FILE PHOTO
Irianese raise the 'Morning Star' rebel flag of Free Papua Movement at Jayapura in Indonesia's eastern province of Irian Jaya Wednesday 12-1-99.
RELATED LINKS
Irian Jaya Home
Issues Home Page
THE RECORD -LINKS TO RECENT NEWS ON THE IRIAN JAYA QUEST FOR INDEPENDENCE
Jayapura Diocese
Office for Justice and Peace
PO Box 1379
Jayapura 99013
Indonesia
Tel: +62-967-536427
Fax: +62-967-536427
E-mail:
NABIRE SITUATIONAL REPORT
The following represents an initial report into the situation of Nabire town in relation to the bloody Nabire incident which took place between 28 February 2000 to 4 March 2000. This report is not a specific report, but a situational report which presents the bloody Nabire incident within the context of socio-political developments which occurred in Papua in general and Nabire in particular.
This report is divided into three main sections, which are not necessarily equal, reflecting the level of importance of the incidents concerned and the data available. The three sections are as follows:
A. The conditions in Nabire town around the time of the flag raising incident. This section will give a brief analysis of the main elements which have influenced the socio-political dynamics in Nabire and its environs.
B. The bloody Nabire incident. This section gives a chronological analysis of the unrest which broke out between the Papuan people and the security forces.
C. Post-incident. This section gives a brief analysis of the prospects for developments in Nabire after the incident.
A. CONDITIONS IN NABIRE AROUND THE TIME OF THE PAPUAN FLAG-RAISING
A.1
The conditions in Nabire developed relatively quickly after the announcement by Theys Eluay on 12 November 1999 in Sentani to all the Papuan people that they should raise the Papuan flag on 1 December 1999. The people of Nabire immediately reacted to this call and planned a flag-raising ceremony. All of this process was arranged by the people under the coordination of the Association of Traditional Peoples (LMA – Lembaga Masyarakat Adat) in Nabire, with the head, Ohar Manase Sayori, who had attended Theys' meeting. The process was discussed with the DPRD level II Nabire and they obtained permission from the head, Maulid Hidayat. At that point the people's aspiration to raise the Papuan flag was complete.
A.2
Unlike other areas in Papua, the Papuan flag which was raised in Nabire on 1 December 1999 continues to fly to this day. It is thought that the people of Nabire were determined to comply with Theys' call, that is to fly the flag from 1 December 1999 up until 1 May 2000.
A.3
In parallel with the increasingly explicit expression of the aspiration for Papuan independence, so was the “Satgas Papua” (Papuan independence forces) phenomena in Papuan urban areas: Sorong, Manokwari, Biak, Jayapura, Timika, Merauke, Wamena, as well as Nabire. The emergence of the Satgas was in fact related to efforts to protect the Team of 100 before and after the meeting with President BJ Habibie on 26 February 1999. The Satgas activities continued during the flag-raising ceremonies of 1 December 1999. However, because the organisation of the Satgas itself is rather fluid, thus conditions for membership, position or role in the Papuan struggle, main aims and tasks and length of tour of duty were rather unclear. The fluid nature of the organisation thus rendered every Papuan able to identify themselves as a member of 'Satgas' for their own private interests. On the other hand, external forces could easily ascribe any kind of activity or action by the Papuan people as a 'Satgas Papua Action.' This stigmatisation was easily done by members of the security forces. In Nabire, the Satgas Papua, inter alia, confiscated spirits in the port, shops and other areas.
A.4
In the small-scale gold panning area in Topo, around 70 Km from Nabire, a small clash broke out between the gold panners and the local people who claimed to have traditional claim to the area. The most recent incident which shook the town of Nabire occurred in the middle of August 1998. During the developments of the last year, the gold panning situation in Topo continues to be coloured by clashes, and more recently stakes claiming land began to be planted in the area by people who claimed themselves to be members of Satgas Papua, or people who were branded as Satgas Papua by members of the security forces. The continued unrest was dealt with rather firmly by members of the security forces who carried out a 'stake cleansing' operation. The local people demonstrated against this action and on 29 November 1999, a Satgas Papua group headed by Pieter Worabay (one of the Satgas Papua commanders) went to the DPRD Nabire. The people demanded that:
· The DPRD issue a letter which: acknowledged that human rights violations had been perpetrated by members of the security forces against the traditional owners of land rights in the Topo area when the 'stake cleansing' operation was carried out.
· That Kapolres Lt.Col Pol Drs Saprisal SH and the Kapolda be withdrawn.
· That the DPRD issue this letter within the space of two hours.
The Nabire DPRD, which was headed by Lafandos Sihombing, the Deputy Head of Level II (because the head was out of the area) issued the letter demanded by the local people, without seeking verification of the incident with the Paniai police.
A.5
The flag-raising, the unrest in the Topo gold panning area, the arrival of Brimob, the silence of the Muspida (local government leaders), the increasing emotion of the Papuan people – all in the end became elements which were to form a complex situation which was highly explosive because there were no further guarantees nor certainties. Based on these conditions, the Nabire Kapolres, Lt.Col, Pol Drs Faisal AN sent a Brimob unit from Jayapura to Nabire with the intention of taking harsh or firm legal action in order to preserve security and law and order as well as in order to uphold the law in the area.
There are two important incidents which are related to the arrival of the Brimob unit:
1. Thursday 10 February 2000, 19.00
A meeting was held in the Nabire Polres. Fourteen local leaders attended, but no-one from the LMA. The aim of the meeting: to discuss the security situation in Nabire and its environs. The main points which were made by the police are:
· Actions by the Satgas Papua were considered excessive by the Kapolres and even inclining towards the criminal. These actions including planting the stakes in the area of the gold panning activities in Topo, 'taxing' the taxi drivers and demanding money from shops. It seems that taxi drivers and the local people had complained about these incidents to the Kapolres.
· The Satgas Papua demonstration to the Mapolres was headed by Socrates Sayori, included women and children and was slanderous against the members of the security forces because the crowd, inter alia, showed their backsides to the police shouting, “go ahead and shoot, go ahead and shoot.” The Kapolres prevented his men from taking action. The police considered that they had approached the local people with love and care, but this approach had failed.
· Nabire was seen as peaceful by the Satgas because the security forces were perceived as weak. The Kapolres stated that the Satgas were increasingly strong and the security forces increasingly weak because the security forces were containing their responses.
· Because of the various threats and criminal actions which had emerged, the Brimob unit of 100 men was being sent to the town in order to uphold the law and ensure security (and that this was not related in any way to the flag-raising incidents).
In the end it was agreed at the meeting that on 28 February 2000, a meeting would be held with the Satgas Papua in Nabire. There was no rejection of this proposal by those who attended because the meeting seemed to be concerned mostly with imparting information in connection with the security situation and the means by which to deal with it.
1. Tuesday 15 February 2000
Two Brimob companies entered Naibre via ship from Jayapura and were stationed in the Diklat building in Jl Pepera (opposite the private house of the Regent, SP Youw) and in the Polres. The following day, Brimob began to patrol in central areas, fully armed with rifles.
B. BLOODY NABIRE INCIDENT
The lack of certainty of law created conditions which coloured every act of violence, regardless of who there perpetrators were. The open and bloody conflict broke out from an incident which was designed to enflame. There are three matters which are analysed below:
1. Chronology of the Nabire incident, 28 February to 4 March 2000
2. The testimony of Yance Pekei.
3. A number of critical notes in respect of the incident
B.1. Chronology of the Incident
Friday 18 February 2000
In front of the Paniai Mapolres, Brimob seized the bow and arrows belonging to Eratus Kogoya and broke them in front of him.
Saturday 19 February
Brimob seized the bow and arrows belonging to Bombuya Boma on the beach, next to the MAF airline offices in Nabire. The bow and arrows were also broken. On the same day, the RRI (state radio) announced that the people were no longer allowed to carry weapons such as bow and arrows, machetes etc.
Monday 21 February
The people began to respond by holding a demonstration to the Nabire DPRD building, chanting, “Who ordered Brimob here? Why? When are they returning home?” The DPRD promised the people that they would have an answer within the next two days, and the people were asked to go home.
Wednesday 23 February
The people returned to the Nabire DPRD offices in order to find out about the DPRD's promise to them. However, no member of the DPRD would meet with the people, so they eventually returned home disappointed.
Monday 28 February
In the morning, the Satgas were chased near the airport because they were seen as insulting/slandering Brimob. Later on in the day, the Papuan people moved towards the private house of the Regent in Jl Pepera, but they were detained by Brimob. At 17.00, the people returned in the direction of Karang Tumaritis via Jl Pepera. Brimob had confiscated bows and arrows from some of the local people, and broke them. The owners reported Brimob's action to the Satgas Papua in Taman Gizi. After making the report of this incident, they returned home once again via Jl Pepera together with the rest of the crowd. However, the end of the road was blocked off by Brimob. An angry verbal exchange took place. Manase Erari (Deputy Head of the Sema STIA Nabire) attempted to mediated in the argument, by explaining that the bows and arrows are cultural artefacts and that they were not weapons used to kill with. However, according to the police version of the story, because Manase moved towards a member of Brimob who was pointing his gun towards the people, other Brimob members believed that he was going to try to seized this gun, and so they immediately shot him in the forehead, and he Manese died instantly. This shooting incident occurred near the Nabire Telkom building.
Steven Yobe who saw Manase Erari being shot tried to take his body away, but other members of Brimob tried to stab him with their bayonets and so a fight ensured to try and wrest the bayonet away, and Steven sustained an injury to his hand.
Tuesday 29 February
Very early in the morning, at around 01.30, the sound of sporadic gunfire was heard from a Brimob truck into the air, as it was passing via Jl Jakarta, where the Satgas Papua post is situated. This is the place where Willem and his friends gathered. As a result, in the morning, the Papuan people closed off the roads to the town by cutting down trees and placing them on the road. The conditions in the town became tense and all activities came to a total halt. Schools, offices, airport, markets, shops – they all closed. The RRI made no broadcasts because the workers there could not enter the building. The sound of sporadic gunfire was heard around the Jl Pepera area. Brimob were withdrawn to the Polres. Some arrests and detentions were made by the police. Yance Pekei was once of those who was arrested in front of the sports building (GOR), in Kotalama, (far from where the unrest was taking place), as he was trying to return home from Kalibobo. He was tortured druing his detention in the Nabire Polres. The crowd gathered in two areas. In Karang Tumaritis and around the Polres. There was heavy rainfall, and so the concentration of the crowd was reduced and they dispursed.
In Jayapura, Kapolda Brig.Gen. Pol Drs SY Wenas stated that the victim (Manase Erari) had died because of a bullet from an air gun belonging to one of the local people, and not because of a bullet from members of the security forces.
Wednesday 1 March 2000, morning
The crowd began to move from the direction of Karang Tumaritis towards the town. A shooting took place in Bukit Meriam. A furious clash took place in front of the Nabire Catholic church between Brimob and the crowd who were armed with arrows, ketapel and stone machetes. As a result, Maximus Bunay died from a bullet fired by a member of Brimob. A number of other people were injured (see the appendix). Two houses belonging to Haji Tanrang and one house belonging to Ledeng (opposite Haji Tanrang's house) in Jl Jend Sudirman was set on fire by the crowd because it was suspected that Brimob were being sheltered in those houses. One kijang vehicle and one truck which was located in the yard of those houses were also set on fire. A group of people then sought refuge in the Catholic Church and the AK Convent. Members of the security forces (Brimob) tried to chase the people into the church, but they were evicted by Pastor Wolfgang.
At 09.30, another shooting took place in Jl Merdeka. Brimob were on guard in the area around the airport. In the day, an inhabitant who was a Bugis descendant was hacked and his wife beaten by six Papuans near the SPK Nabire. Both were rescued by SPK pupils. Their motor cycle was stolen. Conditions in the town became tense.
At the Kodim, at around 13.00, a group of mama-mama demonstrated peacefully and met with the Paniai Dandim, Lt.Col. Inf Adi Widjaja. The group of people demanded that the Dandim withdraw Brimob out of Nabire and that those who were being detained in the Polres be released. The Dandim replied that the security situation would be dealt with directly by the Battalion (Yonif 753 Paniai) and the Kodim and that he was prepared to stake his position on behalf of the people. At the same time, the Dandim promised 'by Jesus' that there would be no more shooting and he asked the mama-mama for the roads to be opened in order that he could control the security situation. He also asked that the people should not carry arrows. Upon hearing this promise, the crowd returned home.
That afternoon, there was a meeting between the police, Brimob and local leaders. The meeting was concerned with there being no more shootings, and that the roads would be reopened again the following day.
In Jayapura, a group of Papuan people led by Sabinus Kobogau demonstrated outside the Irian Jaya Mapolda. Once again, the Irja Kapolda, Brig.Gen Pol Drs SY Wenas stated that the victim had died because of an air-rifle bullet.
Thursday 2 March, morning
In the morning, Father Auwe and Ruben Edoway (Deputy head of the Parish Council of the Nabire Catholic Church) met with the Dandim to ask for security guarantee for the burial of Maximus Bunai in the location of the flag-raising. The Dandim agreed. A joint TNI-Brimob force and a number of local people cleared up the trees in the road. The conditions in the town became calmer and a number of people began to go out into the streets again. The 1705 Paniai Dandim, Lt.Col. Inf Adi Widjaja attended the activities in Taman Gizi and promised 'in the name of Jesus' that there would be no more shooting.
At 13.40 shooting took place in Taman Gizi. At the time, Willem Manimwarba was there when suddenly a convoy of vehicles emerged and then a group of Brimob came with a vehicle belonging to the Paniai regency Pharmacy and shot him. Willem ran in order to evade the bullets which were showering on him from all directions and he was chased by Brimob. In the end he was stopped with a shot to the hand and his thigh, and he was taken to the Nabire Generral Hospital. At the same time, the burial of Maxi Bunay was taking place by Ruben Edoway and Father Auwe. On seeing the security forces firing again, the people quickly dispersed. The Papuan people ran amok and began to block the roads again and throw missiles at the houses in the area around Taman Gizi. Then the town became calm again. Every corner of every road was guarded by the Papuan people.
Friday 3 March
Early in the morning, Willem Manimwarba died in the hospital from bleeding. Around 60 people held a meeting in the Nabire Mapolres. Those who attended the meeting included the Muspida, Brimob, Dandim, Polres. However, the meeting did not include church owrkers and the Papaun intellectuals. Those who were included were the RT/RW heads (town districts). It was agreed that:
· All the roads would be opened up again by the local people.
· All sharp weapons (arrows, machetes etc) would be surrendered to the Polres.
· The people would guard security in their respective areas.
In the meeting, it was demanded that Brimob leave Nabire and a promise was made that they would be withdrawn. The people also demanded that those in detention be released. However, the security forces emphasised that anyone who was carrying weapons would be dealt with in a very firm manner.
Saturday 4 March
The conditions in the town became normal again, from the perspective of the re-emergence of day to day activities: the markets and small shops opened again. However, schools, larger shops and officers remained closed. Willem was buried in the location of the Papuan flag pole in Taman Gizi with a ceremony that was attended by the Papuan people. Willem was buried as a 'Papuan national hero' in a coffin which was covered with a Papuan flag.
B.2. Testimony of Yance Pekei, 21, farmer
Yance Pekei is the victim who was arrested by Brimob in front of the GOR in Kotalama, as he was trying to return home to his house in Kalibobo, together with a friend of his, Silas Dogopia. On 29 February, in the early morning, he was blocked by a Brimob regiment and was ordered to throw away his bow and arrows, which he was carrying. He obeyed the order, but he was ordered to spread out onto the asphalt road. After that, he was handcuffed and taken into the police patrol kijang and taken to the Mapolres. He was detained and interrogated and tortured by four policemen. According to his testimony, he was asked, “where are you coming from?” to which he replied, “from the flag.” Then he was asked, “how much do you get paid for guarding the flag?” to which he replied, “none,” and then they said to him, “Rp. 2.5 million huh?” Yance replied, “the Papuan struggle is long and there is no payment for it." The police accused him of lying and he was beaten around the right ear. They continued, “Sayori gives you food, right?” to which he replied, “it's the people who give me food.” During the interrogation he was beaten in the head with a rifle butt or the chest with a block of wood, if he replied, “no.” Then he was asked, “what is your nationality?” to which he replied, “I am a Papuan.” Then he was asked, “are you not an Indonesian?” to which he replied, “my father is a Papuan and my mother is a Papuan, my land is Papuan. I am Papuan.” Yance was tehn ordered to sleep on the floor and he was trodden on the chest by a number of members of Brimob wearing combat boots. The police tied plastic around the middle finder of his right hand and set it alight. They also burnt his right shoulder. The torture continued with electric shock treatment to his left hand. Then he was ordered to choose one of the instruments of torture placed before him on the table. Yance chose the pistol. The police asked, “why?” to which he replied, “so that I am dead and become a hero.” The Brimob put the barrel of the pistol into his mouth, but they did not shoot.
As a result of the torture, Yance fainted and was taken to the Nabire General Hospital by the police on 3 March 2000 at night. The police said that they had found the victim in the location of the Oyehee marked which is located opposite the Papuan flag pole. After receiving treatment for one night, the victim asked to return home because he did not feel safe in the hospital.
During his detention in the Polres, the victim states that he met with Aten Dimi who was being subjected to even worse torture. This detainee cannot receive visitors from NGOs or the TPF DPRD Irja (fact-finding team).
B.3 A Number of Critical Notes
1. Fatal shootings
During the Nabire incident, there were two victims who died directly as a result of gunshot wounds, namely Menase Erari and Maximus Bunai. These actions are extremely hypocritical of a police force who stated that it was their intention to 'uphold the law.' Why did the members of the security forces not attempt to fire warning shots and then incapacitate the victim if necessary? Based on what law where do members of the security forces have the rights to shoot unarmed citizens who are not doing anything threatening?
1. The use of 'bullets'
The Irja Kapolda, Polda Kadispen, Paniai Kapolres and the Danpomdam continue to make statements that the victim died as the result of a 4.5 air-pistol shot from a long range. They say that the bullet was not from a Polri or TNI weapon because they were only armed with rubber bullets. According to explanation from the Nabire hospital, bullets found in the bodies of those who died as well as the injured were metal or rubber. The bullets found in the bodies of the two who died directly, namely Maximus Bunai and Menase Erari, there were metal bullets. The projectiles found in the body of Maximus Bunai have already been handed over to the Nabire POM (military police) and those found in the body of Menase Erari have already been handed over to the Pinai Polres. Based on the information from the Nabire hospital, how can the statements made by police and TNI officials be held accountable? Is it likely that an individual could have been killed by an air-pistol shot from long range, when metal bullets were found in his body? Why are the Polri and TNI officials attempting to cover the facts of this incident up and why are they not attempting to uncover the truth?
1. Involvement of the TNI
During the Nabire incident, the 1705 Paniai Dandim, Lt.Col Inf Adi Widjaja eventually took an active role in the security operations and a number of meetings. The TNI promised that Kodim and Battalion Yonif 753 would ensure security and that there 'would be no shooting.' Why did the TNI involve themselves in a security matter which is the jurisdiction of the police, and after having made a promise in public?
1. Politicising Religion
The people note that as many as two times (1 and 2 March) in two separate opportunities, the Dandim of 1705 Lt.Col Inf Adi Widjaja made an oath 'in the name of Jesus' that there would be no more shooting. The question is why did the Dandim use religious language? Was it just used casually for security reasons? Is the Dandim only using that oath as a tactic in order to calm the emotions of the people? Does a promise made by a religious oath, which is not kept, only insult religious symbols?
1. The Promise to Withdraw Brimob
In the meeting of 3 march 2000 in Nabire, the security forces promised to withdraw the Brimob unit from Nabire as long as the people were prepared to open up the roads again. However, the promise to withdraw Brimob was not fulfilled and moreover Kapolda Brig.Gen SY Wenas in Jayapura stated on 5 march that there was no way that Brimob would be withdrawn and that moreover they would be further increased in number. Does this represent a tactic by the security forces to confuse the people with contradictory statements between various members of the police? How long will this dishonesty be kept up by the security forces? How long will the people continue to become the victims of empty promises and word games such as these?
1. Detention and Torture of Yance Pekei
Yance Pekei was arrested a long way away from the location of the incidents – whether the shooting or the flag-rasing. Can the police just arrest people for no reason whatsoever? And on what basis did the police torture Yance Pekei during his detention? Aside from Yance Pekei, are there still victims who are being detained who are also being tortured, which the police don't admit to holding, such as was stated by Yance in his testimony?
1. Using the Paniai Regency Pharmacy Vehicle
According to information from the Nabire Hospital, the Paniai Regency Pharmacy vehicle was used by the police to carry out patrols and operations, even though this vehicle (and all medical facilities/other hospitals) are considered neutral. This means that humanitarian symbols have been misused by members of the security forces. The Director of the Nabire Hospital has already protested by phone to the Paniai police on 2 March, but no concrete response has been made. By misusing this vehicle, the humanitarian work which is carried out by the Nabire hospital has been compromised and they are now under threat as the local people now believe that ambulances are being used for security operations. So the serious question is why are the police using humanitarian symbols in this way? Based on what law can they appropriate these symbols and use them?
A. POST INCIDENT
C.1.
The bloody Nabire incident has changed the dynamic of the day to day lives of the people of Nabire. Attention is now focused on the flag which is still raised in the location of Taman Gizi and which is being guarded by the Papuan people. The local government, Paniai Polres, Paniai Dandim, have put pressure on the LMA in Nabire in order to lower the flag because it is seen as the reason behind the unrest in Nabire. This pressure resulted in an agreement between the Nabire LMA and the Nabire Muspika government who signed a joint agreement on 11 March 2000. There were seven main points agreed to, inter alia, 1. That the flag must be taken down, 2. That there would be a special ceremony to take down the flag on 12 March 2000, 3. There would be reconciliation between the government and the people. However, the agreement was not carried out.
C.2. On 23 March 2000, the Head of LMA Nabire, Manase Sayori, together with a number of priests and other LMA members prepared a ceremony for the lowering of the Papuan flag. However, at the moment that they stood in front of the fence of the location of the flag, they were threatened by the Papuan people outside the fence, not to lower the flag. During that incident, Manase Sayori (Head of LMA Nabire) stated that he resigned not only from his efforts to lower the flag, but also all responsibility for the flag raising.
C.3. In parallel with the resignation from the LMA, the nature of the Satgas Papua has become increasingly unclear: basis for membership, scope of duties, internal affairs and leadership. Based on informal sources of information it can be concluded that the Satgas Papua is now composed of three elements: 1. The pure element, that is the Satgas group who from the beginning were concerned with ensuring law and order in the activities of the Papuan people in the expression of their aspirations; 2. 'hangers on' who can be easily influenced here and there; 3. Elements who have been organised by outsiders who have power and force. The confusion which exists provides a great opportunity to a number of people who call themselves “Satgas Papua” to become involved in a number of actions which are difficult to assess, or which can even be considered criminal. On the other hand, the police and the military increasingly burden the Satgas Papua with the stigma of criminal activity. Thus, this becomes a strong foundation to the security forces in order to take strong action and to react in a violent manner. Slowly but surely, the phenomena of the Satgas Paua is being used by the forces in power, such as occurred in Fak-Fak. Because of this, the pure elements of the Nabire Satgas Papua have begun to describe themselves now as LASKAR PAPUA.
C.4. To date, there are still a number of people being detained by the Paniai Polres. The secret arrests which have no legal basis continue. It is not clear why these people are being detained. News of torture whilst in detention continues to be normal and thus a number of people are becoming increasingly nervous, unsettled and afraid, as there is no guarantee of law and order of legal rights. The fear of the people is considered justified because efforts by NGOs or religious leaders to visit the detainees are made extremely difficult by the police. Because of this the number and condition of the detainees cannot be verified given that the key to this verification is not being given by the police.
C.5. Although there is not extensive analysis made in this report, the conditions approaching 1 May (the hope and certainty by a group of people that Papua would be independent by that date) continue to make the situation in Paniai interior difficult, and which is made increasingly difficult with the conditions which cannot be guaranteed. Nabire – as the gate to the Paniai interior – directs all the socio-political dynamics of Nabire to the interior. As a result, the people living in the interior have been affected by the complexities of the Nabire problem, without being able to verify exactly what is happening.
C.6.
Thus, the development of this problem lies on a path which cannot be determined or predicted, bearing in mind
that:
1. The shootings have not been dealt with and so the feelings of anger are still smouldering within the
hearts and memory of the Papuan people.
2. The arbitrary arrests and the incidents of torture have not been dealt with, and a number of people are still
being detained by the police, and they are not being allowed any visits from NGOs or religious leaders.
3. Attention to the shootings is being diverted away from the shootings themselves and towards the flag
raising instead, with the result that the complexities of the Nabire incident are being overlooked.
4. The person officially responsible for the original flag-raising has resigned and so all responsibility now
lies in the hands of those who guard the flag.
5. Those who guard the flag (including the Satgas Papua) do not have a clear leader and they have no
follow-up plan which is clear, and so meetings always fail.
6. The Nabire regency Muspida has received an agreement from the LMA and continue to make demands.
7. The arrival of Brimob and the involvement of the TNI gives a clear indication of the possibility of a forced
lowering of the flag, such as occurred in the yard of the Tiga Raja Church in Timika on 2 December 1999.
CONCLUSIONS AND APPEAL
Based on the data gathered thus far, it can be concluded that the unfolding of the Nabire incident over these last
few months is of grave concern. Nabire has become an area where a number of violations, both criminal as well as
human rights violations, have been taking place. Both types of violation are related and become a means of
legitimation to one another.
As the conditions become increasingly complex, anything is possible and a worsening of the situation is likely. In
order to avoid this, we make a number of appeals/recommendations:
1. That the security forces and the government make available facts in a transparent and professional
manner.
2. That an objective investigation be carried out which has legal authority into the incidence of human
rights violations in Nabire, including the fatal shooting incidents as well as the incidents of torture and arbitrary
arrest and detention, which have no basis in law.
3. The security forces and the government have the responsibility to hold accountable those involved in
the shooting and torture in order to give justice to the people.
4. That the status of the political prisoners be made clear immediately by the police and that the political
prisoners held without any legal bases be released immediately.
5. That the security forces return to their role as protectors of the people and that they act accordingly
when dealing with criminal actions in order to protect the security of the people, based on existing legislation and
with the support of all sides.
6. That the Satgas Papua reorganise themselves and limit themselves to the activities as originally
designated, that is to protect the security and law and order to the Papuan people in all their activities in order to
channel their aspiration in an orderly manner and in accordance with the law.
7. That the government give medical attention to all the victims and make compensation in accordance with
their obligations.
8. That the government and the people immediately open up dialogue once again, using a moderator/third
party trusted by both sides if necessary.
9. That the government and the people acknowledge and accept that the Nabire problem is complex and
rooted in the interests of both sides.
Appendix 1
DATA OF THE VICTIMS OF THE NABIRE INCIDENT
No. Date Name Age Occupation Address Explanation
1. 28-29Feb Menase Erari 33 Government Employee Jl Kusuma Bangsa, Nabire Died
from gun shot wound
2. Maximus Bunai 27 Farmer Karang Tumaritis Died from gun shot wound
3. Stephen Yobe 20 Student Kangguru hostel Torn wrist
4. Ben Gobay 35 Farmer Karang Tumaritis Head injury
5. Melkias Pakage 20 Farmer Kanggur hostel Shot in the thigh
6. Vincen Degey 24 Farmer Epomani, Mapia Shot in the right hand
7. Suwarno Nabire Cut to the head
8. Ismail M 23 Brimob Cut to the stomach
9. Shabir 32 Private Nabire Cut to the eye, eye-brow and back
10. Alex Tebay 20 SMU pupil Injury to back and leg
11. 1 March Thomas Misiro 32 Shot in stomach
12. Yan Degey 25 Farmer Shot in right leg
13. Paulus Mote 30 Farmer Karang Tumaritis Shot in both thighs
14. Hendrik Wakey 17 Pupil Shot in the right and left buttocks
15. Darius Zany 16 Pupil Shot in chest
16. 2 March Saptoreno 42 Nabire Bruising/swollen lips, eyes
17. Benny Bagau 28 Bruising to ear
18. Wellem Maniwarba 25 Farmer Bumi Wonorejo Dead from gun shot
wound
19. 3 March Pindeki Wonda 20 Nabire Injury to leg and back
20. Yance Pekey 21 Farmer Kalibobo Injuries to back, fingers, ear because of
torture
21. Safaruddin 26 Nabire Injured shoulder
Copyright 2000
E-Mail:
isssues@lykos.com
