A recent webinar hosted by the Pacific Network on Globalisation (PANG) brought together minds from across the region to delve into the intricate issues of the digital economy and data value.

The webinar’s focus was clear — shed light on who was shaping the rules of the digital landscape and how these rules were taking form.

At the forefront of the discussion was the delicate matter of valuing and protecting indigenous knowledge.

PANG’s deputy coordinator, Adam Wolfenden, emphasised the need for open conversations spanning various sectors.

“It is a call to understand and safeguard the wisdom embedded in Pacific worldviews and indigenous knowledge systems as we venture into the digital world,” he said.

But amid the promise of the digital age, challenges persisted.

Wolfenden said the Pacific’s scattered islands faced the formidable obstacle of connectivity.

“Communities yearn to tap into online technologies, yet structural barriers stand tall. The connectivity challenges and structural barriers that are faced by the Pacific region are substantial and there is no easy, cheap fix,” he said.

He underscored the necessity of regional partnerships, even beyond the Pacific.

“As they sought to build advanced digital infrastructures, they realised that strength lay in unity. The journey towards progress means joining hands with fellow developing nations.

“It is a testament to the shared dream of progress that transcends geographical boundaries.”

The first step, Wolfenden believed, was awareness.

He said the Pacific region needed to be fully informed about ongoing negotiations, what rules were being carved, and how these might affect the region’s autonomy and data sovereignty.

“Often, these negotiations remain hidden from public view, shrouded in secrecy until agreements were reached. This has to change; transparency is vital,” Wolfenden said.

Beyond this, there was a call for broader discussions during the webinar. The digital economy was not just about buyers and sellers in a virtual marketplace.

It was about preserving culture, empowering communities, and ensuring that indigenous knowledge was never left vulnerable to the whims of the digital age.

Ema Ganivatu and Brittany Nawaqatabu are final year journalism students at The University of the South Pacific. They are also senior editors for Wansolwara, USP Journalism’s student training newspaper and online publications. Republished in a collaborative partnership with Asia Pacific Report.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Do the Fiji news media represent a wide range of political perspectives?
Fiji’s national media, like media elsewhere, would cover a wider berth collectively, rather than as individual media organisations, because individual media have obvious leanings and priorities.

But do the media, even as whole, provide a wide enough perspective?
Not always – media coverage is discriminatory by nature, even by necessity, some would argue.

Besides media’s commercial priorities and political biases, there are resource and logistical constraints to consider, as well as professional capacity development challenges. Inevitably, certain individuals and groups fall through the cracks.

Generally, the political elites, and to some extent the business lobby tend to receive proportionality greater coverage because they are deemed more important and more sellable than the less prominent, prosperous or powerful in society.

Internationally, research indicates that women are among the disadvantaged groups consigned to the margins of political coverage, along with youth.

Then there’s the question of political parties. Are they treated equal?
Usually, the dominant party, and/or the governing party, which can marshal the most resources, gets the lion’s share of coverage, and follows in descending order.

In Fiji, the governing party regularly accuses some media of being anti-government, especially The Fiji Times. Meanwhile, the opposition complain that they are ignored by the Fiji Sun and the Fiji Broadcasting Corporation, whom they label pro-government media.

Fiji media weaned on Anglo-American news tradition
The Fiji media were weaned on the Anglo-American news reporting tradition, based on journalistic objectivity as an ethos. This calls for reporting the “facts” in a neutral, unattached manner.

Because objectivity is neither possible nor ideal in every situation, the media can, and will take a stance on certain issues, political or otherwise. The compromise is that any such leanings are confined to the opinion sections. The news section must remain objective, unbiased and untainted by opinion.

However, it is a slippery slope, and the lines between news and opinion have become blurred, both in Fiji and abroad. Nowadays, it is not unusual to see opinion masquerading as news.

Different media commentators have different takes about the risks and benefits of this trend. At best it is a mixed bag, depending on the issue on hand.

Media can support government policy out of conviction, but not out of pecuniary/financial interests. Even if they take a certain stance, media should still provide reasonably equal coverage to opposing views. Especially state media since it is tax-payer funded.

Ideally, state media should give opposing views a fair hearing, but in the Pacific, the reality is different. State media, by policy, serve as government mouthpieces.

The surest way to know if media represent wide a political perspective is through research. USP Journalism is examining Fiji’s 2018 election coverage data with Dialogue Fiji, and preliminary results indicate a clear bias on the part of all media – some far more than others.

Complex variables for media bias
While the Fiji media do have their favourites, analysing media bias can be complex because there are so many variables to consider. For one, media bias is not only intentional, but unintentional as well.

For example, if a politician or political party refuses to talk to a certain media, then the bias is self-inflicted. The media can hardly be blamed for it.

The bottom line is that the Fiji public know by now their media’s stances. While the media have an obligation to be fair and balanced, the public have the right to choose not to consume media that are deliberately biased.

Do Fiji media exercise self-censorship?
It’s obvious that media exercise a greater level of self-censorship since the 2006 coup and the punitive 2010 Fiji Media Industry Development Act. There are several reports attesting to this, including IDEA’s Global Media-Integrity indices.

The indices show that the Fiji media have been bolder since 2013, yes, but they will not cross a certain line – the fines and jail terms in the Media Act are not worth the risk.

While no one has been charged under the Act so far, it’s like having an axe on your neck because the lettering in the Act is quite broad. For instance, any news reports that are “against the national interest” is a breach of the Act, without clearly defining what constitutes “against national interest”.

This means that there are any number of reports that could be deemed to be against the “national interest”.

An ordeal in terms of stress
Even if in the end the charges don’t stick, just going through the hearing process would be an ordeal in terms of the stress, both financial and emotional.

In 2015, the fines and jail terms for journalists were removed from the Act. Was this impactful in reducing self-censorship? Not necessarily, because the editors’ and publishers’ penalties were retained.

The editor, and to some extent the publisher, are the newsroom gatekeepers – they would put a leash on their journalists to protect themselves and their investment.

So, media are trying to live with the Act and operate around its parameters. Rather than take big risks, they are taking calculated risks, such as a degree of self-censorship, so that they can live to fight another day.

Is criticism of the government common?
The answer is both yes and no — criticism is common with some media, not all media.

There is not as much criticism as before the Act, but still a fair amount of criticism — under the circumstances. Private media such as The Fiji Times stand out for their critical reporting, as well as Fiji Village, more recently.

The FBC and the Fiji Sun are on the record saying that they have pro-government policies, and this is reflected in their coverage.

Blind eye to goverment faults
Of course, being pro-government policy would not mean turning a blind eye to the government’s faults, or endlessly singing its praises.

Some complain that Fiji media in general are not critical enough — such people do not fully understand the context that media work in, or appreciate the risks they take — on a daily basis.

Government accusations usually come with the territory. But because of the Act, the government criticism is menacing. So given the context, I don’t buy fully into claims that the media are not critical enough.

Besides its news reporting, The Fiji Times gives space to government critics in its letters columns, and hosts columnists ranging from opposition members, academics and civil society representatives.

Could there be more criticism? Should there be more criticism?
My answer to both is “yes”. But the criticism needs to be measured, as well as fair and balanced.

In the last IDEA session, University of Hawai’i professor Tacisius Kabutaulaka stated that the quality of media reporting was part of media freedom. I agree — the two cannot be separated. Just as a fawning, biased media is bad for democracy, so is a negative, overly-critical media.

Region’s toughest media law
Fiji’s Media-Integrity graph has improved since 2013 but is still among the lowest in the region. Why so?

Fiji has the lowest ranking in the region, simply because it has the toughest media law in the region. There was some improvement in the rankings because of the 2013 constitution and the 2014 elections. Compared to military rule, this signalled a return to a form of democratic order.

But as long as the Act is in place, the media are government-regulated. In a fuller democracy, the media are self-regulated, as Fiji’s media used to be.

Also, the two-day media coverage blackout on the 2018 elections would have affected Fiji’s ranking as well. The ban was seen to restrict political debate at a crucial time.

The contempt of court charge against a government critic and The Fiji Times sedition trial all affected Fiji’s rankings.

How can Fiji media improve?
Addressing the issues concerning the Act could be a starting point. For one, the Act was imposed on the media; for another, it has not been reviewed in over 10 years.

I suggest a roundtable of stakeholders to review and update the act. The government, the media and other interested parties can get together to find common ground and apply it in the Act to come up with a more acceptable arrangement.

Shailendra B Singh is associate professor in Pacific journalism and coordinator of the University of the South Pacific Journalism Programme. This is extracted from Dr Singh’s recent presentation on International IDEA’s Democratic Development in Melanesia Webinar Series 2021.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Campaigners at a TAPOL-hosted global webinar have called on the people of Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom, United States and other countries to stop funding military training for Indonesian security forces who are “killing innocent West Papuans”.

Rosa Moiwend, a member of the War Resisters International, said West Papuans wanted to live peacefully without any oppression by the military – this was the hope of the indigenous Melanesian people.

“If your government is actually behind this scenario, I think the main thing you have to do is to go and talk to your government, Parliament members and question them about your tax money,” she said.

“Where does your tax money go? Does it go to pay [for] the war or is the tax money used for the purpose of human lives?”

Moiwend said many people across the world loved peace and justice, so they were anti-military and war.

Stopping governments funding military training was a must for activists.

Moiwend, a strong Melanesian and Pacific woman, gave an inspiring message to activists around the world to stand up firmly and speak out about the arms business that was violating human rights and killing people everywhere, “including the lives of innocent West Papuans”.

Sharing militarist experiences
An organiser said a key objective of the webinar was to give an opportunity to lawyers, activists, and supporters of a Make West Papua Safe campaign to share their experiences of militarisation and militarised policing.

Other speakers in the London-hosted webinar on Monday included Elijah Dacosta, a TAPOL campaigner; Yohanis Mambrassar, a lawyer for West Papuan human rights activists; Yones Douw, head of the justice and peace department of the Papua Kemah Gospel Church; author and researcher Jason MacLeod, co-founder of Make West Papua Safe; and Zelda Grimshaw, a Make West Papua Safe campaigner.

TAPOL (Tahanan Politik) is a British-based organisation campaigning for human rights and democracy in Indonesia.

“TAPOL was founded in 1973, and in the beginning the TAPOL campaign was focusing on releasing political prisoners in Indonesia,” said Dakosta.

But later the seriousness of military occupation became increasingly important.

“We have expanded to raise awareness on human rights issue in Aceh, East Timor and West Papua,” said Dakosta.

Yohanes Mambrasar, a West Papuan lawyer gave an illuminating description on what has been happening over human rights violence by state institutions towards indigenous people of West Papua.

“There has been increasing repression. We are seeing violent actions by the TNI (Indonesian National Armed Forces) and police against unarmed peaceful civilians who are gathering to express their political aspirations. We can really see this increasing year by year, even month by month,” said Mambrassar.

Human rights advocacy
Mambrassar who has been working on human rights advocacy said that during 2019 and 2020 “we are seeing this crackdown on protesting West Papuans.”

But they were also seeing a lot of violence towards villagers, who were suspected of supporting independence or having “separatist sympathies”, such as in Nduga, Intan Jaya, and other regions.

He said the violence was now extended to the virtual world where some people who disseminated information on social media such as Facebook and YouTube would face cyber-attacks. They were even physically attacked by the police or armed forces.

RNZ Pacific reports that Indonesian military denied shooting civilians in Papua. Papua’s police chief said that reports of a new military operation in the troubled Nduga regency were a “hoax”.

However, Yones Douw, head of the justice and peace department of KIMI church (West Papua Kemah Gospel Church), said that violence had never stopped since Indonesia had occupied West Papua.

“Really the violence has not changed since 1961 to 1969, 1969 to 2020, and 2020, when special autonomy was declared here in West Papua – right through until today the violence has continued,” said Douw.

Douw, a human rights activist, said that when special autonomy was introduced, Jakarta said that West Papuans would be 90 percent independent.

Promises ‘only words’
He said this was “only words – in fact, we have been seeing increasing violence”.

“So, if special autonomy went the way it was supposed to, West Papuan people should be protected and cared for. But that has not happened at all,” Douw said.

“Why is [the violence] increasing like this? Well, if you find a pastor who is speaking about the suffering of his congregation, he will be called a separatist. Anyone who speaks about human rights will be called as separatist, anyone who speaks about the welfare of Papuan people will be labelled as separatist,” he said.

He said that the Indonesian laws granting freedom of expression did not hold in West Papua. Even journalists, human rights activists, and some church leaders could not work without feeling a sense of fear.

“These are school students who are being shot, these are student who are walking around their own villages and without even any question they are being shot.

“Imagine what it is like if you are an older person, there is just no freedom at all to move,” said Douw.

Stopping foreign support
Jason MacLeod, co-founder of Make West Papua Safe, said he had collaborated with New Zealand activist Maire Leadbeater and Rosa Moiwend in launching this campaign.

The campaign was “to stop foreign government support for the Indonesian police and military,” said MacLeod.

He said it was a peaceful movement seeking to stop New Zealand and Australian government funding and training for the Indonesian police and military which every day brutally repressed the indigenous people of West Papua.

Brisbane-based MacLeod, who has been working on West Papua issues for the last 30 years, said the motivation behind the founding of the Make West Papua Safe campaign was in response to students speaking out in Jayapura.

Asked what they had thought about the New Zealand and Australian governments’ help for the Indonesian military, the students replied that both governments “can go to hell”, said MacLeod.

The activists, lawyers, and human rights defenders called on the people in Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom, United States, the Pacific, Africa, Caribbean, Europe and Asia to raise their voices support of stopping military oppression in West Papua.

Contributed by a postgraduate communication studies student at Auckland University of Technology.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A Pacific Islands Forum-hosted webinar has called on the United Nations and Indonesia to be “more responsive” to the pleas of West Papuans and take action to resolve human rights issues in the Melanesian region.

The Secretary-General of the Forum, Dame Meg Taylor, the secretary-general of Pacific Council of Churches, Reverend James Bhagwan, diplomats and human rights activists made the call at the Suva-hosted online event on Friday.

“I do want and hope the UN will be responsive and the Indonesian government to also be responsive, so this matter moves forward and [we are] not continually having a conversation about it,” said Dame Meg.

She said that the UN high commissioner for human rights had been invited to visit West Papua, but this was not getting attention.

Dame Meg said that although her term would end next year, the issue of human rights in West Papua would go on as it was “ingrained very hard” for citizens of the region.

The webinar was part of the PIF’s Blue Pacific Talanoa series.

Rosa Moiwend, a West Papuan human rights activist, gave a stimulating message from a strong Melanesian and Pacific woman.

“The lives of West Papuans are a matter for all of us, so we need to take an action to save the lives of West Papuans no matter [what] your political backgrounds, or your standing. I think human lives is the most important thing,” Said Moiwend.

Covid no reason to delay action
Reverend Bhagwan said the covid-19 pandemic should not be a reason to not act on the latest Pacific resolutions about West Papua.

He said the resolutions on West Papua to intervene have been long-standing and “we know that the invitation [to visit West Papua] and the discussions have happened well before covid came into the region”.

“The government of Indonesia [must] allow the fact-finding mission to visit West Papua and to respect the call of Pacific leaders in terms of the Human Rights Commission to send a team and respect those findings,” he said.

“We continue to urge the current chair and we acknowledge the work that their chair and secretary general had been doing and we look forward to discussions around the forum leaders meeting this year.”

“And we continue to call for the incoming chair of the forum to continue PIF leaders’ resolutions and report back to the forum leaders meeting in 2021.”
“We need to open the story, we need access for information – this also includes access for foreign journalists to be able to come in and investigate.”

Indonesia ‘committed’ to human rights’
Indonesian representatives Dr Felix Wanggai and Nicholas Messet said that Indonesia was committed to promoting and protecting human rights.

“Indonesia is also facing its own [problems], but we are committed to promoting and protecting human rights and so alleged human right cases with principle of justice,” said Messet.

He said that human rights violations in West Papua never happened without law enforcement against the perpetrators.

“Not a single human rights issue goes with impunity,” he said.

“Indonesia believes that the PIF is not the forum to discuss the issue of territorial integrity of a sovereign countries, but on the other hand, PIF has a moral duty to see that human right issue must not happen to its members and dialogue partners countries, including Papua and West Papua which is part of Indonesia,” Messet said.

Dr Wanggai highlighted the commitment of the central government of Indonesia to human rights such as basic rights of access to health services, education, connectivity, water, housing for the West Papuan people.

“In the context of Papua, our government has defined the root causes in Papua, for example inequality, undeveloped area, lack of connectivity, and lack of the skill to manage their natural resources.”

Managing special autonomy framework
Indonesia was continuing to manage the special autonomy framework for Papua and West Papua provinces.

“So, by the special autonomy framework, the government recognises Papuan identity in economic, culture, social and local politics,” said Dr Wanggai.

He also highlighted that the government recognised the importance of cultural affairs in solving human rights issues which he called Papuan cultural affairs, known as the Papuan People Assembly (Majelis Rakyat Papua).

However, Reverend Bhagwan said that he was concerned about the arrest of the members of the MRP and the breakup of public hearing meetings across West Papua.

“Here we receive information directly from our member churches and on the ground,” he said.

Last Tuesday, more than 50 people were arrested in Merauke at the meeting to discuss their concern over the special autonomy law,” said Reverend Bhagwan.

Moiwend said that the “invasion” by the Indonesia military in West Papua caused more human rights violations as it often became arrogant and oppressed the Papuans. It scared Papuans in the villages.

Human rights abuse still a problem
She said that human rights abuse still continued.

“But I think one of the key aspects is the political aspect and we can’t deny that there is fighting between the Indonesian military and West Papua freedom fighters. I think when we look at this conflict, ordinary people have became a victim,” she said.

“We have thousands of internally displaced people now living in Wamena and another neighboring regency from Nduga.

“And we haven’t finished working on that issue and now we have Intan Jaya also with the same kind of background. The conflict is also related to the Wabu block which is related to the Freeport mining concession area.

“This needs to be addressed by the government of Indonesia. Two things, one is from the political aspect, and one is from the human rights aspect.

“The most urgent things right now is how the government deals with the human rights issue, especially the situation of women and children as internally displaced people in these two areas, but also in other parts like in Sorong,” Moiwend said.

Laurens Ikinia is a Papuan Masters in Communication Studies student at the Auckland University of Technology who has been studying journalism. He is on an internship with AUT’s Pacific Media Centre.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Pro-independence advocates in New Caledonia say a vote for full sovereignty next month would allow the country to step up onto the international stage.

The next referendum on independence from France will be held on October 4 and determine whether New Caledonia will obtain the powers still held by Paris – such as control over its foreign affairs.

Speakers at a webinar of Australia’s Griffith University yesterday said an independent Kanaky-New Caledonia would set policies to reflect its own economic and national interests.

The French president Emmanuel Macron described New Caledonia as part of an Indo-Pacific axis to counter China’s influence in the region.

While export markets for New Caledonia’s mining output are mainly in Asia, a member of New Caledonia’s Congress Patricia Goa said independence would offer a choice.

“What’s wrong with having co-operation with China and others?

“What we are saying is that the difference is that we will choose how we want to put and the level we want to put into that relationship. We choose as a free state, as a state. That’s all the difference.”

Speakers included:
Patricia Goa, an elected member of New Caledonia’s Congress, representing the pro-independence Union Nationale Pour l’Indépendance (UNI). She lives in Baco tribe in New Caledonia’s Northern Province and works as an adviser to provincial president Paul Neaoutyine.

Charles Wea is the FLNKS representative to Australia and has represented New Caledonia’s independence movement at the Melanesian Spearhead Group.

Magalie Tingal is a former journalist and serves in the New Caledonia’s Northern Provincial Assembly. As a member of the Union Calédonienne party, she is a co-ordinator of the Yes campaign for the independence movement Front de Libération Nationale Kanak et Socialiste (FLNKS).

Facilitator: Nic Maclellan is a correspondent for Islands Business magazine and other Pacific media.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz