RACIAL DISCRIMINATION IN PAPUA

BY:
REV. CORINUS BEROTABUI, MTH
CHAIRMAN OF THE EVANGELICAL CHURCH IN THE LAND OF PAPUA

Jakarta is not interested in the people of Papua, what Jakarta is interested in are
the land and its natural resources.1

I. PREFACE

The Indonesian Constitution from 1945 guarantees in Chapter X, A, Paragraph 28, I, verse 2 the
right of everyone to be free from any kind of discrimination and the right to protection from any
discriminative actions. According to verse 4 the State, in particular through its government, has the
responsibility to give protection, progress, enforcement and fulfillment of Human Rights. Through
these stipulations the rights of the citizens of the Republic of Indonesia and their freedom from
discrimination are clearly protected.

According to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
the term "racial discrimination" is defined as any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference
based on race, color, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of
nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights
and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public
life2.

The Convention further states that States Parties undertake to prohibit and to eliminate racial
discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of everyone, without distinction as to race,
color, or national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law, notably in the enjoyment of the
following rights:
(a) The right to equal treatment before the tribunals and all other organs administering justice;

(b) The right to security of person and protection by the State against violence or bodily harm,
whether inflicted by government officials or by any individual group or institution;

1
General Ali Murtopo
2
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, ratification by
General Assembly resolution 2106 (XX) of 21 December 1965, Part 1, Article 1, verse (1)
(c) Political rights, in particular the right to participate in elections-to vote and to stand for election-
on the basis of universal and equal suffrage, to take part in the Government as well as in the
conduct of public affairs at any level and to have equal access to public service;

(d) Other civil rights, in particular:

(i) The right to freedom of movement and residence within the border of the State;

(ii) The right to leave any country, including one's own, and to return to one's country;

(iii) The right to nationality;

(iv) The right to marriage and choice of spouse;

(v) The right to own property alone as well as in association with others;

(vi) The right to inherit;

(vii) The right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion;

(viii) The right to freedom of opinion and expression;

(ix) The right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association;

(e) Economic, social and cultural rights, in particular:

(i) The rights to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favorable conditions of work, to
protection against unemployment, to equal pay for equal work, to just and favorable remuneration;

(ii) The right to form and join trade unions;

(iii) The right to housing;

(iv) The right to public health, medical care, social security and social services;

(v) The right to education and training;

(vi) The right to equal participation in cultural activities;

(f) The right of access to any place or service intended for use by the general public, such as
transport hotels, restaurants, cafes, theatres and parks.3

In 1999, through Law Number 29, the Indonesian Government has ratified the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. The First Part of the
3
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, ratification by
General Assembly resolution 2106 (XX) of 21 December 1965, Part 1, Article 5.
explanation of the Indonesian Law 29/ 1999 about the ratification of the International Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination from 1965 stipulates that Racial
Discrimination is basically a refusal of Human Rights and basic freedoms.4

The Indonesian Government has also passed a Human Rights (Law Number 39/ 99) in 1999. In its
First Chapter, Paragraph 1, verse 3 it is stipulated that Discrimination is any restriction, act of
despising or exclusion which is directly or indirectly based on the distinction of religion, tribe, race,
ethnic, group, social status, economic status, sex, language, political beliefs and resulting in the
decrease, deviation, or abolition of acknowledgement, implementation, use of Human Rights and
fundamental freedoms of the individual or the collective within political, economic, legal, social,
cultural and other aspects of life.

The efforts to eliminate all forms of discrimination related to the measures of human rights
protection resulted in the ratification of the International Convention on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights by the Indonesian Government which was ratified through Law Number 11/2005
(Kovenan Internasional tentang Hak-Hak Ekonomi, Sosial dan Budaya) on 28 October 2005. For
the protection of Civil and Political Rights the Indonesian Government ratified the International
Convention on Civil and Political Rights through Law Number 21/2005 (Kovenan Internasional
tentang Hak-Hak Sipil dan Politik) on October 28, 2005.

Although the Indonesian Constitution already guarantees the rights of every citizen for
equal treatment before the law, reality is still far away from expectations: Regulations and Laws of
non- discrimination are nothing other than a FALSE SLOGAN

This Executive Summary of Racial Discrimination in Papua gives a genenal overview on

how far the above mentioned laws have been implemented in Papua since its integration into the
Republic of Indonesia.

II. DISCRIMINATION IN PAPUA

2.1 RACIAL DISCRIMINATION

4
Penjelasan Atas Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 29 Tahun 1999 Tentang
Pengesahan International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination 1965
(Konvensi Internasional Tentang Penghapusan Segala Bentuk Diskriminasi Rasial 1965)
In 2003 approxiametely 2,35 million people lived in the region of Papua, of which 1.46 million
people (66%) were of Papuan origin. The other inhabitants originated from Java, Bali, Nusa
Tenggara Timur, Sulawesi and other areas of Indonesia. Many of them had arrived in Papua
through the government sponsored transmigration program which relocated people within the
country. This program combined with independent migration resulted in a population shift in the
urban areas of Papua where the local inhabitants have become a minority: They form only a third
of the population.5

The culture of the Malayan Indonesians and the culture of the Melanesian Papuans differ and
racial bias occurs. Related to the Abepura 2000 Case racial discrimination towards the Papuan
people could be proven in the report of the Investigation Commission for Human Rights Violations
from the National Commission on Human Rights (KPP Komnas HAM) in Jakarta on 8 May. The
following racial expressions were reported:

You have an ugly face with curly hair and a stupid brain
You with the curly hair only know how to eat pigs and will never get independence.
Curly hair is an animal quality and only worthy of annihilation.
You Papuans do not know anything, even as scholars you are stupid people.
You people from Wamena sleep with pigs, so you have the brain of a pig, you are all
stupid. Better you eat sheep, so you will be as clever as people from Java, Makassar
and Jakarta.
You Papuans are like pigs, dogs.
You have a brain like a pig.
Knowing how to raise pigs means to have the brain of a pig.
If you want to have freedom, take your freedom tonight. Tomorrow there will be no
freedom again.

Papuans living on Java are often called monkeys or kete in the Javanese language.

2.2. RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION

5
UNDP: Papua Needs Assessment. Jayapura 2005, pages 6 and 12.
The findings of KPP Komnas HAM (Jakarta, 8 Mei 2001) clearly identify religious discrimination in
the Abepura 2000 Case:

You Christians do not have a Jesus, you do not have a faith.

This face is not of a Christian, it is not possible that Jesus comes and helps you.
Call your God Jesus Christ to come and rescue you now.
You have a dirty God.
You have a dirty God, call him so He will help you.
Christians are an embarassement.
You Christians have pastors who order to kill, order to steal and to eat people.
You Christians have a Jesus Christ who does not help you today, so try and call him for
help.
You Christians do not mean anything, you do not know yourself, you do not know
anything.

The International Report Of Religious Freedom 2003 published by the Office of Democracy,
Fundamemtal Rights and Labors on 11 February 2004, states that in Indonesias eastermost
province, Papua, the Muslim community are a minority, except for the region of Sorong and Fak
Fak where they form approxiametely half of the inhabitants. The majority of Papuans practice
Christian religion and/ or animistic beliefs. During the last years, the migration of people resulted in
a shift of ethnic and religious composition in Papua. The arrival of Muslim migrants has caused
some tensions between local Papuans and the new migrants. Nevertheless, these tensions are
more related to economic than religious problems. At the time of the report, the relations between
the religions in Papua were generally fine. However, in May, members of militias from at least one
Muslim village in Papua supported a military operation in the Middle Uplands (Dataran Tinggi
Tengah) where many houses were burned. This support threatened to trigger old resentments
amongst villages with Muslim and non-Muslim majorities in the province. Reports from Non-
Governmental Organisations (NGOs) stated that at that time, Laskar Jihad, responsible for the
killings of many Christians in the Malukus, was present in Papua in significant numbers. Some
observers speculated that the Indonesian Military was supporting the arrival of Laskar Jihad in
Papua. However, in June Laskar Jihad reportedly left and it remains uncertain how many - if any -
members are still in Papua. Economic tensions between local inhabitans (who are generally Non-
Muslims) and the new arrivers (generally Muslims) are an important factor in violent clashes
between religious and ethnic groups in the Malukus, Central Sulawesi, Papua and Kalimantan.

2.3 HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS

Human Rights violations sistematically occur until today (2007). A contributing factor is that
the perpetrators of such violations do not get sentenced due to a culture of impunity in which
perpetrators are protected by the government and their own institutions. Until now only one case
of human rights violations has been brought to the Human Rights Court in Makassar, that is the
Abepura Case of 2000. However, the two defendants from BRIMOB (Special Forces of the Police)
were not found guilty.

Amnesty International estimates that 100.000 Papuan people have been killed by the
Indonesian security forces since the integration into the Republic of Indonesia. Human Rights
violations happening in the concession area of PT Freeport were published for the first time in a
report by the churches in 19956. The National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM)
identifies the following human rights violations by the security forces: arbitrary killings, torture,
arbitary arrest and imprisonment, people going missing, excessive supervision and the destruction
of property. Other human rights violations occuring in the mining area of PT Freeport are: loss of
land and sources of livelihood without consultation and adequate compensation, forced
resettlement, and environmental destruction resulting in an unhealthy environment. Foreign
enterprises are backed-up by the Indonesian military and police taking sides with PT Freeport. PT
Freeport is one of the biggest tax payers in Indonesia, however the returns from the royalties paid
to Jakarta back to the Province are poor.

2.4 EDUCATION

6
Laporan Pelanggaran Hak Asasi Manusia Terhadap Penduduk Lokal di Wilayah Sekitar Timika,
Kabupaten Fak-Fak, Irian Jaya, Tahun 1994/1995.
 According to a UNDP report from 2005 Papua has the lowest level of adult literacy in
Indonesia (74%). 82% of the Papuan children attend primary school, 47% attend junior secondary
school and only 19% senior secondary school. Several factors contribute to the low level of
education, for example badly equipped facilities, teachers being absent and lack of access for
students due to economic and transportation problems. As the educational system of the state is
poor in quality many students turn to private schools.7 These schools however face management
difficulties, the Foundation of Christian Education (YPK) is one example while other good private
schools often can not be paid by Papuan families. It is often said that the people of Papua are
stupid, but this is not true as it depends on the opportunities people have. An example is Geoge
Saa, a high school student from Jayapura who after being educated at the University Pelita
Harapan in Jakarta succeeded in surpassing all the other advanced students from Indonesia and
received the Step Nobel Prize in Physics. Another Papuan student, Surya Bonay, received the
Step Nobel Prize in Chemestry from Sweden.

2.5 HEALTH

According to UNDP the health situation in Papua is much worse than in other parts of
Indonesia. The infant and maternal mortality rates are the highest in Indonesia (maternal mortality
rate is 1.116 per 100.000 births). Besides malaria and tuberculosis Papua faces a serious HIV/
Aids problem with the highest infection rate of the country. Until June 2007 3.377 cases of HIV/Aids
were reported, 68% of the infected being local Papuans. Similar to the education sector, the
facilities of the health sector are poorly equipped, with medical personnel being absent, non-
availability of medicine and people from the villages lacking access to health centers due to long
distances. Even though health has been identified as a priority sector, only 8% of the provincial
budget was allocated for the health sector in 2002 while the city and district governments only
allocated 2% of its budget for health.8

2.6 ECONOMY

7
UNDP 2005, pages 22 and 23.
8
UNDP 2005, pages 23-24
An example of discrimination in the economic sector are the Mama-Mama Papua, the women of
Papua. The city of Jayapura as the main capital of the Papua Province is supposed to become a
decent and well organized city attracting foreign investors9. The Papuan women selling their fruits
and vegetables on the streets are disturbing the picture of a clean city and therefore the Jayapura
city government wants the women to move to the edges of town. The Papuan women however ask
the government to protect them as original traders and also provide a traditional market with proper
facilities for them as the culture, existence and representation of the people of Papua needs to
exist in Jayapura as the capital city of the Province.10

Another economic imbalance is experienced by the Papuan entrepreneurs facing difficulties getting
projects. According to a Presidential Instruction (Inpres) and a Presidential Decision (Kepres
80/2003) entrepreneurs need to have a basic capacity in order to get project offerings. Papuan
entrepreneurs however do not have a high debtor. Therefore they can only receive projects of 500
Million Rupiah and less. The government is also suspicious of the Papuan entrepreneurs, believing
that projects of high value will strengthen the Papuans financing the independence struggle.

Not many Papuans work in the citys supermarkets, hotels or other modern locations. And the
situation in the villages is even more complex. A woman from a village says that in the past her
family was able to hunt right behind their house, nowadays however they have to walk several
days until they can start hunting. The governments goal is to make the Papuans farmers as they
are perceived as primitive people and an embarrassment for the Indonesian state. The local people
of Arso were provided land on oil palm plantations in the area of Arso, but they neither had the
knowledge of farming nor did they receive appropriate support from the government to improve
their capabilities. Eventually, most of them failed as farmers.11 Development projects are therefore
run by Non-Papuans determining in whose hands projects fall. If these managers receive
complaints from local entrepreneurs they immediately report them to the Head of District.12

9
M.R. Kambu, Major of Jayapura, when giving a speech to small traders on 25.11.2006
10
Film from SKP (Sekretariat Keadilan dan Perdamaian) and Witness 2007: Mama-Mama tersingkir di
tanah sendiri.
11
Kristina Neubauer, Research in Arso 2002
12
Case in Boven Digul, 2006
Approximately 5.000 people of Papuan origin and 13.000 from outside Papua are working at the
gold and copper mine PT Freeport in Timika. Most of the Papuan have a non-staff status with little
rights. Non-staff employees are for example not allowed to bring their families to live with them in
the workers barracks, they are neither allowed to use the restaurants, shopping centers and kiosks
owned by PT Freeport nor can their children attend the schools from the multinational company.
This discrimination is both experienced by Papuans as well as Non-Papuans with non-staff
position. At the top management level only one Papuan is represented (Agus Kafiar), but without
any decision making rights. Three Papuans are found at the Management level. The first Papuan
manager ever at PT Freeport got his position just one year before retiring and therefore with little
influence. According to GKIs sources PT Freeport employs Papuans with poor qualifications in
order to minimize their influence. Mrs. L & P stated that even though they had been working for PT
Freeport for already ten years they had not been promoted yet.

2.7 EXPLOITATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES

The robbery of natural resources occurs in Papua since its integration into the Republic of
Indonesia and no end is in sight. Exploitation happens in many ways, one example is the gold
mining at the Degewo River in Nabire. The land of the local Wolani tribe had fallen into the hands
of other people without consultation of the traditional owners informing them that their land had
been formalized with a certification from entrepreneurs in Jakarta. These entrepreneurs acted
tricky when approaching the local community saying:If you give me your land, we will build you a
village, we will build you houses, provided you give me the permission to mine the gold within one
kilometer of the Degowo River. They then brought the chief of tribe to the city of Nabire where he
was served well and eventually was ordered to sign a payment receipt and an official letter
releasing his land.

A similar case happened in Arso in 1982. According to an official document between the
government and the traditional landowners 500 Hectares of land were released to the government.
But after the contract had been signed the governmental representatives changed the 500 into
50.000 Hectares. 13

13
Neubauer 2002
The opening of five million Hectares of oil palm plantation in Papua is planned until 2012, most of it
in Southern Papua. If this plan is implemented, thousands of workers from outside will come, as for
one million hectares of oil palm plantation 300.000 workers are needed. Until 2007 less than 10%of
the oil palm plantation workers employed by Korino, a wood and oil palm company operating in
Southern Papua, originated from Papua. 14 This development indicates that the people of Papua
will become even more a minority than they already are in many parts of the country. They will
experience an increased loss of bio-diversity, destruction of traditional culture and livelihood. In the
region of Rawa Biru Boven Digul, one of the newly formed districts from Merauke district in
Southern Papua, the military is also involved in the business with Arwana fish. They buy the fish
from the local inhabitants for 2.000 Rupiah or with cigarettes or noodles and resell it for several
million Rupiah. The military forces also stop people and force them to share what they caught as a
livelihood in the forest, including horns of deer.

2.8 DISCRIMINATION IN DEVELOPMENT PLANS

On May 16th 2007, the President of the Republic of Indonesia Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono issued
the Presidential Instruction (INPRES) Number 5/2007 about the Papua and West Papua Provinces
Accelerated Development. President Yudhoyono ordered several ministries and provincial
government institutions to take steps accelerating the development progress in the two provinces
with the following priorities:
a) Food resources and poverty reduction, b) Education quality improvement, c) Health service
improvement, d) Basic Infrastructure increase for improved access to remote areas, the interior
and border areas and e) Affirmative action in quality development of indigenous Papuan human
resources.

Even though these priorities are well-thought of they were made by the central government alone
and without any consultation of the Papuan people. In order to implement the Presidential
Instruction 5/07 the President has formed a working team based in Jakarta not involving officials

14
International Crisis Group: Indonesian Papua: A Local Perspective on the Conflict. Jakarta/ Brussels, 19
July 2007.
from Papua. Once again, the participation of the Papuans in their own matters is neglected. The
people of Papua ask: How can the President identify our needs and priorities without consulting us
beforehand?15 That is why we, the people of Papua, ask: For whom is the development in Papua?
The first massive development program undertaken in Papua was the so-called transmigration
program starting in the 60s. Between 1969 and 1999 the Indonesian government resettled
approxiametely 10 million people from densly populated islands to areas with little population
including Papua. Through its transmigration program the government wanted to reach mainly three
goals: a) reducing overpopulation on Java and other islands, b) developing less populated islands
and c) securing the Unity of Indonesia from external and internal threats (security factor). The
government was convinced that through the transmigration program the local people would benefit
and learn as new farming technologies, knowledge and infrastructure were to be transferred. The
local people would learn from the migrants, or so was the belief. But some decades after the
transmigration program in Papua had been implemented the local people have not particularly
benefited from the program. On the contrary, their lives have become more difficult. Through the
opening of oil palm plantations the local people have lost the forest and their basic livelihood. One
obeserver descibes the situation as the following:Streets can not be eaten. The example of Arso
shows that the local inhabitants can no longer suvive from their traditional economic system relying
on natural resources while in modern economies they are neglected and the support which they
need has not been not provided.16

15
Neles Tebay: Guiding Papuas development
(http://www.thejakartapost.com/detaileditorial.asp?fileid=20070829.E02&irec=1)
16
Neubauer 2002
 2.9 DISCRIMINATION BEFORE THE LAW AND TRIALS
Discrimination can also be found at court tribunals. One example is the court case against Filep
Karma and Yusak Pakage. According to their lawyer the two defendants were to be found not guilty
as no evidence against them, such as the morning star flag which had been raised, was presented
at the trial. Nevertheless, they were sentenced for 15 years imprisonment. 17 A clash happened at
the trial of Yusak Pakage and Filep Karma on 10 May 2005 in Jayapura when the leading judge A.
Lakoni climbed up on the table, his hands on his hips and using discriminative expressions: You
Papuans are stupid. The judge Lakoni jumped then down and slapped one of the trial visitors.
This provocation of the judge resulted in a clash between the police and dozens of demonstrators
at the trial who were calling for the release of Filep Karma and Yusak Pakage. Several
demonstrators were mistreated and shot at from the police forces. Racial Discrimination also
occurred in relation to the Abepura Case 2006 when in particular people from the highlands were
arbitrarily pulled out of taxis and private cars by Brimob and police officers who beat and
mistreated members of civil society in revenge. Even though no strong evidence was presented
during the trial against 23 defendants of the March Riots they received sentences from four to 15
years of imprisonment. The defendants lawyers from PBHI Jakarta stated that the trial was nothing
more than a drama, a play.

Another fatal example is the Wamena 2003 case linked to the demolition of a weapon storage of
the military on 4 April 2003. The Papuan defendants of this case received long and life term
sentences even though an Investigation Team of local NGOs proved that the case had been
initiated by the military itself. However when the attack against the office of ElsHAM Papua in
Jakarta was reported, the police only responded: Just leave it, this is the office of OPM
(separatists, Red.), this does not need to be investigated.

Humanitarian activists also experience discrimination by the government perceiving humanitarian

workers as separatists. Even though they do pure humanitarian work, but the security forces and
Jakarta say they are lying and this was a mask only. Those who speak about human rights are
stigmatized as OPM. All the people of Papua get the same stigma, Albert R., the Head of Komnas
17
Albert Rumbekwan, Head of Komnas HAM Papua, 2007
HAM Papua states. Albert himself as a human rights worker receives terror and intimidation and he
perceives this to be normal. However what he experiences as very unusual is the terror he has
received since the visit of UN Special Representative Hina Jilani to Jayapura on 8 June. Although
Albert is the Head of the Indonesian Human Rights Commission of the Representation in Papua, a
high ranking government institution and not an NGO, he receives threats - how is then the situation
of people who do not work for government organizations? People show up at his private house, his
office and follow him on the street. Several Human Rights Cases have been already been
forwarded to Komnas HAM in Jakarta, e.g. the Wamena Case 2003, the Attack of the House of
Head of District David Hubi in 2006, the Wasior Case 2001, the Wagete Case 2006 and the
Abepura Case of 16 March 2006, but none of the recommendations were followed-up until the
recent change of Commissioners in July 2007. Albert values these issues as serious roots of
problems which will push the people of Papua to organize themselves. But the government and the
security forces perceive these efforts as separatist movements. Even though they only demand a
right to a good life within the Republic of Indonesia, they are already perceived as separatists, they
are intimidated and terrorized, arrested and tortured so that the people of Papua do not feel safe.

2. 10 HUMAN SECURITY
Human Security is not guaranteed in Papua as the following examples prove.
A catholic church worker receives visits from Kopassus, the Armys Special forces, asking: Father,
do you know where the weapons are hidden? or Father, do you know who keeps the Morning
Star Flag?. According to this Priest, the people living in the border area with Papua New Guinea
(PNG) do not feel free any longer, their space is limited as every night the military hunts them and
forces them to state that the Unity of the Republic of Indonesia is a fixed price (non-negotiable)
(harga mati). The provincial government already issued an appeal that the Papuan refugees in
PNG can come back to their villages and many of them finally returned. But after we came back
we experienced those things again, says one of the returned refugees in an interview with KPKC.
2127 refugees from the District of Keerom are still in PNG and they would like to go back to their
original villages, but the situation there prevents them from returning. On 1 May 2007, the head of
Web village and a former refugee in PNG was almost killed by the military. People from Waris,
District Keerom, are saying that they want to flee to PNG again as they feel highly observed by the
Military Troups of Yonif 752 from Kodam V Brawijaya.18 A resident from Web, District Keerom is
saying: We are not free to do our everyday activities as the military forces stationed in the villages
always oppress, maltreat and sweep the local population with the aim of finding the weapons
which were lost a couple of years ago. Additionally, they always take away our natural resources
such as gold, tree barks and cacao things we sell. We already asked the military head Kopassus
not to narrow our space where we look for food. Cause we the Papuans are used to hunting in the
forest, free in our search for food19.

2.11 A POLITIC TO DIVIDE THE PAPUAN PEOPLE

The discrimination of the Papuan people is only one side of the challenge as there are also other
general approaches to aggravate the differences between the Papuans themselves, especially
between people from the high-lands and lowlands. Jakarta starts creating a Papuanisation issue
resulting in discrimination amongst the Papuans and their origin: You are from Biak, so if you want
to become a governmental employee, want to get a scholarship, a social guarantee or if you would
like to enter a tertiary educational institution you have to go back to your area of origin. This leads
to resentments amongst the Papuans even though they are one people.

III. CLOSING

3.1. THE RESPONSE OF THE CHURCH

The root of the problem of racial discrimination in Papua is of a political nature. The intentional
neglect of the Papuans is maintained through different approaches leading to a dignity and self-
esteem which are insulted and creating a feeling of powerlessness and frustration. A politic of
neglect is experienced by the Papuans since their integration into the Republic of Indonesia in
1964. A small step was taken by GKI in the Land of Papua and other churches in establishing the
Association of Churches in the Land of Papua PGGP (Badan Persatuan antar Gereja-Gereja di
Tanah Papua) which needs to obtain concrete support from both GKI as well as GKI in its
partnerships with churches from other regions in Asia, Africa and Europe, especially in the

18
Cenderawasih Pos 31 August 2007
19
Surat khabar Harian Keerom Post 30 July, 2007
community of the United Evangelical Mission (UEM). Concrete actions such as the visit of Asian
church leaders to GKI in 2006 and the Geneva Appeal from the Faith-Based Network on West
Papua in 2005 need to be strengthened and followed-up. The structure of the church is positive
and can support these processes but at the same time can also become a hindrance. Therefore
the working structure of UEM could become more flexible in order to support the working progress
in the field of the various sides who are concerned for the peace in the Land of Papua.

3.2. CONCLUSION
As Rodolfo Stevenhagen, Special Rapporteur for Indigenous Peoples appointed by the United
Nations Commission on Human Rights, stated during his contribution to the 61st session in 2005:
Indigenous peoples suffer from widespread discrimination, which prevents, in a significant manner,
them from having access to those institutions of the society, which enable them to make decisions
on their own such as education, health care, income generating, public images on women and

self-esteem.20

Facing the strength of the central government in Jakarta and also taking into consideration the
rumors within the Papuan community itself, we require the solidarity of the churches of UEM in
Asia for concrete contributions. Without this support, we as the people of Papua will not be able to
shift the mountain of neglect perpetrated against us in our own land and maybe, the hypothesis of
the annihilation of the people of Papua will be received as the truth.

Jayapura, 13 September 2007

20
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in West Papua. A study on Reality and Political Perspectif Published by The Evangelical
Church in The Rhineland. Germany, 2005. Page 93