4) Papua Legislative Council urges issuance of Presidential Regulation on Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Papua
——————————————
Jayapura, Jubi – The Paniai Monitoring Civil Society Coalition urges the Supreme Court and the Makassar Human Rights Court to provide protection for witnesses who will be presented in the trial of the Bloody Paniai case. The coalition also requested that each member of the judges presiding over the case should also be protected.
In a written statement received by Jubi on Wednesday evening, September 21, 2022, the coalition highlighted an event when six police personnel visited Paniai students’ boarding house in Makassar City on Tuesday afternoon. The police asked whether or not the students planned to protest during the Bloody Paniai trial at the Makassar Human Rights Court. The coalition considered it a form of terror to the Paniai students.
The coalition urged the Supreme Court and the Makassar Human Rights Court to ensure proper protection for the judges and witnesses, as well as to coordinate with the Makassar Police to ensure the security of Indigenous Papuans in Makassar during the Bloody Paniai trial.
“We regret that security outside the trial is also still a problem unaddressed,” the coalition said.
At the first hearing on Wednesday, a team of public prosecutors led by Erryl Prima Putera Agoes charged retired Indonesian Military (TNI) officer Maj. (Ret.) Isak Sattu with two offenses of crimes against humanity that carry the heaviest penalty of death, and the lightest penalty of 10 years in prison.
The prosecutor team has prepared 52 witnesses from the community, military and police, and six expert witnesses who will be sought to be present in the courtroom on September 28, 2022.
The Paniai Monitoring Civil Society Coalition also criticized the Attorney General’s Office for only presenting a single defendant in the Bloody Paniai gross human rights violation. The AGO’s move is considered incompatible with the element of “widespread or systematic attacks, knowing that the attacks are aimed directly at the civilian” in its construction of crimes against humanity.
(Jakarta) – A rarely used Indonesian human rights court is putting a former army officer on trial for alleged crimes during a 2014 massacre in Papua, Human Rights Watch said today. Maj. (ret.) Isak Sattu alone is charged with crimes against humanity for the killing of five Papuans, including four teenagers, on December 8, 2014, in the town of Enarotali, Paniai regency, in Papua province.
The trial, which began on September 21, 2022, is an important opportunity to provide a measure of justice and compensation to the families of the victims. Prosecutor Errly Prima Putera Agoes charged Major Isak Sattu with four articles that contain penalties of between 10 and 25 years in prison. Chief Prosecutor Agoes read the indictment, saying that Major Sattu, as the Army commander in Paniai, committed crimes against humanity and failed in his command responsibility by not stopping his men from taking guns from the arsenal.
“The Indonesian authorities should not squander this important opportunity to finally hold someone accountable for crimes committed during the Paniai massacre,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “This should be the start of further prosecutions of serious human rights abuses in Papua, and not a ‘one-off’ effort to close the book on Paniai.”
Indonesia’s human rights court, which was established under Law No. 26 of 2000, has been used very infrequently. The trial will not take place in Papua, but approximately 2,500 kilometers away in Makassar, on Sulawesi island, making it very difficult for witnesses and the families of victims to attend the trial. The authorities should make resources available to witnesses and family members who wish to go, Human Rights Watch said.
On December 8, 2014, Indonesian soldiers fired on about 800 Papuan protesters for approximately seven minutes in the public square in Enarotali, killing four teenagers – Simon Degei, 18; Otianus Gobai, 18; Alfius Youw, 17; and Yulian Yeimo, 17 – and wounding at least 17 to 21 others, including women and children. A fifth protester, Abia Gobay, died elsewhere under unclear circumstances.
It is not clear why Indonesian prosecutors decided to prosecute only one member of the military. Witnesses to the shooting have said that many soldiers were firing their guns when the people were hit.
The protest was sparked by a brawl on the evening of December 7, 2014, when members of Tim Khusus 753 (Special Team 753), a unit attached to the Nabire-based Army Battalion 753, assaulted 12-year-old Yulianus Yeimo. The attack was apparent retaliation after a group of children and teenagers, including Yeimo, shouted at a Tim Khusus 753 vehicle to turn on its headlights as it passed the group, whose members were decorating a Christmas tree and nativity scene in Enarotali’s Ipakiye neighborhood.
The Tim Khusus 753 vehicle soon returned with another truck filled with Indonesian soldiers, who chased the group and caught and beat Yeimo with their rifle butts. Yeimo had to be hospitalized.
Local residents reacted by organizing a peaceful protest in the Enarotali square, in front of the Indonesian military command office. The Indigenous Papuans performed their traditional waita dance, shouting, singing while holding ceremonial bows and arrows which have a purely ritual function, and moving in a circle, mimicking Papua’s famous birds of paradise. This dance is a common practice among the ethnic Mee people in Paniai when they are seeking attention from their leaders.
There has never been a clear explanation as to why the military used unnecessary lethal force against the protesters. International law permits the intentional lethal use of firearms only when strictly unavoidable to protect life. Soldiers did not use other less-lethal crowd control measures.
Two weeks later, when visiting Papua, President Joko Widodo promised that the military and police would conduct a full investigation. However, army chief Gen. Gatot Nurmantyo denied that soldiers shot the protesters. He stated instead that the gunfire came from a hilly area where no police or soldiers were stationed, implying that Papuan guerrilla fighters were responsible but providing no evidence to support that claim.
Gen. Nurmantyo also failed to explain how someone could shoot protesters on the field from a distance of at least five kilometers from Enarotali square. Nor did he provide a credible response to the numerous witnesses who said they saw the soldiers shoot at the protesters. The army chief’s statement apparently made it difficult for the police to secure cooperation from the military to question Indonesian soldiers about the shootings.
The army chief’s statement reflected the strong resistance among top military leaders to investigating the massacre properly. Indonesia’s justice system differentiates between military and civilian jurisdiction, and the 1997 Military Tribunal Law requires any trials of soldiers to be before a military tribunal. Military resistance has stymied police and prosecutors’ investigation and prosecution of the case. The military justice system lacks transparency, independence, and impartiality, and has often failed to properly investigate and prosecute alleged serious human rights abuses by Indonesian soldiers.
Families of four of the people killed have questioned why prosecutors have only brought a single suspect to trial. While the authorities have provided no explanation, a number of observers believe the National Police waited to prosecute a retired army officer, who is now considered a civilian and therefore subject to proceedings in a civilian, not military, court.
“Many Indigenous Papuan families and witnesses have said they will boycott the trial because they don’t believe the proceedings will be independent or fair,” Robertson said. “The court will need to prove itself capable of dispensing justice fairly to counteract the decades of distrust that many Papuans have toward Indonesia’s justice system.”
Indonesia’s Human Rights Court Law establishes the human rights court specifically to try only two crimes: genocide and crimes against humanity. Under the law, the court appoints five judges to preside over the trial, including three ad hoc judges lawyers who must apply to be on a human rights panel, and two career judges from the district court that hosts the trial.
Over the past two decades, Human Rights Watch has documented many cases of human rights violations in Papua. Indigenous Papuans experience arbitrary arrests, torture, and extrajudicial killings as well as sexual and gender-based violence. Foreign journalists and international rights monitors have been restricted from visiting Papua since 1967.
Indigenous Papuans face the underlying problem of discrimination and racism from Indonesian authorities – soldiers, police, government officials, judges – and the resulting rights abuses and culture of impunity that protects those responsible. Many Papuans have protested the abuses that they suffered and, in some cases, called for political change.
The government frequently arrests and prosecutes Papuan protesters for peacefully advocating independence or making other demands, further abusing rights, and deepening the cycle of repression. To break that cycle, Indonesia should open Papua to international media and monitors, allow investigations of current and past abuses, and hold those responsible for abuse accountable, Human Rights Watch said.
“The actions of Indonesia’s military, not just one retired officer, will be on trial, and the government’s response is crucial,” Robertson said. “The hearings should be transparent, open to the public, and widely broadcast. The victims of the Paniai massacre and their families have long been waiting for justice.”
Makassar, Jubi – The Makassar Human Rights Court began the trial of the Bloody Paniai gross human rights violation on Wednesday, September 21, 2022. Maj. (Ret.) Isak Sattu was the sole defendant in the case.
The public prosecutor team led by Erryl Prima Putera Agoes charged Isak Sattu with two offenses of crimes against humanity which carry the heaviest penalty of death, and the lightest penalty of 10 years in prison.
The first hearing was held in the Bagir Manan Courtroom of the Makassar District Court and was attended by around 100 people, most of whom were rights activists. However, none of the families of the victims appeared in the trial.
The case was examined by a panel of judges led by Chief Judge Sutisna Sawati, with Abdul Rahman, Siti Noor Laila, Robert Pasaribu and Sofi Rahman Dewi as member judges.
Chief Judge Sutisna said the panel of judges would race against time to complete the examination as they had to pass down a ver
Sutisna then checked the identity of Isak Sattu, a retired Indonesian Military (TNI) officer who was the sole defendant in the case. Isak Sattu, who was wearing a blue long-sleeved batik shirt with a bird of paradise pattern, showed his ID card to the panel of judges and stated that he was in good health.
Sutisna stated that Isak Sattu was not detained because he was considered cooperative. However, Sutisna warned that Isak Sattu could be detained at any time if he was deemed uncooperative in undergoing the trial. Isak stated that he was ready to attend the trial.
The public prosecutors read out their indictment for about an hour. The prosecutor outlined that Isak Sattu at the time of the Bloody Paniai tragedy on December 8, 2014, was the highest-ranking officer coordinating the activities of Koramil (military command) 1705-02/Enarotali, whose area includes Karel Gobay Field in Enarotali Village, Paniai District, Paniai Regency.
Beating at Pondok Natal
The prosecutor’s indictment stated that the Bloody Paniai incident on December 8, 2014, began with a case of beating by a number of TNI soldiers against Benyamin Kudiai, Yosafat Yeimo, Noak Gobai and Oktofince Yeimo. The beating occurred at Pondok Natal Gunung Merah, Enarotali – Madi Road Km 4, on December 7, 2014 evening, around 5:30 p.m. Papua time.
The beating angered the victims’ relatives. Therefore, the next morning, a group of people blocked the road in front of the Pondok Natal Gunung Merah.
Some police personnel led by the head of Operations of Paniai Police, Comr. Sukapdi, came to the Pondok Natal Gunung Merah at around 9 a.m. The mob attacked the police car where Sukapdi’s at. Sukapdi did not get out of the car and reported the situation to the deputy head of Paniai Police, Comr. Hanafiah. Hanafiah ordered Sukapdi to withdraw all police and TNI soldiers from Pondok Natal Gunung Merah.
However, the soldiers said they were staying. Sukapdi repeated his order to the TNI soldiers, “Withdraw, respect the leader”.
The prosecutor’s indictment said that at the same time, there were 100 people who gathered at Karel Gobay Field, about 6 km from Pondok Natal Gunung Merah. The crowd at Karel Gobay Field carried various traditional weapons such as arrows, bows, wood, axes and stones, and performed waita, a dance of running around and forming a rapid human vortex.
Comr. Hanafiah met the crowd and tried to negotiate but the crowd became increasingly uncontrollable. The indictment stated that while Hanafiah was negotiating with angry residents, one of the TNI members shouted and cussed at the crowd, saying “I will make you like last night.”
At the same time, there was a sound of gunfire from below the Karel Gobay Field. The crowd went scattered to follow the sound. The indictment stated that the mass damaged the car driven by Yonif 753/AVT commander First Lt. Prasenta Imanuel Bangun, and tried to seize the firearm that Prasenta was carrying. Prasenta fired into the air. Hanafian came to Prasenta and asked him to stop firing.
The prosecutor’s indictment stated that the mass then split, some returned to Karel Gobay Field and others returned to Pondok Natal Gunung Merah. Hanafiah then met with Paniai deputy regent Yohanis Youw, asking for his help to calm the crowd at Karel Gobay Field.
Shooting and stabbing in Bloody Paniai
When Hanafiah and Yohanis Youw arrived at Karel Gobay Field, the crowd was in the middle of a waita, before running to the Koramil 1705-02/Enarotali. The prosecutor’s indictment stated that defendant Isak Sattu, as the highest ranking officer at the Koramil 1705-02/Enarotali, ordered his soldiers to close the headquarters gate.
The prosecutor said Isak Sattu saw his soldiers taking firearms and live ammunition from the armory and did not prevent this.
There was a member of Koramil 1705-02/Enarotali who asked the person who climbed the headquarters’ fence to come down. The person kept climbing and shouted, “Shoot me, the weapon does not belong to you but to the state”. The soldier then fired a warning shot, while shouting to Isak Sattu, “Commander, we ask for \guidance, our base has been attacked.”
A few moments later, members of Koramil 1705-02/Enarotali fired at the crowd, chased them and stabbed a number of residents with bayonets.
Isak Sattu was stated by the prosecutor to have “failed to take appropriate and necessary action within the scope of his authority to prevent or stop the actions of members who carried out shooting and violence resulting in the death of four people.”
The four victims who died were Alpius Youw (gunshot wound to the left back), Alpius Gobay (gunshot wound to the left abdomen penetrating the right waist), Yulian Yeimo (wound to the left abdomen and penetrating the right waist) and Simon Degei (stab wound to the right chest).
In his first indictment, the prosecutor said that Isak Sattu knew or should have known that his troops were committing or had just committed crimes against humanity in the form of widespread or systemic killings of civilians.
The prosecutor said in the Bloody Paniai case, Isak Sattu had violated Article 42 paragraph (1) letter a and letter b Jis Article 7 letter b, Article 9 letter a, Article 37 of Human Rights Court Law No. 26/2000. It is punishable by the death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment for a maximum of 25 years and a minimum of 10 years.
In his second indictment, the prosecutor elaborated that Isak Sattu knew or should have known that his troops were committing or had just committed crimes against humanity in the form of widespread or systemic persecution against a certain group or association based on political ideology, race, nationality, ethnicity, culture, religion, gender, or other reasons prohibited under international law.
By this, Isak Sattu was said to have violated Article 42 paragraph (1) letter a and letter b Jis Article 7 letter b, Article 9 letter h, Article 40 of the Human Rights Court Law, which carried a sentence of a maximum imprisonment of 20 years and a minimum of 10 years.
After hearing the reading of the indictment, Isak Sattu consulted with his legal team led by advocate Syahrir Cakkari. Syahrir Cakkari stated that his party would not file an exception to the prosecutor’s indictment, and invited the panel of judges to continue the trial. “We have listened well and scrutinized well. Therefore, with regard to the exception, we will not do it,” said Syahrir.
However, Syahrir said his party had yet to receive a copy of the case file, especially the Minutes of Examination of the witnesses and defendants of the Bloody Paniai. “Until now, we have only received copies and derivatives of the indictment. We have not received copies of other files To balance the position and for the sake of defense, we ask the judges to order the prosecutor to provide us with the Minutes of Examination,” he said.
The panel of judges then let Isak Sattu respond to the prosecutor’s indictment against him. Isak said that the Bloody Paniai incident was not planned. “It is said in the indictment that it was systematic, meaning it was planned. I want to say that is not the case,” he said.
Chief Judge Sutisna Sawati cut off Isak’s response, explaining that Isak’s argument had entered the subject matter of the Bloody Paniai case, and could not be conveyed in the indictment reading session.
“That has entered the case material. Later you will be given the opportunity to convey widely what you know and what you saw,” Sutisna told Isak.
The prosecution team said they had prepared 52 witnesses from the community, TNI, and police. The prosecution team also prepared six expert witnesses who will be sought to be present in the courtroom. Chief Judge Sutisna then adjourned the trial until September 28, 2022, with the agenda of witness examination. (*)
https://en.jubi.id/papua-legislative-council-urges-issuance-of-presidential-regulation-on-truth-and-reconciliation-commission-in-papua/
4) Papua Legislative Council urges issuance of Presidential Regulation on Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Papua
Truth And Reconciliation Commission - News Desk
23 September 2022
Jayapura, Jubi – The Papua Legislative Council’s Special Group urged President Joko Widodo to immediately issue a Presidential Regulation on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Papua.
Special group chairman John NR Gobai said the presidential regulation would support the disclosure of various cases of alleged past human rights violations and the reconciliation between Papua and the Indonesian government.
“To this day, the commission has not been established. Coordinating Minister for Political, Legal and Security Affairs Mahfud MD once encouraged the Truth and Reconciliation Commission Bill to be included in the 2020 National Legislation Program. Unfortunately, until now there has been no presidential regulation to form the team,” said John Gobai on Thursday, September 22, 2022.
Gobai said several countries had formed commissions like this, such as in South Africa and Timor Leste. In Indonesia, Gobai said, recognition of human rights became stronger post-reformation with the regulation of human rights in the 1945 Constitutional Amendment and MPR Regulation XVII/MPR/1998 on Human Rights, which attached a Human Rights Charter.
This was followed by the establishment of Law No. 39/1999 on Human Rights, Law No. 26/2000 on Human Rights Courts, and the establishment of a national-level Truth and Reconciliation Commission through Law No. 27/2004 on Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which unfortunately annulled by the Constitutional Court.
“In fact, many human rights violations that occurred before 2000 must be resolved with the help of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, namely the 1965 incident, the Talangsari incident, and Papua,” said Gobai.
Gobai said that in the plenary discussion of the 2019 revised Papua Provincial Budget, the council should have ratified the draft special regional regulations on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
The draft has been discussed with the Legal Bureau of the Papua Provincial Government and publicly consulted in five customary areas.
“However, the ratification was postponed because the regulation on Truth and Reconciliation Commission is the central government’s authority,” said John NR Gobai. (*)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.