My name is Campion Ohasio, and I am currently the only political cartoonist in Solomon Islands.

In recent weeks, I have received many questions and comments from people across the country about my cartoons.

Some ask why I draw our national leaders in certain ways. Others wonder whether my caricatures are personal attacks or whether they violate the leaders’ rights.

A few have even suggested that I should stop drawing critical cartoons.

I would like to take this opportunity to explain my work clearly and honestly.

As the only political cartoonist in our nation today, my job is simple: I use drawings to comment on the decisions, actions, policies, and laws made by our leaders.

My cartoons are not meant to attack any leader as a person or as a human being. Instead, they highlight issues that affect ordinary Solomon Islanders — issues such as corruption, poor governance, broken promises, and policies that may not serve the public interest.

Public figures hold power
In a democracy like ours, national leaders are public figures. They hold power on behalf of the people, and the people have every right to question how that power is used.

Political cartoons are one peaceful and creative way for citizens to express their views and hold leaders accountable.

As response to the many questions I have received. I believe healthy criticism is not an insult; it is an important part of democracy. Through my cartoons, I hope to encourage Solomon Islanders to think critically, ask questions, and stay engaged in the affairs of our country.

I remain committed to drawing honest cartoons that reflect the realities facing our people, always with the hope that our leaders will listen, improve, and serve the public interest better.

Thank you for your interest in my work.

A political caricature (also called a political cartoon) is a funny or exaggerated drawing that comments on a leader’s decisions, policies, or actions. It uses humour, symbols, and exaggeration to make a point about what the leader is doing in his public role.

Many people mistakenly think that a caricature is a personal attack on the leader as a human being. This is not true.

Eight reasons why leaders’ human rights are not violated
Here are eight reasons why cartoons and caricatures are not a violation of the leader’s human rights:

1 What a political caricature actually does: It criticises the actions, decisions, or policies of the leader.

It does not attack the leader’s basic human rights (such as the right to life, dignity, safety, or personal freedom). It focuses on the leader’s public role, not his private life as a father, husband, or ordinary person.

2 Why it isn’t a personal attack on human rights: Leaders are public figures. When someone becomes a president, prime minister, or national leader, they voluntarily step into the public spotlight. Their decisions affect thousands of citizens. Because of this, they must accept public criticism, including through cartoons and satire.

3 Criticism targets power, not the person: A caricature usually mocks a bad policy, a broken promise, corruption, or a harmful decision: not the leader’s race, family, or basic humanity. For example, drawing a leader as a big balloon floating away from reality is criticising his disconnection from people’s problems, not denying his right to exist.

4 Satire and humour are protected forms of free speech: In a democracy, freedom of expression includes the right to use humour and exaggeration to comment on those in power. Political caricatures have a long history of helping people understand and question government actions.

5 It doesn’t take away basic rights: Drawing a funny or critical cartoon does not stop the leader from: Living safely, having a family, practicing his religion, speaking freely, receiving fair treatment in court. These are real human rights. A caricature does not remove any of them.

6 Public accountability requires public criticism: Leaders exercise public power using taxpayers’ money. Citizens have the legitimate right to comment on how that power is used. Caricatures are one peaceful, creative way to do this.

7 Confusion between criticism and hate: Some leaders or supporters claim any negative drawing is “hate speech” or a human rights violation. This is usually an attempt to avoid accountability. Legitimate political satire is very different from threats, violence, or calls for harm.

8 Thin-skinned leaders weaken democracy: If leaders cannot handle a simple drawing or joke about their policies, it shows they may not be ready for the public scrutiny that comes with power. Strong leaders accept criticism; weak ones try to ban it.

For example: If a cartoon shows a leader pouring money into his own pocket while the people are hungry, it is highlighting possible corruption or bad priorities. It is not saying the leader has no right to live or be treated with dignity. It is saying: “Your policy or action is wrong.”

A political caricature is a form of peaceful criticism, not a personal attack. It doesn’t remove or violate any of the leader’s fundamental human rights. Instead, it exercises the public’s right to question those who hold power.

In a true democracy, leaders must learn to live with satire and criticism. Their job is to serve the people: and the people have the right to laugh, question, and point out when the leader is failing in that duty.

Criticising a leader’s actions through a caricature is about holding power accountable, not denying the leader’s humanity or human rights.

Campion Ohasio is a Solomon Islands-based self-taught visual artist, graphic designer, and prominent political cartoonist known for capturing South Pacific social issues. He gained early recognition in the 1990s for his work on Uni Tavur at the University of Papua New Guinea and later as a editor for the Solomons Voice. This commentary is republished with the author’s permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Tairāwhiti tā moko artists Maia Gibbs and Henare Brooking designed the jersey the Warriors wore in their Indigenous Round National Rugby League match against Newcastle Knights last Saturday.

The jersey, called Te Amokura, is a powerful expression of connection, unity and identity developed in partnership with Puma and Gisborne’s Toi Ake Maori art gallery.

Maia Gibbs (Ngāi Tāmanuhiri, Rongowhakaata, Ngāti Kahungungu) and Henare Brooking (Ngāti Porou, Rongowhakaata, Te Whānau-ā-Apanui, Ngāti Kahungunu, Ngāti Tūwharetoa) run the gallery located in Ballance Street Village.

It was set up about two years ago following the first covid-19 lockdown.

Gibbs said the jersey needed to “encompass what the club and team represent”.

“We are the paintbrushes and pencils that put it together but the players are the ones that live their lives under a microscope. This is about them and what they want to represent.

“It’s pretty cool to see our tohu holding its own,” he said.

Powerful expression
“I’m humbled to have had the opportunity to work on this project and see it come to life — even more so to do it along side taku tuakana Henare Brooking.

“To have the support of our iwi, hapū and whānau throughout is really special and we thank you all,” he said.

Te Amokura is a powerful expression of the Warriors’ connection, unity and identity. It takes its inspiration from the manu (bird) of the same name, known across the Pacific, Australia and Aotearoa.

The amokura helped the great navigators of the Pacific chart the largest body of water in the world.

It is known for its two distinct red elongated tail feathers which were highly prized by foremost warriors and chiefs throughout Te moana nui a Kiwa.

These are represented by two red strips on the back of the jersey.

The colours represent significant elements of the club’s identity but also the journey over the last three seasons, and the sacrifices made by players and staff to base themselves away from home, their families and their fans.

The collective whakapapa
Blue represents mana moana — the ocean — that connects Aotearoa, Australia and the Pacific, carrying the collective whakapapa.

Green represents mana whenua — the land — Aotearoa acknowledging the Warriors’ true home and importantly Australia’s mana whenua, the Aboriginal whanaunga and the original people of Australia who hosted the team over the last three seasons.

Red represents mana tāngata — the people — connecting players past, present and future, and interweaving the whakapapa of each individual as they move into the field of battle.

The black represents Te Pō — a place of development and learning — while the white is Te Ao — a place of expression and action.

The jersey is like a korowai (cloak) that adorns the wearer, not just as a jersey but as a representation of their own journey.

It is a celebration of the Warriors’ cultural identity and a representation of the connection they share as indigenous people across the world.

This year’s NRL Indigenous Round focused on creating a space for learning and educating Australians about Indigenous culture as well as encouraging the rugby league community to take three key actions to be part of the change — learn the land; learn the history; support an Indigenous business.

Note: Te Amokura is also the Te Reo Māori name of the Pacific Media Centre, which launched this website Asia Pacific Report in 2016. Asia Pacific Report is now published independently in association with Evening Report and Pacific Journalism Review.

Republished with permission by The Gisborne Herald and NZ On Air.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Artist Dinar Candy has held a protest action over the extension of Indonesia’s Enforcement of Restrictions on Public Activities (PPKM) by wearing a bikini on the side of a road in Jakarta, reports CNN Indonesia.

During the action, Candy also brought a banner with the message, “I’m stressed out because the PPKM has been extended”.

Candy was arrested by police last Wednesday, August 3, about 9.30 pm near Jalan Fatmawati in South Jakarta. She was taken directly to the South Jakarta district police for questioning.

In addition to this, police also confiscated material evidence in the form of a mobile phone belonging to Candy, which is alleged to have been used to record the protest.

And it was not only Candy. Her younger sister and assistant were also questioned by police for recording the protest at Candy’s request.

After being questioned by police, who also sought advice from an expert witness on morality and culture, Candy was then declared a suspect.

“We have declared DC as a suspect for an alleged act of pornography,” South Jakarta district police chief Senior Commissioner Azis Andriansyah told journalists on Thursday.

Candy has been charged under Article 36 of Law Number 44/2008 on Pornography which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison or a fine of 5 billion rupiah (NZ$987,000).

Candy not detained
Despite being declared a suspect, police have not detained Candy who is only obliged to report daily. Andriansyah said that Candy’s protest wearing a bikini did not heed cultural norms.

This is because Candy’s action was held in Indonesia where there are cultural and religious norms which apply in society.

“Anything that is done in Indonesia [is subject to] existing norms, there are ethics, there are cultural norms, there are religious norms which apply in our society, now, the actions of the person concerned did not pay heed to cultural norms,” said Andriansyah.

A number of parties, however, believe that Candy’s bikini protest does not need to be prosecuted under law.

National Commission on Violence Against Women (Komnas Perempuan) Commissioner Theresia Iswarini believes that Candy did not commit a crime even though she wore a bikini during the protest. She suspects that Candy’s protest was related to mental health issues.

“It would indeed be best, it has to be thought about, [although] this [wearing a bikini in public] is indeed inappropriate, but it does not mean she committed a crime, remember,” Iswarini told CNN Indonesia.

The Jakarta Legal Aid Foundation (LBH), meanwhile, is worried that the state is going too far in regulating what people wear in public. LBH Jakarta lawyer Teo Reffelsen is of the view that in the future the state could enforce its own values on what the public wears.

“If so, then eventually our prisons will be full just because people wear bikinis,” Reffelsen said.

Translated by James Balowski for IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was “Protes Bikini Dinar Candy Berujung Jerat UU Pornografi”.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz