Sabtu, 19 Maret 2011

Why Papua’s integration history needs straightening

Socratez Sofyan Yoman, Jayapura | Fri, 03/18/2011 9:47 PM | Opinion
A | A | A |
The people of Indonesia outside Papua are clearly confused and keep asking: Why have indigenous Papuans never recognized and accepted the Act of Free Choice (Pepera) of 1969 but have consistently opposed the history of integration of West Papua into Indonesian territory? Do the people of West Papua of Melanesian ethnicity misunderstand Papua’s integration into Indonesia?

These questions are not easy to answer as they involve a long struggle and journey. In the terminology of the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI), it is the Papua road map. The book published by LIPI, titled Papua Road Map: Negotiating the Past, Improving the Present and Securing the Future, contains findings of the root problems actually faced and questioned by the Papuan people so far.

This book has discovered and formulated four basic issues in Papua: (1) the history and political status of Papua; (2) state violence and human rights violations (3) marginalization of indigenous people; (4) discriminative development. This formulation offers room and opportunity to the Papuans and the central government to sit together for negotiation, mediation, communication and dialogue to propose options for a solution with elegance, dignity and equality.

However, in my view, the four problems found by the team of LIPI actually stem from a single root cause only: the history of Papuan integration into Indonesian territory through Pepera 1969, which was carried out in West Papua on the basis of the Indonesian system of consultation. This Indonesian method differed from the New York Agreement of Aug. 15, 1962 signed by the UN, the US, Holland and Indonesia that Pepera 1969 was to be realized through the international mechanism of one man one vote.

In the process of Papuan integration into Indonesia, the Indonesian military played a major and important role before, during and after Pepera 1969. An official telegram from Col. Soepomo, then the Tjenderawasih XVII Regional Military commander, dated Feb. 20, 1967, based on a radiogram of the Army Commander dated Feb. 7, 1967, said in anticipation of the 1969 referendum in West Irian (Papua): “Intensify all activities in relevant fields intensified by utilizing all material and personnel strengths of the Army as well as the other forces. Strictly follow the guideline provided. The 1969 referendum in West Irian must be won, must be won. Strategic and vital materials must be safeguarded. Minimize the loss of our troops by reducing static posts. This letter is an order to be executed. Make coordination in the best possible way.”

Christofelt L. Korua, a retired police officer and eyewitness, said “the Papuans casting their votes in Pepera 1969 were determined by Indonesian officials and while the chosen people were in their rooms they were tightly guarded by Indonesian soldiers and policemen.” (Interview by the writer in Jayapura, Dec. 11, 2002). “On July 14, 1969, Pepera started with 175 consultative council members for Merauke. On the occasion, a large troop of Indonesian soldiers attended…” (Official report of the UN: Annex 1, paragraphs 189-200).

Most members of Pepera 1969 were people coming from Menado, Toraja, Batak, Ambon/Maluku, and Buton. It was proven by the 59 pro-Indonesia statements in the present UN document. The US Ambassador to Indonesia in 1969 said “95 percent of indigenous Papuans wanted to have freedom” and Sudjarwo Tjondronegoro, the Indonesian team leader to the Act of Free Choice, acknowledged “many Papuans might not wish to stay with Indonesia”.

Dr. Fernando Ortiz Sanz, the UN representative supervising the Pepera, in his official report at the UN General Assembly in1969 said “The majority of Papuan people indicated their desire to break away from Indonesia and support the idea of founding a Free Papua State.” (UN Doc. Annex I, A/7723, paragraph, 243, p. 47).

What is clear and certain is that the outcome of Pepera has invited strong criticism and protests that continue today. Some noted historians like J.P. Drooglever and Hans Meijer have also discovered in their research that Pepera was steeped in orchestration so that Papuan people’s free choice ended in falsehood while a group of voters under considerable duress apparently voted to absolutely support Indonesia.

US Congressman Eni F.H. Faleomavaega was among the initiators of an international movement demanding a review of Pepera in Papua. Along with fellow Congressman Donald Payne, Faleomavaega sent a letter to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon in February 2008, requesting a repeat referendum in Papua. Pressures and demands for an assessment of the political status of have also come from the parliaments of Britain, the European Union and Ireland.

Considering such root issues in the history of Papuan integration into Indonesia with all the orchestration and falsehood, it is a necessity to seek a settlement with the prospect of fostering peace, dignity and humanity between indigenous Papuans and the Indonesian government.

Therefore, the idea of a Jakarta-Papua dialogue between the Indonesian government and the indigenous people of Papua should be supported by all components of society. The dialogue of peace in this context should mean an unconditional talk mediated by a neutral third party like the Jakarta-Aceh dialogue that ended decades of rebellion in the western-most province in 2005.

The unconditional talk here should imply a dialogue without speaking of a free Papua and a unitary state of the Republic of Indonesia. It means an honest dialogue on an equal footing that should apply a new framework toward straightening out the history of Papuan integration into Indonesia.

Without the new framework, this paradox will never find a comprehensive and dignified way of resolution. For this reason, the talk should deal with the Papuan problems with pure conscience and clear minds in order to arrive at a settlement that creates lasting peace for the future of Indonesia and indigenous Papuans. The dialogue is an initial step to negotiate the past, improve the present and secure the future of Papuan people.

The writer is chairman of
the Papuan Baptist Church Alliance. 

Kamis, 17 Maret 2011

Jakarta-Papua dialogue needs third-party mediation

Wednesday, 16 March 2011, 2:09 pm
Press Release: West Papua Media Alerts

Bintang Papua, 11 March 2011

Jakarta-Papua dialogue needs third-party mediation

The leaders of a number of churches in Papua have called on the central government to hold a dialogue with indigenous Papuans, stressing that it should be mediated by a neutral third party and held without conditions.

A press release issued by Rev. Benny Giay of the KINGMI Church, Rev Socratez Sofyan Yoman of the Alliance of Baptist Churches in Papua and the deputy chairman of the GKI Synod, Drs Elly D. Doirebo said:
We church leaders in Papua hereby announce to our congregations and to the general public that we have informed the central government about our rejection of OTSUS (Special Autonomy law) for two consecutive weeks (13-18 February and 28 Feb-3 March). We need to convey a number of important facts as follows:

First, the failure of OTSUS has been acknowledged not only by the Papuan people but also by the executive and legislature of the central government, as well as by foreign diplomats and civil society figures who we met in Indonesia who have been paying close attention to the development of the Papuan people.

A number of government functionaries who we met at the centre have blamed government leaders in the Land of Papua as being responsible for the failure of OTSUS.

We do not believe that this is true. The failure of OTSUS reflects the lack of political will and seriousness on the part of the central government to do anything to promote the development of the Papuan people. We made this clear in the Theological Declaration of Papuan Churches on 26 January 2011 when we said that the central government has failed to promote the development and welfare of the indigenous Papuan people.

Second, bearing in mind that all sides recognise that OTSUS has failed, we continue to urge the government at the centre as well as in the Land of Papua to immediately announce that the swearing in of a second-term MRP will be abandoned because it lacks aspiration and has no firm legal basis. We regard the efforts now being made by the central and regional governments to set up a second-term MRP as arrogant and as a move to force through their will which can only intensify the conflicts between the Papuan people and the Indonesian Government.

Third, we continue to be guided by the people of the Lord who continue to urge the Indonesian government to hold a dialogue with the Papuan people facilitated by a neutral third party, without conditions.

We are well aware that the government of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono was successful in the dialogue it held with the Acehnese people and that the same can be achieved with the Papuan people.

Dialogue is the most dignified, peaceful and democratic way which has been widely accepted by the international community as the modal for the resolution of conflicts that have occurred in other parts of the country.

Fourth, we reject the creation of UP4B, the Unit for Accelerating Development in Papua and West Papua, as well as all talk about 'Constructive Communications', the aim of which is to conceal the failure of OTSUS and to obscure the Papuan people's demand for dialogue.

There should be prior consultation with the Papuan people about all measures taken by the state for Papua which should be the result of agreement between the government and the Papuan people.

Fifth, We reject all acts of intimidation and violence perpetrated by the state in order to silence freedom of expression and democracy in the Land of Papua, such as the stabbing of the journalist Banjir Ambarita.

We therefore urge the police to carry out a thorough investigation of that stabbing incident and to proceed with the case through legal channels, in order to give the victim as well as the community in general in the Land of Papua a sense of peace and justice.


Socrates: UU Otsus Solusi Politik Bukan Kesejahteraan

Rabu, 16 Maret 2011 16:35

Socrates: UU Otsus Solusi  Politik Bukan Kesejahteraan

JAYAPURA—Seluruh umat Tuhan di Tanah Papua, terutama orang asli Papua,  perlu mengetahui dan menyadari bahwa tujuan dan misi UU Otonomi Khusus No. 21 Tahun 2001 bagi penduduk orang asli Papua  adalah  solusi politik bukan solusi kesejahteraan. Demikian disampaikan Socratez Sofyan Yoman, Selasa (15/03) kepada Bintang Papua. “Walaupun Otsus adalah penyelesaian menang-menang (win-win solution) tentang status politik Papua dalam wilayah Indonesia tetapi telah gagal total  dilaksanakan di Papua dimana dalam era Otsus tidak ada perlindungan (protection), tidak ada keberpihakan (affirmative action) dan pemberdayaan (empowering),” jelasnya.    Disebutkannya, penyebab kegagalan pelaksanaan UU Otonomi Khusus di Papua adalah Pemerintah Pusat sendiri. Karena, Pemerintah Indonesia tidak mempunyai niat baik untuk penduduk asli Papua.
“Kepentingan Pemerintah di Papua hanya ekonomi, politik dan keamanan. Dalam hal kegagalan total Otonomi Khusus, Pemerintah Provinsi dan kabupaten  di Papua tidak bisa dipersalahkan,” tukasnya. Lebih lanjut dituturkannya, Pemerintah Indonesia harus berhenti menipu, mengkhianati dan merendahkan martabat  penduduk asli Papua dengan kebijakan-kebijakan pembangunan yang tidak berpihak kepada penduduk asli Papua seperti U4PB (Unit Percepatan Pembangunan Papua dan Papua Barat) yang sedang digodok Pemerintah.  
“UP4B  tidak lagi menjadi solusi politik  yang relevan bagi penduduk asli Papua.  Karena, UP4B statusnya lebih rendah daripada UU Otonomi Khusus No. 21 Tahun 2001 yang telah gagal total itu,” imbuhnya.
Menurut Socrates, para diplomat dari berbagai negara sebagai penyandang dana Otsus dan juga pendukung pelaksanaan Otonomi Khusus di Tanah Papua yang ditemui  juga menyatakan bahwa Otonomi Khusus gagal membangun orang asli Papua.  
“Melihat realita dan kelangsungan hidup penduduk asli Papua yang sangat memprihatinkan ini, dalam Sidang Dewan Gereja Reformasi Sedunia sejak tahun 2004 di Akra Ghana dan selanjutnya Sidang Gereja yang sama tahun 2010 di Amerika Serikat  telah mendukung rakyat Papua untuk Penentuan Nasib Sendiri (Self-Determination),” urainya.
Dimana, Socrates menerangkan bahwa keputusan Sidang Gereja-gereja seperti ini tidak bisa diintervensi oleh pemerintah untuk mengubah keputusan itu.  Gereja-gereja tetap dengan konsisten memperjuangkan keadilan, perdamaian, kesamaan derajat sebagai sesama manusia dan menegakkan nilai-nilai kebenaran, kejujuran dan kasih.
“Karena itu jalan penyelesaian masalah status politik Papua yang diterima dari berbagai pihak adalah dialog damai dan jujur antara pemerintah Indonesia dan penduduk asli Papua tanpa syarat yang dimediasi pihak ketiga yang netral,” pungkasnya.
Karena itu, ditambahkannya, sebagai gereja, pihaknya mendukung penuh dialog damai dan menolak UP4B yang tidak menyelesaikan akar persoalan Papua. (dee/don/03)

Minggu, 13 Maret 2011

Socratez : Saatnya Kebenaran Bersuara Di Papua.

JUBI --- Ketua Umum Persekutuan Gereja-Gereja Baptis Papua, Pdt. Socratez Sofyan Yoman, S.Th, mengatakan sudah saatnya rakyat Papua harus berani bersuara untuk sebuah kebenanran di Papua.
"Rakyat Papua jangan pernah takut bersuarakan kebenaran bagi keadilan di Papua," ujar  Socratez Kepada JUBI, Jumat (11/3). Socratez  mengatakan, jika saja rakyat Papua masih terus berdiam diri, dipastikan bisa mematikan seluruh  kretifitas serta potensi-potensi yang ada pada diri orang Papua sendiri. “Tetapi,  jika ketakutan tersebut terus dilawan dengan kebenaran, pasti cepat atau lambat bangsa Papua dapat menjumpai jati dirinya yang selama ini diperjuangkan,” katanya.

Karena itu, dirinya berharap rakyat Papua tetap optimis dalam perjuangan dan memanfaatkan semua potensi yang dimiliki untuk melawan penindasan di atas negeri Papua.  "Semakin rakyat Papua takut, semakin membuka peluang bagi negara Indonesia untuk merajalela di Papua" ujarnya.
Pdt. Socratez Yoman adalah pria kelahiran Distrik Tiom –Wamena 6 Juni 1967 ini, yang sebelumnya telah meluncurkan buku 'Integrasi Belum Selesai" ini mengakui, buku yang pernah ditulis sebelumnya tidak disukai oleh Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia (NKRI), karena membuka aib negara Indonesia di atas tanah Papua, walaupun demikain tetap menyuarakan berbagai persoalan diatas tanah Melanesia dengan cara yang ilmiah.
"Mari ciptakan nasionalisme Papua, jangan lagi terjebak dengan berbagai propaganda yang ingin memecah bela Orang asli Papua, seperti isu gunung dan Pantai" ajak Socratez, saat peluncuran bukunya yang berjudul Otonomi, Pemekeran dan Merdeka, (OPM) di di auditoririum Sekolah Tinggi Theologi Isak Samuel Kiene Jayapura, Papua.  (Yarid AP) 

Socratez Luncurkan Buku "'OPM"

JUBI --- Pendeta Duma Socratez Sofyan Yoman kembali mengeluarkan buku tentang gejolak politik Papua. Buku yang diluncurkan, Jumat, (11/3) diberi judul, "Otonomi, Pemekaran dan Merdeka (OPM) dalam buku itu, Socratez mengurai persoalan demi persoalan yang terjadi Papua.
"Indonesia gagal Meng-Indonesiakan Papua. Sehingga pemerintah NKRI sudah seharusnya menyadari hal tersebut dan segera menyelesaikan persoalan Papua melalui suatu mekanisme yang bermartabat seperti dialog bersama rakyat Papua yang dimediasi oleh pihak ketiga  yang netral,”   tegas Pdt. Duma Socratez Sofyan Yoman, saat membedah buku 'OPM' di Aditorium Sekolah Tinggi Theologia  (STT) Isak Samuel Kijne di Abepura, Jumat (10/3).
Socratez yang juga Ketua Umum Persekutuan Gereja-Gereja Baptis Papua ini, menulis buku OPM setebal 135 halaman.  Socratez mengurai berbagai gejolak politik, seperti penerapan Otonomi  Khusus (Otsus), Pemekaran wilayah dan tak lupa mengulas tentang  Organisasi Papua Merdeka (OPM). "Otsus dan kebijakan pemekaran wilayah di Papua bertujuan untuk meredupkan ideologi Papua merdeka generasi Papua, dan melunturkan perjuangan OPM," nilainya.
Dalam buku itu Socratez juga menulis agar pemerintah Indonesia tidak memecahkan tujuan politik lokal rakyat Papua, dan menghargai kebebasan serta hak demokrasi bagi Orang Asli Papua. "Demokrasi di Papua jangan dibungkam,” katanya.

Untuk menyelesaikan persolan di Papua, ada lima solusi yang ditawarkan Socrates dalam bukunya itu, diantaranya; Pemerintah Indonesia bisa  memberikan kemerdekaan bagi bangsa Papua Barat dengan cara terhormat, sebelum NKRI digugat secara hukum dan dipaksa secara tidak terhormat untuk meninggalkan tanah Papua.
“Karena makna kata merdeka tak sekedar bukan sekedar merdeka dalam kesejahteraan, pendidikan, ekonomi sebagaimana yang ditafsirkan oleh para pejabat NKRI. Merdeka yang dimaksud harga diri dan jati diri rakyat Papua yang ingin menjadi suatu negara yang benar-benar berdaulat sebagi pemilik tanah pusaka Papua.”
Kepada audiens Socratez mengatakan, buku yang ditulisnya itu  merupakan wujud nyata yang dilakukannya dalam menjalankan misi Tuhan untuk membela kebenaran  manusia yang tertindas di Papua.  "Buku OPM ini adalah bentuk kotbah saya, karena saya adalah duta besar Allah di dunia saat ini, mari seluruh pimpinan gereja dan umat Tuhan di Papua, kita saling bergandengan tangan, berdoa dan berjuang bersama-sama untuk mencapai tujuan kita" katanya.
Pdt. Socratez sendiri sebelumnya telah meluncurkan buku ‘Intergrasi Belum Selesai”  yang memilki 118 halaman banyak menceritakan tentang kisah sejarah Penentuan Pendapat Rakyat  (Pepera) 1969 dan mengulas kebenaran sebagaimana tergambar sebelumnya dari buku Papua Road Mapi dan buku. (Yarid AP) 

Sabtu, 12 Maret 2011

Socratez Luncurkan Buku ‘OPM’

Sabtu, 12 Maret 2011 00:32

Pdt. Socratez S Yoman
Pdt. Socratez S Yoman
– Salah satu tokoh asal Pegunungan Tengah Papua, Pdt. Socratez S Yoman yang rajin menyusun buku, Jumat (11/3) kembali meluncurkan buku terbarunya berjudul OPM (Otonomi, Pemekaran dan Merdeka). Buku setebal 136 halaman tersebut diluncurkan di Aula STT GKI Padang Bulan dengan menghadirkan Pdt. Herman Awom,S.Th. Sebelum diakhiri acara peluncuran bukunya yang menggunakan sub judul ‘Saatnya kebenaran bersuara di Tanah Papua’ dan dimoderatori oleh Mathius Murib, Socratez menyatakan bahwa apa yang dilakukannya adalah sebagai salah satu tugasnya sebagai utusan Allah.  “Penyusunan buku ini, hanya untuk melaksanakan tugas sebagai utusan Allah, sebagai malaikat Allah. Jadi nanti kalau menghadap Allah dan dipertanyakan apa yang telah saya lakukan, apakah dinilai salah dan harus masuk neraka, ya saya terima,” ungkapnya sebelum acara do’a. Usai acara peluncuran, Socratez mengatakan kepada Wartawan bahwa buku baru yang diluncurkannya yang dipatok dengan tarif Rp. 30 ribu, tidak dititipkan di toko-toko buku. “Buku ini saya pasarkan melalui anak-anak mahasiswa. Sehingga keuntungannya bisa membantu mereka,” ungkapnya.
Sementara itu, Herman Awom yang diundang untuk mengomentari buku terbaru karya Socratez tersebut mengatakan bahwa nilai atau bobot buku karya Socratez adalah adanya pelarangan peredaran buku-bukunya.
“Mengapa buku-bku itu dilarang oleh Jaksa Agung, karena buku-buku itu memuat pengaman orang Papua, tentang sejarahnya yang dibengkokkan, pengalaman Pepera yang dibengkokkan, kemudian mengenai pelanggaran HAM di Papua yang tidak dituntaskan, kekerasan di Papua,” ungkapnya saat ditemui usai acara peluncuran.
Dikatakan, dari sisi Gereja, ia menulis sebagai pendeta yang berkhutbah melalui tulisannya yang tidak semua gereja berani menulis seperti yang dilakukan Socratez. “Saya melihat bahwa beliau menggunakan satu terminology yang selalu menimbulkan kekerasan OPM,” lanjutnya.
Menurut mantan pimpinan sinode dan sebagai seorang Emiritus, bahwa Socrates menulis sebagai seorang pengkhotbah melalui tulisannya. “Saya melihat bahwa ia memilih jalan itu, berkhotbah dengan cara menulis, supaya orang baca, supaya orang tahu,” jelasnya.(aj/don/03)

Rabu, 09 Maret 2011

Room for improvement in Papua, says visiting leader

March 9, 2011
Dr Boediono ... help for indigenous people. Dr Boediono ... help for indigenous people. Photo: Mosista Pambudi
INDONESIA'S Vice-President, Boediono, has signalled a new drive for reconciliation with the troubled province of Papua, revealing plans to create a new agency to arrange talks with disaffected Papuans and promote prosperity.
In an interview with the Herald, Dr Boediono conceded the central government needed to move beyond its usual preoccupation with economic development and develop new policies for Papua.
''There is room for improvement. That's why the President asked me to look into what can be done in this area,'' said Dr Boediono, who arrives in Australia today for a visit to Perth and Canberra.
Papuan groups, including its major churches and elected Papuan Peoples' Assembly, want a formal dialogue ''without condition'' with the central government and a renegotiation of Papua's special autonomy deal, introduced in 2001 but widely seen as a failure.
But Dr Boediono rejected such a ''bilateral'' dialogue, saying multiparty ''communications'' would be better assisted by a new agency. He said a proposal was being formulated for ''some kind of institution that will be there on the spot, that will look at all the co-ordination and communication and implementation as well''.
It is hoped the agency would be created this year after a special decree by Indonesia's President, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.
Representatives from Papuan civil society groups, local government and the central government would be in the agency on an ''ongoing'' basis as it formulates new policies and development programs.
International donors would be welcome to contribute aid money, but not to play a mediation role as happened in Aceh in 2005 when a peace accord was forged to end decades of bloody separatist insurgency. Even so, the new agency is loosely modelled on the reconstruction and rehabilitation agency known as the BRR that successfully organised the development of Aceh after the devastating tsunami that spurred on the establishment of the pact.
Dr Boediono identified three priorities for Papua: better communication, more affirmative action for indigenous Papuans and ''more openness''.
International human rights groups, aid organisations and foreign journalists are banned from visiting the province without special, and difficult to obtain, permission from Jakarta.
But Dr Boediono offered no firm commitment this would change and also declined to endorse moves to allow Papuans to display their Morning Star flag and other symbols of cultural difference, as is now permitted in Aceh. Under a law passed in 2007, Papuans face up to 10 years in prison for displaying the flag and leaders such as Filep Karma are in jail for doing so.
Asked about reducing the heavy security presence in Papua, Dr Boediono offered no immediate encouragement. ''Let's see the new approach, how it works [first]. The process is to make all these programs effective on the ground and give benefits directly to the communities - that's what is our main aim.''
Socratez Yoman, a prominent figure in Papua's Baptist Church, said the proposed arrangement was inadequate. ''Stop the creation of new bodies, new programs. These won't work as long as dialogue is not held. In the dialogue, Jakarta must abandon its jargon of 'unitary state of Indonesia' and Papuans must abandon our demand for independence,'' he said.