Last week, on 26 February 2025, President Prabowo Subianto officially launched Indonesia’s first bullion banks, marking a significant shift in the country’s approach to gold and precious metal management.

This initiative aims to strengthen Indonesia’s control over its gold reserves, improve financial stability, and reduce reliance on foreign institutions for gold transactions.

Bullion banks specialise in buying, selling, storing, and trading gold and other precious metals. They allow both the government and private sector to manage gold-related financial transactions, including hedging, lending, and investment in the global gold market.

Although bullion banks focus on gold, this move signals a broader trend of Indonesia tightening control over its natural resources. This could have a significant impact on West Papua’s coal industry.

With the government already enforcing benchmark coal prices (HBA) starting this month, the success of bullion banks could pave the way for a similar centralised system for coal and other minerals.

Indonesia also may apply similar regulations to other strategic resources, including coal, nickel, and copper. This could mean tighter government control over mining in West Papua.

If Indonesia expands national control over mining, it could lead to increased exploitation in resource-rich regions like West Papua, raising concerns about land rights, deforestation, and indigenous displacement.

Indonesia joined BRICS earlier this year and is now focusing on strengthening economic ties with other BRICS countries.

In the mining sector, Indonesia is using its membership to increase exports, particularly to key markets such as China and India. These countries are large consumers of coal and mineral resources, providing an opportunity for Indonesia to expand its export market and attract foreign direct investment in resource extraction.

India eyes coal in West Papua
India has shown interest in tapping into the coal reserves of the West Papua region, aiming to diversify its energy sources and secure coal supplies for its growing energy needs.

This initiative involves potential collaboration between the Indian government and Indonesian authorities to explore and develop previously unexploited coal deposits in West Papuan Indigenous lands.

However, the details of such projects are still under negotiation, with discussions focusing on the terms of investment and operational control.

Notably, India has sought special privileges, including no-bid contracts, in exchange for financing geological surveys — a proposition that raises concerns about compliance with Indonesia’s anti-corruption laws.

The prospect of coal mining in West Papua has drawn mixed reactions. While the Indonesian government is keen to attract foreign investment to boost economic development in its easternmost provinces, local communities and environmental groups express apprehension.

The primary concerns revolve around potential environmental degradation, disruption of local ecosystems, and the displacement of indigenous populations.

Moreover, there is scepticism about whether the economic benefits from such projects would trickle down to local communities or primarily serve external interests.

Navigating ethical, legal issues
As India seeks to secure energy resources to meet its domestic demands, it must navigate the ethical and legal implications of its investments abroad. Simultaneously, Indonesia faces the challenge of balancing economic development with environmental preservation and the rights of its indigenous populations.

While foreign investment in Indonesia’s mining sector is welcome, there are strict regulations in place to protect national interests.

In particular, foreign mining companies must sell at least 51 percent of their shares to Indonesian stakeholders within 10 years of starting production. This policy is designed to ensure that Indonesia retains greater control over its natural resources, while still allowing international investors to participate in the growth of the industry.

India is reportedly interested in mining coal in West Papua to diversify its fuel sources.

Indonesia’s energy ministry is hoping for economic benefits and a potential boost to the local steel industry. But environmentalists and social activists are sounding the alarm about the potential negative impacts of new mining operations.

During project discussions, India has shown an interest in securing special privileges, such as no-bid contracts, which could conflict with Indonesia’s anti-corruption laws.

Implications for West Papua
Indonesia, a country with a population of nearly 300 million, aims to industrialise. By joining BRICS (primarily Brasil, Russia, India, and China), it hopes to unlock new growth opportunities.

However, this path to industrialisation comes at a significant cost. It will continue to profoundly affect people’s lives and lead to environmental degradation, destroying wildlife and natural habitats.

These challenges echo the changes that began with the Industrial Revolution in England, where coal-powered advances drastically reshaped human life and the natural world.

West Papua has experienced a significant decline in its indigenous population due to Indonesia’s transmigration policy. This policy involves relocating large numbers of Muslim Indonesians to areas where Christian Papuans are the majority.

These newcomers settle on vast tracts of indigenous Papuan land. Military operations also continue.

One of the major problems resulting from these developments is the spread of torture, abuse, disease, and death, which, if not addressed soon, will reduce the Papuans to numbers too small to fight and reclaim their land.

Mining of any kind in West Papua is closely linked to, and in fact, is the main cause of, the dire situation in West Papua.

Large-scale exploitation
Since the late 1900s, the area’s rich coal and mineral resources have attracted both foreign and local investors. Large international companies, particularly from Western countries, have partnered with the Indonesian government in large-scale mining operations.

While the exploitation of West Papua’s resources has boosted Indonesia’s economy, it has also caused significant environmental damage and disruption to indigenous Papuan communities.

Mining has damaged local ecosystems, polluted water sources and reduced biodiversity. Indigenous Papuans have been displaced from their ancestral lands, leading to economic hardship and cultural erosion.

Although the government has tried to promote sustainable mining practices, the benefits have largely bypassed local communities. Most of the revenue from mining goes to Jakarta and large corporations, with minimal reinvestment in local infrastructure, health and education.

For more than 63 years, West Papua has faced exploitation and abuse similar to that which occurred when British law considered Australia to be terra nullius — “land that belongs to no one.” This legal fiction allowed the British to disregard the existence of indigenous people as the rightful owners and custodians of the land.

Similarly, West Papua has been treated as if it were empty, with indigenous communities portrayed in degrading ways to justify taking their land and clearing it for settlers.

Indonesia’s collective view of West Papua as a wild, uninhabited frontier has allowed settlers and colonial authorities to freely exploit the region’s rich resources.

Plundering with impunity
This is why almost anyone hungry for West Papua’s riches goes there and plunders with impunity. They cut down millions of trees, mine minerals, hunt rare animals and collect precious resources such as gold.

These activities are carried out under the control of the military or by bribing and intimidating local landowners.

The Indonesian government’s decision to grant mining licences to universities and religious groups will add more headaches for Papuans. It simply means that more entities have been given licences to exploit its resources — driving West Papuans toward extinction and destroying their ancestral homeland.

An example is the PT Megapura Prima Industri, an Indonesian coal mining company operating in Sorong on the western tip of West Papua. According to the local news media Jubi, the company has already violated rules and regulations designed to protect local Papuans and the environment.

Allowing India to enter West Papua, will have unprecedented and disastrous consequences for West Papua, including environmental degradation, displacement of indigenous communities, and human rights abuses.

As the BRICS nations continue to expand their economic footprint, Indonesia’s evolving mining landscape is likely to become a focal point of international investment discourse in the coming years.

Natural resources ultimate target
This means that West Papua’s vast natural resources will be the ultimate target and will continue to be a geopolitical pawn between superpowers, while indigenous Papuans remain marginalised and excluded from decision-making processes in their own land.

Regardless of policy changes on resource extraction, human rights, education, health, or any other facet, “Indonesia cannot and will not save West Papua” because “Indonesia’s presence in the sovereign territory of West Papua is the primary cause of the genocide of Papuans and the destruction of their homeland”.

As long as West Papua remains Indonesia’s frontier settler colony, backed by an intensive military presence, the entire Indonesian enterprise in West Papua effectively condemns both the Papuan people and their fragile ecosystem to a catastrophic fate, one that can only be avoided through a process of decolonisation and self-determination.

Restoring West Papua’s sovereignty, arbitrarily taken by Indonesia, is the best solution so that indigenous Papuans can engage with their world on their own terms, using the rich resources they have, and determining their own future and development pathway.

Ali Mirin is a West Papuan academic and writer from the Kimyal tribe of the highlands bordering the Star mountain region of Papua New Guinea. He lives in Australia and contributes articles to Asia Pacific Report.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

During World War I, the New Zealand government took a big area of land at Raglan from the local Tainui Awhiro people to build an airfield and bunker as part of local war preparations.

The airfield was never built and, instead of returning the land to the people, the government used the Public Works Act in 1928 to give legal justification for the Crown keeping the land.

In 1967, local iwi were evicted from the land and forced to rebuild nearby with the government then selling the land for the Raglan Golf Course.

In the early 1970s, Tainui Awhiro, led by Māori activist Eva Rickard, began the fight to have the land returned and after much protest, marches, petitions, lobbying, occupations and arrests on the golf links themselves they were finally successful in 1983.

The land was handed back — but not until they had fought off a government “offer” requiring them to buy their land back from the Crown.

It was my first experience of being part, in a very small way, of a Māori land protest.
One of the important things I remember from Raglan, Bastion Pt and those early land protests were the messages of support and solidarity which came in from around the country and all over the world.

Typically, these would be read out at the start of a protest hui and local iwi and supporters took great heart from them. They lifted spirits and warmed hearts when things sometimes seemed bleak.

Long way to decolonisation
We have a long way to go in decolonisation in Aotearoa New Zealand but we have come a significant way from the crude government behaviour at Raglan.

On the other side of the world, colonisation in Palestine is continuing apace since the mass expulsions of Palestinians from their land in 1948 (more than700,000 people evicted from their homes and land by Israeli militias from more than 500 villages with dozens of civilian massacres along the way).

Every day for the past 74 years, more Palestinians have been evicted from their land using all manner of spurious, creative justifications, backed by a court system run by the Israeli colonisers.

In the spotlight today are 12 Palestinian villages with more than 1000 people who face eviction from their land in an area of the South Hebron Hills called Masafer Yatta.

An Israeli court has given the Israeli army the go-ahead to evict the people and take over their land for a “live firing range”. The range isn’t needed. The Israeli army already has close to 18 per cent of the occupied West Bank set aside for firing zones — it’s just a commonly used pretext for land theft.

If the Israeli army is able to evict these people, it will be the largest eviction of Palestinians in more than 50 years.

Like the early colonists in New Zealand, Israel wants the land without the people.

Palestine’s Raglan struggle
Masafer Yatta is Palestine’s Raglan Golf Course, albeit on a larger scale and as part of the longest-running military occupation in modern times.

The people of Masafer Yatta are fighting back with protests and vowing not to move despite five weeks of thuggish bullying by Israeli military with vehicles racing around the land in a massive show of force to intimidate and cower the people. Live bullets ripped through roofs of houses in the Khallat Al Dabea village during this “military training”.

The local Palestinian people are organising to defend their land and homes against Israel’s aggressive colonisation.

Young people are on the frontline. Co-founder of non-violent resistance group Youth of Samud (Sumud means “steadfastness”) Sami Hurraini was detained by the Israeli army in the hot sun for eight hours without food or water last week but is undaunted.

Despite receiving a demolition order for their centre in Masafer Yatta, Hurraini says, “Of course Israel won’t stop us! We will rebuild the centre every time they demolish it.”

The least we can do is add our voices of international support and solidarity to the people of Masafer Yatta. We need to let them know they are not alone — just as similar messages gave heart to Māori fighting land theft here.

And we have to let Israel know there are accountabilities for ethnic cleansing and the war crimes associated with colonisation of Palestinian land.

Palestinians are not looking for our sympathy — they are looking for practical solidarity. If enough voices are raised around the world Israel will be forced to back down.

The strongest voice we have is the government’s. We need to insist our government uses it on behalf of all of us.

John Minto is a political activist and commentator, and spokesperson for Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa. This article was first published by The New Zealand Herald and is republished with the author’s permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Papua’s Guinea’s National Court has issued an interim restraining order stopping the planned eviction of thousands of Morata settlers on portion 2733 in the capital of Port Moresby.

MSaka Lawyers, engaged by National Capital District (NCD) Governor Powes Parkop, went to court last Friday in light of the looming eviction by First Estate Limited, a company owned by a local individual and his Chinese business partner.

Governor Parkop, a former human rights lawyer before entering politics, said the interim orders should give the settlers “some comfort”.

Clarifying his government’s stance, he reiterated that people claiming title to land and their investment partners should provide alternative solutions to the thousands of affected families who are made homeless due to eviction.

He called on title holders and their investor partners to have talks with him on how this humanitarian crisis could be addressed.

“Our people cannot be left homeless for corporate greed or just for the benefit of one title holder,” he said.

More proactive action
“Lands Department and National Land Board should ensure too that they don’t award title to individuals over land which already has thousands of people in occupation,” said Governor Parkop.

Governor Parkop has also directed the Physical Planning Division and Regulatory Department of NCDC to be more proactive in stopping illegal occupation and settlement of both state and customary land in the city.

He made the call yesterday during the first Physical Planning Board Meeting for NCD for 2022.

“Many of these issues could have been avoided had NCDC and Department of Lands cooperated to prevent or stop all illegal occupation and settlements of state and customary land in the city,” he said.

First Estate Limited will be moving a motion on NCDC standing and abuse of court process while NCDC will be moving a motion on the legality of the UDL.

Justice Kariko ordered that:

1. The matter is adjourned to 2 Feb 2022 for hearing of the Plaintiff’s Notice of Motion (NOM) filed on 10/04/21 and the First Defendant’s NOM filed on 02/07/21;
2. Parties shall file and serve any further affidavits for the hearing by Monday 31/01/22;
3. Parties should settle and hand up to the court on the return date a chronology of all related litigation in all courts in relation to the dispute in this proceeding;
4. The hearing of the motions shall not be further adjourned except for good reasons; and
5. Until the return date, the First Defendant, its servants and agents including members of the police force are restrained from entering into the subject land and carry out steps to evict the residents on the land formerly known as Portion 2733, Morata, NCD.

Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Deputy Police Commissioner Operations Anton Billie has given the green light for Papuan New Guinean police in the National Capital District to carry out a major eviction operation.

Settlers who have built their homes on land at the back of the University of PNG, bordering with Gerehu stage 3B and Morata stage one suburbs, will be forced to leave — if they do not comply with the court-ordered eviction notice handed out earlier.

Last week Deputy Commissioner Billie had stopped his men from carrying out the eviction because the court order was “not clear” and he feared that there could be legal repercussions for police involvement — especially with such a huge eviction operation involving many families.

On Tuesday, Billie was served a notice to rescind his decision by the proprietor of the land, Sixth Estate Limited, and on Wednesday, after seeking advice from his legal team, he gave the okay for the eviction exercise to start.

He explained to the Post-Courier newspaper the stop notice was to ensure that the eviction exercise was legally correct and everything was in order.

Civil issues must be clarified
“We have our own legal directorate and any civil issues in nature must be clarified first,” he said.

“This is basically to safeguard the police force and state because on numerous occasions we’ve been taken to court on issues like an eviction exercise done without proper consultation,’’ said Deputy Commissioner Billie.

“My decision was not intended to stop the court order but to get legal clarification into the matter at hand, which must be clarified by the legal team. And, after receiving clarification on the matter, I will let the police execute forthwith and without delay the eviction exercise.

“The eviction will be carried out anytime next week.”

Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A Supreme Court ordered mass eviction of settlers on land between Papua New Guinea’s University of PNG, Gerehu Stage 3B and Morata stage one in the National Capital District has been stopped at the 11th hour by Chief of Police Operations and Deputy Police Commissioner Operations Anton Billie.

Deputy Commissioner Billie’s orders to stop this mass eviction have put him in a collision course with two separate orders of country’s highest court — SCA 19 of 2018 and SCA 77 of 2015 — unless he reviews and rescinds his orders within 72 hours.

Lawyers representing the land developers have threatened the police with a contempt lawsuit.

Deputy Commissioner Billie ordered a freeze on the mass eviction citing concerns that the court order was not clear and that the legal ramifications of police involvement were not properly clarified in such a large scale operation involving many families.

In a minute sent to NCD Central Commander, Deputy Commissioner Billie said: “After having been briefed on the matter involving the occupants of the portion of land, NCDC, Sixth Estate Limited and Lands and Physical Planning Department, I believe it is a very complex issue as it is.

“If a request with clear court orders have been presented for police assistance, then we have to engage our Legal Directorate to clarify our legal standing in the matter first before engaging our men.

“There is no real need for impetuosity.”

Land dispute settled in 2016
But the registered proprietor of the land — as determined and settled by a three-man Supreme Court bench in 2016 — the Sixth Estate Limited, through its chairman and chief executive officer Philip Mark Paguk, said the Deputy Commissioner may not have been privy to the history of the issue.

In a detailed, five-page letter, including attachments, lawyers of Sixth Estate Limited, Kandawalyn Lawyers, explained the background to all the court proceedings from the district, national and Supreme Court and two police operational orders for the eviction exercise.

The law firm urged the Deputy Commissioner to revoke his earlier orders within 72 hours or contempt proceedings in the Supreme Court would be filed against him and others who were hindering the mass eviction.

“There is no stay order of the Supreme Court Decision in Otto and Others vs Sixth Estate Limited and Others; SCANO. 19 of 2018 and SCA. NO.77 of 2015, hence the runway is clear for the proposed eviction to progress in compliance with the Supreme Court Order,” the lawyers advised.

The letter went on further and stated that: “As far as we are concerned, there is no court order in place stopping/hindering/restraining the pro-posed eviction exercise.

“There is a Supreme Court order in place as mentioned in our letter for police assistance, and that paves the way for the eviction to commence with the assistance of police.”

CEO Paguk said that while he appreciated the concerns raised by Deputy Commissioner Billie in his minute freezing the eviction exercise, his company had spent millions of kina in mobilisation for this eviction after almost 10 years of court battles.

Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

“If I don’t steal your house, someone else will.”

This is how an Israeli settler called “Yakob” responded to the Jerusalemite journalist Muna El Kurd when she asked him to leave the garden of her home in Jerusalem’s Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood.

The video of the exchange Kurd posted on her Instagram page was shared on many news pages and sites, going viral and becoming iconic of the oppression her family—and the neighbourhood—currently faces.

The ongoing apartheid in Jerusalem.

“Even if i get out of the house, it won’t be returned to u” pic.twitter.com/5sELdmClH5

— Abed? #SaveSheikhJarrah (@Abd_HajYahia) May 1, 2021

Since El Kurd posted her video, tensions in the occupied Palestinian territories have flared up to the worst level in years. The blockaded enclave of Gaza has been pounded by Israeli airstrikes as Muslims marked the end of Ramadan, their holy month of fasting.

So far, at least 212 people, including 61 children, have been killed in Gaza so far since the latest violence began more than a week ago. Some 1500 Palestinians were also wounded.

Ten Israelis, including two children, have been killed as Hamas, which governs Gaza, fired hundreds of rockets on Israeli-occupied territories, in response to earlier Israeli provocation.

Meanwhile, hundreds of Jerusalemites have been wounded by occupation forces who have clamped down on protesters and worshippers in the past weeks.

The tensions in Jerusalem coincided with the start of Ramadan on May 13. Occupation Israeli forces set up barricades to block Jerusalemites from accessing the area of Bab Al-Amud, preventing them from observing a longtime ritual of casual gatherings in that part of the Old City.

This resulted in protests—which have come to be called the “Bab Al Amud Uprising”— which eventually displaced the barriers and obstacles erected by the Occupation forces.

This was followed by Israeli forces’ storming of Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem’s Old City, one of Islam’s holiest sites, firing tear gas and stun grenades and wounding many, and coincided with Israeli settlers appropriating the homes of Palestinians in Jerusalem’s Sheikh Jarrah neighbourhood, citing Israeli court verdicts.

Sheikh Jarrah: a decades-old struggle
The struggle over Sheikh Jarrah dates back to 1948, when representatives of the then-nascent state of Israel tried to storm the neighborhood, displace its people and destroy their homes. They were prevented from doing so by the British forces, which were protecting the city of Jerusalem at the time.

Fast-forward to the Six-Day War—also known as the June 1967 War—when Israeli forces occupied the West Bank, including Jerusalem and its environs.

Since then, consecutive Israeli governments have sought to displace the Palestinian population from the city of Jerusalem to shift its demographics to a Jewish majority, in line with efforts to position the city as Israel’s capital and mobilise countries to relocate their embassies there.

This despite Palestine’s United Nations-backed claim to at least part of the city as its capital.

The neighbourhood of Sheikh Jarrah, located to the north of Jerusalem’s Old City, contains one of the main arteries linking the concentration of the city’s Jewish population in the city to Hebrew University. Seizing control of the neighbourhood would bring the entire eastern side of Jerusalem under Israel’s authority.

The expulsion of Palestinians goes back to the period 1948-1967, when Jerusalem was under Jordanian control. In 1956, the Jordanian authorities, in cooperation with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), constructed housing for 28 refugee families in Sheikh Jarrah. The Jordanian Ministry of Construction and Development provided the land, with the proviso that construction took place through the UNRWA and that ownership of the homes would be transferred to their residents three years after the completion of construction. But this did not happen until 1967, when Jordan lost control of the West Bank.

أيام قليلة تفصلنا عن قرار محكمة الاحتلال بإخلاء حي #الشيخ_جراح او تأجيله.
أكثر من 500 فلسطيني موزعين على 28 عائلة يواجهون شبح نكبة جديدة وتهجير قسري.
لنعلي أصواتنا دعماّ وإسنادا لأهلنا في الحي المقدسي. #انقذوا_حي_الشيخ_جراح pic.twitter.com/XjDc6pL541

— فلسطين27 (@Pal_27KM) April 30, 2021

A few days separate us from the occupation court’s decision to evacuate the Sheikh Jarrah’s neighborhood #الشيخ_جراح or postpone it. More than 500 Palestinians over 28 families face the spectre of a new catastrophe and forced displacement. Let’s raise our voices to support our people in the Jerusalem’s neighborhood. #انقذوا_حي_الشيخ_جراح pic.twitter.com/XjDc6pL541 — فلسطين27 (@Pal_27KM) April 30, 2021

With Jerusalem under Israeli control, Israeli settler organizations began occupying houses whose residents happened to be absent at the time, even if temporarily. The Shatti family, for example, lost their house while they were away on a visit to Kuwait in 1967.

In 1972, two Israeli societies comprising Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews went to the Israeli Land Registry Department claiming ownership of the area of Karm Al-Jaouni in Sheikh Jarrah. The claim was based on a purchase document allegedly dating from the Ottoman period. The societies were granted ownership of the land.

Between 1974-1975, the two societies then filed a lawsuit in an attempt to force four families to evacuate their homes. The Israeli court dismissed the cases because the residents were tenants protected by law.

But the lawsuits resumed again in 1982, this time against 23 families, 17 of whom retained an Israeli lawyer, Tosya Cohen. In 1991, however, Cohen shocked his clients by concluding a deal with the two settler societies, recognising their ownership of the land. Cohen’s recognition created a legal precedent that paved the way for the two societies to strip Palestinians such as the Hanoun and Ghawi families of their homes.

An initial court decision directed these two families to pay rent to the plaintiffs, and although they complied, they were expelled in 2002. In 2003, the two societies sold their share in the land to an investment company. The change in ownership allowed the Hanoun and Ghawi families to appeal their expulsion, enabling them to return to their homes until the case was adjudicated.

Mona ElKurd’s family has been the target of lawsuits since the beginning of the 1990s. After numerous rulings, the last of which was in 2009, Israeli settlers were granted the right to appropriate the ElKurd’s house. Since that time, ElKurd family has been sharing their home with the settlers who appropriated it, leaving them with only 50 metres to live in.

More recently, in October 2020, El Kurd, Al Qasim, Al Jauni and Al Skafi families received evacuations notifications from the Israeli Magistrate’s Court. In September, three other families—Hammad, Dajani, and Al Dawoudi—received similar notifications, bringing the total of people facing threats of eviction from their homes to 55. These decisions were suspended until February 2021, during which an evacuation order was issued to be carried out by Thursday, May 6, 2021, resulting in the current escalation.

Sheikh Jarrah residents ‘can’t breathe’
As tensions brewed, Palestinians took to social media to speak about the oppression they’re facing.

Bentzi Gopstein (Lehava), one of the “Death To Arabs” march organizers, is coming to Sheikh Jarrah tonight at 8:30 pm. #SaveSheikhJarrah from colonial violence. https://t.co/ov5rqBjDVE

— mohammed el-kurd (@m7mdkurd) May 6, 2021

The phrase “I can’t breathe”—the last words uttered by George Floyd as he was killed by police last year in Minnesota—is trending on social media among Palestinian users and sympathisers, as Israeli occupation forces violently cracked down on those expressing solidarity with the evicted residents of Sheikh Jarrah.

“I cant breath” he said.

The apartheid never stops. pic.twitter.com/jnQXZr6W5M

Another Twitter user, Kawther, wrote:

— Abed? #SaveSheikhJarrah (@Abd_HajYahia) May 4, 2021

The same violence but no one speak . ??#انقذوا_حي_الشيخ_جراح pic.twitter.com/N1HYD5M4iF

— kawther slama (@KawtherSlama) May 6, 2021

In a gesture of solidarity with residents of Sheikh Jarrah, Jerusalemites broke their fast every day of Ramadan in front of houses whose residents were being made to evacuate. This prompted Itamar Ben Ghafir, a member of Israel’s Knesset and leader of the Israeli far-right party Otzma Yehudit, to participate in a gathering in the district on May 6, the day set by the court to evacuate these houses, where he made the provocative announcement that he would relocate his office to Sheikh Jarrah to confront the “Arab extremists”.

When a crowd of Palestinians gathered to express their rejection of the parliamentarian’s incitements, a settler pepper-sprayed the Palestinians, an act documented in many video clips.

Israeli settlers spray pepper gas at Palestinian youths in Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood.
#SaveSheikhJarrah #انقذو_حي_الشيخ_جراح pic.twitter.com/baiP9UeuH0

— Huda Fadil ?? #Gaza (@HudaFadil2) May 6, 2021

This led to a clash between the two sides, involving the throwing of chairs and stones.

مستوطن يرش الشباب بغاز الفلفل وقت الافطار، والشباب ما قصرو معاه ?.#انقذو_حي_الشيخ_جراح #SaveSheikhJarrah pic.twitter.com/pmNArc0bFy

— شجاعية (@shejae3a) May 6, 2021

A settler sprays the guys with pepper spray, and the guys didn’t disappoint #انقذو_حي_الشيخ_جراح

#SaveSheikhJarrah pic.twitter.com/pmNArc0bFy

— شجاعية (@shejae3a) May 6, 2021

Israeli occupation forces intervened and arrested several Palestinians.

The Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs presented the official documents containing details of the displacement operations carried out by Israel to the International Criminal Court on May 5, but the confrontations on the ground are not expected to abate.

On May 10, an Israeli court postponed a session scheduled that day to decide the fate of Palestinian residents of Sheikh Jarrah. Announcing that the date of the upcoming session would be set within 30 days, the court permitted families facing eviction to remain in their houses until the session is held.

Muna El Kurd, whose Instagram video has turned her into an emblem of the struggle of Sheikh Jarrah’s residents, wrote:

We should not stop. Freezing [the decision] is not cancelling it.. The movement of Sheikh Jarrah is a popular and global movement against displacement and colonization in Jerusalem and all of Palestine. We must raise our voices, and intensify efforts through our presence and solidarity in Sheikh Jarrah neighbourhood, and intensify our voice on social media platforms, because the violence of the colonial occupation is prevalent and its outbreak in our cities has not been frozen.

أيمن حسونة and Yasmeen Omera are Global Voices contributors.Republished with permission from Global Voices under a Creative Commons licence.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Ayat S. Karokaro in Medan

Indonesian ­ activists have deplored the recent jailing of two indigenous community members in Sumatra in a land conflict involving an affiliate of pulp and paper giant Royal Golden Eagle.

The Simalungun District Court, in North Sumatra province, handed down nine-month sentences to Jonny Ambarita and Thomson Ambarita, who are elders from the Sihaporas community, for assaulting an employee of PT Toba Pulp Lestari (TPL), an RGE affiliate company.

The Sihaporas community and PT TPL have been embroiled in a dispute for decades over land to which both lay claim.

READ MORE: Will Asia Pulp and Paper default on its ‘zero-deforestation’ commitments?

As in most such cases in Indonesia, the authorities have sided with corporate interests and pursued criminal charges against the community, said Agustin Simamora, head of the advocacy at the provincial chapter of the Indigenous Peoples Alliance of the Archipelago (AMAN).

“The judges ignored all the facts in this case. This [ruling] is very regrettable,” he said.

The sentences, handed down Feb. 13, cap a trial sparked by an incident last September in which the company, or people claiming to represent it, appeared to be the side escalating the legal wrangling into a violent conflict.

Scuffle broke out
On the morning of September 16, 2019, according to the community members, a group of men claiming to be PT TPL employees arrived in their village and demanded that they cease their farming activity and leave the area.

The farmers refused, and a scuffle broke out, during which the 3-year-old son of one of the community members was reportedly hit by one of the purported company representatives. The child passed out and had to be taken to a nearby public health center.

The following day, leaders of the Sihaporas community went to a nearby police station to file a report about the alleged assault on the child. But the officers refused to receive their complaint, telling them instead to file it at a different precinct office.

Officers from that larger precinct later issued a summons for Jonny and Thomson Ambarita to appear for questioning on September 24. Unknown to the community, PT TPL had filed its own report with the police, alleging that the farmers had assaulted one of its employees in the earlier skirmish.

When Jonny and Thomson showed up at the police station, they were promptly charged and arrested.

In the months since then, they have been indicted, tried, and convicted. But police have still not acted on the community’s report on the alleged attack on the child.

Sahat Hutagalung, the lawyer for Jonny and Thomson Ambarita, called the guilty verdict unfair.

Evidence ignored
Like other observers of the trial, he questioned why much of the evidence presented in court that corroborated the community’s account ­ including witness testimony and videos of the incident ­ was ignored.

“Unfortunately, it was overlooked by the judges,” Sahat said.

Hundreds of members of the Sihaporas community turned up at the courthouse to hear the verdict and demand that Jonny and Thomson be acquitted. Community members said the trial was a familiar ordeal for them: from 2002 to 2004, three other indigenous members were arrested after PT TPL complained they were farming in the disputed area.

Arisman Ambarita was jailed for three months in 2002, while Mangitua Ambarita and Parulian Ambarita were each sentenced in 2004 to two years in prison.

The Sihaporas community has since the early 1900s claimed ancestral rights to a large swath of forest in what is today North Tapanuli district in the province of North Sumatra, where it continues to practice subsistence farming.

In 1913, it loaned part of the land to the Dutch colonial authorities for a pine plantation. After Indonesia won independence from the Dutch, the new government claimed the pine forest, among other Dutch-run assets and properties at the time, as belonging to the Indonesian state.

In 1992, the government issued a pulpwood permit in the area to PT TPL, for a concession covering 185,000 hectares (457,000 acres). The Sihaporas community contends that 40,000 ha (98,800 acres) of that concession is part of its ancestral territory. PT TPL has already planted half of the disputed area with eucalyptus.

No responses
In its campaign to free Jonny and Thomson, the Sihaporas community took its case to Indonesia’s National Commission for Human Rights last October. Community elders also sent three letters to President Joko Widodo to demand state recognition of their ancestral lands and ask the government to revoke PT TPL’s permit.

There have been no responses to any of those initiatives.

Since 2013, when a landmark Constitutional Court ruling struck down the state’s claim to indigenous peoples’ forests, President Widodo has recognized the rights of 55 indigenous groups to forest areas spanning a combined 24,800 ha. AMAN, the indigenous rights advocacy group, says it has mapped out some 7.8 million ha of land it says belongs to 704 indigenous communities nationwide, including the Sihaporas community.

“When did land ownership certificates come about? Only after Indonesia came into being as a nation,” said Domu Ambarita, a historian for the Sihaporas community. “But indigenous peoples have existed and lived on their customary lands since before Indonesia was established.”

Domu said it was important to recognize the Sihaporas as the stewards of their land at a time when Indonesia is losing its forest at alarming rates to agriculture and other land-use changes.

“Our rituals exist alongside and protect nature,” he said. “If the ancestral forest is owned and seized by PT TPL, everything will be destroyed. We completely reject that.”

This story was first reported by Mongabay’s Indonesia team and republished by the Pacific Media Centre under a Creative Commons licence. Ayat S. Karokaro is a Mongabay contributor. Translated by Basten Gokkon.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Hans Nicholas Jong in Jakarta

Experts have warned that a slate of sweeping deregulation planned by the Indonesian government could prove disastrous for the environment and create even more conflicts over land and resources.

The administration of President Joko Widodo is preparing to submit to Parliament two bills containing more than 1200 proposed amendments to at least 80 existing laws.

The government says these provisions are all aimed at easing the investment climate in Indonesia in a bid to boost economic growth beyond the 5 percent pace it has been stuck at since 2014.

READ MORE: Scrapping of criminal charges against business people who commit environmental violations

But the so-called omnibus bills threaten to dismantle already tenuous protections for the environment, while the process of drafting them has been opaque and rushed, according to Hariadi Kartodihardjo, a forestry researcher at the Bogor Institute of Agriculture (IPB).

“The process [to discuss] the substance [of the bills] is still long,” he said. “But it seems like the politicians want it to be fast. I hear the omnibus bills will be passed in May or June by Parliament.”

President Widodo’s ruling coalition controls three-quarters of seats in Parliament, making it likely that any bill introduced by the government will pass relatively unchanged. The government says it expects the bills to pass within 100 days of submitting them.

But rushing through so many deregulatory provisions in such a short time leaves virtually no room to consider them properly and still maintain some semblance of environmental regulation, according to Laode Muhammad Syarif, the executive director of the NGO Kemitraan Partnership.

“How do you make a law in 100 days? Impossible,” he said. “If officials at the government support that, where did they go to school?”

Hariadi said that when legislation is rushed, risks arise.

“And who will bear the risks? It’s actually investors themselves,” he said.

End of environmental assessments
One of the most contentious points in the bills is the easing of requirements for businesses and developers to carry out an environmental impact analysis, known locally as an Amdal. Under current law, an Amdal is required to obtain an environmental permit from either the environment ministry or local authorities, depending on the scope of the project.

The environmental permit is itself a prerequisite to obtaining a business permit, which will then allow the project to go ahead.

The omnibus bills call for revising or revoking 39 existing articles on environmental permits, including articles in the 2009 law on environmental protection and the 1999 law on forestry.

In effect, environmental permits will no longer be a prerequisite for a business permit. And the environmental impact assessments that underlie them will only be required for projects deemed high risk, according to Bambang Hendroyono, Secretary-General of the Environment Ministry.

“Amdal is only [needed] if [the projects] are heavy and have a large impact on the environment,” he said. “[In that case], it will need public communication.”

He said environmental protections would remain robust despite this because companies were, as a principle, considerate of environmental conservation.

“So there’s nothing to be worried about because Amdal is a moral message,” he said. “In businesses, environmental principles have to be paid attention to.”

High risk criteria
Another ministry official said the government was still discussing what kinds of projects would be designated as high risk and therefore still required to have an environmental impact assessment.

Even then, companies will still be able to obtain a business permit before carrying out the assessment, according to Mahfud MD, the coordinating minister for legal and security affairs. He said the safeguard to ensure their projects were environmentally sound would be an audit carried out after they had both secured the business permit and carried out the Amdal.

“If the permits are issued after the Amdal, it’s going to take a long time,” Mahfud told local media. “People will run out of money [before the permits are issued].”

Forestry researcher Hariadi said revoking the requirements for an impact assessment and an environmental permit, all for the sake of facilitating investment, would be disastrous for a country that is already prone to natural disasters.

He cited the floods and landslides at the start of the year that hit Jakarta and surrounding areas, killing at least 67 people and displacing more than 173,000.

Environmental activists have attributed the severity of the disaster to deforestation and environmental damage in upstream areas. These include residential and commercial developments built in flood plains and water catchment areas, in violation of zoning and environmental regulations.

Hariadi said things could get even worse if the omnibus bills discount environmental protections entirely, noting that many such protections were in place for good reason.

‘You can’t get rid of wheels’
“What about the articles that indeed prevent investment in certain sectors for environmental reasons?” he said. “The problem is you can’t throw these articles away.

“Let’s say you want to make a car. The car has to have wheels, but the wheels are expensive. If you get rid of the wheels, then you won’t have a car, right?”

Hariadi said the current high cost and long wait for an Amdal to be carried out and environmental permit issued was not because of onerous requirements for due diligence and scientific surveys, but rather because of the myriad opportunities for corruption in the process by bureaucrats.

He cited a study carried out by his university that identified at least 32 stages within the process that could either be abused by officials to solicit bribes or gamed by applicants to bypass regulations.

Henri Subagiyo, former executive director of the Indonesian Center for Environmental Law (ICEL), said another factor was the lack of environmental data, such as the carrying capacity of the country’s rivers.

Each time a company wants to set up a factory near a river, for example, it has to collect its own data from scratch to determine how much waste it can discharge safely into the river.

“Environment data can’t be made in an instant, it has to be measured over a long period of time,” Henri said. “But the problem is that these data are often not available because our government doesn’t have them.

“We never know how much waste we can discharge into rivers, and yet permits keep being issued.”

Not an investment roadblock
Subagiyo also said environmental protections, including the requirement to carry out an Amdal, should not be seen as a roadblock to investment. Instead, it’s an integral part of safeguarding investors against future uncertainty, he said.

“Amdal isn’t merely an administrative document. It’s guidance for businesses to protect the environment,” Subagiyo said. “If it’s ignored, then there will be environmental risk for the businesses themselves. Amdal actually protects businesses from legal threats.”

He noted that similar requirements were in place in other Southeast Asian countries seen as friendlier to investors, indicating it was not the environmental regulations keeping them away from Indonesia.

Mas Achmad Santosa, a maritime expert from the Indonesia Ocean Justice Initiative, said Indonesia risked being an outlier among its peers in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

“Environmental impact assessments are practiced universally, especially in developed countries,” he said. “All 10 ASEAN countries require it and the trend is actually toward strengthening it, not weakening it.”

There are other worrying provisions in the bills being drafted, Hariadi said. One crucial amendment is the scrapping of criminal charges for businesspeople who commit environmental violations. The proposed maximum punishment will instead be a revocation of their business permits.

Conflicts over land, resources
The bills also call for limiting public participation in the permit application process, as a means of speeding up their issuance. Hariadi said this would prevent the public from being properly informed about projects that affect them, and could trigger conflicts over land and other resources.

“In order to issue permits swiftly, all [public] participation will be stopped as long as [the projects] are in line with zoning regulations,” he said. “There will be [environmental and zoning] problems of such big magnitude, but public participation will be limited. Won’t that create conflicts? Instead of the quality of public participation being improved, it’s being ditched just like that.”

The Environment Ministry’s Bambang said the public would still have a chance to participate — but again only in the case of high-risk projects.

Another proposed amendment is to curtail the process by which an area is designated a forest area. This would be an important change, as forest areas are currently off-limits to oil palm plantations, one of the leading drivers of deforestation in Indonesia. As with the limiting of public participation, this change in designating forest areas also has the potential to spark land conflicts, Hariadi said.

The designation process currently requires the approval of indigenous and forest communities, but will bypass these largely marginalised groups if the government has its way. The subsequent mapping process will be carried out electronically, using satellite imagery to speed up the process, Bambang said.

Hariadi said this would only deepen the divide between the forest communities, on one hand, and the government and businesses eyeing their land, on the other, who would be more likely to have access to the technology for drafting the electronic maps.

Most of the existing conflicts over land in Indonesia center around disputed boundaries, and communities without access to electronic maps would be hugely disadvantaged in staking their claim to the land, Hariadi said.

“Just imagine them having to rely on the local government and the private sector, who have possession of the electronic maps,” he said. “An area has social and cultural functions, it’s not just a commodity on paper.”

Forest areas amendment
Also related to forest areas is a proposed amendment to scrap a requirement for all regions to maintain a minimum 30 percent of their territory as forest area.

Muhammad Iqbal Damanik, a researcher with the environmental NGO Auriga Nusantara, said this would allow mining and plantation companies currently operating illegally inside forest areas to whitewash their crimes. The companies, under the proposed change, would be able to request that the forest status of the land be revised to non-forest area, thereby legalizing their operations, Iqbal said.

“So the perspective [of the omnibus bills] is exploitation,” he said. “There’s no conservation perspective.”

Anggalia Putri, a researcher at the NGO Madani, said the government should actually be pushing to increase the threshold above 30 percent, especially for regions like Papua in Indonesia’s east, which still has a lot of intact natural forest.

Maintaining minimum forest area in Papua of 30 percent would effectively greenlight a massive spate of deforestation, she said.

Despite the significance of the changes being proposed in the omnibus bills, the public still has not been able to see the drafts.

President Widodo in December ordered his officials to make the drafts available to the public for the sake of transparency. That still has not happened, prompting labour unions to stage protests against the bills amid speculation about sweeping cuts to worker welfare and job security regulations.

Ombudsman left out of loop
The office of the national Ombudsman has also been left out of the loop; when it requested a meeting with the office of the chief economics minister to discuss the bills, it was rejected.

Ombudsman Ahmad Alamsyah Saragih said this was the first time his office had been denied a meeting by a government institution. Instead, the minister’s office told the Ombudsman to submit a written recommendation about the bills.

“How can we give a written recommendation if we’ve never received the drafts?” Alamsyah said. “We’ve also seen NGOs [ask for a meeting with the minister’s office] and receive the same response.”

Laode from Kemitraan Partnership, who until recently served as a commissioner with the national antigraft agency, the KPK, said the lack of transparency indicated the omnibus bills were ridden with problematic articles.

He likened them to the controversial anticorruption bill drafted by the government and passed by Parliament in similarly lightning fashion last year, with the KPK left out of the deliberations.

While the government insisted the bill would strengthen the agency’s fight against corruption, the reality is that, once passed, the law has severely curtailed the KPK’s ability to carry out investigations.

In the cases of both the anticorruption law and the omnibus bills, the deliberations have been carried out behind closed doors, civil society groups have been shut out, and the government has pushed for speedy passage. If the government has nothing to hide and the omnibus bills truly serve the greater good, then why the secrecy, Laode asked.

‘What’s being hidden?’
“What’s being hidden such that the drafts aren’t being shared [with the public]?” he said.

Hariadi also called on the government to be more transparent about the bills.

“Don’t limit participation,” he said. “Don’t let the bills become legal and yet illegitimate by failing to involve the public in the deliberations.”

He said public participation was important because neither the bills nor prevailing legislation adequately addressed the real problems hindering greater investment in Indonesia, including corruption and land conflicts.

“The roadblocks [for investors] are actually caused by abuse of authority,” Hariadi said.

“The government and lawmakers have to see the facts on the ground in order to solve the problems that the omnibus bills are supposed to solve. The problems on the ground are so many and they’re very complicated. They can’t just be simplified.”

If anything, he said, the bills are a potential minefield for investors, threatening to create more of the problems — environmental degradation and land conflicts, among others — that already deter investors from coming to Indonesia.

Bills ‘actually counterproductive’
Dzulfian Syafrian, an economist with the Institute for Development of Economics and Finance (INDEF), agreed that the bills “are actually counterproductive in attracting investors.”

He said loosening environmental protections would harm investors because environmental damage would lead to more problems.

“From the economic perspective [businesses and the government] are looking for short-term gain and profit,” Dzulfian said. “They don’t see sustainability as something important for the development of their businesses.”

The kinds of investment that would be encouraged by the bills are those in hydrocarbons, he added, which won’t serve Indonesia’s emissions reduction goals or its long-term plans for sustainable growth.

“With the relaxation of environmental regulations, these businesses will be happy,” Dzulfian said. “But investors who are pro-environment will have doubts.”

Banner image: Gold mining tailing pond near Mandor in West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Image by Rhett A. Butler/Mongabay.

This article is republished from Mongabay under a Creative Commons licence.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Pacific Media Centre Newsdesk

The Pacific Media Centre’s Del Abcede joined the Ihumātao “protectors” protest at the weekend to soak up the atmosphere of guardianship over the future of the sacred indigenous Māori site.

Fletcher Building plans to build 480 homes on the site but work has been suspended by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern while talks continue between various stakeholders.

The SOUL (Save Our Unique Landscape) protectors group says the land has historical, cultural and archaeological significance and should be left an open space or returned to mana whenua.

The block of land was confiscated in 1863 by British colonial authorities, acquired by the Crown and sold to the Wallace family. In 2016, the 32ha block was bought by the Fletcher group for housing development.

Here is a portfolio of Del’s images.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Charlotte Muru-Lanning in Auckland

Controversial social media pages belonging to the New Zealand iwi opposing the occupation at Ihumātao were shut down this morning.

The Twitter and Facebook pages named “Protecting Ihumātao” were set up by Te Kawerau a Maki, the Auckland iwi opposing the occupation lead by the SOUL group at Ihumātao.

The social media pages have been criticised for being misleading by looking too similar to SOUL’s social media pages which use the similar name “Protect Ihumātao”.

READ MORE: Ihumātao: Powerful powhiri welcomes state ministers to protest site

A spokesperson for Te Kawerau a Maki, Pita Turei, said that he was at the meeting where the “Protecting Ihumātao” social media campaign had been discussed.

He said that the similarity of the pages to SOUL’s social media was done on purpose and was a “tactical move” by the iwi authority.

The pages which appeared online on Monday shared articles and quotes in support of the Fletcher Building development and the deal made between Fletcher and Te Kawerau a Maki.

Kelly Marie Francis, a spokesperson for SOUL said that it was obvious that the online pages had been made to look like SOUL’s social media.

She said that she believed that the pages were shut down because of the negative response.

“They would have been receiving too much flack for it,” she said.

Although the Facebook and Twitter pages for “Protecting Ihumātao” have been deleted, the website is still active. Te Kawerau a Maki has been criticised for paying for this website to sit above SOUL’s website in Google search results relating to Ihumātao.

• Charlotte Muru-Lanning is Tainui and Ngati Maniapoto. She is based in Auckland, New Zealand. She has a BA in sociology and film and media studies and is currently completing a Postgraduate Diploma in Journalism at Auckland University of Technology

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

By RNZ News

About 2000 people showed their support as New Zealand protests against a controversial proposed housing development at Ihumātao in South Auckland entered their fifth day.

RNZ reporters at the scene sid it was abuzz with people and activities that included traditional Māori massage, mirimiri.

At least 50 tents were erected in the main paddock which protesters reclaimed from police yesterday.

READ MORE: Our trail of tears: The story of Ihumātao was stolen

LISTEN TO RNZ: Peeni Henare speaks to Kim Hill on Saturday Morning

Government minister Peeni Henare, the MP for Tāmaki Makaurau, arrived at the site at midday with fellow minister Willie Jackson.

They were welcomed onto Ihumātao with a roaring powhiri.

Earlier this week both ministers were reluctant to weigh in on the land dispute, saying there was nothing the government could do to resolve it.

A representative of mana whenua, Eru Rakena, spoke directly to Henare, asking him what he would do if Ihumātao was his land and under threat.

Appeal for support
He asked the ministers for their support to save the land from a housing development so it could be used by his mokopuna.

He said whānau protesting were mana whenua and had always been mana whenua.

Mana movement leader Hone Harawira said Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern should stay away from the land dispute at Ihumātao, and allow her Māori ministers to find a resolution.

Yesterday Ardern vowed that no building would take place at Ihumātao while the government and other parties tried to broker a solution

Harawira arrived at the site this morning with more than 100 Destiny Church members to pledge his support for protesters.

He said it was disappointing that Māori ministers had not taken a lead role in trying to find a solution.

“It would be nice to see the Māori ministers leading here rather than being told what to do by Jacinda.

‘Stay overseas’
“I don’t think she knows what’s going on here. Stay overseas. Leave it to Peeni and the whānau here. Let’s get it done.”

Earlier, one of the Save Our Unique Landscape (SOUL) campaign leaders, Pania Newton, said people were arriving from all over the country to oppose the Fletcher Building development on land considered sacred by iwi.

Newton said there would be a free concert later today, with Stan Walker, Ladi6, Troy Kingi, NRG Rising and others performing.

“We just are so grateful for the support that is coming in from the nation.

“We are expecting around 10,000 to 15,000 visitors so we do encourage everybody to come on down and enjoy the event and to come and take a stand on the land with us and with our whānau and our marae to protect it.”

Destiny Church leader Brian Tamaki said Pākehā systems and the government would never be able to help Māori.

He said a solution to the land dispute would come from the ground up.

Range of stakeholders
Henare told Kim Hill on Saturday Morning ahead of his visit to the disputed site that there was a range of stakeholders.

“There are mana whenua, there are whānau, there are iwi, there are local supporters, that’s the trickiness of this all … mana whenua have as we know traditional rights in places like this, but we also have other people involved too.

“Mana whenua are Ti Akitai, Te Wai o Hua, Tainui and Te Kawerau ā Maki – those are the mana whenua. Now whether people like it or not, engagement that the Crown has had in the past with those tribes … for legislation purposes, they are recognised as mana whenua.”

But Henare said no one was denying the whakapapa to the land of people from the group Save Our Unique Landscape.

“There’s no doubt it’s caused a lightning rod, if you like, for the issue of Māori land rights and that’s what’s seen so many other iwi and people from across the country make their way to Ihumātao.”

Henare said it was a complex issue which had been through many courts and also involved Auckland Council, as well as mana whenua.

“One of the points made to me by mana whenua, who have said many of the people that are going there aren’t from there, and that creates a bit of a challenge because they would argue that they’re not respecting the rights of mana whenua there.

‘Passionate people’
“While I don’t want to belittle the role of mana whenua in this, the fact remains there’s many passionate people that made their way to Ihumātao.”

The government has been considering how to broker a situation for a number of months, Henare said.

He said he and minister Jackson were going there today primarily to listen and to get a feel for what was going on.

Despite the prime minister’s assurances no houses would be built at Ihumātao until a solution was found between both groups, people still arrived during the night to support those protesting against the development.

Green MP Mārama Davidson was one of those supporting the SOUL (Save Our Unique Landscape) group by sitting with the line of protesters in front of police.

Around 30 tents were set up in a paddock and people were also sleeping in their cars.

Throughout the night there was singing and speeches of support as many fires around Ihumātao lit up the whenua.

Fletcher Building welcomes talks
A senior Fletcher Building executive has welcomed the chance for talks while the development of housing at the Ihumātao site in south Auckland stops.

Steve Evans, the company’s chief executive of residential and land development, said the company had had about a dozen meetings with the Save Our Unique Landscape group in recent years.

Last night, after meeting iwi, Fletchers and Auckland Council, Ardern said no houses would be built at the site while they tried to broker a solution.

Evans said people had the right to protest.

He said the hui with iwi and the government meant no further work would happen at the site for now while talks were arranged.

• This article is published under the Pacific Media Centre’s content partnership with Radio New Zealand.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

An internationally acclaimed investigative documentary about Paga Hill community’s fight for justice from the illegal eviction and demolition of their homes in Papua New Guinea’s capital of Port Moresby has been banned from screening today at the PNG Human Rights Festival.

“The ban highlights the lingering limits on free speech in our country and the continued attempts to censor our story of resistance against gross human rights violations,” claimed Paga Hill community leader and lawyer Joe Moses, the main character in The Opposition film who had to seek exile in the United Kingdom after fighting for his community’s rights.

“This censorship comes as a deep disappointment for my community who have suffered greatly over the past six years.”

The Opposition tells the David-and-Goliath battles of a community evicted, displaced, abandoned – their homes completely demolished at the hands of two Australian-run companies, Curtain Brothers and Paga Hill Development Company, and the PNG state.

What was once home to 3000 people of up to four generations, Paga Hill is now part of the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation (APEC) summit “AELM Precinct” which will take place this November.

• ‘I was scared for my life’: Paga Hill activist seeks asylum in the UK 

• Port Moresby settlers evicted to make way for Australian-backed development abandoned 

• ‘The battle of Paga Hill’ – controversial PNG doco finally on NZ screens

• PNG Human Rights Film Festival on Facebook

Frontline Insight: The Paga Hill struggle. Video: Reuters Foundation

This article was first published on Café Pacific.]]>

]]> https://eveningreport.nz/2018/08/11/films-about-1965-anti-communist-stigma-dominate-indonesian-festival/ Fri, 10 Aug 2018 15:01:32 +0000 https://eveningreport.nz/2018/08/11/films-about-1965-anti-communist-stigma-dominate-indonesian-festival/ ]]> The trailer for Eka Saputri’s film Melawan Arus. Video: Komunitas Kedung

By Joko Santoso in Purbalingga

A short film by a student whose family were victims of the 1965 anti-communist purge in Indonesia has won best fictional film at the 2018 Purbalingga Film Festival.

The film titled Against the Current (Melawan Arus) was directed by Eka Saputri and produced by the Kebumen 1 State Vocational School.

Facilitated by the Ministry of Education and Culture’s (Kemdikbud) Cinematography Development Centre (Pusbangfilm), the film tells the story of a man and wife defending their rights to their land despite being branded “decadents” of the banned Indonesian Communist Party (PKI).

Yono, the husband, has lost his spirit to defend the land which is being disputed with the authorities. He suggests to his wife Siti that they move.

Siti however who is strong in her convictions remains living in the house squatting on the land. The 10-minute film researches a land conflict in Urut Sewu, Kebumen.

-Partners-

According to one member of the fictional film jury, Teguh Trianton, Against the Current succeeds getting views to explore the psychological aspects of the issue.

“The film leaves viewers contemplating deeply and leaves behind questions the answers to which can be found outside of the film,” sauidTrianton.

“We hope that our film can inspire views through the courage of community farmers in Urut Sewu in defending their right to land,” said director Eka Saputri.

Best documentary
The best documentary category was won by Sum by director Firman Fajar Wiguna and produced by the Purbalingga 2 State Vocational School.

The 15-minute film tells the story of a woman named Suminah, a former Indonesian Peasants Union (BTI, affiliated with the PKI) activist.

After being jailed for 13 years, Sum lives in solitude. She continues to wait for things to take a turn for the better.

According to the documentary jury board’s notes, the film Sum was put together through selected esthetic pictures and a sequence of clear informational narratives.

“As an endeavor at visual communication, this film enriches the national historical language through a grass-roots perspective and the victims who were impacted upon by the excesses of political struggles at the national level,” explained one of the jury members, Adrian Jonathan Pasaribu.

The favorite fictional film category was won by the film Banner (Umbul-Umbul) directed by Atik Alvianti and produced by the Purwareja Banjarnegara Group Indonesian Farmers Association (HKTI) 2 Vocational School.

Viewers’ favourite
In the favorite documentary film category meanwhile, viewers sided with Unseen Legacy (Warisan Tak Kasat Mata), directed by Sekar Fazhari from the Bukateja Purbalingga State senior high school.

The Lintang Kemukus award for Banyumas Raya maestro of the arts and culture was awarded to R. Soetedja (1909-1960), a composer from Banyumas, and the Kamuajo Musical Group was awarded the Lintang Kemukus category of contemporary arts and culture.

Purbalingga regent Dyah Hayuning Pratiwi, SE, B. Econ who attended the highpoints of the FFP event, said that the Purbalingga regency government was committed to supporting cinematographic activities and the film festival in Purbalingga.

“Aside from being an arena for friendly gatherings, cinematographic activities are also an arena to improve respective regency’s reputations and prestige,” he said.

Translated by James Balowski for the Indoleft News Service. The original title of the article was Film Tragedi 65 Raih Penghargaan di FFP 2018.

The making of Melawan Arus – dialogue in Bahasa Indonesian.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>

]]> https://eveningreport.nz/2018/05/18/cheated-png-landowners-threaten-to-close-five-fish-processing-plants/ Fri, 18 May 2018 00:01:34 +0000 https://eveningreport.nz/2018/05/18/cheated-png-landowners-threaten-to-close-five-fish-processing-plants/ ]]> Lae landowners have given the papua New Guinean government seven days to review existing agreements or they will close the disputed tuna fish canneries. Video: EMTV News

By Scott Waide in Lae

Landowning clans in the Papua New Guinean city of Lae are threatening to close down five fish processing plants if the government does not review the existing agreements that govern them.

The clans, which include the Ahi and the Busulum, say they have been cheated of development benefits.

Since the agreements were signed four years ago, they have received K5000 a year for the five portions of land they own.

The threat comes after three years of complicated wrangling with the government and the companies over landowner benefits.

If the landowners have it their way, Majestic Seafoods, Frabelle and three other fish processing factories will be forced to shut down next Tuesday.

-Partners-

Landowner company BUP Development is calling on the National Fisheries Authority (NFA) to review the existing agreements so that they receive more in terms of landowner benefits.

Bad deal
After four years, it has now become clear, landowners got a bad deal.

The landowners are paid a total of K5000 (NZ$2225) annually for the five land portions they leased to the companies. The deal was negotiated by the provincial administration at the start of the projects.

Apart from a K2 million (NZ$890,000) premium payment made several years ago, the landowners receive little else.

They are also not party to agreements between the state and the fish processing companies.

They also do not know what the terms of the state agreement are.

The landowner company since issued a 7-day notice to the government to come to Lae for negotiations.

They are demanding K20 million in compensation as well as a review of the memorandum of agreement they signed with the companies.

Scott Waide is EMTV’s Lae bureau chief and began his career with the television station in 1997 as a news and sports reporter and anchor. He has won several awards for his journalism. This article is republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>

]]> https://eveningreport.nz/2017/12/18/yogyakarta-airport-developers-warned-not-to-steal-peoples-land/ Sun, 17 Dec 2017 23:00:17 +0000 https://eveningreport.nz/2017/12/18/yogyakarta-airport-developers-warned-not-to-steal-peoples-land/ ]]> A police officer looks on as workers of state-owned airport operator PT Angkasa Pura I bulldoze a building in the vicinity of Glagah village to make room for the New Yogyakarta International Airport (NYIA) in Kulonprogro, Yogyakarta on Friday. Image: Bambang Muryanto/The Jakarta Post

By Bambang Muryanto in Yogyakarta

Indonesia’s National Commission for Human Rights (Komnas HAM) has demanded that state-owned airport operator PT Angkasa Pura I consider human rights aspects while working on the construction of a new airport in Kulonprogo, Yogyakarta.

The project should be free from human rights breaches, in particular when it comes to land ownership, the organisation said.

“Please, do not steal the citizen’s lands in the name of infrastructure development,” said Komnas HAM commissioner Choirul Anam.

READ MORE: Students reject new Yogyakarta airport, condemn forced evictions

Choirul added that he had received reports from local activists claiming that people of Glagah village were being forced by the company and police to give up their land.

Thirty of some 2700 families living on the disputed land reportedly insist on staying in their homes. Choirul suggested the company engage in dialogue with the people to find a solution.

-Partners-

“This is not only about land ownership; the eviction also threatens the people’s culture and social wellbeing,” he said, noting that violence could create even more problems.

Meanwhile, PT Angkasa Pura, through the manager of the New Yogyakarta International Airport (NYIA) construction project, Sudjiastono, claimed it had done everything in line with the law on land procurement for public utilities construction.

According to the regulation, he added, the company was allowed to forcibly evict people who refused to give up their land in return for compensation through the court.

“We’ve respected the people’s rights by giving them compensation, more than they deserve to get,” he said.

Bambang Muryanto is Yogyakarta correspondent of The Jakarta Post.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz