The state of civic space in Indonesia has been rated as “obstructed” in the latest CIVICUS Monitor report.

The civic space watchdog said that ongoing concerns include the arrest, harassment and criminalisation of human rights defenders and journalists as well as physical and digital attacks, the use of defamation laws to silence online dissent and excessive use of force by the police during protests, especially in the Papuan region.

In July 2023, the UN Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, Alice Wairimu Nderitu, expressed concerns regarding the human rights situation in the West Papua region in her opening remarks during the 22nd Meeting of the 53rd Regular Session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva.

She highlighted the harassment, arbitrary arrest and detention of Papuans, which had led to the appropriation of customary land in West Papua.

She encouraged the Indonesian government to ensure humanitarian assistance and engage in “a genuine inclusive dialogue”.

In August 2023, human rights organisations called on Indonesia to make serious commitments as the country sought membership in the UN Human Rights Council for the period 2024 to 2026.

Among the calls were to ratify international human rights instruments, especially the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPPED), to provide details of steps it will take to implement all of the supported recommendations from the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) and to fully cooperate with the Special Procedures of the Council.

Call to respect free expression
The groups also called on the government to ensure the respect, protection and promotion of the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association, for clear commitments to ensure a safe and enabling environment for all human rights defenders, to find a sustainable solution for the human rights crisis in Papua and to end impunity.

In recent months, protests by communities have been met with arbitrary arrests and excessive force from the police.

The arbitrary arrests, harassment and criminalisation of Papuan activists continue, while an LGBT conference was cancelled due to harassment and threats.

Human rights defenders continue to face defamation charges, there have been harassment and threats against journalists, while a TikTok communicator was jailed for two years over a pork video.

Ongoing targeting of Papuan activists
Arbitrary arrests, harassment and criminalisation of Papuan activists continue to be documented.

According to the Human Rights Monitor, on 5 July 2023, four armed plainclothes police officers arrested Viktor Makamuke, a 52-year-old activist of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP), a pro-independence movement.

He was subsequently detained at the Sorong Selatan District Police Station where officers allegedly coerced and threatened Makamuke to pledge allegiance to the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI).

A week earlier, Makamuke and his friend had reportedly posted a photo in support of ULMWP full membership in the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) — an intergovernmental organisation composed of the four Melanesian states.

Shortly after the arrest, the police published a statement claiming that Makamuke was the commander of the West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) — an armed group — in the Bomberai Region.

The Human Rights Monitor reported that members of the Yahukimo District police arbitrarily arrested six activists belonging to the West Papua National Committee (KNPB) in the town of Dekai, Yahukimo Regency, on 6 July 2023.

KNPB is a movement promoting the right to self-determination through peaceful action and is one of the most frequently targeted groups in West Papua.

The activists organised and carried out a collective cleaning activity in Dekai. The police repeatedly approached them claiming that the activists needed official permission for their activity.

Six KNPB activists arrested
Subsequently, police officers arrested the six KNPB activists without a warrant or justifying the arrest. All activists were released after being interrogated for an hour.

On 8 August 2023, three students were found guilty of treason and subsequently given a 10-month prison sentence by the Jayapura District Court.

Yoseph Ernesto Matuan, Devio Tekege and Ambrosius Fransiskus Elopere were charged with treason due to their involvement in an event held at the Jayapura University of Science and Technology (USTJ) in November 2022, where they waved the Morning Star flag, a banned symbol of Papuan independence.

Their action was in protest against a planned peace dialogue proposed by the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM).

According to Amnesty International Indonesia, between 2019 and 2022 there have been at least 61 cases involving 111 individuals in Papua who were charged with treason.

At least 37 supporters of the West Papua National Committee (KNPB) were arrested in relation to peaceful demonstrations to commemorate the 1962 New York Agreement in the towns Sentani, Jayapura Regency and Dekai, Yahukimo Regency, on 14 and 15 August 2023.

Allegations of police ill-treatment
There were also allegations of ill-treatment by the police.

On 2 September 2023, police officers detained Agus Kossay, Chairman of the West Papua National Coalition (KNPB); Benny Murip, KNPB Secretary in Jayapura; Ruben Wakla, member of the KNPB in the Yahukimo Regency; and Ferry Yelipele.

The four activists were subsequently detained and interrogated at the Jayapura District Police Station in Doyo Baru. Wakla and Yelipele were released on 3rd September 2023 without charge.

Police officers reportedly charged Kossay and Murip under Article 160 and Article 170 of the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP) for “incitement”.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Papuan protesters from seven customary regions this week stormed the Mako Brimob police headquarters in Kota Raja, Jayapura, accusing the KPK and police of “criminalising” local Governor Lukas Enembe.

The protest on Monday was organised in response to the Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi (KPK) Corruption Eradication Commission’s attempt to investigate corruption allegations against Governor Lukas Enembe.

This time, Enembe is suspected of receiving gratification of Rp 1 miliar (NZ$112,000).

These accusations are not the first time that the KPK has attempted to criminalise Lukas Enembe, the Governor of Papua. The KPK has tried this before.

KPK had attempted to implicate the governor in their corruption scam in February 2017, but the attempt failed.

On 2 February 2018, KPK attempted another attack against Governor Enembe at the Borobudur Hotel, Jakarta, but [this] failed miserably. Instead, two KPK members were arrested by the Metro Jaya Regional Police. The KPK announced a suspect without checking with the governor first.

The representative of the Papuan people at the rally stated that KPK failed to follow the correct legal procedures in executing this investigation.

KPK should avoid inflaming the Papuan conflict, as the Papuan people have so far followed Jakarta’s controversial decisions — decisions that are contrary to the wishes of the Papuan people, a representative stated at the rally.

For instance, Jakarta’s insistence on the creation of new provinces from the existing two (Papua and West Papua) has been strongly rejected by most Papuans.

Remained silent
The spokespeople for the protesters warned KPK that they had remained silent because Governor Enembe was able to maintain a calm among the community. However, if the governor continues to be criminalised, Papuans from all seven customary regions will revolt.

The KPK has named Governor Enembe as a suspect in the corruption of his personal funds.

“This is ‘funny’,” protesters said. “One billion rupiahs [NZ$112,000] of his own money used for medical treatment were alleged to be corrupt. This is strange. We will raise that amount, from the streets and give it to KPK.

“Remember that,” speakers said.

Stefanus Roy Renning, the coordinator of Governor Enembe’s Legal Council Team, said the case the governor was accused of (1 billion Rupiah) is actually, the governor’s personal funds sent to his account for medical treatment in May 2020.

Therefore, if you refer to this [KPK’s behaviour] as criminalisation, then yes, it is criminalisation.

This is due to the fact that the suspect’s status was premature and not in line with the criminal code, and that the governor himself has not been questioned as a witness in the alleged case.

Questioned as witness
Renning said that for a suspect to be determined, there must be two pieces of evidence and he or she must be questioned as a witness.

Benyamin Gurik, chair of the Indonesian Youth National Committee (KNPI), expressed apprehension about the allegations, saying it amounted to the criminalisation of Papuan public figures, which may contribute to conflict and division in the region.

“Jakarta should reward him for all of the good things he’s done for the province and country, not criminalise him,” said Gurik.

Otniel Deda, chair of the Tabi Indigenous group, urged the KPK to act more professionally.

He suspects that the KPK’s actions were sponsored by “certain parties” intent on shattering the reputation of the Papuan leader.

The governor himself has his own suspicions as to who is behind the corruption accusations against him.

He suspects KPK and the police force are among the highest institutions in the country being used to serve political games that are being played behind his back.

Purely a political move
According to Dr Sofyan Yoman, president of the Fellowship of West Papuan Baptist Churches (PGBWP), the attempted criminalisation of Governor Enembe is a purely political move geared toward dictating the 2024 election outcome, not a matter of law.

Dr Yoman explained that other parties in Indonesia are uncomfortable and lack confidence in entering the Papua provincial political process in 2024.

There have been those who have seen, observed, and felt that the existence of Lukas Enembe is a threat and an obstacle for other political parties seeking the position of number one in Papua.

To break the stronghold of Governor Enembe, who is also the chair of the Democratic Party of the Papuan province, there is no other way than to use KPK to criminalise him.

In a statement to Dr Yoman on Wednesday, Governor Enembe said:

Mr Yoman, the matter is now clear. This is not a legal issue, but a political one. The Indonesian State Intelligence, known as Badan Intelligence Negara (BIN), and the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle, known as Partai Demokrasi Indonesia Perjuangan (PDIP), used KPK to criminalise me.

Mr Yoman, you must write an article about the crime so that everyone is aware of it. State institutions are being used by political parties to promote their agenda.

Account blocked
Dr Yoman met the governor and his wife at Governor Enembe’s Koya residence, where he was informed of the following by Yulce W. Enembe:

In the last three months, our account has been blocked without any notification to us as the account owner. We have no idea why it was blocked. We could not move. We can’t do anything about it. Our family has been criminalised without showing any evidence of what we did wrong. Now we’re just living this way because our credit numbers are blocked.

The governor himself gave an account of how he used the Rp 1 billion:

As my health was getting worse, we left for Jakarta at night in March 2019. We were in lockdown due to COVID-19 at the time. When I left, I saved 1 billion in my room. In May 2019, I called Tono (the governor’s housekeeper). I asked Tono to go to my room and take the money in the room worth 1 billion. I asked Tono to transfer it to my BCA account. That’s my money, not corruption money.

“The KPK is just anybody,” the governor stated. “The KPK’s actions were purely political, not legal. KPK has become a medium for PDIP political parties. Considering that the Head of BIN, the Minister of Home Affairs, and the KPK descend from one institution — the police — these kinds of actions are not surprising to me.

“I am being politically criminalised”, said the governor. “Part of a pattern of psychological and physical threats and intimidation I have faced for some time”

“I am not a criminal or a thief,” the governor said.

Singapore health travel
The governor’s overseas travels for medical treatment in Singapore have been halted [barred] by the Directorate General of Immigration based on a prevention request from the KPK.

This appears to be a punitive measure taken by the country’s highest office to further punish the governor, preventing him from receiving regular medical care in Singapore.

Media outlets in Indonesia and Papua have been dominated by stories about the governor’s name linked to the word “corruption”, creating a space for hidden forces to assert their narratives to determine the fate of not only the governor, but West Papua, and Indonesia.

West Papua is a region in which whoever controls the information distributed to the rest of the world, controls the narrative. It is a region where the Indonesian government and the Papuan people have fought for years over the flawed manner in which West Papua was incorporated into Indonesia in the 1960s.

When news of a criminalised Papuan public figure such as Governor Enembe comes to the surface, it is often conveniently used as a means of demoralising popular Papuan leaders who are trusted and loved by their people.

It has been proven again and again over the past decade that Jakarta would have to deal with the revolt of hundreds of thousands of Papuans if they sought to disturb or displace Governor Enembe.

Ultimately, these kinds of nuanced incidents are often created and used to distract Papuans from focusing on the real issue. The issue of Papuan sovereignty is what matters most — the state of Papua, as Jakarta is forcing Papuans to surrender to Indonesian powers that seek to transform Papua and West Papua into Indonesia’s dream.

Papuan dream turned nightmare
Tragically, the Indonesian dream for West Papua have turned into nightmares for the people of Papua, recently claiming the lives of four Indigenous Papuans from the Mimika region, whose bodies were mutilated by Indonesian soldiers.

In recent weeks, this tragic story has been featured in international headlines, something that Jakarta wishes to keep out of the global spotlight.

The UN acting High Commissioner for Human Rights Nada Al-Nashif raised West Papua in her statement during the 51st session of the Human Rights Council on Monday — the day that Governor Enembe was summoned to police in Kota Raja.

Despite Jakarta’s attempts to spin news about West Papua as domestic Indonesian sovereignty issues, the West Papua story will persist as an unresolved international issue.

Governor Enembe (known as Chief Nataka) his family, and many Papuan figures like them have fallen victim to this protracted war between two sovereign states — Papua and Indonesia.

Some of the prominent figures in the past were not only caught in Jakarta’s traps but lost their lives too. In the period between 2020 and 2021, 16 Papuan leaders who served the Indonesian government are estimated to have died, ranging in their 40s through to their 60s.

Papuans have lost the following leaders in 2021 alone:

Klemen Tinal, Vice-Governor of Papua province under Governor Enembe, who died on May 21.

Pieter Kalakmabin, Vice-Regent of the Star Mountain regency, died on October 28.

Abock Busup, Regent of Yahukimo regency (age 44), was found dead in his hotel room in Jakarta on October 3.

Demianus Ijie, a member of Indonesia’s House of Representatives, died on July 23.

Alex Hesegem, who served as Vice-Governor of Papua from 2006-2011, died on June 20.

Demas P. Mandacan, a 45-year-old Regent from the Manokwari regency, died on April 20.

The Timika regency (home of the famous Freeport mine) lost a member of local Parliament Robby Omaleng, on April 22.

In 2020, Papuans lost the following prominent figures: Herman Hasaribab; Letnan Jendral, a high-ranking Indigenous Papuan serving in the Indonesian Armed Forces, who died on December 14; Arkelaus Asso, a member of Parliament from Papua, died on October 15; another young Regent from Boven Digoel regency, Benediktus Tambonop (age 44), died on January 13; Habel Melkias Suwae, who served twice as Regent of Jayapura, the capital of Papua, died on September 3; Paskalis Kocu, Regent of Maybrat, died on August 25; on February 10, Sendius Wonda, the head of the Biro of the secretary of the Papua provincial government, died; on September 9, Demas Tokoro, a member of the Papuan People’s Assembly for the protection of Papuan customary rights, died; and on November 15, Yairus Gwijangge, the brave and courageous Regent of the Nduga regency (the area where most locals were displaced by the ongoing war between the West National Liberation Army and Indonesian security forces), died in Jakarta.

These Indigenous Papuan leaders’ deaths cannot be determined, due to the fact that the institutions responsible for investigating these tragic deaths, such as the legal and justice systems and the police forces, are either perpetrators or accomplices in these tragedies themselves.

Dwindling survival for Papuans
This does not mean Jakarta is to blame for every single death, but its rule provides an overarching framework where the chances of Papuans surviving are dwindling.

This is a modern-day settler colonial project being undertaken under the watchful eye of international community and institutions like the UN. This type of colonisation is considered the worst of all types by scholars.

It is only their grieving families and the unknown forces behind their deaths that know what really happened to them.

The region for the past 60 years has been a crime scene, yet hardly any of these crimes have been investigated and/or prosecuted.

Given the threats, intimidation, and illness Governor Enembe has endured, it is indeed a miracle he has survived.

A big part of that miracle can be attributed to his people, the Papuans who put their lives on the line to protect him whenever Jakarta has tried to harass him.

This week, KPK tried to criminalise the governor and Papuans warned Jakarta – “don’t you try it”.

Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University and who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The criminalisation of activists — including those in West Papua — in 2019 and 2020 has been cited as one of the factors for the decline in the quality of democracy in Indonesia.

Based on a report by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), democracy in Indonesia scored its worst figure ever with a score of 6.3 and was placed 64th out of 167 countries.

Advocacy Team for Democracy (TAUD) member Teo Reffelsen said that the criminalisation of activists contributed to Indonesia’s poor record on civil freedoms.

“It has been marked by the criminalisation of expression and public opinion, through to repressive actions ridden with violence,” said Reffelsen in a media release, reports CNN Indonesia.

Between 2019 and 2020, said Reffelsen, TAUD recorded at last 10 incidents of the criminalisation of activists in Indonesia.

This included six Papuan activists — Watchdoc founder and senor journalist Dandhy Dwi Laksono, Jakarta State University (UNJ) sociologist Robertus Robet, musician Ananda Badudu, Papua Student Alliance (AMP) lawyer and human rights activist Veronica Koman and public policy activist Ravio Patra.

Also, 5198 demonstrators were arrested during the protests against the Omnibus Law on Job Creation in September and October 2019, Save Indonesia Action Coalition (KAMI) activists Syahganda Nainggolan and Jumhur Hidayat along with Banda Aceh Syiah Kuala University lecturer Saiful Mahdi.

12 cases in 2021
In 2021, TAUD recorded at last 12 cases of criminalisation of activists. Two of these cases were related to senior state officials, namely Presidential Chief of Staff Moeldoko and Coordinating Minister for Maritime Affairs and Investment Luhut Binsar Pandjaitan.

“The criminalisation of two Indonesian Corruption Watch (ICW) researchers, Egi [Primayogha] and Miftah, threats of criminalisation against [rights activist] Haris Azhar from the Lokataru [Foundation] and Fatia Maulidiyanti from Kontras [Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence],” wrote Reffelsen.

Reffelsen also said they found several cases of attacks on civil freedoms in the form of doxing or attacks in digital space against people who were critical of the government such as those suffered by Ravio Patra and critical online media Tempo.co and Tirto.id.

“The [police] cyber patrols which were legitimised by an instruction by the Indonesian police chief is another example,” said Reffelsen.

Apart from civil freedoms, another factor was that it appeared as if the government lacked the involvement of public participation in policy formulation.

The enactment to revisions to the Corruption Eradication Commission Law, the Omnibus Law and other legislation were examples.

Another aspect was actions by law enforcement agencies such as the judiciary which were seen as corrupt and the lack of seriousness on the part of the government to resolve human rights violations.

“The decline in Indonesia’s democratic index is in keeping with TAUD’s findings on the ground, primarily in relation to civil freedoms which have shrunk,” said Reffelsen.

Translated by James Balowski for Indoleft News. The original title of the article was “Kriminalisasi Aktivis Disebut Buat Indeks Demokrasi Menurun”.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Dr Johan Lidberg in Melbourne

Australia is a world leader in passing the most amendments to existing and new anti-terror and security laws in the liberal democratic world. Since September 11, 2001, it has passed 54 laws.

The latest suggested addition is the Turnbull government’s crackdown on foreign interference. The bill has been heavily criticised by Australian Lawyers for Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, and major media organisations for being too heavy-handed and far-reaching in the limits it would place on freedom of expression and several other civil liberties.

The government’s own intelligence watchdog, the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, argues the bill is so widely worded that its own staff could break the law for handling documents they need to access to do their job.

READ MORE: New foreign interference laws will compound risks to whistleblowers and journalists

A case in point is whether the ABC’s publication of confidential and secret cabinet documents would be in breach of the proposed bill. Two filing cabinets full of thousands of confidential cabinet documents were given to the ABC by a source who, astonishingly, had bought them for small change at an op-shop in Canberra.

The ABC made an assessment and chose to publish a very limited number of the documents it deemed in the public interest. The ABC has so far clearly acted responsibly, and no documents that could harm Australia’s national security were in the first publication.

-Partners-

Some of the published documents are embarrassing for both the current and former Coalition and Labor governments, but that should not stop publication – rather, the opposite.

What the bill would mean
The foreign interference bill, in its current form, suggests it should be criminal for anyone to “receive” and “handle” certain national security information. It would seem that by just receiving the filing cabinets and assessing what to publish, the ABC staff would be in breach of the provisions suggested in the bill.

Furthermore, this makes an already heavy-handed whistleblower regime from an international perspective even more draconian. It is sure to lose Australia several places on the Press Freedom Index if implemented as suggested.

The bill is an overreach in many respects. But one of the worst aspects, from a transparency and accountability point of view, is that it seeks to extend the draconian Section 70 of the Commonwealth Crimes Act.

Section 70 makes it a crime, punishable by a maximum of two years in prison, for public servants to communicate or supply information to anyone outside government without permission. The ABC’s publication of the cabinet files clearly illustrates that media organisations with ethical and thorough editorial polices are perfectly capable of assessing what to publish.

The bigger picture is that the current bill is part of a pattern that started after the terrorist attacks in the US on September 11, 2001.

In our forthcoming book, In The Name of Security – Secrecy, Surveillance and Journalism, my colleagues and I assess how the anti-terror laws and mass surveillance technologies in the Five Eyes countries has impacted on in-depth public interest journalism. We also compare the Five Eyes with several BRICS countries and the situation in the European Union.

Fear-driven security
Our main conclusions are that the current fear-driven security environment has made it much harder for investigative journalists to hold governments and security agencies to account. This is partly due to anti-terror and security laws making it harder for whistleblowers to act.

Add to this the truly awesome powers of mass surveillance making it increasingly difficult for investigative journalists to grant anonymity to sources that require it for their own safety, and you end up with a very complex journalist-source situation.

Another important factor in Australia and the UK is that all national security agencies are exempt from Freedom of Information laws. This makes it virtually impossible to independently acquire information from the security branch of government.

The balance between national security and transparency is complex. As citizens, we want to feel safe and know what is being done to keep us safe. In our book, we have labelled this the “trust us” dilemma, meaning governments argue they can’t disclose what they are doing security-wise, lest the “bad guys” find out.

That leaves us needing to trust the government’s security actions and policies. But the problem is, how can we as citizens decide if we trust the government if we don’t have the information on which to base this decision?

There is no easy answer to this question. Political philosopher Giorgio Agamben takes our reasoning one step further when he argues that the liberal democratic world has been in a “state of exception” since September 11. This has granted powers to security agencies that are creeping increasingly closer to those of the totalitarian regimes in Europe in the 1930s.

‘Other’ enemy
Agamben traces various states of exception all the way back to Roman times. The pattern is similar through history: governments point to an “other” – often a hard-to-define enemy – as a reason for increased powers to the security apparatus. They are convinced they are doing the right thing.

The problem is that if we don’t roll back the strengthened security laws in times of lower threat, we start from a high level next time we enter a “state of exception”. This in turn can lead to a never-ending war on real or perceived threats where our cherished democratic civil liberties become part of the collateral damage.

If we allow the “state of exception” to become permanent, we risk allowing the terrorists to win.

Dr Johan Lidberg is an associate professor in the School of Media, Film and Journalism, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. This article was first published by The Conversation on a Creative Commons licence and is republished with the author’s permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz