of Indonesia which gained independence
in 1949, Irian Jaya was under Dutch control until
1963 and only became part of Indonesia after a fraudulent,
U.N.-supervised "Act of Free Choice" in 1969.(1)
Over the last three decades, support for independence,
fueled by resentment of Indonesian rule, loss of
ancestral land to development projects, and the
influx of migrants from elsewhere in the country,
has taken the form of both an armed guerrilla movement,
the Free Papua Movement (Organisasi Papua Merdeka
or OPM), and generally non-violent attempts to raise
the West Papuan flag. Guerrilla activity has led
in most cases to military operations in which civilians
have suffered a wide range of abuses; flag-raisings
and other demonstrations have led to the arrests
of those involved, often on charges of subversion
or rebellion.
When it took office, the government of B.J. Habibie
made initial efforts to recognize and apologize
for the human rights violations that its predecessor
had committed in Irian Jaya. But the willingness
to acknowledge past abuses in general terms was
not accompanied by any concrete measures toward
justice or redress for the victims. Indeed, it took
until October 1998 for the military to declare an
end to the designation of Irian Jaya as a combat
area (daerah operasi militer or DOM). In the meantime,
the independence movement grew stronger, in part
because of the climate of greater political openness,
in part because of a belief that international support
would now be stronger. Students in Irian Jaya also
organized themselves following the model of student
activists in Jakarta and other cities but directed
their demands toward independence rather than Habibie's
removal.
As a consequence, in early July 1998 and again in
October, a series of pro-independence emonstrations
took place across Irian Jaya. The independence demonstrations,
not all wholly peaceful, led to the shooting of
demonstrators by security forces in the provincial
capital, Jayapura, and in the district of Biak;
to arrests in Sorong and Jayawijaya; and to rioting
by angry mobs in Manokwari. One student and one
police intelligence agent died in Jayapura. The
death toll remains unclear in Biak; one person is
known to have died in the local hospital and two
others died shortly after their release from prison.
There were reports of trucks taking away the wounded,
however, and over thirty bodies washed up on the
shore of East Biak in the weeks after the shootings
took place. The government claimed they were victims
of a tsunami that struck neighboring Papua New Guinea;
local people are convinced they were victims of
the shooting. The bodies were buried without autopsy
near the sites where they were found, contributing
to the suspicion of a government cover-up. The trial
of suspects in the Biak demonstrations began on
October 5; the prosecution was expected to rest
its case by mid-December.
In Manokwari, efforts by independence supporters
to raise the West Papuan flag on October 2 were
stopped by police and led to a rampage through the
business district and outlying areas, destroying
many homes and shops. Nineteen people were arrested,
all of whom were later released pending trial. In
Jayapura, a man named Sem Yaru tried to organize
a demonstration on the same day, but it failed after
church leaders urged their followers not to take
part, worried that Yaru was acting as a provocateur.
Yaru and four others were arrested for planning
the abortive demonstration and for helping organize
the July demonstrations. The arrest of a sixth man
in early October, Theys Eluay, caused such public
outrage that all six were eventually released to
house arrest pending trial on October 22. Their
trials were expected to begin in January 1999. But
the Biak and Jayapura demonstrations and deaths
shocked Jakarta into action. In July, the national
parliament sent a fact-finding team to Irian Jaya
to discuss local grievances under the chairmanship
of Abdul Gafur, the deputy speaker; members spent
much of August in the province and concluded that
the independence demands stemmed from human rights
violations, unhappiness with the government-sponsored
transmigration projects, concerns about Islamicization
of a traditionally Christian area, and underrepresentation
of indigenous people in the local government --
and from the "latent influence of the OPM."(2)
In late July, a new organization called Forum for
the Reconciliation of the People of Irian Jaya (FORERI),
composed of church leaders, intellectuals, and nongovernmental
activists, first broached the idea with the parliamentary
fact-finding team of addressing the aspirations
of the Papuan people through a "national dialogue."
The aim would be to discuss possible political solutions
for Irian Jaya, ranging from autonomy to federalism
to independence. On August 1, at a seminar in Jayapura,
leading public figures from Irian Jaya took up the
idea and suggested that the dialogue could be followed
by an international dialogue involving the United
Nations. The Habibie government cautiously welcomed
the idea, and concrete discussions on how to conduct
a national dialogue began in earnest in October.
In mid-November, the dialogue was scheduled to begin
in early 1999, but there was no agreement between
the government, which wanted to restrict the discussion
to autonomy (known as the "O word," otonomi, in
its Indonesian spelling), and many community leaders,
who believed the dialogue could only be meaningful
if independence (the "M word," merdeka) was also
discussed. By late November, as more and more avowedly
pro-independence organizations began to make themselves
heard, the government was suggesting that the dialogue
be pushed back until after the 1999 general elections,
that is, to late 1999 or early 2000. The stated
rationale was that it would be better for the dialogue
to be held with a more representative government.
The not-so-hidden concern may have been that the
issue of independence was all too clearly going
to dominate the agenda.
Recommendations
Human Rights Watch
calls on the Indonesian government:
- to fully investigate the shooting by the
military in Biak. It would be important for
the investigation to include an assessment of
the extent to which the army's actions did or
did not conform to accepted principles of international
law, in particular the U.N. Basic Principles
on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement
Officials.
- to allow full and impartial investigations
into reports that at least ten people believed
to have been present at the demonstrations never
returned home and are feared dead.
- to conduct, in the presence of NGOs and forensic
pathologists, an exhumation of at least some
of the graves of the alleged tsunami victims
so that the cause of death can be conclusively
determined.
- to ensure that full freedom of expression
be permitted in Irian Jaya, including free debate
over the full range of options for Irian Jaya's
future political status. Human Rights Watch
takes no position on what that status should
be but believes that the right to peacefully
express opinions in support of Independence
is fully supported by international human rights
standards.
II. Background to the
Demonstration
Initially, the July demonstrations across the province
were reported to have been sparked by a letter from
several members of the U.S. Congress to President
Habibie, calling, among other things, for a dialogue
on the political status of Irian Jaya and East Timor.
Representative Christopher Smith presented the letter
to Habibie during a visit to Jakarta in late May;
copies of the letter and translations of the text
were widely circulated in Irian Jaya and construed
as American support for the independence of Irian
Jaya. One observer in Biak at the time noted that
photocopy shops were full of people reproducing
the letter, together with other documents relating
to the history of the territory's incorporation
into Indonesia. (3)
The timing of the letter was important, because
in the euphoria following Soeharto's resignation,
anything seemed possible -- demonstrations that
had never been allowed before, discussions on topics
that were previously taboo, even fundamental changes
in the political landscape and a restructuring of
the highly centralized political system of Soeharto's
"New Order" were thinkable for the first time in
recent memory. The accumulated resentment of three
decades of harsh and often discriminatory Indonesian
rule in Irian Jaya and the shared knowledge of how
international politics cheated them out of having
their own country in the 1960s combined to give
many in Irian Jaya a sense that it was time to revisit
the question of independence. While the pro-independence
guerrilla movement OPM has been operating in Irian
Jaya since the 1960s, it is important to underscore
that the desire for self-rule and an end to the
Indonesian presence is widely held among people
who have no connection of any kind to the guerrillas.
The U.S. parliamentarians' letter was almost certainly
a factor in the demonstrations, and it was mentioned
by the leaders of the actions in Jayapura, Sorong,
and Biak, but there were many other possible causes.
Human Rights Watch has obtained a copy of a memo
dated June 25, 1998 and marked "secret." The memo,
sent by the intelligence section of the provincial
police command to all police stations across Irian
Jaya, warns of a rash of OPM-led pro-independence
actions, "in the lead-up to the [anniversary of
the] independence of West Melanesia [sic] on July
1, 1998." The memo was based on a letter that appeared
in the Irian Jaya governor's office on June 2, sent
by the Supreme Military Command of the Front for
the Liberation of West Papua, a name for the top
leadership of the OPM.
According to the memo, the letter included the text
of the proclamation of independence of West Papua
on July 1, 1961(4) and listed the symbols of statehood,
among them, the "morning star" flag that was designed
in 1961 as preparations for independence got underway.
It demanded independence for West Papua before the
year 2000. It recalled the August 15, 1962 "Rome
Agreement" between the Netherlands and Indonesia
where it was agreed that the principle of "one man,
one vote" would be applied in the act of free choice,
and noted how this agreement was violated. The letter
said that on July 1, 1998, in nine districts of
Irian Jaya, the people would take action to demand
independence and secession from Indonesia. For Jayapura,
the letter said, people would gather in Sentani
and march to the provincial parliament building.
At each of these demonstrations, the morning star
flag would be raised.
The police memo then warned that these plans could
be used by elements inside and outside Indonesia
to further destabilize the situation, particularly
in Irian Jaya, and create negative feelings toward
the government. It called on all recipients of the
memo to step up surveillance and monitoring prior
to July 1.
If true, the OPM letter referred to in the memo
could help explain the early July timing of the
flag-raising actions and why these actions took
place in so many different places. But whatever
the OPM may have planned, the fact that its letter
was addressed to Soeharto more than a month after
his resignation does not say much about its access
to information or ability to coordinate a widely
dispersed set of actions. In only one of the July
actions is there clear evidence of OPM involvement,
and that one received no publicity whatsoever --
the raising of a flag on July 6 in Mugi, Jayawijaya
district, by acknowledged OPM leader Daniel Kagoya.
Local activists believe the letter from the OPM
leadership never existed and was manufactured by
the military to make it seem as though Irian Jaya
was still in need of heightened security measures;
an OPM threat would justify a large troop presence
at a time when the public was demanding troop withdrawals.
They point to the military's involvement in a number
of lucrative economic enterprises in the province,
especially timber and mining, and note that a greatly
reduced military presence could have negative economic
implications for some of the commanders involved.(5)
An observer in Biak shortly after the demonstrations
wrote us in relation to the above argument, "Whatever
one makes of the conspiracy theory, it does seem
clear that the interests of Agus Edyono, the Biak
military commander, were advanced by the recent
unrest. The current district head is due to step
down in six months. The flag-raising is being used
as an excuse for appointing a non-Biak from the
armed forces -- the last three have been from the
island -- and Agus Edyono is one of the leading
candidates. The post has been a 'wet one' in recent
years, with all the money flowing in for road-building,
tourism development, and earthquake relief." (6)
Another factor in the demonstrations was the increased
mobilization of local people around calls for the
withdrawal of the Indonesian troops, particularly
after a report released by church leaders in May
citing human rights abuses during counterinsurgency
operations in the central highlands of Irian Jaya.
They also note that one impact of Soeharto's resignation
on May 21 was a belief that the new post-Soeharto
era of political reform should allow more freedom
to voice aspirations for independence. In any case,
the resentment against Indonesia is deep enough
and the post-Soeharto political atmosphere open
enough for a variety of pro-independence expressions
to take place without any links to the guerrillas.
III. Sorong and Jayapura
On July 2, thousands of young people calling themselves
Reform Forum of Students and the People of Sorong
(Forum Reformasi Mahasiswa dan Masyarakat Sorong
Irian Jaya) took part in a pro-indepen-dence demonstration
in front of the district council of Sorong. They
presented nine demands to the council in a document
called "Political Position Statement." The demands
included support for the proclamation of the independence
of West Papua in July 1971; the granting of independence
to West Papua as quickly as possible by President
Habibie; immediate release of West Papuan political
prisoners detained in Kalisosok Prison, Surabaya,
Pamekasan Prison, Madura, and Cipinang Prison, Jakarta;
withdrawal of Indonesian troops and all Indonesian
people from West Papua; observance of the Rome promises
made by former President Soeharto; attention to
the letter from U.S. members of Congress dated May
22, 1998 and the appeal dated May 26, 1998 from
the U.S. Senate to the government of Indonesia regarding
self-determination for the people of West Papua;
review of the U.N.-supervised "Act of Free Choice"
undertaken in 1969 in West Irian; cancelling of
all political statements from Irian Jaya that indicate
that West Papua is under Indonesian administration;
and the immediate dispatch of a team from the National
Human Rights Commission to meet with the demonstrators
in Sorong. When their appeals went unheeded, they
began using violence, burning the district council
building and several stores as well as the car belonging
to the district head. As troops arrived, five people
were reportedly shot; the crowd then attacked the
district military commander, Lt. Col. Nico Obaja
Woru, who had to be hospitalized.
The demonstration that led to the shootings of two
students on July 3 began as students from Cenderawasih
University held an "open forum" (mimbar bebas) on
the campus in Abepura, a suburb of Jayapura. Trouble
broke out after students spotted an intelligence
agent from the local police sitting under a tree.
According to reports, a group of students grabbed
his identity card, confirmed that he was from intelligence,
and began beating him up. They also took his pistol.
The agent, Sergeant Dahlan, was initially listed
in critical condition in a Jayapura hospital, and
one newspaper reported he had died on Saturday.
As word of the beating reached security forces,
trucks full of anti-riot and regular army troops
came into Abepura. Demonstrators were massed outside
the campus on the main road and began throwing stones
at the trucks. It was at this point that troops
fired warning shots, according to the regional military
commander. Soldiers then apparently opened fire
into the crowd. A law student, Steven Suripatti,
and a high school student, Corina Ruth Onim, were
seriously wounded. Suripatti appeared to have been
hit in the head by a regular bullet, although the
military maintained they were using only blanks
and rubber bullets; he later died in a Jayapura
hospital. Ms. Onim, who was shot in the knees, was
expected to recover. She was on the campus of the
Iskijne Technical High School near the university
at the time.
On July 5, Major General Sembiring, the regional
military commander, apologized for the shootings
and promised to investigate them; he said he did
not know who fired the actual shots.
IV. The Biak Demonstration
From July 2 to July 6, when the military opened
fire, the morning star flag flew over the thirty-five-meter-tall
water tower near the harbor in Biak town. (Biak
is the name of the island, the district, and the
district capital.) The demonstration was led by
a Jayapura-based provincial government employee
named Filip (Philip) "Yopy" Karma. Like others,
he had copies of the May 22 letter of the U.S. members
of Congress, interpreted it as support for independence,
and drafted a declaration of independence accordingly.
The flag appeared on the top of the tower on July
2, at about 5:00 a.m. Some seventy-five people gathered
beneath it, shouting freedom slogans, singing songs
and dancing traditional dances. Some had painted
their faces and arms with the morning star symbol,
and as the demonstration continued, many people
in the immediate area joined in. The water tower
is near both the main taxi terminal and a major
market, so the site is one that many people would
pass as part of their daily lives. Small boys reportedly
guarded the area wearing armbands that said "Satgas
[task force] OPM." The demonstration grew to more
than 500 people by one account. (7)
Around 9:00 a.m., the district head of Biak, Amandus
Mansnembra, together with the district military
and police commanders, came, in the words of the
military commander, "to give guidance and direction"
to the demonstrators, but they "did not want to
listen."(8) Instead, they held an open forum as
part of their protest. Yopy Karma appeared as one
of the speakers to voice the aspirations of the
people of Biak and demand independence for the people
of West Papua. Among other things, he read out the
following oath:
1. We, the people of West Papua, pledge to stay
united, no matter what the circumstances, under
the flag of West Papua and the eastern morning star
and pledge to live and die for the flag of West
Papua which has already flown over an independent
Papuan land.
2. We, the people of West Papua, pledge to continue
our struggle to demand our right to independence
and the freedom of all West Papuan prisoners and
detainees held by the government of Indonesia.
3. We, the people of West Papua, pledge to struggle
to uphold the ideal of the independence of West
Papua.
4. We, the people of West Papua, demand the implementation
of the fourth point of the letter from the American
Congress dated May 22, 1998, that is, that the people
of Irian Jaya be given full human rights and a solution
of their political status (independence).
5. We, the people of West Papua, declare that the
Republic of Indonesia cannot interfere in the affairs
of West Papua.
6. We, the people of West Papua, ask that our security
be guaranteed by the United Nations and by no one
else.
7. We, the people of West Papua, ask that the United
Nations give full independence to the state of West
Papua in accordance with the urging of the American
Congress in its letter of May 22, 1998.
8. We, the people of West Papua, will not consider
entering into a dialogue with anyone or any party
except for the United Nations, and we ask that Secretary
General Kofi Annan come here.
9. We, the people of West Papua, will always be
loyal to and will support the flag of West Papua.
10. We, the people of West Papua, hereby state that
no one can take away our independence.
God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, is
witness to this pledge.
Biak, Thursday, July
2, 1998 19:30 (9)
About 4:30 p.m., security forces tried to break
up the demonstration. When the crowd recognized
one intelligence agent there, Police Sergeant Irwan,
who they believed had been infiltrated into the
crowd to cause trouble, they attacked him, knocking
out a few teeth and breaking his leg. This led to
a violent clash between the demonstrators and the
security forces surrounding them. The latter consisted
of a Brimob platoon, a platoon from Infantry Battalion
753, one from KODIM 1702, and one from the Biak
navy post. According to a report prepared by local
activists, thirteen troops were wounded, nine of
them lightly, while two others with serious injuries
were airlifted out of Irian Jaya. Eleven of the
thirteen wounded were from the Biak police. A military
report said twenty-three of the security forces
were wounded, seventeen lightly, three seriously,
and three critically. The troops were eventually
withdrawn around 8:00 p.m.
Economic activity in the area came to a halt because
of the demonstrations. Shops and kiosks in the area
closed down, and trading in the old market ceased
around 5:00 p.m. After about 5:30, the main road
in the town of Biak was virtually empty. According
to the military report on the incident, the demonstrators
had set up blockades around the area, preventing
anyone from reaching the harbor. A ship that was
supposed to dock at 5:00 p.m., the Dobonsolo, was
unable to do so and had to anchor offshore.
Meanwhile, on the same day, on July 2, in the subdistrict
of West Biak, eleven village heads were ordered
by the subdistrict authorities to call a counterdemonstration
at the Numfor district council against the separatist
activities of Yopy Karma. The villages represented
were Mandenderi, Adadikam, Mamoribo, Sopen, Opuri,
Dedifu, Yomdori, Kababur, Warberik, Wasyai, and
Andey. The village heads were all told that to ensure
that the people of West Biak were not branded as
OPM, they had to take part in this action.
Early on July 3, those gathered beneath the water
tower began to hear rumors that there was going
to be a move to break up the demonstration. The
subdistrict authorities, through their meeting with
village heads, reportedly secured an agreement that
there would be two prongs to the attack. A crowd
from West Biak would gather in a housing complex
north of the airport and would go by truck to the
demonstration site. When they got near the gas pumps
in the harbor, they would be let off to attack the
demonstrators. Another group would gather in front
of the guardpost of the air force in front of the
Hotel Sinar Kayu, then would attack from the south.
About 5:30 a.m. on July 3, the village heads were
taken home to gather up residents to be trucked
into Biak, and about 1:00 p.m., seven trucks belonging
to the Karya Kencana Harpindo company brought counterdemonstrators
into the city. They were given a kind of armband
so that if a clash took place with the flag-raisers,
the army would know whom to protect. But no attack
took place; the counterdemonstrators reportedly
chose to act peacefully.
According to the local activists' report, the villagers
were given pro-government banners to hold, and some
expressed reluctance to take part in the counterdemonstration.
According to the military report, 250 people from
thirteen villages sought out local military and
civilian leaders of their own accord to tell them
that they rejected the idea of an independent West
Papua, that they did not want a repetition of the
bitter experience of years past, and that they wanted
nothing more than to work hard and help development
the district of Biak.(10) Human rights organizations
in Jayapura dismissed the military's account as
self-serving.
The pro-independence demonstrators, in the meantime,
hearing that they were going to be attacked, had
prepared themselves with bamboo spears and molotov
cocktails, and cut down trees to block the way into
the demonstration area, according to the report
from local activists. The head of the district council
for Biak, Ayub Sumerta, came and asked Yopy Karma
to take down the flag, but before doing so, he reportedly
took off his hat to honor it. He then invited the
people to come to the district council to discuss
their demands, but they wanted to stay to guard
the flag.
At 1:00 a.m. on July 4, the local military brought
nine village heads together to discuss a strategy
for attack, and both the subdistrict head (camat)
and the subdistrict military commander told the
village heads that each man was responsible for
bringing thirty men into the city. He also told
them that the district commander's instructions
were that each man should bring a weapon of some
sort, whether a spear, a knife, or some other sharp
object.
At 8:00 a.m., negotiations began between the army
and church leaders to try to resolve the situation.
As a result, troops were pulled back from around
the district health clinic, near the water tower,
but the demonstrators refused to leave, saying they
would stay until a representative of Kofi Annan
came or a representative of the U.S. embassy in
Jakarta.
At 2:00 p.m., a Hercules transport plane landed
in Biak with troops from the Trikora regional command,
the regional command based in Ujung Pandang, Sulawesi,
and anti-riot forces from the police mobile brigade.
Shortly thereafter, a group of pastors from the
Irian Jaya Tabernacle Church (GKII) began further
negotiations with the demonstrators, who turned
over the molotov cocktails, spears, and other weapons
they had amassed for self-defense. They pledged
on the Bible, however, to defend the morning star
flag to the death.
On July 5, after Sunday services, villagers from
West Biak were brought to Yomdori, the subdistrict
center, where they stayed overnight before proceeding
on to the city to prepare for the attack. The pastors,
meanwhile, tried unsuccessfully to convince Yopy
Karma to take down the flag.
The long-awaited attack took place at 5:00 a.m.
on July 6. Troops from Battalion 733 Pattimura,
stationed at the air force base at Manuhua aided
local forces, and were reinforced by troops from
two warships, a logistics ship called Waigeo and
another with a registration number of 108. The troops
opened fire from four sides. Witnesses reported
that five civilians who were already on the ground
prone were deliberately shot. By 9:00 a.m., twenty-one
people had been brought to the hospital, one of
whom, Ruben Orboi, died about an hour later in the
hospital's emergency room; he had been shot in the
head. (A month later, his body had still not been
turned over to his family.) Soldiers were all over
the hospital, and a nurse on duty said her superior
was ordered not to say anything about anyone having
died. She also told Human Rights Watch that when
an army truck drew up to the hospital entrance with
some of the wounded, the latter were just pushed
off the truck.(11) She said Yopy Karma's brother,
Costan, was told to jump off the truck even though
his feet and hands were tied. He of course fell
to the ground. Although he was barely conscious,
soldiers forbade the nurses to untie him, but they
did anyway, after pleading with him not to run.
(12)
One young man who was in the crowd when the shooting
started told Human Rights Watch that the army loaded
people on trucks, dead, wounded, and unhurt, and
headed for the outskirts of the town. When they
reached the jungle, he and ten others were let off
the truck, while the remaining wounded and dead
were driven on, to where he had no idea. He was
then picked up with the other survivors and taken
to the navy headquarters, where he was held from
July 6 to July 11 and repeatedly kicked and beaten.
He was not allowed to contact his family, who assumed
he had died, and it was not until he returned home
on July 11 that they knew he was alive. (13)
Additional violence followed the shooting, when
youths from Sorido, armed with molotov cocktails,
set fire to shops owned by immigrants from South
Sulawesi in the area of Kampung Baru, about a mile
from Kampung Baru. The youths were apparently intending
to join the demonstration, but when they saw trucks
taking wounded demonstrators to the hospital, they
turned on the shops instead.
People living near the water tower were taken to
the port area on the day of the attack and were
forced to remain there all day. Anyone who complained
was beaten, according to one written eyewitness
account made available to Human Rights Watch. Of
150 people arrested after the crackdown, nineteen
eventually were charged and tried and as of November
30, 1998, were detained at the Biak district prison.
Their trials began on October 5 and were continuing
at the time this report went to press. All were
charged with rebellion, spreading hatred toward
the government, and assault, under Articles 106,
154, and 170 respectively of the Indonesian criminal
code.
(See Appendix I for list.)
In addition, two young men, Paulus Mamoribo and
Nico Smas, died shortly after being released from
detention, about three weeks after the shootings.
The causes of death are not clear, but in neither
case was an autopsy conducted. Mamoribo, who had
been shot in the hand during the demonstration,
died at his home; Nico Smas collapsed and died while
walking in the street. At least ten others believed
to have taken part in the demonstration never returned
home, but a full accounting of the missing has not
been possible because of the climate of fear that
prevails in Biak as of this writing.
V. Bodies in Biak
In the meantime, thirty-three bodies of men, women,
and children washed up on the shore of East and
North Biak beginning on July 27. The Indonesian
army claimed they were victims of the tsunami that
struck Aitepe, Papua New Guinea on July 16. There
were unconfirmed reports from local people that
some of the bodies had their hands tied behind their
backs, and one was wearing a Golkar T-shirt, giving
rise to the belief that at least some of the bodies
might be those of shooting victims. Activists have
questioned why bodies from the tsunami only showed
up in Biak and nowhere else, whereas there are many
other places along the Irian Jaya coast closer to
Papua New Guinea than Biak. On the other hand, reports
in the local newspaper, the Cenderawasih Pos, quoting
military sources, stated that some of the bodies
were tattooed with marks only found among Papuan
New Guinea natives, and other artifacts including
schoolbooks and a map that washed up with the bodies
suggest strongly that they are tsunami victims.
A medic who helped bury the bodies reported that
one had washed ashore with the remains of a house.
All were buried quickly, however, without proper
autopsies, so the cause of death remains uncertain.
Six bodies, including an adult male, three adult
females, an adolescent girl, and a girl estimated
to be about four years old, were found in East Biak
on July 27 and immediately buried by security forces.
The bodies were in poor condition, but police said
that some were marked with a tattoo that resembled
the letter "w." Nine more bodies washed up the next
day. Of the six found in Amini village, five were
children (three boys and two girls), and one was
an adult woman wearing a shell necklace. A body
of a girl estimated to be about twelve years old
was found in Nyampun, Orwer village, and two other
headless bodies were found on Paidado island, near
the villages of Pasi and Saribra. Among the debris
found linking them to Papua New Guinea, according
to police, were a map, a plastic bag with the motto
"25 Years PNG" and some Papua New Guinean coins
and banknotes. On July 29, the body of an adult
male was found in Yobdi, North Biak, and that of
a young girl was found near Wadibu, East Biak. (14)
Local groups, backed by church leaders, are urging
that the bodies be exhumed so that a full investigation
can proceed. Human Rights Watch supports that demand
but also believes it is critical that a fuller investigation
take place into the shootings themselves. In particular,
investigators should assess whether the Indonesian
army, in firing on the demonstrators, faced a threat
serious enough to warrant the use of lethal force.
U.N.(15) Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms
by Law Enforcement Officials state in Article 14,
"In the dispersal of violent assemblies, law enforcement
officials may use firearms only when less dangerous
means are not practicable and only to the minimum
extent necessary."
VI. Wamena, Jayawijaya
On July 7, the West Papuan flag was raised in front
of the district council building in Wamena, Jayawijaya
district. A month later, between August 6 and 8,
eleven people were arrested and are currently detained
in Wamena. According to the Institute for Human
Rights Studies and Advocacy, a Jayapura-based rights
organization, the acknowledged leader of the demonstration,
Emanuel Menay, was allowed to go free, even though
his role in the flag-raising was witnessed personally
by the regional military commander. All were held
in the Jayawijaya police command until November
1988 when they were transferred to the district
prison as their trials got underway.
(See Appendix I).
VII. Riots in Manokwari
At about 8:30 a.m. on October 2 in Manokwari, a
district of some 150,000 people in western Irian
Jaya, about twenty men lowered the Indonesian flag
outside the district council building and raised
the West Papuan flag in its place. The leader of
the group was a man named Albert Kareth, an employee
of the local campus of Cenderawasih University's
agriculture faculty. They sang hymns and OPM songs,
and some of the men made short speeches. Police
arrived shortly after the flag-raising took place
and surrounded the demonstrators, as crowds began
to gather to see what was happening. At about 10
a.m., the demonstrators entered into negotiations
with the police, who agreed to let the flag fly
for two more hours. The demonstrators, however,
insisted on having it fly until sunset. After two
hours, police approached to cut down the flag, and
the demonstrators, according to one report, tried
to prevent them from doing so with knives.(16) The
police reportedly shot into the air to try to break
up the demonstration, and the crowd began throwing
stones at the police. Violence then erupted, with
the crowd breaking into smaller groups and systematically
stoning, burning, and vandalizing homes and shops
along Manokwari's major streets. Shops owned by
Muslim migrants from other parts of Indonesia, especially
South Sulawesi and Java, were particularly targeted.
As a result of the violence, all economic activity
in the town ceased for the next few days. By October
6, government offices were open, but most stores
remained closed. An ugly confrontation at the main
market between Bugis, the dominant Muslim migrant
group, reportedly hurling epithets at local youths,
and Irianese, armed with iron pipes and knives,
was narrowly averted. By October 8, the town was
functioning more or less normally.
Church leaders who conducted an inquiry questioned
whether the violence was spontaneous but came to
no conclusions, and those arrested in connection
with both the flag-raising and the violence that
followed were eventually released.
VIII. Arrest of Theys
Eluay and the National Dialogue Debate
Just before the Manokwari demonstrations, on September
29 and 30, five men were arrested and accused of
organizing the series of pro-independence demonstrations
that had begun in July. A sixth, They Eluay, a respected
tribal leader (ondofolo), was arrested the next
week, on October 6. All were charged under Article
110 of the criminal code with conspiracy to commit
crimes against national security. The arrests, and
Eluay's in particular, became a major test of how
far the government was willing to go in allowing
free discussion of independence.
The first five men to be arrested, Don Flassy, Rev.
Agustinus Ansanai, Barnabas Yufuwai, Laurence Mehuwe,
and Sem Yaru, were all known in Jayapura as pro-independence
advocates; indeed, led by Don Flassy, secretary
of the provincial government's Planning and Development
Board, all were members of a group called Committee
for an Independent West Papua (Komite Independen
Papua Barat). Sem Yaru was a more controversial
figure: a former OPM member who had been detained
in the late 1980s, Yaru was a civilian employee
of the regional military command and, according
to local sources, widely suspected in the activist
community of having links to the military that went
beyond his job. When, at the end of September, he
circulated flyers calling on people to take part
in a pro-independence demonstration in Jayapura
on October 2, church leaders urged their followers
not to take part, fearing it was a provocation.
The demonstration did not materialize. (Two students,
arrested and briefly detained on October 2 for taking
part in a meeting three days before that police
said was aimed at organizing a pro-independence
rally, wrote in testimonies made available to Human
Rights Watch that in fact, they were meeting to
tell students not to take part in the October 2
demonstration planned by Yaru.)
It was the arrest of Theys Eluay, however, that
sparked a major public reaction. Not only was he
regarded as one of Irian Jaya's elder statesmen,
a man who had been among the few handpicked people
to take part in the 1969 sham "vote" on integration
with Indonesia but who had become an outspoken advocate
of independence. At the time of his arrest, he was
also head of the Customary Council of Irian Jaya,
a government creation, but one composed nonetheless
of influential people, and his words and actions
carried great weight.
Eluay was arrested at his home in Sentani, outside
Jayapura, early in the morning on October 6. When
police came to his home, he told them that the next
day he had planned to be tied up by his own people
as a symbolic gesture and be carried to the police
command where the other five were detained. He was
then planning to offer to be locked up in exchange
for their release. The police rejected the plan
and took him off to the police command, where he
was locked up with the others. He was formally charged
with rebellion on October 7; in addition, police
said he had violated Criminal Code Article 169 about
gathering people together with the intention of
committing a crime and Article 160, inciting people
to violence against the authorities. "He himself
admits that several times he called meetings to
discuss the independence of West Papua and how it
should separate itself from Indonesia," the police
commander said. (17)
Eluay freely admitted meeting with Sem Yaru, whom
he apparently did not regard with the same suspicion
that others did, and with Don Flassy. His lawyers
told the press that during questioning, Eluay made
no effort to hide his belief that Irian Jaya should
be a separate state or that he considered himself
a leader of West Papua. He explained that he had
welcomed integration with Indonesia three decades
ago but that Indonesian practices had convinced
him that independence was the best option for the
Papuan people. "If anyone is ready to be detained
for his opinions, it's Theys Eluay," the lawyer
said.(18) Eluay sent letters from his cell saying
he would continue the struggle for independence
from behind bars; the governor of Irian Jaya responded
by saying he was revoking the decree making Eluay
head of the tribal council.
Eluay's arrest and detention became inextricably
tied to the debate over the idea of a national dialogue
One local newspaper said in mid-October that it
had been flooded with calls, as people rang up to
vent their anger at Eluay's arrest, asking the editors
if it was true that he was arrested as a way of
silencing anyone who did not agree with the government
that a dialogue could only focus on greater autonomy
for Irian Jaya, not independence. The paper noted
the statements of provincial security officials
in response to widespread demands for Eluay's release:
that they would never tolerate any activities that
smacked of rebellion or separatism. But, the editors
asked, it was a real question if detention of independence
advocates was going to suppress the sentiment or
resolve the problem. (19)
Whether or not Eluay and the others were arrested
to suppress debate on independence, the public airing
of the belief that they were, together with the
massive pressure mounted within Irian Jaya, led
to all six men being released on October 22. By
that time, the debate over the dialogue was in full
swing.
That debate bore striking parallels with the dynamics
of tripartite talks among the United Nations, Portugal,
and Indonesia on autonomy for East Timor. As with
East Timor, the Indonesian government indicated
that autonomy in Irian Jaya could not be seen as
a transition step toward independence; not only
was independence not an option, but it was even
banned from discussion. The government maintained
that support for independence was restricted to
a small, if vocal, group of people, and that any
dialogue had to take place on the basis of acceptance
of a unitary Indonesian state.
Freddy Numberi, the governor of Irian Jaya, said
in October that the dialogue would focus on issues
such as injustice, human rights violations, land,
economic autonomy, and retaining a greater share
of earnings from natural resources so that every
child in Irian Jaya could have free schooling and
health care. In an autonomous Irian Jaya, he said,
security, currency, and the court system would continue
to be handled by Jakarta. (20)
Church leaders were among those who argued that
for the dialogue to be an open and honest forum,
there should be no restrictions on content, nor
should the precise contours of autonomy be set beforehand.
Rev. Herman Saut, head of Irian Jaya's largest Protestant
congregation, said in an interview that if limits
were going to be imposed in advance, it would no
longer be a genuine dialogue. Instead, it would
be a repeat of 1969, when the interests of the central
government determined the outcome and local people
had no real say in the matter. In response to suggestions
that the church was seen as backing some of the
pro-independence activities, he said the church
took no sides but wanted to ensure that its followers
understood the full implications of the three possibilities
before them: autonomy, federation, and independence.
He said that independence had widespread support
in the interior of Irian Jaya and wondered aloud
to the journalist whether autonomy would be enough
for people who had suffered so much under three
decades of Indonesian rule. (21)
As the debate was growing more heated and the differences
between the government position and influential
community leaders growing more pronounced, Theys
Eluay used his recovered freedom to begin calling
for a major demonstration throughout the province
on December 1 to commemorate the thirtieth anniversary
of the date the Dutch government promised independence
to what was then known as the territory of West
Irian and the date the West Papuan flag was flown
for the first time. Throughout November, as the
anniversary approached, church leaders as well as
government officials were openly expressing concern
that such a demonstration could only lead to violence
and/or widespread arrests. Eluay called off the
demonstration at the last minute, but not before
troop reinforcements had been sent to all the towns
where demonstrations had taken place before. In
the end, December 1 passed peacefully without either
rallies or crackdowns, but the tension built up
in the preceding weeks has not diminished. Eluay
now says he will not take part in a dialogue; others
in the church, NGO, and university communities,
including some who proposed the notion in the first
place and who initially greeted the government's
offer with something approaching exhilaration, are
increasingly convinced that it will end up as a
Jakarta-engineered initiative with a foreordained
outcome in which local aspirations are ignored.
The fact that government officials were proposing
in late november that the dialogue be postponed
until late 1999 only increased the feeling of disillusionment.
IX. Appendix: Arrests
Since July 1998
1. The Biak Detainees:
All of the following were arrested in connection
with the Biak demonstrations, and all are being
held in Biak prison as their trials proceed.
Drs. Filip (Yopy) Jakob Samuel Karma was
detained on July 6. Aged thirty-nine, he is an employee
of the training and education bureau of the provincial
government; he had studied public administration
and management in Manila. He was also the secretary
for the provincial branch of KORPRI, the civil servants'
association linked to the ruling party, Golkar.
The prosecution charged him with being the leader
of the July demonstration. He was shot in both feet
during his arrest by security forces. After not
being able to see him for over a week after his
arrest, his wife was finally allowed to visit, but
she and other members of the family were experiencing
harassment from officials at least through August
and believed the telephone at the family home in
Jayapura was tapped.
Nelles Sroyer, thirty-eight, is unemployed.
He was accused of leading the crowd in hymns at
the time the flag was raised and of soliciting contributions
from local people to buy food for the demonstrators.
He reportedly gave a statement to police under duress
and was beaten during interrogation on July 7. He
lived in the Asrama Pelayaran, Biak town.
Thonci Wabiser, aged sixty-six, is a retired
policeman. He was accused of leading prayers and
collecting funds from sympathizers during the demonstrations.
He was released into the custody of his family pending
trial but was redetained before the trial began.
Melki Kmur, twenty-five, is a sometime fisherman
from Inggiri village, subdistrict Yendidori, Biak
Numfor, who helped carry the flag to the demonstration.
He was beaten, forced to lie down on his back, and
then walked on by police.
Celsius Raweyai, forty-six, self-employed
as a porter in the Biak airport, he took part in
the singing of the hymn "Onward Christian Soldiers"
as the flag was being raised. He was arrested at
his home on July 6 and reportedly gave a statement
to police under duress. For most of his questioning,
he was not accompanied by a lawyer; a court-appointed
attorney appeared toward the end of his interrogation.
Agustinus Sada, forty-nine, is an unemployed
resident of Biak town. He was previously imprisoned
for the non-political murder of a policeman. He
helped mobilize the crowd at the time of the flag-raising.
Eduard Iwanggin, known as Edu, forty-four,
was released in August into the custody of his family.
He worked as a civil servant involved in traffic
control, Biak town. He was arrested at gunpoint
on July 6 by three members of the mobile police
brigade and one soldier from the regional military
command (KOREM). He was not charged with assault,
unlike most of the others.
Andreas Marsyom, thirty-seven, is a civil
servant in the district government of Yapen Waropen
and is a native of Dobo village, subdistrict Warsa,
North Biak. He was accused of taking part in the
demonstration and leading the singing of "Onward
Christian Soldiers."
Hengky Yosias Wambrauw, twenty-three, is
an unemployed man from Samofa, Biak Numfor, whose
main role during the demonstration was to provide
guitar accompaniment to the singing. He was arrested
on July 6 and gave a statement to police, reportedly
under duress.
Nehemia Ronsumbre, forty-three, is a fisherman
from Paray village, East Biak, who turned himself
in to the police on July 7 and was eventually released
into the custody of his family. He was later redetained
before his trial began in October.
Marinus Ronsumbre, thirty-two, is a fisherman
from Paray, Samofa, East Biak. He was beaten with
a rifle butt and otherwise ill-treated during his
arrest on July 6.
Clemens Ronsumbre, fifty-seven, is a farmer,
Ridge II, Biak Numfor.
Bernardus Mansawan, nineteen, was a taxi
conductor. He was arrested on July 6 but eventually
released into the custody of his family. While being
questioned, he was reportedly ordered to sign a
statement refusing legal counsel.
Lamekh Dimara, twenty-two, is a farmer from
Robuki village, North Biak. He helped provide security
for the demonstration and was shot with a rubber
bullet by security forces. He was charged with rebellion,
spreading hatred, and possession of a sharp weapon
under Emergency Law No.12/1951.
Robert Iwanggin, also known as Roy, thirty-eight,
is unemployed and a resident of Biak town. He helped
make the flag and later turned himself in to police
because he was afraid of the consequences if he
did not. He was charged with rebellion and spreading
hatred.
Inseren Sampari Karma, a housewife, came
to the demonstration only in order to give her brother,
Yopy Karma, a report on their father's health; he
had had an operation several days earlier. Once
there, however, she stayed to help collect funds
and distribute food. A warrant for her arrest was
produced two days after she was detained on July
6. She was eventually released into the custody
of her family.
Djoumunda Costan Karma, Yopy's brother, aged
thirty, was a self-employed resident of Biak town.
He helped make the flag used in the demonstration.
Arrested on July 6, he was only presented with an
arrest warrant several days later. Although the
charges against him do not include assault, they
do include carrying or possessing a sharp weapon
under Emergency Law No.12/1951.
Adrianus Rumbewas, twenty-five, unemployed,
took part in the demonstration and was arrested
on July 9 by members of the district military command.
He is from Inggiri village, subdistrict Yenidori,
Biak Numfor. He was charged with rebellion and spreading
hatred but not with assault.
Nico Rumpaidus, forty-two, is a civil servant
working for the district government's treasury department
(Kantor Pebendaharaan dan Kas Negara). He was present
when the flag used in the demonstration was made.
Originally from Paray village, Samofa subdistrict,
Biak Numfor, he was charged, like Costan Karma,
with violating Emergency Law No.12/1951.
2. The Wamena Arrests
Most of the following people were not shown an arrest
warrant until twenty-four hours after they were
detained, and none was accompanied by a lawyer during
interrogation. All were on trial as of December
1998.
Marinus Muabuay, fifty-eight, retired civil
servant, arrested on August 6. He watched the flag-raising
as an elder in charge.
Yakobus Tanawani, twenty-seven, self-employed,
arrested on August 6. He helped raised the flag.
Soleman Manufandu, thirty-six, a teacher
in a government school. He turned himself in on
August 8; he had been tasked by the flag-raisers
with making banners and the flag, the model for
which was given to him by another one of the accused,
Ishak Windesi.
Ones Pariaribo, twenty-nine, self-employed.
He helped make banners and the flag, and was arrested
without a warrant at the Wamena airport.
Amos Ramanday, forty, civil servant. He was
responsible for mobilizing local people to witness
the flag-raising. He was arrested at his home on
August 6 without a warrant.
Piter Samalo, thirty-seven, self-employed.
He helped Soleman Manufandu and Yakobus Tanawani
in making banners and the flag. He was arrested
at his home on August 7.
Paulus Guiliano Marlo Muabuay, twenty-five,
unemployed. He watched the second flag-raising and
witnessed the agreement to this event by the district
military and civilian officials, members of the
district council, and one journalist (Linda Korwa).
He was arrested on August 8 and was reportedly beaten
by a police captain during interrogation.
Margaretha Wakman, twenty, a contract worker
in the district forestry office in Wamena. She was
a witness to the second flag-raising and was arrested
on August 8.
Jemmy Togotly, seventeen, a high school student,
accused of helping raise the flag. He told local
human rights defenders that in the course of his
interrogation, he was hit with a club eighteen times,
his knees were kicked, and he was kicked in the
head and beaten with a stick. He was also told that
he would be given electric shocks, although they
were in fact not administered.
Isak Windesy, a civil servant who reportedly
worked with Yan Manuel Menay in planning the flag-raising.
3. The Arrests of Pro-Independence
Advocates in Jayapura, late September and October
Immediately following the Manokwari demonstrations,
two students were arrested, Martinus Werimon
and Ronald Tapilatu. Martinus was head of the
student senate at Cendrawasih University, and Ronald
was a student at a Protestant technical high school.
The detention of the two on October 2 sparked a
protest rally by other students at the police station
where they were held, with protestors saying Ronald
and Martinus, like other students, were only playing
their role as a moral voice for the people and that
part of that role was to hold an open forum on campus
where people could say whatever they wanted. In
a meeting with the protesters, in response to questions
about why the two were detained without warrant,
the police chief said it was an intelligence operation,
and those were the procedures. (22)
The six pro-independence
advocates arrested in and around Jayapura were:
1. Theys Eluay, sixty-one, head of the Irian Jaya
Customary Council
2. Drs. Don A.L. Flassy, fifty-three, secretary
of the provincial Planning and Development Board.
3. Rev. Agustinus Ansanai, forty-one, minister.
4. Barnabas Yufuwai, forty-five, civil servant.
5. Laurence Mehuwe, fifty-one, director of the provincial
Planning and Development Board.
6. Semual (Sem) Yaru, thirty-nine, civilian employee
of the regional military command.
Footnotes
to the text on this page >>> |
