AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Ami Dhabuwala in Suva

The people of the Pacific have been handed a big challenge over the weekend – mobilise for urgent climate change action and “save the world” through their example.

Bill McKibben, founder of the global grassroots climate campaign 350.org, challenged Pacific islanders to fight for the climate change movement at a conference at the University of the South Pacific.

It is ideal for Pacific people to use solar power, fuel efficient cars, ride bicycles, he argues.

But in the end it would not make any difference to the final outcome for the fight for climate change as there are small populations in the Pacific.

“The Pacific is probably going to play a crucial role in helping to build the movement that changes the politics around the climate change,” he said.

“You can make big countries like China, United States and Australia to act fast on it. You have a particular job to build this movement.”

The seminar, organised by USP’s environmental studies programme PACE-SD, focused on climate change action.

“We started the 350.org operation almost 8 years ago to build the movement for climate change around the world,” said McKibben.

‘We need a fight’
McKibben has written several books on the environment, including The End of Nature, The Age of Missing Information, Hope, Human and Wild, Oil and Honey.

“I thought long ago that writing books, discussions, and talks could solve this issue, but I was wrong at that time. We need a fight. We have to fight against the fossil fuel industries and against their money and power.”

To fight against the power of these industries, he explained the necessity of a movement.

“It is a systemic structural problem and we have only a few years to solve it. We require a huge political change. We need to find some source of power other than money to fight against [the fossil fuel industry] and the only other source is to build the movement.”

McKibben said this could be an opportunity for the Pacific people to save the world.

“It is a great burden to be in the Pacific right now. You didn’t ask for climate change and you didn’t cause it – yet it’s happening to you.

“But you can turn this burden into a privilege. You can fight together to save the world from this crisis.”

‘Deep emergency’
He talked about how it was known 25 years ago that the world would face the effects of climate change because of the fossil fuel and other industries, but “we didn’t know how fast it would be”.

“We are in the deep climate change emergency. It is much deeper than we thought,” he said.

McKibben believes that it is not a matter of decades – it is only a matter of years now. The world needs to act fast with the fight over climate change.

“Since the Pacific faces the quickest danger than any part of the world, you have more right, more credibility to stand up and push this movement on the fast track.

“We have to make the world understand about the crisis, which is the most difficult job. We have got to figure out the way to make them understand.”

Professor McKibben has already covered many countries, including Afghanistan, Australia, Bangladesh, China, Ethiopia, India, Pakistan, Russia, United Arab Emirates (UAR) and the US, with the 350.org campaign.

New Zealand approach
This campaign comes up with creative ideas in different countries.

For New Zealand, they took help from the bike mechanics. They went to the people’s garages and helped them to repair their bikes – so they could not find an excuse not to ride their bicycles.

Koreti Tiumalu has worked for the New Zealand government for 10 years. But 4 years ago she quit her job and now is now working with 350.org as the Pacific region coordinator.

“I have heard stories that sometimes I wish I wouldn’t have. It’s not an easy fight. But I can’t just sit there and do nothing.”

Tiumalu believes that young people love their culture and with the help of concerts, music and smart phones, they can become a huge part of this movement.

“We need to get into their music, their sports.”

350.org plans to launch a “Break Free” campaign to target the world’s dangerous fossil fuel projects during May 4-15.

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Sara Stavropoulos

Ruatoria-born soldier Private Christian Hohepa has now travelled a long way since joining the New Zealand Army in 2013.

On his first-ever trip out of New Zealand, the 21-year-old Ngata Memorial College ex-pupil is a member of the Maori Cultural Group, which is part of the New Zealand Defence Force’s contingent to Gallipoli for Anzac Day tomorrow.

The 33-strong contingent has entered the final stages of rehearsing the various roles they will play at the two Anzac Day services to be held on the Gallipoli peninsula in Turkey – the Dawn Service at the Anzac Commemorative Site at North Beach, and the New Zealand Service at Chunuk Bair.

PTE Hohepa is currently an apprentice armourer in the Army, learning to fix and maintain weapons. Outside the workshop, he’s into physical training and enjoys a variety of sports.

“Joining the Army was a childhood dream,” he said.

“Then when I got a bit older I could see it was a path to expanding my knowledge and potential, and also a way that I would be able to help people, which is really important to me.”

Although PTE Hohepa is interested in most sports, right now his focus is on work and his involvement with the MCG. He has also taken on the study of mau rakau (traditional weapons skills) through the NZDF.

PTE Hohepa says he was “overwhelmed” at selection for the Gallipoli contingent.

“I was really surprised, and so humbled. There was a lot of talent at the selection wananga and to be chosen was a very proud moment for me, not just for myself but for the fact that I get the privilege of walking the same grounds as the brave soldiers who died here to protect our future.”

PTE Hohepa isn’t the first of his family to serve in the Army – his grandfather, John Grace, was a member of the famous Maori Battalion in World War 2. The Maori Contingent which served at Gallipoli was the forerunner of the Battalion.

“The NZDF is a solid career,” he says.

“There’s just so much opportunity, especially for rural people who might not have the range of experiences you get in the cities. You have experiences and learn in ways that you never would anywhere else.”

Extra security for ANZAC Day at Gallipoli

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

Papua New Guinea Prime Minister Peter O’Neill says recent calls by former prime minister and the country’s founding leader Sir Michael Somare to leave office are “self-serving” from a person who has been “hell-bent” on removing his government since Somare lost power in 2011.

“While these matters [corruption allegations] are before the courts, he has to respect that no person is guilty until proven so in a court of law based on compelling evidence,” he said.

“I have always stated – show evidence of me benefiting financially or otherwise and I will resign.

“I would never do so because Somare or [another former PM, Sir Mekere] Morauta think I should, their motive is simply sour grapes.”

If they think they have the support, they should both combine and face us at the elections. But from recent memory when the people voted, Morauta lost badly in 2002 and Somare lost badly in 2012.

Looking at the issues he has raised, it is a fact that I did not receive money in my bank account like Somare has.

He needs to explain why PNG government money from the community college fund ended up in his personal account number in Singapore.

Personal benefits
His son and him had benefited directly while PNG was left with incomplete community colleges and with millions of US dollars in loans taken out for this project, while Somare got millions of dollars in his pocket, alleged O’Neill.

This matter was being pursued by the Singapore public prosecutor with Somare’s Singapore partners.

If anyone should resign, Somare should resign and he should be charged, said O’Neill.

“It is all very well to point fingers, but people must only do so with clean hands,” he said.

“The same goes for Sir Mekere Morauta.

“While our people in Western Province are dying, he continues to keep their funds parked in the SDP fund in Singapore.

“It is the people’s money that pays exorbitant fees to Morauta and his consultants, and for them to travel first class around the world.

“This is money that belongs to the people of Western Province and should be given to them to use for their own community benefit, but while Morauta splurges their money they continue to suffer.

“This is a fact that was confirmed by courts in Singapore recently.

“What a load of first-class hypocrisy we see from Somare and Morauta, they should hide their heads in shame,” O’Neill added.

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

I give my column space today to my favorite communication man, Professor Crispin C. Maslog. A former journalist with Agence France-Presse, Cris was director of the Silliman School of Journalism and Communication when Martial Law was proclaimed in the Philippines 1972. He is now senior consultant, Asian Institute of Journalism and Communication, and chair of the board, Asian Media Information and Communication Center (AMIC) based in Manila.

While I was grappling with the horrible impositions of Martial Law when I was editor-in-chief of Philippine Panorama, I had to run to some safe, soul-restorative place on weekends outside the city. It was at the home of Cris and his wife scientist, Flor, on the University of the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB) campus that I found comfort and assurance that all will be well, that the tyrant Ferdinand Marcos and his family will be driven away from the land, and that democracy will be restored.

His article should remind us that Martial Law should never happen again – and the

perpetrators not be returned to seats of power. – Domini M. Torrevillas, The Philippine Star

By CRISPIN C. MASLOG in Manila

Somehow, today’s university student generation is not to blame for its Martial Law amnesia. These people were not yet born at the time Martial Law was proclaimed 44 years ago!

We, the older folks, are to blame. We did not teach them history properly – and I mean by we, mainly the Philippine government and the mass media who suffered the most under the Martial Law regime of Ferdinand Marcos.

Now that the surviving members of the Marcos family are active in politics again and pushing a revisionist version of Martial Law history, we are worried, to say the least.

So when I told students at Silliman’s College of Mass Communication recently about the abuses during Martial Law proclaimed by Marcos in 1972, they were aghast at what they heard. I told the group that before Martial Law was proclaimed in 1972, the Philippines went through hard times under Marcos’ two four-year terms from 1965 to 1973 – the years of discontent.

There was a dramatic increase in poverty during Marcos’ two elective terms, resulting in social unrest.

Yet Marcos wanted to extend his term, which he could not do legally because he was limited by the Constitution to two presidential terms ending in 1972. So he decided to suspend the Constitution and declare Martial Law on Sept. 21, 1972.

The first few years under Martial Law were peaceful and orderly. The average person liked that people were disciplined. But people were disciplined because they were afraid.

More corrupt
And soon after 1972, Marcos and his family became more corrupt because no one, especially the mass media, was free to criticise them. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The next 14 years witnessed corruption unparalleled in Philippine history.

Instead of improving, the Philippine economy took a nosedive during the 14 years of Martial Law because of cronyism and economic plunder. Cronyism was an “economic system” where every major economic activity was controlled by the First Family, their relatives, or cronies.

This phenomenon was documented meticulously by Ricardo Manapat in his 615-page book, Some Are Smarter Than Others: The History of Marcos’ Crony Capitalism (Aletheia Publications, NY, 1991). The New York Times has reviewed the book as “impressively documented”.

Answering criticisms about relatives who became millionaires overnight during Martial Law, Madame Imelda is quoted to have replied: “My dear, there are always people who are just a little faster, more brilliant, more aggressive.”

The Manapat book is based on 11 years of research and writing and is the authoritative source of information on the economic plunder of the Philippines under Marcos. The title of the book is based on a famous quote from Madame Imelda.

The major cronies, as documented in Manapat’s book, were: Roberto Benedicto who controlled the sugar industry, Danding Cojuangco who monopolised the coconut industry, Antonio Floirendo who cornered the banana industry, and Hans Menzi who lorded over the mining and paper industries.

Cronyism meant giving loans to friends that had little or no collateral, whose corporations were undercapitalised. Marcos, family and his cronies used the national coffers, the resources of private banks, and even international loans from multinational banks for their business. Aid money from the US and Japan were placed at the disposal of Marcos’ money-making network.

Squandered loans
Until today we are still paying for these loans squandered by the Marcos regime.

The corruption reached such a massive scale that it took its toll on the Philippine economy and the lives of the average Filipino. By 1986, just before People Power I, the number of Filipinos living below the poverty line doubled from 18 million in 1965 to 35 million.

The history of this economic plunder is one of the blind spots in the minds of the Filipino millenials today.  It worries me and my generation no end, that the son of Ferdinand Marcos is running for vice-president of the land, and be just a heartbeat away from the presidency.

If that happens, philosopher George Santayana may again be proven right when he said long ago that a people who do not remember their past are condemned to repeat it.

Domini M. Torrevillas is a columnist on The Philippine Star. One of her From The Stands columns this month was devoted to this article by Professor Maslog and is republished here with the permission of the author. The Philippines presidential election is due on Monday, May 9.

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

Led by Fiji, at least nine island states are formally presenting their ratification of the agreement to the UN, moving quickly to the next stage in a bid to bind countries to their commitments to tackle global warming.

The Paris agreement will come into force as soon as 55 countries responsible for 55 percent of the world’s greenhouse gases have ratified the accord.

“We wanted to be the first to ratify it,” said Fiji’s Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama, whose cabinet quickly endorsed the deal in February.

That same month, Tropical Cyclone Winston that killed 44 people, destroyed 40,000 homes and caused more than US$1 billion in damage hit the Pacific nation.

“A single climatic event can wipe out all the gains we have made and set back our development,” the prime minister told a news conference.

Other early ratifying countries of the deal are Tuvalu, Kiribati and the Maldives – low-lying islands that face oblivion from rising sea levels – as well as Belize, Barbados, Nauru, Saint Lucia and Samoa.

Greenhouse gas giants
China and the US, the world’s top two greenhouse gas emitters, are pushing for quick ratification so that the Paris deal can come into force, possibly as early as 2016 or 2017.

More than 150 governments, including some 50 heads of state and government, signed the historic accord during the ceremony on Earth Day yesterday.

It was the largest signing of an international agreement since the Convention on the Law of the Sea in 1982.

French President Francois Hollande was the first to sign the accord, but the ceremony would also see island leaders take the podium to appeal for urgent action to ratify the Paris accord.

“What was achieved in Paris was a positive first step, but it is not nearly enough to avert catastrophe,” the Fijian prime minister said.

Fighting for 1.5
Fiji and other island states want to keep global warming within 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels, instead of 2 degrees as outlined in the Paris accord.

A study this week explained a 2 degrees jump in the global temperature would double the severity of crop failures, water shortages and heat waves in many regions compared to a rise of 1.5 degrees.

An extra 0.5 degrees would also add 10cm to the average ocean waterline, further imperilling dozens of small island nations and densely populated, low-lying deltas, a team of researchers reported.

Island governments want to unlock international financing so that they can better prepare their economies and infrastructure to withstand the impact of climate change.

Tropical Cyclone Winston, the strongest ever to hit the South Pacific, affected some 250,000 people, or 40 percent of the regional population.

“After Winston, we’ve had three tropical depressions that have brought continued flooding,” said Bainimarama.

“We’ve received some 1000 earthquake tremors, so we are fairly worried about earthquakes and tsunamis,” he said.

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

The IFJ, SEAJU, CPJ and Freedom House sent a letter to Timor-Leste Prime Minister Dr Rui Maria de Araújo relating to the criminal defamation case brought before Timor Post journalist Oki Raimundos, former editor Lourenco Vicente Martins and the Timor Post.

The case against Oki and the Timor Post is based on a published report from 10 November 2015, which contained a factual error on a government tendering process. In accordance with Timor-Leste’s own Press Law, the outlet subsequently published a correction and right of reply from the Prime Minister’s office in relation to the story.

“In spite of this, you have filed a criminal defamation lawsuit that carries potential prison sentences against Oki, Vincente and Timor Post,” the letter said.

Oki and Martins were summoned to attend the office of the Prosecutor-General on Monday, April 11. Appearing with their lawyers, each faced separate 30 minute interviews.

Both men relied on their right to silence, and each was given a “letter” stating that neither could change his address nor travel overseas without giving the prosecutor 15 days’ notice. The prosecutor will now decide whether to file an indictment or drop the charges.

The time permitted for the prosecutor to gather evidence and to make a decision about remains unclear.

IFJ lawyer in Dili
Australian barrister and IFJ legal representative Jim Nolan was in Timor Leste on April 11 to support Oki and Martins.

During his trip he met with various figures in the Timor-Leste media.

In a piece authored  by Nolan, he said that the prosecution must establish four conditions.  Firstly, the publication of the ‘accusation’.  Secondly, at the time of publication; the journalist must be “aware of the falsity of the accusation,” thirdly, the accusation must concern the “commission of a crime”; and fourthly, the publication must be made “with the intent of having criminal proceedings initiated against the person.”

In the letter, IFJ, SEAJU, CPJ and Freedom House highlighted the implications for the case for Timor Leste’s press freedom, noting that such actions will weaken the view of the country’s media freedom in the eyes of the international community.

The IFJ said: “We continue to support our local affiliates as well as Oki and Martins as they continue with this battle.

“The support of the international community highlights the importance of this case and the need to end criminal defamation as a tool to silence critics. We again, call on the Prime Minister to withdraw the case against Oki and Martins.”

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fiji is still facing a major challenge to deal with suicide cases, especially of young children, reports Ami Dhabuwala of Asia-Pacific Journalism from Suva.

Fiji is already struggling to cope with the aftermath from the recent tropical cyclone Winston, other storms and the impact of climate change, but suicide among youth is also becoming a major concern for parents and communities.

Suicide became a national issue in Fiji last year when fresh statistics showed worrying trends. Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama showed his concern for the increasing rate of suicide cases, especially among youth.

Bainimarama said that counselling services and initiatives already existed in Fiji, but he would ask every branch of government to improve its response to youth suicide.

Last year, there were 89 cases of suicide from January to September, which had 10 cases of children aged under 16. Also, there were more than 20 people aged between 17 and 25 years who had committed suicide during the same time.

However, this issue has some deeper roots back into the 1990s.

Peter M. Forster (UK), Selina C. Kuruleca (Fiji) and C. R. Auxier (USA) published a report named A Note on Recent Trends in Suicide in Fiji in 2007 in the Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology. They collected suicide data from Adinkrah who reported in 1995 and from Booth who reported in the years 1997 and 1999.

They had cited that the “standardised” annual rate of suicide for the year 2002 at 15 per 100,000 population for male and 11 for females.

Current scenario
Government has launched National Child Helpline since last January in partnership with the Medical Services Pacific (MSP).

People in need for counselling are provided a toll free number 1325 to talk with trained counsellors. It is a 24-hour helpline.

“We have got almost 7000 calls since last September,” says Peci Baladrokadroka, a senior counsellor in MSP.

Naina Ragigia, a Fiji Police Force spokesperson, shows her concern because the force receives many calls related to suicide cases as well.

“The Fiji Police Force receives an average of 5 reports of suicide in a month. Most reports of suicide cases received are only attempted suicide, which is much higher than the suicide cases.”

People from different age groups, starting from 5 to 70 are attempting suicide.

“We have noticed young people around the age of 12-23 years are mostly victims of suicide cases,” says Ragigia.

Reasons for suicide
There are so many reasons ranging from child neglect to poverty which are leading people to commit suicide in Fiji.

“In young people, child neglect, sexual abuse and physical abuse are one of the major reasons,” says Peci Baladrokadroka.

Ragigia says that in some cases children are disappointed by his or her own parents.

“A 10-year-old boy was playing outside his home. His mother scolded him to come home and study. But that boy took this in a different way; he locked himself in his room and eventually hanged himself.

“Children from the young ages of 12 years are now committing this offence which is indeed a sad thing,” she said.

Entertainment programmes on television and radio are also contributing.

“Last year we had a case of 12-year-old girl. She was trying to mimic a scene [of a suicide] from the movie, but ended up dead instead,” says Ragigia.

Breaking points
For the young students career and good grade are also one of the major breaking points.

Matthew Galuvakadua works as a volunteer at Youth Champs for Mental Health.

“Family expectations put extreme pressure on young children, especially when exams are a concern,” he says.

Galuvakadua has been working with this organisation for the past four years. The group mainly focuses on suicide prevention for young people in Fiji and tries to reduce the stigma associated with it, especially people living with mental illness.

Apart from this, relationships and family issues are also among major reasons for suicide. Peci says that drugs, alcohol, educational needs and poverty also contribute.

The issue is becoming more serious each year and the government, with the help of local organisations and NGOs, is trying to deal with the suicide cases, but results are disappointing.

Reluctant over information
“When Asia Pacific Report tried to contact different organisations for statistical data and information, they were reluctant to give any details.

Ragigia says suicide is a very sensitive issue and how foreign media might present the scenario is difficult to judge.

“Organisations seem to be reluctant over this particular issue because they don’t want Fiji to be represented in a wrong way.”

Peci says the government is running many awareness programmes with different organisations.

The Fiji police also conducts various awareness programmes for the general community.

They have a fine relationship with the local health authorities.

Frequent check-ups
“The Fiji police is fortunate to have services of our local health authorities for offering a frequent medical check-up for the victims and there are also counselling services offered from local NGOs that we are able to refer to the victims for counselling purposes,” says Ragigia.

However, Galuvakadua thinks that the government should be more involved with mental health organisations.

“Government should work and form better relationships with existing mental health service providers in the community,” he says.

Galuvakadua also shows his concern about lack of rehabilitation centres in Fiji.

“The Community Recovery Outreach Programme is the only functioning rehabilitation programme that refers people at-risk from suicide to people living with mental illness, sending them to St Giles Hospital in Fiji.”

He hopes to see an improvement in the months ahead.

Ami Dhabuwala is a postgraduate student journalist at AUT University. She is reporting on the Asia-Pacific Journalism course and is currently in Fiji.

Fiji’s National Child Helpline – ring 1325

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Kalafi Moala in Nuku’alofa

The man who was once jailed for his stand for press freedom in the kingdom of Tonga has now breached the same freedom by ordering a government journalist to be suspended “for asking hard questions”.

Samuela ‘Akilisi Pohiva was a member of Parliament who leaked information to the media in 1996 resulting in a contempt of Parliament case, in which he was jailed together with the two journalists who published the information.

But as Tonga’s Prime Minister 20 years later, elected on a platform of democratic “transparency”, Pohiva issued an order on Wednesday to his Minister of Public Enterprises, Poasi Tei, to suspend veteran journalist Viola Ulakai “until further investigation”.

Minister Tei is responsible for the Tonga Broadcasting Commission through a selected board of directors,

The Prime Minister has accused Ulakai of being too insistent with her questions, particularly with issues regarding reform that he as Minister of Education is bringing about in the Ministry of Education.

The fallout and a mess in the Ministry after the 2015 exam results has been a confusing issue at the centre of much public discussion.

Ulakai has been a journalist with the Government Broadcasting for 26 years. She is now the head of news at Tonga’s largest news organisation.

Press conference
In the past few weeks, Ulakai has been trying unsuccessfully to set up a press conference between the media and the Prime Minister to answer questions regarding education.

Meanwhile, a press release was issued last week by the Prime Minister’s Office accusing Ulakai of trying to set up the press conference as something endorsed by the Tonga Media Council, while it was allegedly only a personal arrangement of her own.

The Tonga Media Council chair, Lady Luseane Luani, responded in support of the Prime Minister’s Office, saying Ulakai was “not doing it for the Media Council”, a statement that has been widely regarded by other journalists as a betrayal of Ulakai.

Ulakai is on the board of directors of the Tonga Media Council, and she herself has been the one that set up previous press conferences on behalf of the council.

Other directors of the Media Council, like Filo ‘Akau’ola, owner of the Talaki newspaper, has come out in support of Ulakai, stating that there was an understanding Ulakai would organise the press conferences.

Pohiva, since the beginning of his administration in January of 2015, has consistently been aloof and selective over the media he would talk to, and who would interview him.

Because Ulakai was the head of news at the Government Radio and Television, she usually did the interviews with the leaders of government. But the Prime Minister took exception to her hard questioning.

Another angle
He claimed that Ulakai usually takes another angle to ask the same question when he had already provided the answer.

The Prime Minister’s Office offered the notion that Ulakai was opposed to the Prime Minister, and that she was backed by opponents to his reform programme at the Ministry of Education.

Ulakai shared publicly her frustration at not being given the opportunity to ask questions that have not been answered or even spun to support a perspective in question.

“I am only trying to do my job,” she told reporters in Nuku’alofa.

Ulakai did not break any laws, neither did she breach any work ethics in accordance with her contract at the Tonga Broadcasting Commission.

She is being persecuted for doing her job. And a man who promised press freedom to Tongans is driving that persecution.

As this report goes out, Viola Ulakai has been officially suspended from the Tonga Broadcasting Commission, from yesterday, on order from the Prime Minister.

Tonga is due to commemorate World Media Freedom Day on May 3. In the 2016 Reporters Without Borders World Press Freedom Index released this week, Tonga had improved its global ranking seven places to 37th out of 180 countries surveyed.

The author, Kalafi Moala, is publisher and editor of the Taimi ‘o Tonga, Tonga’s first independent newspaper. He and his then deputy editor were jailed for contempt along with ‘Akilisi Pohiva in 1996.

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Damon Jones and Bill Hare

The world took a collective sigh of relief in the last days of 2015, when countries came together to adopt the historic Paris agreement on climate change.

The international treaty was a much-needed victory for multilateralism, and surprised many with its more-ambitious-than-expected agreement to pursue efforts to limit global warming to 1.5°C.

The next step in bringing the COP21 agreement into effect happens in New York today, with leaders and dignitaries from more than 150 countries attending a high-level ceremony at the United Nations to officially sign it.

The New York event will be an important barometer of political momentum leading into the implementation phase – one that requires domestic climate policies to be drawn up, as well as further international negotiations.

It comes a week after scientists took a significant step to assist with the process. On April 13 in Nairobi, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change agreed to prepare a special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. This will provide scientific guidance on the level of ambition and action needed to implement the Paris agreement.

Why the ceremony?
The signing ceremony in New York sets in motion the formal, legal processes required for the Paris Agreement to “enter into force”, so that it can become legally binding under international law.

Although the agreement was adopted on December 12 2015 in Paris, it has not yet entered into force. This will happen automatically 30 days after it has both been ratified by at least 55 countries, and by countries representing at least 55% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Both conditions of this threshold have to be met before the agreement is legally binding.

So, contrary to some concerns after Paris, the world does not have to wait until 2020 for the agreement to enter into force. It could happen as early as this year.

Signing vs ratification
When a country signs the agreement, it is obliged to refrain from acts that would defeat its object and purpose. The next step, ratification, signifies intent to be legally bound by the terms of the treaty.

The decision on timing for ratification by each country will largely be determined by domestic political circumstances and legislative requirements for international agreements.

Those countries that have already completed their domestic processes for international agreements can choose to sign and ratify on the same day in New York.

Who is going to sign and ratify in New York?
It is perhaps no surprise that the countries which are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and who championed the need for high ambition in Paris will be first out of the gate to ratify in New York.

Thirteen Small Island Developing States (SIDS) from the Caribbean, Indian Ocean and Pacific have signalled their intent to sign and ratify in New York: Barbados, Belize, Fiji, Grenada, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Palau, Samoa, Saint Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, the Seychelles and Tuvalu.

While these countries make up about a quarter of the 55 countries needed, they only account for 0.02% of the emissions that count towards the required 55 percent global emissions total.

Bringing the big emitters on board
China and the United States have recently jointly announced their intentions to sign in New York and to take the necessary domestic steps to formally join the agreement by ratifying it later this year. Given that they make up nearly 40 percent of the agreed set of global emissions for entry into force, that will go a significant way to meeting the 55 percent threshold.

We can expect more announcements of intended ratification schedules today. Canada (1.95 percent) has signalled its intent to ratify this year and there are early signs for many others. Unfortunately the European Union, long a leader on climate change, seems unlikely to be among the first movers due to internal political difficulties, including the intransigence of the Polish government.

The double threshold means that even if all of the SIDS and Least Developed Countries (LDCs) ratified, accounting for more than 75 countries but only around 4 percent of global emissions, the agreement would not enter into force until countries with a further 51 percent of global emissions also ratified.

Consequently, many more of the large emitters will need to ratify to ensure that the Paris agreement enters into force. This was a key design feature – it means a small number of major emitters cannot force a binding agreement on the rest of the world, and a large number of smaller countries cannot force a binding agreement on the major emitters.

The 55 percent threshold was set in order to ensure that it would be hard for a blocking coalition to form – a group of countries whose failure to ratify could ensure that an emissions threshold could not be met in practice. A number much above 60 percent of global emissions could indeed have led to such a situation.

The countries that appear likely to ratify this year, including China, the USA, Canada, many SIDS and LDCs, members of the Climate Vulnerable Forum along with several Latin American and African countries – around 90 in all – still fall about 5-6 percent short of the 55 percent emissions threshold.

It will take one more large emitter, such as the Russian Federation (7.53 percent), or two such as India (4.10 percent) and Japan (3.79 percent) to get the agreement over the line. The intent of these countries is not yet known.

Why is early action important?
The Paris agreement may be ambitious, but it will only be as good as its implementation. That will depend on the political momentum gained in Paris being maintained. Early entry into force for the treaty would be a powerful signal in this direction.

We know from the Climate Action Tracker analyses that the present commitments are far from adequate. If all countries fully implement the national emission reduction targets brought to the climate negotiations last year, we are still on track for temperature increases of around 2.7°C. Worse, we also know that current policies adopted by countries are insufficient to meet these targets and are heading to around 3.6°C of global warming.

With average global annual temperature increase tipping over 1°C above pre-industrial levels for the first time last year, it is clear that action to reduce emissions has never been more urgent.

We are already seeing more evidence this year: increases in the monthly global averages of February and March 2016 far exceeded 1°C, record coral reef bleaching, heatwaves, and unprecedented early melting of the Greenland ice sheet this northern spring.

Early entry into force will unlock the legally binding rights and obligations for parties to the agreement. These go beyond just obligations aimed at delivering emissions reductions through countries’ Nationally Determined Contributions to the critical issues of, for example, adaptation, climate finance, loss and damage, and transparency in reporting on and reviewing action and support.

The events in New York this week symbolise the collective realisation that rapid, transformative action is required to decarbonise the global economy by 2050.

Climate science tells us that action must increase significantly within the next decade if we are to reign in the devastating impacts of climate change, which the most vulnerable countries are already acutely experiencing.

Damon Jones is a lecturer at Cologne University, Germany, and Bill Hare is visiting scientist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. This article was first published by The Conversation and is republished here under a Creative Commons licence. For an up-to-date picture of which countries have ratified the Paris Agreement, see The Conversation’s Ratification Tracker.

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

After more than half a century without clarity on the identity of perpetrators or those who orchestrated the event, some survivors and victims of Indonesia’s 1965 purge hope that the government will rehabilitate their names as they have been stigmatised in the past as enemies of the state.

The stigma does not end with themselves, but also extends to their children and grandchildren. The number of the people affected by the 1965 tragedy, whether murdered, tortured, raped or detained without trial, could reach into the hundreds of thousands.

“I hope the government will rehabilitate all survivors and annul all discriminative laws against the 1965 victims,” said Kusnendar, an 83-year-old survivor, during a two-day symposium on 1965 in Jakarta this week.

He also expressed his concern that there were still state documents that discriminated against them. Presidential Decree No. 28/1975, for example, prevents members or sympathisers of the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI) who worked as civil servants from receiving their pensions.

Meanwhile, Presidential Decree No. 16/1990 prevents former PKI members from working as civil servants or joining the Indonesian Military.

The kidnapping and murder of six Army generals on Sept. 30, 1965, led to a purge of communists and alleged communist sympathisers by the military under the leadership of Soeharto.

In the purge, countless thousands were murdered, tortured and arrested without trial. It is estimated that between 500,000 to 1 million people were killed during the “cleansing” of people with any leftist connections, regardless of their age or level of connection.

Generals murder
“I was beaten up when I arrived at the Budi Kemuliaan penitentiary as I was accused of being involved in the murder of the generals,” said Kusnendar, adding that he was arrested on October 10, 1965, in Jakarta, because he was involved in a labor union allegedly affiliated with the PKI.

He was also accused of harboring sympathies with the PKI’s youth arm, Pemuda Rakyat. Kusnendar moved from one prison to another, including the Cipinang and Salemba penitentiaries in Jakarta, the Nusakambangan prison island in Central Java and Buru Island in Maluku, often remembered as the “Island of Exiles”, in 1969.

Yohanes Winaryo, a 72-year-old survivor, was arrested on Nov. 2, 1965, because of his involvement in the Indonesian Youth and Students Association (IPPI), allegedly affiliated with the PKI.

“We had no affiliation with the PKI as the IPPI just held study-group sessions or sporting events. We even helped the government eradicate illiteracy going door-to-door to the people’s houses,” he said.

However, Yohanes was forced to work without pay as a stonemason in Central Java until he was released in 1970. Since then, he has been “marked” as a former political prisoner.

“Our main demand is rehabilitation. The government should bring back our good name in society. It’s more important than compensation,” he said.

Because of the stigma attached to them, the 1965 victims had to live hard life. Kusnendar was released in 1978 and reunited with his family in Jakarta.

However, he said his wife was forced to divorce him as a prerequisite to working in the Jakarta Education Agency because of his status as a former political prisoner.

Kusnendar earned a living working as an insurance salesman, a scavenger and a thesis typist in a printing shop.

High school teacher brings alternative narratives to 1965 purge

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

Twenty-nine veterans of Timor-Leste’s struggle for national liberation will be visiting Australia next week to meet with members of the local veteran community and to participate in events commemorating ANZAC Day on April 25 – next Tuesday.

Delegations will be based in Perth, Sydney, Brisbane and Canberra with a small delegation travelling between key cities.

Minister of Planning and Strategic Investment, and Chief Negotiator for Maritime Boundaries, Kay Rala Xanana Gusmão will lead the visit and is accompanied by the Vice-Minister for Social Solidarity.

Miguel Marques Manetelu; Francisco Guterres, former President of the National Parliament and president of FRETILIN; and Colonel Falur Rate Laek, representing the Defence Forces of Timor-Leste [F-FDTL], will also participate.

Inês de Almeida, Liaison Officer for Veterans Affairs, Office of the Prime Minister of Timor-Leste, is the visit coordinator and spokesperson.

This trip will further strengthen the close friendship between the veterans of Timor-Leste and the veteran community of Australia, the Timor-Leste government said in a statement.

Interactions with Australia’s Returned Services League (RSL) and the War Widows Guild of Australia have been ongoing since 2014 and have included several visits by Australian veterans to Dili.

Telling the story
During this time, Timor-Leste has developed its own National Council of Combatants of National Liberation and veterans have used their meetings to consider how to tell the story of the struggle for future generations, how to honor the fallen ones and how to best serve those remaining.

In each location Timor-Leste’s veterans will visit facilities that have been developed in Australia to support ex-service personnel, participate in ANZAC Day commemorations and meet with members of the Timorese Community.

This year a group led by Colonel Laek are investigating walking treks in two national parks to assist in planning the development of similar treks in the mountains of Timor-Leste.

This group will be assessing the tourism potential of this idea and the opportunities it can provide for veterans to share the story of the Resistance.

The state president of the NSW Branch of the RSL, Rod White, said it had been a privilege for their organisation to work with the veterans of Timor-Leste and emphasised that the strengthened bonds of friendship between the two veterans communities were part of what would be “an enduring relationship”.

Timor-Leste veteran Jorge Alves said of the upcoming trip:  “The veterans of the country were invited to take part in the Australian Veterans Day.

“It is part of the Timorese veterans solidarity to the Australian veterans as we have very strong and unforgettable history.”

‘Warm friendship’
Government spokesman, Minister of State Agio Pereira, said: “The relationship between the veteran communities of Australia and Timor-Leste is characterised by warm friendship, mutual respect and genuine goodwill.

“The government commends this ‘enduring relationship’ and salutes the Timorese veteran delegation as they proudly represent the nation, develop plans to honor and care for the veterans of Timor-Leste and participate in the commemorations of ANZAC Day.”

Timor-Leste government media releases

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

[embedded content]

TJ Aumua’s video report on youth’s fears over their homelands. PMC on Demand

By TJ Aumua

The effects of climate change on Pacific island nations like Samoa are leaving young people faced with uncertainty about being forced to leave their homelands and migrating to other countries.

The chair for Ōtara-Papatoetoe local board in Auckland, Fa’anānā Efeso Collins is also a former broadcaster and recently returned from Samoa.

He “feels” for Pacific youth who are unsure about the existence of their homeland in the future.

“There is a lot of fear about whether or not they will be able to have their own children, their own families and grow up safety in Samoa over the next few decades,” he told Asia Pacific Report.

“We know that in countries like Kiribati, Nauru and Tuvalu, there’s been more international travel – so they’ve migrated more in the last 10 years than any other period in their history. I think Samoan young people are starting to think about the same thing.”

This is ironic for Pacific Islanders living in New Zealand, with hopes of many eventually to return back home.

But Fa’anānā says that with the increasing impact of climate change there may not be a home to go back to.

“I know for New Zealand-born Samoans like myself, we often talk about wanting to go back, or our parents retiring back to Samoa because the land is special to our parents generation – and it’s special to us.

“We are going to lose that sense of ‘specialness’ if we are thinking whether we are safer long-term in New Zealand.”

Health impacts
Unknown to many outside the region, climate change also has major health impacts and is contributing to the level of illnesses in the Pacific.

Fa’anānā says the health ministries in Samoa are focusing on infections like malaria, typhoid and dengue fever, which are all, transmitted by mosquitos.

‘You pick illnesses up a whole lot easier because of cyclonic activity,’ he said. ‘So the ministry is looking at how to dry up large areas of waste water where mosquitos breed’.

“And in Samoa they don’t have the western, first-world facilities to be able to deal on mass with those issues.”

Fa’anānā says the World Health Organisation (WHO) is working with the health ministry in Samoa to address diseases enhanced by climate change.

“When you are living with those sorts of things in the back the your mind, of course you are going to think about moving countries, for long term investment.”

Fa’anānā says New Zealand’s response to Pacific climate change is slow and both Pacific and mainstream media outlets need to bring this issue to the forefront.

“New Zealand can do it,” he says.

“We are a good community, we can care enough about each other, and now it’s just about us being relaxed enough to say, ‘yeah lets join together and support what’s going on in the Pacific’.”

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

Thirty people from 13 Pacific nations attended the Nadi conference organised by the Pacific Community.

Ben Robinson reports – listen to Radio NZ International:

Declaration of Human Rights-based Approach to Journalism in the Pacific, Nadi, Fiji, 15 April 2016

The Pacific Community’s Suva-based team leader for human rights training, Nicol Cave, says the forum gave journalists a framework for writing human rights stories in the Pacific, a region with varying degrees of media freedom.

NICOL CAVE: “And also during the forum some journalists raised the risks. If you get on the wrong side if you report the wrong story there maybe risks and consequences for the media house or for the journalist. But I think there has been an increase in reporting around issues of corruption and reporting the gravest human rights violation in the Pacific [which] is very high levels of violence against women.”

The executive director of the Fiji Women’s Rights Movement, Tara Chetty, told the forum that women need greater representation in the media beyond the reporting of gender-based violence.

TARA CHETTY: “It’s great that it is getting good strong coverage, however, what we’re seeing is women are most often presented as victims of violence and there’s very little opportunity for them to be portrayed in any other way. So we ended the session with some very practical tips about having a more gender aware approach to your journalism. Things like developing a list of experts in various fields who are also women.”

The forum’s keynote speaker was the director of the Pacific Media Centre at the Auckland University of Technology, Professor David Robie. He says social media has an important role to play in exposing human rights abuses as it has done in West Papua.

DAVID ROBIE: “Social media has really just about brought a revolution in terms of world exposure by journalists, by activists in West Papua, able to get good video footage out, for example, showing what has really been happening. It’s forced the Indonesian government to actually be a little bit more proactive and they brought in this policy last year enabling journalists to go to West Papua on a more official basis rather than undercover as they’ve tended to in the past.”

The forum also brought together journalists and government communications officials which Nicol Cave says helped them work through the frustrations they cause each other.

NICOL CAVE: “So governments’ sense of, you only right negative stories, and journalists’ sense of, we’re unable to reach you, we’re unable to right the good stories. So each of the regions, Polynesia, Melanesia, came up with a plan of how they would link and work better. Because the media also needs to be telling the good news stories because progress is being made and the media needs to reflect that.”

But a Fiji political commentator, Professor Wadan Narsey, says he doubts Fiji’s journalists at the forum aired their dissatisfaction with state communicators. He says the media in Fiji self-censor criticism of the government.

WADAN NARSEY: “We don’t know what was really discussed over there, however, the chances are that there wouldn’t have been very many critical issues discussed, simply because people are afraid of talking. So there’s a silent censorship taking place right throughout the Fiji media that is not visible because there are no censors in the newsrooms, there’s nobody physically telling them don’t do it, but everybody there they are all self-censoring.”

Wadan Narsey says the Fiji media won’t expose human rights abuses by the government for fear of reprisal.

HUMAN RIGHTS AND MEDIA FORUM
Human rights violations blamed on silence and ‘looking the other way’
Pacific journalists make human rights for the ‘voiceless’
Regional Rights Resource Team (RRRT)
Reporters urged to be gender sensitive

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Elly Burhaini Faizal in Jakarta

A high school Indonesian history teacher in Batam, Riau Islands, has brought alternative narratives of the 1965 to 1966 communist purge into class as a way to reveal the truth behind the mass killings done during those years.

“In school, the lesson materials of our history must reveal the truth about the state’s failure in the past because history itself should represent the country,” says Diah Wahyuningsih, a 42-year-old history teacher at state senior high school SMAN 4 Batam.

“Don’t deceive the people any more. The young generation is not as stupid as they might think because they now could find everything on the internet,” she said.

Diah said she had held discussions about the 1965 tragedy and its impacts on society in her classes.

She even asked her students to together watch Joshua Oppenheimer’s documentary film The Look of Silence, which was released in December 2014.

Diah claimed her grandfather had been a spokesperson for former president Sukarno’s Indonesian National Party (PNI). However, she said, her grandfather was murdered in West Sumatra during the 1965 tragedy.

The kidnapping and killing of six Indonesian Army generals on September 30, 1965, which was suspected to have been orchestrated by the now defunct Indonesian Communist Party (PKI), led to an attacks against the PKI by the military under the leadership of Soeharto.

Following the attacks, scores were arrested, tortured and murdered. It is estimated that between 500,000 to 1 million people were killed during the “cleansing” of people suspected of having leftist connections, regardless of their age or level of “connection”.

Survivors and relatives of the victims have also been stigmatised and face discrimination to this day. Moreover, the perpetrators of the mass killings have never been revealed.

The National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) and the Presidential Advisory Board (Wantimpres) held a two-day symposium in Jakarta this week to discuss and bring recommendations on the 1965 to 1966 mass killings.

The symposium involved academics, human rights activists, 1965 victims, politicians and representatives of several government bodies.

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

“Mainstream journalism has failed to communicate not only peace, but also human rights in ways that have the potentual of illuminating the important nexus between them.”

– Media agenda-setting researcher and journalist Ibrahim Seaga Shaw

Before picking up David Robie’s Don’t Spoil My Beautiful Face: Media, Mayhem & Human Rights In the Pacific, I had to admit my knowledge of human rights issues and historical struggles in the Pacific region was somewhat patchy.

Naturally, having taken Robie’s Asia-Pacific Journalism paper a few years ago at AUT University, I had some understanding of the ongoing independence struggles in Timor-Leste and troubled West Papua provinces. I knew snippets of the Fijian coups and post-colonial struggles in French Polynesia, but these were snapshots at best that had filtered through from the mainstream media.

First published in 2014 by Little Island Press, Don’t Spoil My Beautiful Face: Media, Mayhem and Human Rights in the Pacific (with a second edition out a few months ago with Rainbow Warrior tags on the cover) is journalist and media educator Robie’s tenth book and one of several written on the region’s political and media landscape spanning the 35 years he has worked as an independent journalist covering the Asia-Pacific region.

A strong advocate for media, environmental and human rights in the Pacific, Robie takes the reader through a number of serious and historical conflicts witnessed firsthand and shares abridged versions of articles written and published by both mainstream and independent publications including the New Zealand Listener, the now defunct Auckland Star and Pacific Journalism Review.

“The reader is immediately aware of the prickly political and colonial minefield that is the Pacific and the importance of a free press when it comes to ensuring basic human rights are upheld in the face of cultural unrest.”

Beginning with a preface by Tongan journalist and publisher Kalafi Moala, Pasifika Media Association deputy chair and former Amnesty International prisoner of conscience Kalafi Moala, the reader is immediately aware of the prickly political and colonial minefield that is the Pacific and the importance of a free press when it comes to ensuring basic human rights are upheld in the face of cultural unrest.

Often violent and always uneasy, we follow Robie chronologically beginning with his time as a young journalist working in South Africa for a daily newspaper championing human rights during the Apartheid era to his developing interest in France’s neocolonial and nuclear policies in the South Pacific, which leads him to the seriously under-reported colonial legacy conflicts in French Polynesia and the countdown towards the first of the notoriously politically unstable Fiji’s many coups during the 1980s.

Coverage of the 1984 Hienghene massacre in New Caledonia and the 1992 Santa Cruz massacre in Timor-Leste are just two of many sobering accounts contributing to the stain on the Pacific’s human rights record.

Why are these abuses and this political unrest within the Pacific still ongoing and what do we need to do as a neighboring nation to combat it? Robie believes one aspect of the solution lies with cultivating good quality local journalists, giving them the platform to tell their stories without fear of being censored, punished, beaten and even locked up for not towing the political line by speaking the truth.

“The reality is that we are living in a country where respected investigative journalists face public defamation and unlawful police searches for reaching further and exposing the truth.”

But is the treatment of journalists here in New Zealand really that far from the way our neighbours treat theirs? The reality is that we are living in a country where respected investigative journalists face public defamation and unlawful police searches for reaching further and exposing the truth.

If you take anything away from Robie’s book, it’s the importance of having a free and unbiased media. We need to look past the mainstream and support the tireless and often dangerous work of “development journalists” like Robie, Stevenson and Hager.

Everyone has the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas without fear or interference. Without an independent media there is no transparency and without transparency, there is no freedom.

Having experienced imprisonment in his native Tonga for his role as a journalist, Kalafi Moala recommends this book to aspiring journalists in his preface. I would go one step further than that and say if you have any passion for human rights and a desire to educate yourself on the history of human rights struggles in our own part of the pond, please read this book. It will be 361 pages well-read.

The book: Don’t Spoil My Beautiful Face: Media, Mayhem & Human Rights In the Pacific, by David Robie. Auckland: Little Island Press

Erica George is supporter relations coordinator of Amnesty International New Zealand. She is an AUT University graduate and was on Professor Robie’s Asia-Pacific Journalism course in 2010. This article was first published on the Amnesty International New Zealand website and has been republished with permission.

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

[embedded content]

TJ Aumua’s video report “Scientists take on Pacific crown of thorns starfish threat”.

By TJ Aumua in Suva

The crown-of-thorns phenomenon may sound like something from a Hollywood movie storyline. Instead it’s the name given to the rapid mass reproduction of the crown of thorns (COT) starfish – the biggest threat to the Pacific’s coral reefs.

Named for its long poisonous spines on its exterior, the starfish are the primary cause for the extinction of live coral in the South Pacific.

Dr Pascal Dumas, a researcher at the Institute for Regional Development (IRD), has been working on the phenomenon in the Pacific for almost a decade.

Although this has always been a natural marine cycle for the starfish, climate change such as warming sea temperatures and nutrient run off from floods and drains into the sea are possible factors for the starfish’s population explosion.

Standing on or being scratched by a COT spine can cause serious illness and infection.

This makes fishing for those who live on the Pacific coastlines a dangerous chore.

Dumas, together with IRD colleague and information technology engineer, Sylvie Fiat, developed OREANET, an online COT monitoring system.

This was previously launched in Vanuatu and New Caledonia to keep track of where COT clusters were present or growing around the coast.The project is planned to begin in Fiji this year.

OREANET relies on “citizen science” by encouraging locals to report on COT observations and submitting this via an online form.

Those involved in ORENET will be working with community leaders and NGO’s to help rural communities gain access to the project.

• The University of South Pacific’s Pacific Centre for Environment & Sustainable Development (PaCE-SD) is hosting a weekly seminar for students during their semester. This week, they invited Dr Pascal Dumas and Sylvie Fiat from Vanuatu to inform the students about their project.

Ami Dhabuwala and Pacific Media Watch contributing editor TJ Aumua are in Fiji on a two-week “Bearing Witness” climate change journalism project with the University of the South Pacific.

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

In the year since the law on the protection of specially designated secrets took effect in Japan (72nd, down 11) in December 2014, many media outlets, including state-owned ones, succumbed to self-censorship, especially vis-à-vis the prime minister, and surrendered their independence.

In South Korea (70th, down 10), relations between the media and government have become much more fraught under President Park Geun-hye.

In Hong Kong (69th), where Chinese businessmen are increasingly interested in acquiring media outlets, media independence continued to be the main challenge for freedom of information.

In China (176th), the Communist Party took repression to new heights. Journalists were spared nothing, not even abductions, televised forced confessions and threats to relatives.

In a recent tour of the country’s leading news organisations, President Xi Jinping said the media “must love the Party, protect the Party, and closely align themselves with the Party leadership in thought, politics and action.”

He could not have made his totalitarian view of the media’s role any clearer.

After improving last year, Burma (143rd) and Philippines (138th) saw their scores decline in the 2016 index, revealing the limits of the reforms and measures taken to improve media freedom and safety.

Singapore (154th) suffered the region’s second biggest decline, after the Sultanate of Brunei (155th, down 34), where the gradual introduction of the Sharia and threats of blasphemy charges fuelled self-censorship.

The governments of India (133rd) and Bangladesh (144th) took little action in response to violence against media personnel and were sometimes directly involved in violations of their freedom.

Sri Lanka (141st, up 24 places) is the Asian country that rose most in the 2016 index. Its journalists no longer had to fear telephone threats or enforced disappearances encouraged by the Rajapaksa family, especially the former president’s brother, former Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa.

Its news media also fortunately recovered their former readiness to speak out even if they obviously still lag far behind the dynamism and combativeness of the media in Samoa (29th, up 11), where the Media Council law adopted in early 2015 decriminalised defamation, strengthened pluralism and gave the media more leeway to criticise.

In Tonga (37th, up 7), the independent media have progressively assumed their watchdog role since the first democratic elections in 2010.

In Fiji (80th, up 13), despite the threats that the constitution and legislation pose to journalists, the media have asserted their independence, improved the public debate and succumbed less and less to self-censorship.

“A fine Pacific island postcard,” reports RSF.

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

While abroad for a study exchange year in Melbourne, Connor Woodman discovered that Indonesia’s effort to thwart the independence movement of its troubled Papuan provinces spreads all the way to Australia’s urban heartlands.

Occupied by Indonesia since 1963, the western half of the island of New Guinea – known to advocates of independence as West Papua – has been the subject of extensive military and intelligence operations for decades.

Since the Dutch left what was then called Western New Guinea in 1962, both peaceful and armed advocates of independence have been targeted for imprisonment, extrajudicial assassination and harassment by the Indonesian police and army.

According to Papuans Behind Bars, a monitoring group, 38 West Papuan political prisoners remain in custody today.

One recent study described torture as a “mode of governance” in the provinces, and despite efforts by the Indonesian government to limit reporting, stories of killings of demonstrators still emerge.

But these abuses do not stop at Indonesia’s borders. So seriously does Indonesia take what it perceives as a threat to its territorial integrity, that its spies and diplomats target West Papuans and Australian citizens residing in Melbourne in a concerted attempt to undermine the overseas independence campaign.

“You can feel the presence of Indonesian intelligence,” says 24-year-old Ian Okoka, an indigenous West Papuan who now lives in Melbourne.

Indonesian photographers
“Every time we hold a rally, there’s always an Indonesian, usually a student, that comes and take pictures of us.”

Exactly that happened on April 29 last year at a rally outside the State Library of Victoria calling for international media to be allowed to enter West Papua. Two Indonesian men photographed the rally organisers until plain-clothed Victorian police officers told them to leave, according to the organisers.

Ronny Kareni, one of the organisers of the April 29 rally, received anonymous text messages last December threatening his then-pregnant wife. The messages warned him his wife would “pay” for his “activities”.

He has since decreased his general profile within the Free West Papua movement. Victoria police, Kareni says, have been investigating the texts, although they refused my request for comment.

Professor Damien Kingsbury of Deakin University has published on Indonesia for years, and was involved in the peace negotiations that ended an insurgency in the Aceh region of the country in 2005.

His Indonesian students confide in him that they are often “required to report to the consulate” in Melbourne about West Papuan activities.

“They report on activities, what individuals say publically or privately, their interpretation of the perspective of particular individuals in relation to Indonesia, whether they’re friendly or perceived to be hostile,” Kingsbury told me.

Controlling dissent
One tool used to control West Papuan dissent is financial. Some students come to Australia on a scholarship funded by the central Indonesian state or the provincial Papuan authorities, and the threat of cancellation of the scholarship can be used to keep them in line.

Ian Okoka studied at Deakin University on a scholarship from the nominally autonomous Papuan government, which in reality is heavily under the influence of Jakarta.

After he became involved in the independence movement in 2010, he noticed he was being followed by an Indonesian man when travelling on public transport in Melbourne.

“I had to change trams a couple of times to get away from him,” he recalls.

Following this event, funding for his studies was abruptly stopped.

“Because of my involvement with the Free West Papua campaign, they just cut my scholarship,” explains Okoka. He was informed via email that his return flight had been booked, and was offered no official explanation.

The latent threat of financial retribution appears to be gaining success in silencing those West Papuan students in Melbourne who support independence for their homeland.

Requested anonymity
I interviewed three other West Papuan students studying in Melbourne for this story, all of whom requested anonymity for fear of Indonesian retribution. All three students confirmed that they have tempered their activism around the question of independence, fearful of payback from the Indonesian authorities.

Two are on scholarships from the Indonesian government, and both voiced concern that their scholarships would be cut if they became involved in campaigning for a free West Papua.

A more sinister consequence of these operations is how they impact on those living in West Papua itself.

“Living in Australia at least we have freedom to express ourselves,” says Okoka. “Once you get your picture taken they’re not targeting you. What they do is they go to West Papua and target your family; by that method they shut you down.”

His father, who lives with the rest of the family in Jayapura, the provincial capital of Papua, received calls from the Indonesian government after Okoka’s scholarship was cut.

“When they cut my scholarship… my father had to take my family to live in a remote village to escape.” His family hid in rural West Papua for six months until they felt the threat had receded.

Another target of the Indonesian operations is Jacob Rumbiak, a native West Papuan and naturalised Australian citizen. He works in Melbourne at the office of the Department for Foreign Affairs, Immigration and Trade of the Federal Republic of West Papua.

The Federal Republic of West Papua operates as a “government-in-waiting” in the event of West Papuan independence, and Jacob Rumbiak is the Foreign Minister-in-waiting.

“When I use the telephone […] Jakarta knows in advance what I’m doing,” says Rumbiak. “Every time when I fly overseas, they’ve already put intelligence to follow me: Holland, Canada, Japan.”

Academic institutions targeted
Outspoken academics and educational institutions across Australia have been targeted by Indonesia. Professor Kingsbury himself has been on the receiving end of such attention.

When he asked the Indonesian consulate in Melbourne why his request for a visa to Indonesia had been constantly rebuffed, the consulate made it clear that the problem resided with his academic work and political views.

“I’ve been banned from Indonesia for over ten years”

“The consulate did say that if I was prepared to be more sympathetic to Indonesia, to write more sympathetic articles and so on, that they would look at having the ban lifted.”

Confidential internal documents leaked from the Indonesian army list overseas figures and intellectuals that the army perceives to be supporters of West Papuan independence.

These documents have been made available by the West Papua Project, part of the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Sydney.

One PowerPoint illustrating the army’s analysis, “Anatomy of Papuan Separatists”, has an entire slide dedicated to a profile of Jacob Rumbiak – clear evidence that the Indonesian authorities are monitoring him. The powerpoint also puts University of Sydney researcher Peter King at the top of a list of Australian “FOREIGN NGO NETWORKS/FOREIGN LEADERS IN SUPPORT OF FREE PAPUA”.

‘Top of hate list’
“I got to the top of their hate list,” Dr King explains.

He is co-convener of the West Papua Project and co-author of a number of papers on Indonesia’s rule in West Papua.

Camellia Webb-Gannon, coordinator of the West Papua Project, confirms that Indonesia similarly monitors West Papua protests in Sydney.

“Whenever the West Papua Project put on a public event then [Indonesia] send along someone from the embassy or consulate,” she says.

Pressuring academic institutions is not a new tactic for Indonesia.

In 2003, the Globalism Institute at RMIT University in Melbourne received “significant pressure” from the Indonesian embassy in the run up to a forum on West Papua, hosted by the institute, according to Professor Paul James, who was head of the institute at the time.

Indonesia pressured Canberra to refuse visas to forum speakers coming from overseas, and the Indonesian Charge d’Affaires at the time, Imron Cotan, made personal representations to RMIT regarding the forum, says Professor James. RMIT eventually requested the forum be moved from University premises.

Australian government complicity
It’s not just critical academics that irk Indonesia – any moves by the Australian government to protect West Papuans are met with a vocal response.

In January 2006, the Australian government granted 42 West Papuans protection visas as they fled Indonesian persecution in the territory. The refugees were settled in Melbourne, which Jakarta considered a challenge to its sovereignty over West Papua.

Hoping to rebuild bilateral relations, in November 2006 Canberra and Jakarta signed the Lombok Treaty, an agreement between the two nations on security cooperation.

Article 2, section 3 of the treaty states that each party:

Shall not in any manner support or participate in activities by any person or entity which constitutes a threat to the stability, sovereignty or territorial integrity of the other Party, including by those who seek to use its territory for encouraging or committing such activities, including separatism, in the territory of the other Party.

Concerns have been raised that this clause could infringe on the right of activists to peacefully express their desire for West Papuan independence, given that such advocacy could be construed by Indonesia as “separatism”.

“The Lombok Treaty has given great access to Indonesian intelligence to operate here and to monitor any activism or what they call ‘separatist’ movements,” explains Kareni, the West Papuan activist who helped organise the April 29 rally.

“This is what they use to pressure Canberra.”

Harassment increased
He says instances of harassment and surveillance by Indonesia increased after the signing of the treaty.

Human rights groups such as the Melbourne-based Human Rights Law Centre have also sounded the alarm over the Lombok Treaty. Their warnings now seem prescient.

In a Joint Press Statement during a 2013 visit to Jakarta, then-Prime Minister Tony Abbott said that, “the government of Australia takes a very dim view, a very dim view indeed, of anyone seeking to use our country as a platform for grand standing against Indonesia. We will do everything that we possibly can to discourage this and to prevent this.”

Echoing the language of the Lombok Treaty, he pledged to the then-President of Indonesia, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, “Australia’s total respect for Indonesia’s sovereignty, total respect for Indonesia’s territorial integrity”.

This was widely regarded as signalling support for Indonesia’s claims over West Papua.

Abbott was quoted in The Australian that same year as claiming that the “situation in West Papua is getting better not worse”.

Nonetheless, in 2014, Human Rights Watch wrote that in the past three years there had been:

Dozens of cases in which police, military, intelligence officers, and prison guards have used unnecessary or excessive force when dealing with Papuans exercising their rights to peaceful assembly and association. The government also frequently arrests and prosecutes Papuan protesters for peacefully advocating independence or other political change.

Since leaving office, Abbott has boasted how he “had West Papuan activists, who’d arrived in the Torres Strait claiming asylum, quietly returned to Papua New Guinea” during his premiership.

Economic interests, intimidation and resistance
Ultimately, Indonesia fears it will lose control over its West Papuan provinces, haunted by memories of the role played by the Australian movement for a free East Timor in ending the genocidal Indonesian occupation there at the turn of the millennium.

The Indonesian army reaps great economic rewards from its iron grip over Papua, and Western capitals are reluctant to pressure Jakarta on the issue. The largest open-pit gold mine in the world, Grasberg, operates in the territory.

The Australian-British company Rio Tinto will have a 40 percent stake in the mine by 2021.

“The whole reason for all this is that Indonesia is becoming quite concerned at the international focus that is being put on West Papua,” says Joe Collins of the West Papua Association in Sydney, which assists West Papuans campaigning for self-determination.

“That’s the main reason; they’ve begun to realise that the activists overseas are actually beginning to make headway in bringing attention to the human rights abuses so they are becoming quite concerned.”

The reason why Indonesia spends so much time intimidating campaigners is clear: putting pressure and keeping tabs on overseas activists keeps them afraid, and deters others from joining their efforts.

“There’s an implied threat, or a sense of threat, when people who are behaving lawfully within this country are being spied on by people from another country because of their activities here,” says Professor Kingsbury.

“If you were a pro-democracy Russian activist here in Australia […] you would be obviously concerned if you felt you were being spied on by people acting on behalf of the Russian Embassy. It’s much the same.”

Jacob Rumbiak is undeterred. After a life that has taken him from a guerrilla army in West Papua through several Indonesian prisons to his current role as Foreign Minister-in-exile, he will continue to fight for his homeland’s freedom despite Indonesia’s best efforts.

“Intelligence operations outside can’t solve the problem, but will create new problems […] They [Indonesians] show that they are colonial. They follow someone they should not follow. We do not create problems in Indonesian territory, we struggle in our own home.”

• The Indonesian Embassy in London, the consulate in Melbourne, and the Embassy in Canberra were all contacted but failed to reply to a request for comment.
• Connor Woodman is finishing a BA in politics, philosophy and economics at the University of Warwick, during which he did a year of study at Monash University in Melbourne, and is about to begin an MA in modern history. He is editor-in-chief of the Warwick Globalist and campaigns on environmental and higher education issues. This article was first published in Lacuna Magazine.

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

This was the statistics shared by Fiji Women’s Rights Movement executive director Tara Chetty during a human rights reporting workshop for senior journalists and government media officers in Nadi last week.

She added reporters needed to be gender sensitive and aware when reporting on issues relating to women and girls or on issues of national interest.

“Gender aware journalism matters because it promotes freedom of speech, good governance, reveals hidden stories, redefines news value and, most importantly, upholds human rights,” she said.

Chetty quoted an analysis conducted by FWRM communications officer Shazia Usman of media articles in the last ten days leading up to the 1999 and 2006 elections as an example of how disproportionate media reports are.

“Out of the total 471 items analysed, female election candidates were quoted only 10 per cent of the time. While female election candidates were only quoted a small per cent of the times, the data collected shows that the percentage was even worse when taking into account all females.”

Chetty added women were rendered “invisible” by the media’s omission of women and girls’ voices and images on matters of interest.

Men in media majority
“If we read, listen to, and watch those who are speaking in the media — those who are quoted in stories on events of the day — the majority are men, although women and men live in the societies reported on, and both have views on the events and issues.

“Certain categories of women receive even less attention in the media, such as elderly women, women with disability and women with different sexual orientations or gender identities.”

The Enhancing a Human Rights-based Approach to News Reporting Forum was organised by the Secretariat for the Pacific Community’s Regional Rights Resource Team in partnership with the Pacific Media Assistance Scheme, the Pacific Islands News Association and the University of the South Pacific’s Journalism Program.

The workshop, held at the Tanoa Skylodge Hotel, was supported by the Australian Government and the European Union.

HUMAN RIGHTS AND MEDIA FORUM
Human rights violations blamed on silence and ‘looking the other way’
Pacific journalists make human rights for the ‘voiceless’
Regional Rights Resource Team (RRRT)
Reporters urged to be gender sensitive
‘Tell the truth’ about West Papua

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

OPINION: By Professor Wadan Narsey

Just living in Australia for a few months and watching television, makes you see clearly, how the Fiji public is so badly denied by the poverty of Fiji media offerings and silent censorship

There are wonderful Australian media programmes such as Q and A, Insiders, Catalyst, Landline, Insights, Foreign Correspondent, Four Corners, to name just a few, not even mentioning the many specials every week on ABC and SBS.

Just in the past two months alone, Landline explored how an Australian sugarcane farmer, successfully intercropped rice to pander to his Vietnamese wife. Another intercropped with sunflowers for the seeds and oil, and mung beans (which Fiji farmers have also tried on a very small scale).But what really stands out are the many robust public policy debating programs with sharp neutrality such as Q and A (Tony Jones) or Insider (Barry Cassidy) or Insights, where Opposition MPs or politically neutral commentators are given equal weight to that of government voices.

Often, intelligent studio audiences are allowed to comment or give their verdict on particular utterances with applause or sceptical silence,

Of course, we all remember that once upon a time, Fiji Television also had very robust programmes, such as Close Up, but sadly, no more.

Despite the ending of open censorship by the Fiji government, an invidious silent self-censorship is denying the public access to “alternative voices”.

My personal individual experience of censorship by the premier university – University of the South Pacific, by the Fiji media and by the Fiji Bureau of Statistics is only the tip of the iceberg of a much wider “silent censorship of many”.

The one rare exception is The Fiji Times whose survival must be defended, or the public won’t know what they have got, until it is gone.

Open and silent censorship
In the past, media censorship was quite easy to prove. Censors were physically in the newsroom, expatriate newspaper publishers were being expelled, large fines or jail terms were being handed down by courts, and warnings were given to certain media organisations.

Today’s censorship is not obvious simply because no journalist, media organisation or educational institution will publicly own up to “self-censorship”. But it is abundantly clear that there is an absence of dissenting voices from forums such as Close Up, 4 The Record, Talk Business, and the many talkback shows on TV and radio.

My personal absence from these programmes is obvious to many, given my obvious prominence in previous years. Also absent are other “dissenting” voices like Opposition Members of Parliament or critical NGO leaders, while voices sympathetic to government are given maximum exposure.

What is missing in government circles is any adherence to the dictum attributed to Voltaire (or Evelyn Beatrice Hall): “I disagree with your views but I will defend to the death your right to express them.”

The one bright media light in Fiji, is The Fiji Times which continues to serve the public as a channel for alternative views and as a proper watchdog on the government of the day, despite operating financially on a less than level playing field.

It saddens me that the Fiji public continues to show total apathy to the censorship of individuals such as me, or blatant unfairness with taxpayers’ advertising funds shown to The Fiji Times, the proven most popular print media in Fiji.

Censorship from USP
This individual has been a senior USP economist, former parliamentarian and well-known media commentator, yet there is no public comment on his continued censorship by not just that university but also the mainstream media and a supposedly neutral government department like the Fiji Bureau of Statistics.

Despite my decades of service from 1973, USP asked me to resign in 2012, alleging financial pressure from the government.

In 2013, USP refused to allow the Faculty of Business and Economics to host the launching of my FBS Report on the 2008-09 Household Income and Expenditure Survey, and the associated policy workshops for civil servants, NGOs and other stakeholders.

In 2013, an invitation by the USP Journalism Students Association to speak at USP for World Media Freedom Day was withdrawn.

This prominent economist has been excluded from several panel discussions in his area of expertise, organised by USP departments, while expatriate professors have been welcomed.

One Economics Department panel discussion on the Fiji government’s re-issue of a F$500 million (NZ$ 345 million) bonds (to which I had been invited) was cancelled.

A special edition of the Journal of Pacific Studies on the 2014 Election, excluded all writings by this academic, while pro-government non-academic outsiders were invited to contribute.

USP’s censorship is not confined to me. It is on record, that one senior member of the university management was strongly warned not to associate socially with a particular Member of Parliament (and former USP academic) or even with one of his friends, also a senior academic at USP.

Other senior USP academics, not perceived favourably by the management are deprived of acting headships, despite their proven experience.

The USP Staff Association fails to defend members’ rights and privileges, while USP students have been actively discouraged from responsible political activity.

The once robust intellectual life at USP of both academics and students, has been severely eroded without any show of concern by the University Council or the public.

Censorship by FBS
It is public knowledge that my FBS Report on the 2010-11 Employment and Unemployment Survey (Fiji Women and Men at Work and Leisure) completed in 2013 has still not been published. This denies the Fiji public essential and fascinating statistical results on gender gaps in employment, incomes, unpaid household work, sports and leisure activities like sports, kava drinking, watching television, and religious gatherings.

It is understandable that the FBS management cannot protest publicly for fear of loss of their employment. But sadly, neither has there been any public protest from university academics, or NGOs (like FWRM, WCC, CCF, Transparency International) or professional organisations such as the Fiji Institute of Accountants or Fiji Law Society, or social leaders, who all should be interested in the statistical findings being censored.

The public will not know that while the FBS has completed a 2013-14 Household Income and Expenditure Survey, this data is being processed now with World Bank assistance, while a local academic who did this work with them for the past seven years, has been completely shut out, undermining the self-reliance that has been built up these past 10 years.

Yet objective and freely disseminated statistics from FBS is vital for public policy decisions.

Media censorship of one
After the 2009 abrogation of the 1997 Constitution, not just my articles but also many letters to the editor were not accepted for publication by both Fiji Sun and The Fiji Times even when copied to the Media Industry Development Authority (MIDA) chairman.

Media programmes such as Close Up, 4 The Record and Talk Business and the many radio talkback shows declined to invite this economist, who used to be ever-present on their programmes before 2009. On a rare positive note, just prior to the September 2014 Election, The Fiji Times began to publish and continues to publish my opinion pieces, sometimes only after vetting by its lawyers.

The Fiji public needs to appreciate the courage of The Fiji Times owners (Motibhai Patel family), FT publisher (Hank Arts) and editor (Fred Wesley) for their moral courage in producing a newspaper which remains the sole source of independent information in Fiji, and whose relative superiority has been independently verified by the Tebbutt Poll.

Lest we forget, in recent years, newspapers have been fined heavily, some expatriate publishers have been expelled, while editors have been given jail sentences.

A recent decision by government denying The Fiji Times fair access to taxpayers’ advertising funds, also drew no public comment from MIDA, the Commerce Commission, the Fiji Chambers of Commerce, or professional organisations such as the Fiji Institute of Accountants and Fiji Law Society, or NGOs (like FWRM, WCC, CCF, Transparency International) or social leaders, who all should be interested in ensuring that there is a robust competitive media environment.

If the Fiji public do not rise out of their apathy to defend the legitimate rights of The Fiji Times, then sadly, “the Fiji public won’t know what it has got, until it is gone”.

One day, they will also remember bitterly the words of Jawaharlal Nehru: “Evil unchecked grows and evil tolerated poisons the whole system.”

Oppressed people do leave
As occurred after the 1987 and 2000 military coups, there is also today an emigration of many educated and skilled people.

Sadly, that category now includes me, even though no comfortable refuge abroad will ever be the “home” that Fiji has been and will always be in my heart.

This will be my last article for The Fiji Times as I pursue professional work in Australia.

I thank the publisher, editor and other staff members of this newspaper who have facilitated my media contributions over the years.

I also thank its readers who have expressed appreciation for my articles.

Professor Wadan Narsey is adjunct professor at James Cook and Swinburne universities in Melbourne, Australia. This article was first published by The Fiji Times and is republished with the permission of the author.

Dr Wadan Narsey’s blog on fighting censorship in Fiji

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

And that is how journalists in Fiji and the Pacific should approach the ongoing human rights violations happening in West Papua.

This was the key message highlighted by Professor David Robie, journalist, author and director of the Auckland University of Technology’s Pacific Media Centre, as he gave The Fiji Times a sweeping snapshot of issues he thought were important for journalists in the region.

“From a journalist’s point of view, it is a human rights issue,” he said.

He said as far as he was concerned, journalists had a responsibility to cover widely, and as often as they could, West Papua’s call for self-determination — a 50-year plus struggle for liberation from Indonesian occupation.

“They are Pacific. They should never be lost sight of. That is one reason the media in the Pacific should latch on to the significance of this struggle and how important it is to the Pacific.

“For me, the biggest and most staggering human rights issue in the Pacific is West Papua. This has to be a global story.”

‘Untold story’
He said the absence or lack of coverage of this “untold story” had much to do with journalists and editors being unaware and indifferent to a struggle that had persisted for so long.

“The trouble is this all comes back to journalism and telling the truth. If the truth is not being told, how do people respond?

“For some reason many media are also indifferent, they don’t actually realise this is a big story.”

Dr Robie was chief guest at the Human Rights and Media Forum attended last week by senior journalists and government communication officers from 13 Pacific countries.

Supported by the Australian Government and European Union, the forum reaffirmed the vital role of the media in highlighting human rights issues and the importance of news reporting with a human rights-based approach.

Dr Robie said over the past two years there had been a dramatic change to awareness of the plight of West Papua and attributed this to social media, a platform that had allowed the West Papuans to tell their stories themselves, despite the restrictions placed on foreign journalists.

Human rights agencies vary in their estimates of the number of indigenous Papuans who have died since Indonesia first invaded the region – then a Dutch colony – in 1962 and wresting control through the UN-organised “Act of Free Choice” in 1969 widely regarded as a sham. However, a Sydney University academic’s report alleging “secret genocide” estimated 100,000 deaths.

Atrocities evidence
“The West Papuans have been able to get evidence of human rights atrocities in a way that other NGOs and media can pick up and so now through social media the story can be told more widely.”

He said he hoped the Australia and New Zealand media would commit themselves to providing more coverage on the issue.

West Papua is the western half of the island of New Guinea, just 200 km north of Australia.

Over time, Dr Robie said, the West Papua issue could also become a major source of instability in the Pacific as it would have implications across the border with refugees.

He said in countries such as Vanuatu and Papua New Guinea — where citizens were sympathetic — there were West Papua communities already established and exiles were travelling around the region telling their stories.

“So for journalists there are many people there for journalists to interview, to keep the stories alive and tell the truth, any opportunity you get, write the story.”

Dr Robie said it was encouraging that West Papua had achieved observer status in the Melanesian Spearhead Group. With the support of the Solomon Islands, and social media’s ability to push information and supporters to the forefront, he said the region should be ready for some significant changes in media coverage.

Learn from history
Political leaders, he said, should also learn from history.

“East Timor’s invasion was treated like a lost cause. The media saw it largely as a non-issue because governments recognised the sovereignty of the Indonesian government, even though it was invaded illegally.

“People used to say East Timor would never be independent but 24 years later it did, at a terrible cost.

“It’s a lesson for us. Somehow we don’t learn from history. Because if it happened in East Timor then hope should not be lost for West Papua.

“Unfortunately political leaders are a long way behind the reality of what is happening.

“It’s a real important story for Pacific journalists. Human rights is beyond trade. Human rights should actually override trade. Many countries in the world turned their backs on a major human rights violation. Human rights violations is the main issue that the story should be told from.

“Ultimately, history will move on and the leaders that don’t recognise this now will be exposed in time. West Papua coverage is in the context of human rights issues and the accountability processes, there is no accountability in a whole range of areas. Through social media more people are asking questions and there is more debate and discussions about the situation in West Papua.”

Dr Robie said as credible sources, churches were critically important to discussions on West Papua.

He said fortunately, through the commitment of leaders and researchers, the churches had been generally able to publicise reports in a systematic way.

The forum was organised by the Regional Rights Resource Team (RRRT) of the Pacific Community (SPC) in partnership with the Pacific Media Assistance Scheme (PACMAS), the Pacific Islands News Association (PINA) and the University of the South Pacific (USP) Journalism Programme.

HUMAN RIGHTS AND MEDIA FORUM
Human rights violations blamed on silence and ‘looking the other way’
Pacific journalists make human rights for the ‘voiceless’
Regional Rights Resource Team (RRRT)
Reporters urged to be gender sensitive

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Thompson Marango in Port Vila

The Supreme Court decision to ban the 14 convicted former MPs from holding public offices in Vanuatu for 10 years has been upheld after the appeal by two of the former politicians was dismissed by the Appeal Court.

The principle argument of the appeal was that the MPs were no longer leaders when the ban was made last December after the Leadership Code charges were invoked by the Public Prosecutor.

The two appellants, Willie Jimmy and Silas Yatan, claimed the December decision should have happened earlier in October when they were initially convicted for bribery and corruption. They said they were no longer leaders when the ban was made.

“In our opinion this argument is misconceived,” the Appeal Court ruled in its judgment on Friday.

“The provisions in the Leadership Code, section 41, 42 and 43 are not substantial, they are in a nature of sanction here because of the conviction of the corruption case.”

The Appeal judges added in their ruling that the provisions simply followed the conviction on the bribery charges.

“They do not create new offences,” the Appeal Court ruled.

Suspended MPs
The Supreme Court suspended the former MPs’ rights to hold public office last year according to  Section 41 of the Leadership Code that covers the dismissal of a leader from office and Section 42 ‘Disqualification from future office’: “Where the leader is dismissed from office under section 41 the leader is disqualified from standing for election as, or being appointed as, a leader of any kind for a period of 10 years from the date of the conviction”.

Section 43 on “Loss of benefits” further stipulates: “If the leader is entitled to any other payment or allowance, on ceasing to be a leader, as a result of being dismissed from office under this Act, the entitlement ceases”.

The Leadership Code charges were originally part of the case during Preliminary Inquiry stages in the Magistrate Court.

When admitting the case to Supreme Court, the Chief Magistrate dropped the charges saying the Ombudsman would have to issue a report.

An Ombudsman report was made and the charges were added to the case by Supreme Court Judge, Mary Sey.

After the conviction of the bribery case the process followed by the Ombudsman investigation was challenged and the report was later declared null and void.

Leadership charges
The Leadership Code charges were brought back to the case following the appeal judgment on the bribery case  last year.

The Public Prosecutor last year had requested the Appeal Court during the bribery case appeal hearing for the Leadership Code charges not to be considered so that if the appeal is dismissed he would proceed under sections 41 and 42 of the Leadership Code seeking an order for dismissal of each of the appellants at that time from office.

The bribery appeal case was dismissed.

The Public Prosecutor then invoked the Leadership Code charges and this led to the Supreme Court’s decision in December 2015 on the 10-year ban.

The appeal by Jimmy and Yatan on the 10-year ban was dismissed on Friday.

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

Greenpeace New Zealand has called for the “linchpin” of New Zealand’s climate policy to be thrown out following a report released today that shows the New Zealand government has allowed businesses to buy fraudulent carbon credits from Russia and Ukraine

Greenpeace NZ climate campaigner Simon Boxer said today the report from the Morgan Foundation was proof that New Zealand’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), a policy which allows companies to offset their pollution by buying ‘carbon credits’ from other companies that pollute less, was “nothing but hot air”.

“It’s a total bloody waste of time. The ETS was a policy that was purposefully made to sound boring and dense so people wouldn’t dig deeper into it,” he said.

“But the reality is it doesn’t clean up pollution at all – in fact it actually allows businesses to make a profit from pollution. Under the National government, this scheme is a scam.

“It’s a climate crime.”

Complicit dealings
The Morgan Foundation report, called Climate Cheats, outlines how the New Zealand government has been complicit in the dealing of fraudulent carbon credits manufactured by organised crime in Russia and Ukraine.

The countries use loopholes in international rules to create millions of false carbon credits that have no environmental benefit, and then sell them at bargain rates to the world market.

The European Union banned trade in these dodgy credits in 2013, but Boxer said New Zealand had continued to use them because they were cheap, despite the government knowing they were fraudulent.

Even worse, he said, was the fact that the use of these credits was one of the ways the NZ government planned to meet its climate targets for 2020.

“It’s another excuse for John Key to sit back, relax and do what he does best – which is absolutely nothing,” Boxer said.

“If he was serious about the communities he represents, he would do real-life things like shut the coal burners at Huntly Power Station and promote renewable energy like wind and solar.

“He would be backing green farming, rather than driving huge and costly irrigation schemes, which industrialise our farms, bankrupt New Zealand’s farmers, and allow our rivers and lakes to become so dirty they could make you sick.

“Most importantly, if he were a decent bloke, Key would not allow our environmental policy to be driven by a scam scheme that implicates us all in the heart of a global scandal.”

The Morgan Foundation report comes mere weeks after the release of the Panama Papers, which show New Zealand’s lax tax laws make it a pseudo tax-haven for foreign companies.

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

[embedded content]

The Dokhtar Forooshi song Sonita – “Brides for Sale”.

Amnesty International has criticised the denial of a visa for Iranian film director Rokhsareh Ghaemmaghami who is due to visit New Zealand during the Documentary Edge Film Festival next month.

This award-winning documentary, Sonita, addresses the issue of forced marriage in Iran.

Through the journey of a young Afghan refugee turned rapper living in Tehran, Sonita Alizada narrowly escapes forced marriage at 16 by writing the song “Brides for Sale”.

A human rights activist, Ghaemmaghami was due to speak at screenings of the documentary and also to feature as a guest masterclass speaker at an international industry event.

Amnesty International, sponsor of the documentary, said in a statement today that the Screen Edge Forum was giving New Zealand audiences the opportunity to explore these important issues.

“Film directors are often the target of crackdowns by governments in their own countries,
but it is deeply concerning to see our own country rejecting this visa application”, said Margaret Taylor, activism manager at Amnesty International.

“Rokhsareh plans to visit several other countries such as Australia, Turkey and the United States on her worldwide tour to promote this documentary, so it’s surprising that New Zealand has rejected her application on the grounds that she may be a flight risk.”

Amnesty International said it would like to hear more from Immigration New Zealand on how officials came to this decision and the organisation would welcome a reassessment of this case.

Sonita will screen at The Roxy in Miramar, Wellington, on May 13-15 and at Q Theatre, Auckland, on May 19-29.

The festival has set up a petition calling for Immigration NZ to reverse its decision on
Rokhsareh Ghaemmaghami’s visa.

You can add your name here.

–]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

[embedded content]

Ice melt, sea level rise and superstorms … Professor Hansen speaks on the science and implications. Video: Climate Science, Awareness and Solutions

An “alarming” new study by Professor James Hansen predicts rapid sea level rise and more intense superstorms. What could this mean for Pacific nations? Dominic Pink reports for Asia Pacific Report.

Last month was the hottest March on record, according to satellite data. This follows the hottest February on record, and a December-February warm streak which set a record for the highest departure from average global temperature for any three-month period.

March also saw the publication of a “bombshell” new climate change study by Professor James Hansen and 18 co-authors, which has been making waves in the media and inspiring much debate among climate scientists.

Hansen, considered “the father of climate change awareness”, outlines a scenario where a growing ice melt could cause 2 to 5 metres of sea level rise by the end of the century if global warming stays at 2° C – significantly faster than the less-than-1 metre projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

“A more immediate threat is the likelihood of shutting down the oceans’ overturning circulations in the North Atlantic and Southern Ocean,” Hansen says in his accompanying video address, detailing a previously uncovered feedback link between the oceans and giant ice sheets in Antarctica and Greenland.

“These feedbacks raise questions about how soon we will pass points of no return in which we will lock-in consequences that cannot be reversed on any time scale that people care about.”

Hansen describes a future with “superstorms stronger than any in modern times” and the potential “loss of all coastal cities, most of the world’s largest cities and all of their history”.

Plausible and ‘alarming’
Commenting on Hansen’s study, Professor James Renwick of Victoria University found the research to be plausible and “alarming”, although he thinks the time scale of change will be slower than Hansen suggests.

“Having said that, there is an important message here. Even if it takes 200 years rather than 50 years, we may well already be locked-in to very large changes in sea level and climate.”

Jason Garman of Oxfam NZ considers the study to be “another in a long line of serious warnings from the best climate scientists in the world that we’re not taking action fast enough”.

“If we’re going to have several metres of sea level rise within 50 years, 150 years or 250 years, we’re still talking about ultimately the same thing, which is … the potential end of cultures here in the Pacific that have been around for tens of thousands of years. This is a tremendous injustice and it should be a wake-up call.”

A recent study by the United Nations University Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU-EHS) found that nearly everyone surveyed on the low-lying Pacific Island nations of Kiribati, Tuvalu and Nauru had been affected by climate change.

Sea level rise, saltwater intrusion, droughts and floods have resulted in forced migration, with 23 percent of migrants in Kiribati naming climate change as a reason to relocate, and 70 percent of households seeing migration as a likely response if conditions worsened.

In May 2014, Kiribati’s government purchased 2430ha of land in Fiji, where its 110,000 population would potentially relocate to avoid a humanitarian crisis should sea levels continue to rise.

Fact-finding mission
Labour Party’s Pacific Climate Change spokesperson Su’a William Sio has just returned from a fact-finding mission to Kiribati and Tuvalu.

“For the rest of the world climate change might be an emerging issue, but for these Pacific Islands it is a present issue, they’re having to deal with it on a day-to-day basis.”

Sio encountered many young i-Kiribati voicing disappointment over what they see as New Zealand and Australia “dragging their feet” over addressing climate change.

“On a number of levels we’ve got this connection with the Pacific, and we do have a responsibility to step up and stand in solidarity with them,” Sio says.

“There’s a real need for us to have a long-term migration with dignity plan in place … What I saw was some of the outer islands of both Tuvalu and Kiribati are no longer inhabitable because of constant flooding with their rising tides. So we’ve got to help these islands plan for migration.”

In the wake of the “historic” Paris climate agreement, Sio shared i-Kiribati concerns, saying “the international community patted itself on the back last year… but so far there is no action that is going to reduce global warming right now… at the moment the Pacific are fighting for their lives.”

Paula Bennett, the National government’s Minister for Climate Change, responded by highlighting that next week New Zealand will sign the Paris climate agreement, which “will serve as the foundation of the action the world takes to transition to a low carbon economy.”

Ratification next
“Our next steps are to work on the operational details of the agreement that will enable us to move towards domestic ratification.”

Bennett also said New Zealand had committed to spending $200 million to “support our Pacific friends and neighbours adapt to the effects of climate change”.

While acknowledging that Paris “was a great diplomatic achievement”, Renwick worries that it may “lull us into a false sense of security”, and he remains critical of National’s climate change policy.

“The government’s plan to meet targets involves buying emissions credits from overseas — riding on the efforts of others — and by use of the ETS (Emissions Trading Scheme), which is completely ineffective”.

Bennett explained that the global market for emissions credits is “a key way to help us meet our targets while we work on a long-term plan to make genuine changes to our economy.”

“This is especially true for sectors that cannot quickly or affordably lower their emissions without gutting businesses and potentially impacting on New Zealanders’ jobs. We need fewer emissions going into the atmosphere, and it doesn’t practically matter where these reductions come from.

“Buying emissions from others like developing nations is also an important way of supporting those countries attempting to grow in a sustainable way.”

Renwick, however, urges more action, pointing to the Green Party’s 2015 plan for reducing emissions as an ideal for New Zealand.

“We need proper carbon pricing, a move away from dairying, electrification of the car fleet, and investment on public transport.”

Dominic Pink is an Auckland-based student journalist reporting on AUT’s Asia-Pacific Journalism course.

–]]>