[Kabar-indonesia] 8 Papua Reports: Grave Concerns for Arrested Rights Advocate [+Asylum Updates]

[JoyoNews at aol.com]

[Note: Listen to Rachel Harvey's BBC report - The international energy giant 
BP 
is investing $5 billion in a gas plant in a remote part of Indonesia - West 
Papua.
The investment could bring prosperity to the region. But the area is 
politically unstable, with a strong separatist movement. Can BP's promises of 
corporate 
social responsibility hold good in such an environment? at: 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/check/worldservice/meta/tx/assignment?
nbram=1&nbwm=1&size=au&lang=en-ws&bgc=003399]

8 Papua Asylum and Migration Bill Reports: 

- Grave concerns for a human rights advocate arrested 
  in Papua

- Transcript: Indonesia urges Australia to review Papua 
  refugee decision   

- ABC: Coalition division delays migration bill

- Transcript/Indonesia: Papua issue should be resolved 
  by Jakarta 

- Transcript: PNG: Says no more Papuan refugees 

- The Age/Perspectives: Little justice in mutual respect
  ["If we now, as the Government proposes, doom the people 
  of Papua to the same experience as the Timorese, will it 
  make us more secure?"]

- Australian Green Party: Howard should reverse Papua blunder

- The Australian update: Howard's key to asylum deadlock

Radio New Zealand International
June 18, 2006

Grave concerns for a human rights advocate arrested in Papua

There are grave concerns for the safety of a West Papuan 
non-violent activist and human rights advocate currently 
in policecustody in the Indonesian province of Papua.

Jonah Wenda was arrested on Thursday by local Police 
in the West Koya area, about 30 kilometres from the 
Papua New Guinea border.

The 35 years-old was later transferred to Jayapura where 
he is currently being held.

At the time of his arrest Mr Wenda was engaged in 
humanitarian work and human rights investigation.

He made a mobile phone plea to alert friends but his 
phone has now gone quiet.

Reports say Mr Wenda is sick and needs urgent 
medical attention.

Human Rights workers have been denied access 
and remain concerned about his health and well 
being.

--------------------------------------

Radio Australia
June 21, 2006
AM Program
-transcript-

Indonesia urges Australia to review Papua refugee decision  

Reporter: Geoff Thompson

TONY EASTLEY: A senior Indonesian parliamentarian says that the Australian 
Government's proposed changes to asylum laws should be completed before John 
Howard meets Indonesian President Yudhoyono next week.

Theo Sambuaga, the Chairman of the Indonesian Parliament's Foreign Relations 
Committee, also says it would be advisable for the Australian Prime Minister 
to steer clear of discussing last week's release of radical cleric Abu Bakar 
Bashir.

Last night Mr Howard dismissed Mister Sambuaga's tips, saying he wouldn't be 
taking his advice on what issues to raise in his meeting with the Indonesian 
President.

Theo Sambuaga has told our Jakarta Correspondent, Geoff Thompson, that 
Indonesia's parliament still expects Australia to review its decision to grant visas 
to 42 Papuan asylum seekers.

THEO SAMBUAGA: We of course would like very much that first the granting of 
Temporary Visa to the 42, our brothers from Papua, asylum seekers, being 
refused by the Australian Government. While we are thinking for the future, we still 
have to address this issue, and we hope that the Government of Australia will 
have this review.

GEOFF THOMPSON: It seems that the Australian Government's offer is to change 
the legislation so that it won't happen again, but it seems that those changes 
may not quite make it in time for the meeting. Will that provide an obstacle 
to the healing effect that the meeting is meant to have?

THEO SAMBUAGA: Yes of course, as a signal, it is a positive signal of the 
Australian Government with the process of reviewing the legislation. We don't 
know whether it's going to be completed before the meeting. We hope it's going to 
be completed, of course.

GEOFF THOMPSON: If it's not completed, what will that mean?

THEO SAMBUAGA: If it is not completed I can understand, as a Member of 
Parliament, as a legislator myself, I know that it takes time to have it processed.

GEOFF THOMPSON: Indonesia has obligations under United Nations Resolution 
1267, which requires for sanctions against UN-listed terrorists such as Abu Bakar 
Bashir, such as freezing his assets, restricting his movements and making 
sure he has no access to arms. And this issue is one which Prime Minister Howard 
says he will be taking up with President Yudhoyono.

THEO SAMBUAGA: But not in the (inaudible) of, let's say, put more ascendance 
or put more sanction to Abu Bakar Bashir.

GEOFF THOMPSON: Would you oppose moves to enforce the United Nations Security 
Council Resolution 1267 and take more action against him?

THEO SAMBUAGA: No. We, as a member of the United Nations, abide by the 
decision or resolution of the UN.

GEOFF THOMPSON: Why not freeze Abu Bakar Bashir's assets then?

THEO SAMBUAGA: We should see it case-by-case, but not in... give more, let's 
say, (inaudible) or sentence to Abu Bakar Bashir. As a, you know, a citizen, 
he is a free man after he's served his sentence.

GEOFF THOMPSON: Prime Minister Howard has said: "I don't normally take advice 
on what I raise with foreign heads of state from the chairmen of foreign 
relations committees," referring to you. What do you say to that?

THEO SAMBUAGA: Oh, yes, yeah, of course. The Australian Prime Minister 
doesn't take advice from Members of Parliament of other countries, but of course it 
is the express of the few of the people, and then it is addressed to our 
President, Indonesian President. The President should take advice or should 
consider advice from his people and from his parliamentarians.

GEOFF THOMPSON: And your advice would be what?

THEO SAMBUAGA: My advice is don't let other heads of foreign countries to 
intervene in our process of law.

TONY EASTLEY: Theo Sambuaga, the Chairman of the Indonesian Parliament's 
Foreign Relations Committee, talking there with Geoff Thompson in Jakarta.  

---------------------------------------

ABC
Thursday, June 22, 2006

Coalition division delays migration bill

The Federal Government has put off plans to debate changes to its migration 
laws in the Federal Parliament, after a compromise failed to win over a group 
of Coalition backbenchers.

The plans to move all unauthorised boat arrivals offshore were to be debated 
today. 

Some Government backbenchers have threatened to cross the floor over the 
issue. 

The Prime Minister John Howard has made an offer which includes placing women 
and children in residential style accomodation in offshore centres. 

Liberal MP Bruce Baird says there are still sticking points. 

"There are some issues we are still talking through," he said.

The changes were proposed after 43 Papuans arrived in Australia, prompting a 
rift in the relationship with Indonesia. 

But Mr Howard says he does not think the delay will affect his visit to 
Jakarta next week.

"It's never a problem for me to practise Australian democracy," he said.

"If it's a problem for other countries, well that's their problem, not mine."

Debate on the changes is not expected until August. 

Discussion

Mr Howard says most in the party room support the plans but he is prepared to 
allow more time for discussion over the winter break.

"In these matters the minority view point has a right to be heard," he said.

"But in the end the majority view, clearly expressed, is the way our party 
has always operated and there'll be time to look at them in greater detail in 
the six-week break.

"What we have done is to make sure the agreement reached last year is 
reflected in these new arrangements."

The offer includes a commitment to try to complete assessments in three 
months.

Mr Baird has acknowledged the concessions made to meet concerns about the 
bill.

"I've expressed my reservations about the legislation, but it's also 
certainly true that the Prime Minister and Amanda Vanstone have met a number of our 
concerns, so we'll see," he said.

The Federal Opposition spokesman on immigration, Tony Burke, says the 
Coalition backbenchers are to be congratulated and Labor will not support the changes.

"The principle behind the legislation is that Australia has no borders," he 
said.

"Border protection is too important to pretend that we don't have any 
borders, so the principle behind the legislation that you have no borders is wrong.

"Added to that the whole concept of dumping people in other countries, it 
doesn't matter what concessions you get, it's the wrong thing to do."

--------------------------------------

Radio Australia
June 16, 2006
-transcript-

Indonesia: Papua issue should be resolved by Jakarta 

Even as the Australian Government finds dissent within its ranks over the 
proposed changes to Australia's refugee law, the Opposition has accused the 
Howard administration of appeasing Indonesia. An Indonesian parliamentary 
delegation visited Canberra this week, so what do the MPs make of the proposed new law? 

Presenter/Interviewer: Sen Lam 

Speakers: Dr Mohamad S. Hikam, leader, visiting parliamentary delegation, 
Indonesia 

HIKAM: It is up to the government and the parliamentarians of Australia in 
determining that law. What we say in this respect is that we appreciate whatever 
efforts being done, both in Indonesia and also in Australia, with securing 
towards improvement of our relations, including, in terms of the Papua issue.

LAM: Some Australian politicians say that Canberra is trying to appease 
Jakarta with this proposed law?

HIKAM: Well, that's an opinion that remains in Australia. I think we have 
also similar concern that somehow, Indonesia is being always pressured by 
Australian government. 

LAM: If, as you say, it's a domestic matter for Australia to get right its 
immigration law ... the Papua issue, for instance, that Australia was just 
merely observing international mores in granting protection visas to these 
forty-two Papuan asylum-seekers, and yet there was such an outcry in Jakarta over the 
issue?

HIKAM: Ya, as far as the law is concerned, you know I couldn't agree more. 
But then, also, we have to realise that it also touches the sensitivities and 
Indonesian democracy and people. So I think relations should not be only based 
on understanding on the legal matter, but also political thing, like (Abu 
Bakar) Bashir for example...

LAM: Indeed, I was about to come to that, just as some Indonesian politicians 
and sections of Indonesian society were upset over the papuan asylum-seekers, 
many Australians are dismayed by this week's release of Abu Bakar Bashir from 
jail - the man many see as the inspiration for the Bali 2002 bombings - Do 
you see the parallel there - that just as Jakarta has to follow the law courts' 
ruling to release Abu Bakar Bashir, so too Canberra had to observe 
international mores in protecting or granting protection to these Papuan asylum-seekers?

HIKAM: There is some parallel which is what I say the "sensitivity" between 
the two countries and two people. But there is also a very serious difference, 
which is, that in the case of Papuan asylum-seekers, you know, they're really 
not admitting or respecting the recognition of our sovereignty and also 
integrity, while in Indonesia, it stopped in the use of the rule of law in the 
country. So I would say that every cloud has a silver lining, meaning that we have 
to learn from this very, very fragile understanding and to have a deeper 
understanding. And we work together, for example, in terms of terrorist 
elimination, I think Indonesia and Australia should become more and more serious about it.

LAM: But if you make Papua province a better place for the Papuans to live 
in, including no more human rights abuses from the TNI, the Indonesian military, 
then this whole Papuan asylum-seeker issue will go away, because people will 
not actually want to leave?

HIKAM: I couldn't agree more with that issue, that's why we repeatedly say, 
Papua is an Indonesian case. Don't get involved in that, because we invite all 
kinds of assistance from others, including criticism, but when it comes to the 
integrity, and also sovereignty of the nation, then it's a totally different 
case.

LAM: You, I understand have recently been in Papua province?

HIKAM: Yes, Yes.

LAM: What is your assessment of the situation?

HIKAM: First of all, just following your argument, that there is a concern in 
terms of discrepancy of wealth, also the problem of human rights, and also 
the sensitivity of local culture. And we realise that that's what has to be 
addressed perfectly, and also systematically by the Indonesian government. That is 
my view about Papua right now. 

-----------------------------------------

ABC
Pacific Beat
June 20, 2006
-transcript-

PNG: Says no more Papuan refugees 

Papua New Guinea's Prime Minister Sir Michael Somare says he will not accept 
any requests from Australia to process West Papuan asylum seekers in PNG. 
Several years ago Australia started using offshore processing centres in both PNG 
and Nauru as part of its Pacific Solution program to curb the number of people 
seeking asylum in Australia. PNG's new new stance on Australia 's West Papuan 
asylum seekers was announced last week by the PM.

TIRIMAN: Powes Parkop. Meanwhile PNG's minister of foreign affairs, Sir 
Rabbie Namaliu says the issue between Indonesia and Australia is a very sensitive 
one and PNG does not want to get involved in it. 

Presenter/Interviewer: Caroline Tiriman 

Speakers: Powes Parkop, PNG Human rights lawyer and West Papuan supporter. 
Sir Rabie Namilu, Minister for Foreign Affairs, PNG. 

TIRIMAN: Sir Michael Somare's statement will definitely mean a major set back 
for any plans by Australia to process asylum seekers on PNG's Manus Island 
especially after Australia agreed to review its immigration laws to ensure all 
future boat arrivals are processed offshore - in an attempt to heal a 
diplomatic squabble with Indonesia. 

The rift between Australia and Indonesia erupted several months ago after 
Australia granted 42 West Papuan asylum seekers, protection visas allowing them 
to stay in Australia.

PNG Human rights lawyer and West Papuan supporter, Powes Parkop says he 
welcomes Sir Michael Somare's announcement.

PARKOP: It's good news because from the beginning we always maintained that 
the processing centre in PNG's, especially Manus province, was illegal. 

It was illegal because you cannot detain a person here in PNG without being 
charged. And those persons were taken from Tampa and transferred to Manus 
Island. They were not charged for any particular offence, so they could not be 
detained here in PNG or in Manus under the law in PNG. 

And secondly we welcome the news because it places the responsibility then to 
Australian government. They have an obligation under the refugee convention 
and its protocol to consider applicants who come to their jurisdiction. 

They cannot pass their responsibility to a third country or a fourth country, 
they can't do that. And their attempt to isolate mainland Australia from 
potential refugees is also I would argue, it's unlawful and also immoral.

NAMALIU: You may be aware that we obviously share an agreement with Indonesia 
on refugees coming over from across the border, and on matters like this we 
obviously have to consult each other on those that cross the border from the 
Indonesian side. 

But in relation to Papuans seeking refuge in Australia, because of the 
sensitive nature of the situation it will be difficult for us to do it unless of 
course after consultations with Indonesia it's agreed that's possible. 

But in the current circumstances because of the controversial nature of it, 
insofar as the discussions that are going on between Australia and Indonesia, 
it's an extremely sensitive matter that Papua New Guinea is very much aware of 
and therefore in that light that the Prime Minister has made those comments 
that at this point PNG unless consultations with Indonesian government are such 
that it is possible to do it, would not in the current situation be in a 
position to accept them.

TIRIMAN: Sir Rabbie so what will now happen to the refugee processing centre 
in Manus?

NAMALIU: Manus is there but it's for other refugees, other than Papuans. 
There's another one in Nauru, so that's available obviously.

TIRIMAN: Sir Rabbie Namaliu. While the West Papuan issue continues to create 
diplomatic problems between Australia, PNG and Indonesia, Powes Parkop 
suggests independence for Paua would solve the issue.

PARKOP: Well ideally the West Papuans want independence, there's no doubt 
about it. If there was a referendum conducted tomorrow, a free and fair 
referendum unlike that fraud in 1969, I would say 99 per cent would vote for 
independence.

So ideally that would solve this problem. I mean PNG getting independence in 
1975, we haven't seen people migrating in large amounts, fleeing the country 
to go to Australia. People are freely going to Australia for study, working and 
so on under the law. 

So if West Papua get their independence I don't believe they will, people 
will start fleeing to Australia. 

-----------------------------------------

The Age (Melbourne)
June 18, 2006

Perspectives

Little justice in mutual respect

by Terry Lane

In the past few days we have had visits from Indonesian and Singaporean 
politicians, exciting the usual platitudes about the need for mutual respect for 
each other's laws and institutions.

On the subject of the risible punishment of Abu Bakir Bashir, the Indonesian 
politician leading his delegation says we must respect each other's laws. Our 
own foreign minister says that decisions of Indonesian courts have to be 
accepted.

The Prime Minister of Singapore, Lee Hsien Loong, got the full honoured guest 
treatment with a 19-gun salute and he tells us we have to respect his 
country's execution of drug traffickers. Our own Prime Minister diplomatically 
describes it as a "difference of opinion on sensitive matters".

Pragmatically there is nothing Australia can do about either Indonesia or 
Singapore's "justice" systems. We're not going to go to war against them to 
impose our scruples on them. Not unless the Americans discover that they have lots 
of oil, then we might.

But the idea that we should respect their systems is absurd. We are under no 
more obligation to respect the legal systems of Indonesia and Singapore than 
we were ever obliged to respect the legal institutions of Nazi Germany or 
Stalinist Russia. And things get worse.

Immigration Minister Amanda Vanstone says in defence of the Government's 
proposed border protection laws that "it is indisputable that we have to take into 
account the concerns of Indonesia".

Really? This is a novel idea that a free nation bordering a state that treats 
its citizens barbarously should be influenced in its asylum policies.

If the Indonesian regime is brutalising its reluctant citizens in Papua are 
we to help them do it by denying those in danger an avenue of escape and a 
place of asylum? Have we reached the point where, as the Opposition claims, 
Indonesia sets our refugee policy?

Australia is not the first nation in history to find itself in a dangerous 
environment. Sweden, during World War II, had to balance self-preservation 
against humanitarian obligations. Its record may not be perfect, but by remaining 
aloof and staying true to its own values it did help thousands of refugees 
escape.

After decades of turning a blind eye to the horrors of Indonesian rule in 
Timor, Aceh and Papua what have we got? If we now, as the Government proposes, 
doom the people of Papua to the same experience as the Timorese, will it make us 
more secure? Will the Indonesians love us more? Will the Indonesian citizens 
who struggle for human rights respect us?

Respect seems to be a one-way street in these parts. We redefine our borders 
out of respect for Indonesia. We presume to give away the freedom of the 
Papuans to show how much we respect Indonesian sensibilities.

We are an outpost of European civilisation in a hostile environment where our 
laws and traditions are alien. We should stay true to our inherited 
principles while minding our own business. The Prime Minister of Singapore or 
Indonesian parliamentary delegations should not be either welcomed or hectored. Put 
bluntly, they are not like us. And they have a legitimate complaint against us. 
As long as we play the role of Tonto to America's Lone Ranger the contempt, not 
respect, will be mutual.

----------------------------------------

Australian Green Party  
Press Release
20 June 2006

Howard should reverse Papua blunder

Prime Minister John Howard should reverse the blunder of legislating for West 
Papuan refugees to be banned from Australian soil, Greens Leader Bob Brown 
said in Sydney today.

"There is no common ground between a Nauruan solution and processing refugees 
in Australia. That given, the PM should look at how to allay
Indonesian anxiety that Australia will simply be a receptacle for West 
Papuans activists," Senator Brown said.

"Perhaps he should look at UN experts confirming Australia's dinkum 
processing of refugees on our soil. This is not a Greens' policy, but it's a helpful 
suggestion for a Prime Minister who has bungled this issue from the outset by 
trying to appease Jakarta," Senator Brown said. 

----------------------------------------

The Australian
Monday, June 19, 2006

Howard's key to asylum deadlock

Samantha Maiden, Political correspondent

AUSTRALIA will consider time limits to allow boatpeople being processed
under proposed tough new immigration laws to settle here as part of a package 
of concessions to head off a Coalition backbench revolt.

In major concessions to break the deadlock within the Government over the
migration laws, John Howard will allow some genuine asylum-seekers, whose
applications are processed offshore, to settle in Australia if a third
country cannot be found within a specific time limit.

The concession is aimed at avoiding families languishing for years in
offshore processing centres under the proposed new laws drawn up after the
Papuan asylum-seeker row with Indonesia.

The Australian understands that safeguards are also being discussed to
protect women and children and to ensure legal advice is offered to
asylum-seekers who are held in offshore processing centres, including Nauru.

While the Government is determined to retain the core philosophy of
processing boatpeople's asylum claims offshore, whether they reach the
Australian mainland or not, significant changes will be made to secure the 
votes of concerned Coalition MPs.

In response to one of the most significant backbench revolts since the
Howard Government was elected in 1996, the concessions are designed to 
avoid an embarrassing defeat in the Senate for the Government and the 
prospect 
of Liberal MPs crossing the floor in the House of Representatives this week if
agreement cannot be reached.

While the Prime Minister is yet to publicly detail the changes, he
predicted yesterday that agreement could still be reached with dissident 
MPs.

"Nothing is ever certain in politics, but I am a patient man," he said.

"The main point about this whole debate is will it strengthen our border-
protection policy to have a situation where every illegal arrival is
processed offshore? The answer to that question has to be yes. And I hope 
that in the end we can further strengthen the policy but I will keep talking 
to 
my colleagues. I have done that in the past and I'll continue to do it in the 
future."

Up to 10 Coalition backbenchers are pushing for changes to the legislation,
including Liberal MPs Petro Georgiou, Judi Moylan, Russell Broadbent,
senators Judith Troeth, Marise Payne, Russell Trood and Barnaby Joyce. 
Family First senator Steve Fielding has also indicated he cannot support the 
current legislation.

"What we want is for Australia to be considered as a definite possibility
for resettlement," Senator Troeth said yesterday. "And you can't dump them 
on Nauru with no access to legal advice." However, the Government's draft
response to a Senate report that demanded the migration laws be scrapped 
will now offer concessions to allow more genuine refugees to settle in 
Australia.

If genuine refugees need urgent medical care or have family already living
in Australia, officials may also consider this when determining where families
are re-settled.

"We never precluded the possibility of accepting genuine asylum-seekers in
Australia," a senior government source said.

The preferred position under the current legislation is that asylum-seekers
be resettled in a third country, even if they are found to be genuine
refugees, after arriving in Australia by boat.

Proposed changes to migration laws followed the arrival of a group of
Papuan asylum-seekers, 42 of whom were granted protection visas in a 
move that sparked outrage in Indonesia.

Despite claims the Government is pursuing a policy of appeasement with the
new policy towards Indonesia, Mr Howard said there was no rush to resolve
passage of the new laws before his meeting with Indonesian President Susilo
Bambang Yudhoyono in Indonesia later this month.

"We are not kowtowing to Indonesia because it is not kowtowing to a country
to retain their co-operation in implementing a policy which is in
Australia's national interests," he said.

Immigration Minister Amanda Vanstone, who will have further talks with
rebel MPs, said the Government was "bending over backwards" to resolve 
their concerns.

"The only change in relation to this legislation is that the people who, by
luck of strong winds or better planning, happen to arrive on the mainland
will be treated in the same way as those who land at an island just one
kilometre off our northern coast," she told ABC TV.

Mr Howard confirmed yesterday he had not yet received a reply from the
Indonesian President to his letter protesting about the release of Abu
Bakar Bashir.

Australia has formally complained to Dr Yudhoyono about the release of the
Muslim cleric and demanded that restrictions be placed on him.

------------------------------------------
Joyo Indonesia News Service
------------------------------------------