a statement of Cordaid, CMC/ Mensen met een missie and Justitia et Pax - Netherlands Position Paper on West Papua

Transcription

1 200 a statement of Cordaid, CMC/ Mensen met een missie and Justitia et Pax - Netherlands Position Paper on West Papua

2 P o s i t i o n P a p e r o n P a p u a Contents Introduction 4 Our involvement in Papua 5 Analysis of recent developments 8 Variety of Confl ict Sources 12 Signs of Hope: Building a Culture of Peace 15 Various Components of Building Culture of Peace 17 Working towards reconciliation and peace-building 21 JPCMCordaid s position on Papua 23 Sources 25 Colophon 26 3

3 Introduction Under Dutch rule and before de facto becoming part of Indonesia in 1963, Papua was known as Nederlands New Guinea. During the Suharto regime, the province of Papua was known as Irian Jaya. Following the passage of the Special Autonomy Law for Papua in 2001, Irian Jaya was renamed Papua. This decision was greatly significant to the Papuan population. They welcomed it as a sign of recognition of the Papuan people and their existence as a nation. In 2003, the Indonesian government proposed to divide this province into three sections, violating the Special Autonomy Law of At present, Papua is divided into two provinces: the western province of West Irian Jaya and the eastern province of Papua. This position paper uses the term Papua to refer to the entire province as intended by the Special Autonomy Law of Our involvement in Papua Justitia et Pax, CMC and CORDAID (JPCMCordaid) have a long history in developing partnership relations with Papua. In 2005, we celebrated the centenary presence of the Catholic Church in Papua. Our organisations pursue the missionary tradition of promoting the Church s mission of Justice and Peace in Papua. Some of our former colleagues have themselves been working as missionaries in Papua. A personal commitment and involvement to bring and proclaim the Gospel of Peace in Papua itself and other areas stood at the very core of our organisations. In later years, relationships of solidarity evolved into more institutional ones between our organisations and church institutions such as diocesan socioeconomic committees, justice and peace committees, and religious orders and congregations. These institutions were supported in various ways and in various fields, such as in education, health, agriculture, socio-pastoral activities, and social justice. Over the last 6 years we have intensified our joint effort with our partner organisations, the Justice and Peace Commissions in Papua, to promote the concept of Papua Land of Peace (Papua Tanah Damai). The development of the concept Papua Land of Peace was pursued in a number of important meetings (such as the Conference for establishing a Peace Zone in October 2002 and the workshop on Building a Culture of Peace in November 2002). JPCMCordaid supported the workshop of November 2002 and committed ourselves to support capacity building processes to strengthen the work of our partners and their networks in Papua, and to actively engage ourselves in lobby and advocacy work in the Netherlands and Europe. We have further committed ourselves to promote dialogue among the different stakeholders, and to look for ways of reconciliation without neglecting the aim that justice has to be done. This commitment has motivated us to take on an active role in keeping all channels for dialogue alive. Efforts related to building an atmosphere of reconciliation means that we ourselves have to deepen our understanding of what reconciliation in the Papua context really stands for. It cannot be emphasised enough that we cannot achieve this without joining in with our partners in Papua in general, and the Justice and Peace Commissions (SKP Jayapura, Merauke, Sorong-Manokwari, Agats, and recently Timika) and their networks in Papua in particular. 5

4 We believe that social injustice is an institutionalised evil embedded in the social, economic, and political structures around the world. Therefore, networking and collaboration are crucial in addressing social injustice. Within the Church structures, SKP Jayapura has encouraged the four other Catholic dioceses and other Christian denominations in Papua to establish similar offices. Addressing social justice and peace issues require sufficient human and material resources. SKP Jayapura cannot do it alone given the amount of resources needed. Fortunately, it has sister offices in the four other dioceses, namely: Merauke, Agats, Sorong, and recently Timika. Other Christian churches have also taken similar steps, such as setting up institutions within their own circles. These institutions include the Bureau for Justice and Peace of the Christian and Missionary Alliance, and the Bureau for Human Rights and Legal Aid of the Evangelical Christian Church. SKP Jayapura has assisted these churches by providing internships for their staff. Hopefully, these new offices will provide greater assistance to the people through a larger network of services. Of course, there are also links with networks and organisations outside the church structures and with networks of women s organisations such as the women s caucus - a network that was formed in reaction to the violence and oppression that has caused suffering to generations of Papuan women and is a powerful testimony to those determined to work together beyond boundaries of age religion and ethnic backgrounds. Photo: The first catholic church in West Papua in the vicinity of Merauke At the national level, the SKPs are collaborating with several Jakarta-based human rights NGOs with programmes for and/or in Papua, such as ELSHAM and PBHI. At the international level, SKP Jayapura has been closely working with its advocacy partner, Franciscans International, since 2001, especially in the form of lobbying at the UN in Geneva, including its human rights mechanisms, such as the United Nations Human Rights Council. JPCMCordaid collaborates with KerkinAktie (KIA) and ICCO in the Netherlands. We are (founding) members of the faith-based network on West Papua of which JPC runs the secretariat. Other members are Progressio (the former Catholic Institute of International Relations, CIIR) in the United Kingdom and the West Papua Netzwerk in Germany. Peace is ultimately not about structures but about people. Certain structures and mechanisms of peace (juridical, political, economic) are of course necessary and do exist, but they have been derived from nothing other than the accumulated wisdom and experience of innumerable gestures of peace made by men and women throughout history who have kept hope and have not given in to discouragement. Gestures of peace spring from the lives of people who foster peace first of all in their own hearts. They are the work of the heart and of reason in those who are peacemakers (cf. Mt. 5:9). Gestures of peace create a tradition and culture of peace.

5 Analysis of recent developments For anyone who is somewhat familiar with the situation in Papua, it is no secret that the indigenous people of Papua have suffered from frequent use of force and political manipulation. After losing its status as a Dutch colony in 1962, it has become a part of the Indonesian Republic through international political manipulations, dramatically infringing Papua s desire to become an independent country. Although an Act of Free Choice was staged under United Nations supervision in 1969, it left the population with no choice at all. This experience of international treachery has left deep, if not traumatic, marks in the hearts of the indigenous population. This integration has been followed by bitter experiences of being suppressed during the past 38 years, including arbitrary killings, torture and disappearances. In brief, the people feel that they have had enough! The conflicts in Papua run along vertical as well as horizontal lines. The most important conflict is the vertical one between Papua on the one hand and government and army of Indonesia (TNI) on the other. This conflict is essentially about the (power) relationship between the centre (Jakarta) and the periphery (Papua). It is about the right of self-determination and cultural (Papuan) identity and dignity. Since 1969 there has been an open-armed conflict between small groups of Papuan separatists and the Indonesian government and military (TNI). At the same time, there is also a system of structural violence that creates conditions of economic, political, social and cultural injustice for the Papuan population. This structural violence has created unequal power relations and life opportunities. Although being one of the richest provinces in terms of natural resources, Papua has one of Indonesia s highest poverty rates. Not only were the larger part of economic benefits channelled straight to Jakarta and abroad, massive environmental and social damage was done as in the case of PT Freeport s Grasberg gold and copper mine in Mimika. There are also conflicts within Papuan society itself, which run along horizontal lines, such as the conflict between the Papuan population and the immigrants. When Papua was under Dutch rule, Papuans were very much the majority. Today nearly half (48 percent) of the population of 2.4 million people are non-papuans. The latter are migrants brought in by the Indonesian government under the transmigration programme or spontaneous migrants looking for economic benefits. They live in the towns and dominate the economic sphere, reaping the majority of benefits from government programmes and from natural resource exploitation by having access to jobs for skilled and qualified labour. The majority of Papuans live in isolated and remote villages and are marginalised in the towns. Although the majority of migrants are Muslims - as opposed to Papuans who are Christians - the ethnic factor (Papuans versus non-papuans) is perceived to be more important than the religious factor in analysing conflict trends in Papua today. In fact, Christian and Muslim leaders join hands in addressing important justice and peace issues. At the same time, it cannot be ignored that many Papuans identify Islam with the central government in Jakarta and view Islamisation as a threat to their identity and culture. Religion may become a conflict factor in future relationships between Papuans and Non-Papuans as well as among Papuans themselves. In addition, there are conflicts linked with significant cultural and sub-ethnic differences between the more than 250 Papuan sub-ethnic groups themselves, particularly between the highland and coastal tribes. These differences in ethnicity, religion, culture, and socio-economic status have become horizontal conflict lines. If we examine the development over the past eight years, we can differentiate between a number of stages. The picture is more or less as follows: 1. Resurgence stage: in 1998 Papuan community started to break out of their decade long silence. Motivated by the developments on the national level, even Papuans started to demand renewal (reformasi). Long hidden aspirations of the citizens were expressed, the climax being the meeting with President Habibie in February Internal organisation stage: after the meeting with President Habibie, Papuans started gathering in a mass movement. During two grand meetings an organisation was added to the movement. The first of these meetings, the Great Conference (Musyawarah Besar), was held in Sentani in February 2000; the other, the 2nd Papua Congress (Kongres Papua II), was held in Jayapura in May-June Through these two meetings, the aspiratory movement became organised and a dialogue relationship with the Government (President Abdurrahman Wahid) was pioneered. Apparently, the President was quite receptive to the dialogue requested by the representatives of the Papuan community. On 31 December 1999, he even apologised for Indonesia s hard-line approach to Papua. It was under President Wahid that the decentralisation process, for Aceh and Papua meaning special autonomy was further given form. 3. Stage of confrontation between two approaches: after the 2nd Papua Congress (May-June 2000), voices were raised at the Central Government demanding the movement in Papua to be abolished, if necessary through the use of violence. Bloody incidents happened in Abepura, Wamena, Merauke (December 8 9

6 2000). The approach of violence reached its climax in the killing of Theys Eluay (November 2001). In the meantime, President Abdurrahman Wahid was succeeded by Megawati Sukarnoputri (July 2001). In addition, from January 1999 until February 2002, a war was taking place in the Moluccas which had repercussions on developments in Papua. This approach of violence was answered by the effort to enhance an approach for peace. Even though the community suffered from despair as a result of the bloody incidents, a number of trusted organisations were prepared to follow the course of peace and open dialogue. In this framework, two points were developed to: 1. add meaning to the slogan Papua Land of Peace, and 2. formulate a guide for the Special Autonomy for Papua. As mentioned above, the development of the concept Papua Land of Peace was pursued in the Conference for establishing a Peace Zone in October 2002 and the workshop on Building a Culture of Peace in November A special public demonstration was the Procession of Peace (21 September 2002) in Jayapura, in which all important government officials, religious leaders and civil organisations took part. Meanwhile, the Special Autonomy for Papua was clarified by the Papuan intellectual leadership and handed over to the Central Government in October The content of this Special Autonomy was understood as a practical means to realise the desire for Papua as a Land of Peace. 4. The stage of the division: Since , differences of perception are sensed among the Papuans, especially with regard to the Special Autonomy as a means to overcome the conflicts. The differences appear in all fragments of society and have brought about pro and contra parties. This drastically hampers the progress of the implementation of the initial laws of the Special Autonomy and an orderly process of implementation still cannot proceed. The atmosphere became even more chaotic, because of a number of bloody incidents: in Wasior (2001), the murder of Theys (2001), Timika (2002) and Wutung (2002). Then some issues sowed the seeds of fear: the rumour about the formation of the Red and White militias; the role of the TBO (assistant operational forces); the activities of the paramilitary Jihad-fighters (Laskar Jihad); the men with masks; Operation Adil Matoa. It is no wonder that the community became increasingly confused and troubled. In the middle of this disturbance, the Presidential Decree Nr. 1/2003 was suddenly introduced, which further inflamed the atmosphere and forced the people to once again re-determine their position, resulting in a greater division in the local community. In addition to this, violence has been darkening the mood of the community and paralysing Papuan society since April Then there was no voice left which could represent or unite the Papuan people: the government officials are divided amongst themselves. As a clear sign of the frustration of many Papuans, the Special Autonomy (Otsus) was returned to the Indonesian government by the Dewan Adat Papua or the Papuan Customary Council. Amidst the confusion the presidential decision of December 2004, the implementation of a Papuans People s Assembly (MRP, Majelis Rakyat Papua) was finally carried out with its installation on 31 October The MRP is an important part of the Special Autonomy Law. However, there is still much debate about whether this MRP is indeed a sign of hope and true commitment of the Indonesian Government to live up to the Special Autonomy Law. Doubt and mistrust by the Papuans is high, particularly as the province of Papua is still divided in two (Papua and West Irian Jaya). In March 2006, governor elections were organised for both provinces, making dialogue between the MRP and the Indonesian government virtually impossible. It is significant that the Papuan community, including the officials, are gradually feeling surfeited in the face of all these events. Apathy and frustration within the community is surmounting, causing people to be easily influenced to commit acts of violence. Recent evidence of this was witnessed during demonstrations that turned violent in Abepura on 16 March this year. Violence and criminality are on the increase in Papua. Amidst this total paralysis- and this is clearly not the foreign influence mentioned by the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces- the ones who want to play a game in Papua can move freely

7 Variet y of Conf lict Sources According to the view of the religious leaders, as expressed by Bishop Leo Laba Ladjar OFM, the tensions that characterise the current social situation have emerged because of decades of oppression and a suppressed collective memory of abuse (memoria passionis). These tensions are also caused by factors that could easily trigger conflict. Future conflicts could have various sources; some of which are described below: 1 1. Differing Political Aspirations There are differing political aspirations among the Papuan community, particularly concerning the issue of Papua s integration into the unitary state of Indonesia. These different aspirations are yet to be properly reconciled. Meanwhile, the Special Autonomy reform package has not been an adequate response to the aspirations of Papuan communities. In fact, Special Autonomy also has the potential to cause tensions among Papuans themselves. 2. Misuse of Official Status and Authority The contest for (government) positions amid initiatives giving priority to Papuans in recruitment practices could easily become a source of conflict. In addition, the national diseases of corruption, collusion and nepotism (KKN), as well as a project mentality, have spread easily in Papua. 3. Diffuse governance While there is a desire to see governance in Papua placed increasingly under civilian authority, TNI continues to assume a prominent role in governance - and this role becomes more entrenched everyday. TNI appears to operate in a manner removed from civilian authority. It is also clear that the authority of TNI is not exclusive of economic interests and often has its own agenda. TNI is clearly a source of conflict and tension in the community. 4. Suspicion between ethnic and tribal groups A lack of respect for the dignity and rights of human beings is a source of conflict. There are many among us who are yet to fully appreciate others as fellow human beings and deserving of respect on this basis. The status and dignity of a person 1. This is a brief overview of the analysis put forward by Bishop Leo Laba Ladjar OFM (the Bishop of Jayapura) in his keynote speech to the Peace Conference for Papua, October 2002, in Jayapura. is more often measured in consideration of their physical appearance (their skin colour, etc.) or based on their wealth and social status. 5. Suspicion between different religious groups The human instinct to compete and gain the upper hand over rivals can encourage people to call on the help of God/Allah to back them in their race. Throughout history, this narrow perspective of religion has given rise to fanatical views from extreme religious groups that seek not only to be stronger than other religious groups, but to also wipe them out by any means possible. This perspective of religion robs people of faith of their ability to bring about peace. These groups bring about tension and social unrest through the use of violence - irrespective of the fact that violence itself is a disavowal of God/Allah as a manifestation of love and goodness. 6. Socio-economic disparity One of the main potential sources of conflict is the imbalance in levels of socioeconomic welfare among different social strata. While some have a lot - perhaps even much more than they need; others have little or live in continuous poverty. The gap between rich and poor is a form of injustice (a result of some defending their existence without compromise) and this causes disharmony in the relations between people. This imbalance is a potential source of conflict that threatens the prospects for peace. Reflecting on all the developments analysed in the above, it is no exaggeration when Bishop Leo Laba Ladjar OFM concludes that we are all dizzy seven times over. The worries of the religious leaders about these developments come out clearly in the following statement given by the Bishop: We, the religious leaders, feel like spectators at a football match. We sit on the stand and watch how the players play on that field Some run with the ball individually, not minding their fellow players. Some just walk around casually, some even far off the field. There are some who kick the referee. Others stamp the trainer and force him to hand over all the money, so that they can quickly use it in the corners of the field. We just watch from the stand. We shout, reminding them to improve whatever goes wrong and to stick to the rules. Sometimes we loose patience and want to jump onto the field to join the game. But we can t. It is not our business. It is our business to shout, either to support or to reprimand or even to swear. But we feel that our voices are like the voice of the one crying in the desert. Our voices are swallowed by the sand and remain unheard, because the players are enjoying the feeling of chaotic democracy, of drunken power, drunk with projects and dirty money

8 The concrete analysis is very clear. It shows that Papua has developed in the direction of an atmosphere, where not the rules of the game (the law and respecting the basic human rights of every citizen), but private interests, the interests of a group or specific ideology determine the course of events. Papua, it seems, has diverged from the state of law (negara hukum) and it is no wonder hat the Papuans are sad and worried in the face of these developments. Signs of Hope : Building a Culture of Peace Aware of the many sources of conflict (as outlined above), an increasing number of people and organisations have come to believe that the potential for conflict can only be contained if we agree to live together in peace and a spirit of acceptance. What is needed is a culture of peace, as an alternative to the resolution of conflicts through the use of violence. Photo: Budi Hernawan (on the left), A culture of peace cannot be built through talking; it needs concrete action. Moreover, peacebuilding requires extensive effort and political will to address the problems we currently face. These problems are very complex; they relate to socio-cultural, economic and political aspects of life. Yet ultimately, all these issues have a common foundation, the desire of the Papuan people to liberate themselves from all forms of oppression. This concept emerged within an atmosphere rife with tension; the kind of atmosphere that has come to characterise community life in Papua in recent times. For decades, Papuan people have sought to liberate themselves ; struggling to break free from fear and inferiority, and striving to be able to again stand proud with the kind of self-respect that has long been deserved. Different elements of the community have responded to this struggle in different ways: Papuans are relieved to finally break free from their silence and voice their aspirations; non- Papuan communities in Papua, however, have watched these developments with concern. As for the authorities, they feel uneasy and on guard as they regard the new awareness of the Papuan community as an act of opposition, and therefore akin to separatism. There are differing perceptions of the struggle for self-liberation ; both among Papuans themselves and outside observers. But what is apparent to all is that there is an atmosphere in the community that is causing and will cause a kind of tension that could have serious consequences if it is not handled wisely. It is also clear that the increasingly strained social situation cannot be addressed through violence; this would only aggravate tensions that have accumulated over the course of Papuan history. Amid this context emerged the idea of a zone of peace as a way to create conditions conducive to peace, in which all parties concerned could find a way to live together and people could stay calm as they work to resolve the conflicts born of efforts toward self-liberation. director of 14 SKP Jayapura 15

9 Making Papua a Land of Peace 2 is a component of the goal of liberation from oppression. It is an absolute set of conditions that enables people to resolve problems without the use of violence. Therefore, the concept of a land of peace is a social condition, not a geographical area free of violence within a war zone. It should be stressed that the military s understanding of a peace zone is not what was envisaged or hoped for when the idea was first floated. Various Components of Building Culture of Peace As a framework to develop the concept of culture of peacebuilding, the November 2002 meeting in Sentani put forward a number of components that determine whether or not a sense of peace exists among the Papuans. A number of components were brought forward by the Papuans themselves and are paraphrased below. 1. Harmony/unity Papuans make part of a realm of existence that is greater than they themselves. This universe is their home ; a philosophy that is very much respected, instilled and maintained in their traditional belief systems. Today, Papuans feel increasingly removed from their environment: their land, its fauna, and so forth. Respect for the wholeness of the larger realm of existence must be reflected in the management of natural resources, as well as policies to protect and preserve their environment. 2. Communication-information Communication/information is fundamental to any kind of participation in today s world. Incorrect information can only mislead people. Correct information helps people to decide where the truth lies. Any attempt to censor or blur the truth negates efforts to build peace. Obviously, the mass media plays a key role when it comes to information and communication in the community. 3. Sense of security All members of the community have the right to a sense of security, without feeling threatened or facing the risk of arbitrary treatment by any given authority. To this end, law enforcement is crucial and there must be respect for people s basic rights. Achieving a sense of security assumes there is a collective political will to create peace. As long as there are parties lacking a desire for peaceful situation because of fear of losing their opportunities for economic profit or because of their own agenda, people will not feel safe. 2. This is a brief overview of the analysis put forward by Bishop Leo Laba Ladjar OFM (the Bishop of Jayapura) in his keynote speech to the Peace Conference for Papua, October 2002, in Jayapura. 4. Justice and truth Papuans are aware that there are still many things to be fought for, particularly considering that there are many Papuans who still suffer deeply because they have been victims of an ideology or a power game (national and international). The human costs of this have already been too high. There are various strategic and practical steps that can be taken to promote justice and truth, including advocacy, research, efforts to uncover the truth, mediation and negotiation, and so forth

10 5. Tolerance The will to respect each other s uniqueness is a precursor to peace. It is not only just a matter of tolerance - accepting different cultural backgrounds - but also actively respecting the wealth represented in the differences and promoting a sense of unity among all human beings with equal dignity. This assumes an attitude of tolerance; moreover, an attitude of respect for beliefs and views that might be different from their own. They need to fi nd the balance between being open to external values without abandoning their own inherited values.. Self-reliance Papuans want to feel in charge of their own affairs so that they are not merely an object of others agenda or interests. A project mentality and dependency on others generosity undermine their capacity for self-reliance. Many members of the community have lost their self-esteem as they have been used as a pretext for some kind project. Moreover, when this kind of practice becomes entrenched, the community starts seeing themselves as poor and, therefore, in continuous need of help. Self-reliance, as a principle, encourages them to take the initiative, and to work creatively using the kind of resources and capabilities available to them. capable of; the capabilities inherent in their world-view and culture, while also respecting the capacities of others with a different cultural background. There are many aspects of traditional belief systems that they can turn to as strong principles to support or help restore self-confi dence as they also face the realities of the new world. Once lost, self-esteem can be restored in a number of ways, including through the struggle to uphold human rights. 10. Participation In the present situation, participation has particular importance given its signifi cance in relation to governance in Papua. The voices of the people, their concrete aspirations and needs, must be raised so that they can be incorporated in the process of government policy making. This kind of popular participation in decision-making rarely occurred in the past and as a result, Papuans have been inert objects to patterns of development determined by the government. Government policy has been executed simply as the government pleased, and not based on the demands and actual needs of the community. The ten components of Papua Land of Peace Programme:. Welfare: All members of the community should be given the opportunity to develop and have equal access to collective forms of wealth, such as land or other economic opportunities. Similarly, each member of the community deserves the equal right to be healthy and educated. Without equitable community welfare, there will be no peace. The issue of welfare is closely tied to the state of politics and governance in Papua today. 8. Solidarity For the most part, participation depends on a sense of solidarity among members of the community: to what extent people see things as my concern or our concern. The degree to which people have a sense of solidarity is refl ected in these simple expressions. But what we often hear is the reverse of this: It has nothing to do with me or That is your problem, not mine, and other variations of this kind of sentiment. The strength, or weakness, of one s sense of solidarity is evident in the extent to which a person feels I want to be involved, or I want to take part. 9. Recognition and self esteem It is clear that the self-esteem of Papuans has too often been stifl ed or destroyed. As a consequence, people start to see themselves as inferior and primitive. This attitude is borne out of practices of discrimination that have become ingrained over the decades. It is time for Papuans to stand up and show what they are recognition & self esteem togetherness participation welfare harmony/unity selfreliance DAMAI (peace) communication-information of sense securety justice & truth tolerance respect 18 19

11 Brief explanation: When thinking about peace, there are a number of elements that Papuans expect to be part of the daily reality: they want to feel secure, they want to be respected as a person irrespective of their ethnicity; they want to have enough to eat and for other basic needs to be fulfilled, they want to be treated fairly and justly, they want to be recognised as a member of humankind as well as their group (tribal community), they want to be in control over their own lives, and finally they want to live in harmony with nature and all within it with a sense of unity and wholeness. All the components above are significant and can serve as principles in formulating activities and policies in our efforts to support Papuans who want to build a culture of peace. It is true that many of these components are politically loaded, or require action that accords with this. Working towards reconciliation and peace - building Reconciliation is not a neutral ministry and it is not served by neutrality. It is based on a fundamental consideration that human dignity must be accommodated, defended and fought for. Without this consideration as a vital demand, any effort towards reconciliation is bound to fail. This means that the aspiration of a whole people demanding that their dignity and freedom be respected must be accepted as a fact, and not denied or minimised. This aspiration is at the very heart of the people and almost the only thing on their minds at all levels of the community -hence, the urge to talk about the problem of freedom and dignity and to deal with it. Accepting that priority is a first condition needed to keep in touch with the people. In the Papua context it means that we have to opt for getting involved in the process towards being free - we must be involved with and be committed to restoring dignity. How must we define this freedom? For the time being, we propose to articulate the freedom-concept as free from all forms of suppression and oppression. Freedom might be expressed in an independent state or by a federative political status or some other political construction. However, ultimately it is not up to the religious leaders, or JPCMCordaid, to decide upon this. Reconciliation represents a place, the point of encounter where concerns about both the past (memoria passionis) and the future (Papua Land of Peace) can meet. Reconciliation as encounter suggests that space for the acknowledgement of the past and envisioning of the future is the necessary ingredient for reframing the present. The events of 1 December 1961 (nominating representatives of Papuan community in Nieuw Guinea Raad, flying the Morning Star flag beside the Dutch flag, and socialising the national anthem Oh My Land, Papua ), the adoption of the New York Agreement of 1962 as the basis of transfer of Netherlands New Guinea to Indonesia during which the Papuans were excluded from the negotiations, and the Act of Free Choice (PEPERA) in 1969, which actually was an Act Free of Choice, are part and parcel of this memoria passionis. This memory of collective suffering produced a community which was bitterly disappointed and deeply frightened. The Papuans have never felt that their dignity and identity were recognised. Acknowledgement is decisive in reconciliation work. It is one thing to know; 20 21

12 it is quite another thing to acknowledge. Acknowledgement through hearing one another s stories validates experiences and feelings and represents the first step toward restoration of the person and the relationship. At the same time, reconciliation must envision the future in a way that enhances interdependence. Papua: Land of Peace as a social condition seeks to achieve this. A first step towards such a shared future may be to create room and space for storytelling in an accommodating setting. Through storytelling the public can be told the truth. People feel more confident to speak after their suffering has been made public and after institutional (church) support has become clear to them. Truth telling means to pass on the right information. Truth is the longing for acknowledgement of the wrong and the validation of painful loss and experiences. Truth is coupled with Mercy, which articulates the need for acceptance, letting go, and a new beginning. There will be no reconciliation if no justice is done. In this context it is still a very urgent task to push the authorities to handle legal cases, such as Abepura, seriously. Justice represents the search for individual and group rights, for social restructuring, and for restitution. It is linked with building a culture of peace which underscores the need for interdependence, well-being, and security. Building a culture of peace gradually is a key element in both pastoral, developmental, and human rights work of our organisations. We have made a start and the work is still in a very delicate stage, but nevertheless, when we look at our efforts from a peacebuilding point of view we feel proud to report on some achievements over the past few years. Starting in 2002, we attended the meeting on building a culture of peace in Sentani organised by SKP Jayapura, where some 40 representatives from Papuan civil society were present and made a strong commitment to work collectively for Papua Land of Peace as a shared future. We started a process of accompaniment with the Justice and Peace Commissions of Jayapura, Merauke, Sorong-Manokwari, Agats and recently Timika and their networks in capacity building, networking, human rights training and education, lobby and advocacy work. In the Netherlands, we joined hands with KerkinAktie and ICCO to put Papua Land of Peace programme on the agenda with the minister for Overseas Development Cooperation in the context of the meetings of Indonesië Beraad (Indonesia NGO platform). We supported the publication of Dirk Vlasblom s book Papua: a History to present the Papua issue among a broader Dutch public. Last but not least, together with others, we took the initiative to establish a faith-based lobby forum on Papua in Europe and to bring Papua to the attention of the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva. JPCMCordaid s position on Papua In the following position statement we assume the position statement made earlier by Progressio with whom we have closely worked together for many years on Papua and East Timor. For JPCMCordaid, our commitment to human rights and justice compels us to support Papuans in their struggle for justice, peace and human rights. We recognise that the struggle for justice in Papua is not a struggle of the Papuan people alone. International organisations, governments and economic interests share responsibility for the situation in Papua today, and should also be held accountable. Our support for victims of injustice in Papua is not simply solidarity, but awareness of a shared responsibility for the conditions that lead to injustice in West Papua. We recognise the need for action to address these causes of injustice, bring about resolution of the political conflict over Papuan sovereignty, and lay the foundations for a just peace. We recognise that: Papuans will not feel justice has been served until they are freed from all forms of suppression and oppression, from fear and inferiority and are able to again stand proud with the kind of self-respect that they have long deserved. A political solution to the dispute over Papuan sovereignty alone will not bring justice. Parallel to the resolution of the political conflict, there must be a process to establish broad-based justice and create lasting conditions for sustainable peace and development. To this end, we see the need for efforts to build the foundations of peace, justice and development by fostering respect for human rights and responsibilities, a democratic culture, tolerance, pluralism, as well as good governance and responsible citizenship. The process toward building the foundations of peace and justice must dismantle the structures of injustice (including legal and policy frameworks), restore damaged relationships and bring about changes in the attitudes and behaviours of individuals. We believe the process should bring about change at all levels of society, with particular effort to engage women and marginalised groups

13 Our goal is for the people of Papua to enjoy justice and respect for human rights as the foundation of sustained peace and development. We aim to: Promote the capacity and opportunity of civil society organisations, in particular faith-based organisations, in Papua and Indonesia to advocate for justice and ensure respect for human rights in Papua; Generate political will among governments, regional bodies and international organisations to encourage greater accountability for the situation in Papua by the Indonesian government and other stakeholders; Encourage international accountability for the situation in Papua. A core principle of JPCMCordaid s approach to advocacy is that we will never replace our partners voices. We are committed to the belief that Papuans are their own best advocates. JPCMCordaid s role in advocacy for peace and human rights in Papua seeks to support partners in promoting the effectiveness and reach of their advocacy work, and to help amplify their voices in the North. Injustice has been able to thrive in Papua because little has been known about that part of the world. This position paper of our organisations is made to help raising awareness of the situation in Papua. Live in Peace is the message of the Gospel. 150 years ago Christian missionaries brought and proclaimed the Gospel of Peace. The missionaries founded their Christian communities among Papuan people. This process is marked not only by peaceful dialogue, but also for a long time by conflicts and rivalry. The seeds of peace do not grow immediately into a tree of peace. It grows only painfully together with the weeds (Mat. 13:24-30). Since 2002, the religious leaders in Papua and Jayapura in particular united in a commitment to make Papua a Land of Peace (Papua Tanah Damai). This is our (religious) mission, which corresponds to the wishes of the people. It means that we have to build communion and to walk with our Papuan partners/people ( accompaniment ) in our common effort to resolve conflicts and to transform potential conflict situations into just and peaceful situations, in which every individual can grow and develop in dignity as a human being (blossoming society). Thus, starting from here we encourage all the religions to overcome negative sentiments, to break down barriers, and to build bridges among religions and communion among people of all faiths. The proclamation of the Gospel cannot be separated from questioning injustice issues. Therefore, our organisations have to play a prophetic role by raising our voices against human rights violations, promoting non-violent ways in the struggle for justice, human dignity, peace and integrity of creation. Our partners have been jointly demanding that victim s grievances be addressed, by upholding the supremacy of law and settling the problems in Papua through peaceful means such as dialogue and reconciliation. Our organisations are committed and determined to continue playing a prophetic role in accompanying our partners for the sake of Papua Tanah Damai. Sources Bonay, Yohanis G. and McGrory, Jane: West Papua: Building Peace Through an Understanding of Conflict, In Searching for Peace in Asia Pacific, pp , ECCP, Lynne Rienner, London, Broek, Theo van den: OFM, Reconciliation and peace building: The West Papua Context, presentation at a workshop on the role of churches in human rights advocacy, Biak, 3-9 September 2000 Broek, Theo van den: OFM, Papua Nowadays: Peace Building and Interreligious Co-operation, contribution to conference towards better peace building practice, Soesterberg, October 24th-26th, 2001 Faith-Based Network on West Papua: Geneva Appeal on West Papua: Papua, Land of Peace, April 2005 Lederach, John Paul: Building Peace, United States Institute of Peace, Washington, 1997 Nielen, Jan: Reisverslag Indonesië 17 november tot 3 december 2002, CORDAID, Den Haag, December 2003 Sekretariat Keadilan & Perdamaian: Diocese of Jayapura, Annual Report 2000, January 2001 Sekretariat Keadilan & Perdamaian: Diocese of Jayapura, Annual Report 2001, January 2002 Sekretariat Keadilan & Perdamaian: Diocese of Jayapura, Socio-Political Notes No. 5, Recent developments in Papua, Special Autonomy: its process and final contents, Jayapura. December 2001 Sekretariat Keadilan & Perdamaian: Diocese of Jayapura, Building Culture of Peace towards Papua, a Land of Peace, Report of Workshop, November 25th-30th, 2002 Tebay, Neles: West Papua, The struggle for peace with justice, CIIR, London, May

14 J P C M C o r d a i d Colophon ISBN /EAN Text Jan Nielen Cover Pak Krey, Manokwari Photos Michel Peters and Marjolijn Eshuis Design en production SO creatief, The Hague Print Bestenzet, Zoetermeer Copyright Justitia et Pax Nederland P.O. Box BH The Hague +31 (0) info@justitiaetpax.nl

15