A new edition of the Okinawan Journal of Island Studies features social justice island activism, including a case study of Aotearoa New Zealand’s Pacific Media Centre, in what the editors say brings a sense of “urgency” in the field of diversity, equity, and inclusion in scholarship.
In the editorial, the co-editors — Tiara R. Na’puti, Marina Karides, Ayano Ginoza, Evangelia Papoutsaki — describe this special issue of the journal as being guided by feminist methods of collaboration.
They say their call for research on social justice island activism has brought forth an issue that centres on the perspectives of Indigenous islanders and women.
“Our collection contains disciplinary and interdisciplinary research papers, a range of contributions in our forum section (essays, curated conversations, reflection pieces, and photo essays), and book reviews centred on island activist events and activities organised locally, nationally, or globally,” the editorial says.
“We are particularly pleased with our forum section; its development offers alternative forms of scholarship that combine elements of research, activism, and reflection.
“Our editorial objective has been to make visible diverse approaches for conceptualising island activisms as a category of analysis.
‘Complexity and nuance’ “The selections of writing here offer complexity and nuance as to how activism shapes and is shaped by island eco-cultures and islanders’ lives.”
The co-editors argue that “activisms encompass multiple ways that people engage in social change, including art, poetry, photographs, spoken word, language revitalisation, education, farming, building, cultural events, protests, and other activities locally and through larger networks or movements”.
Thus this edition of OJIS brings together island activisms that “inform, negotiate, and resist geopolitical designations” often applied to them.
Geographically, the islands featured in papers include Papua New Guinea, Prince Edward Island, and the island groups of Kanaky, Okinawa, and Fiji.
Dr Robie emphasises the need for critical and social justice perspectives in addressing the socio-political struggles in Fiji and environmental justice in the Pacific broadly, say the co-editors.
Inclusive feminist thinking
The article engages with “women’s political activism and collaborative practice” of the podcast and radio show La Pause Décoloniale.
The co-editors say the edition’s forum section is a result of “inclusive feminist thinking to make space for a range of approaches combining scholarship and activism”.
They comment that the “abundance of submissions to this section demonstrates the desire for academic outlets that stray from traditional models of scholarship”.
“Feminist and Indigenous scholar-activists seem especially inclined towards alternative avenues for expressing and sharing their research,” the coeditors add.
The signing of the memorandum of understanding between the University of the South Pacific’s vice-chancellor and president, Professor Pal Ahluwalia, and the Indian government’s National Centre for Coastal Research, Ministry of Earth Sciences, in March for the setting up of a Sustainable Coastal and Ocean Research Institute (SCORI) has raised serious questions about leadership at USP.
Critics have been asking how this project poses significant risk to the credibility of the institution as well as the security of ocean resources and knowledge sovereignty of the region.
The partnership was formally launched last week by India’s High Commissioner to Fiji, Palaniswamy Subramanyan Karthigeyan, but the questions remain.
Regional resource security threat
Article 8 of the MOU regarding the issue of intellectual property and commercialisation
states:
“In case research is carried out solely and separately by the Party or the research results are obtained through sole and separate efforts of either Party, The Party concerned alone will apply for grant of Intellectual Property Right (IPR) and once granted, the IPR will be solely owned by the concerned Party.”
This is a red flag provision which gives the Indian government unlimited access to scientific data, coastal indigenous knowledge and other forms of marine biodiversity within the 200 exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and territorial waters of sovereign countries in the Pacific.
More than that, through the granting of IPR, it will claim ownership of all the data and indigenous knowledge generated. This has potential for biopiracy, especially the theft of
local knowledge for commercial purposes by a foreign power.
No doubt this will be a serious breach of the sovereignty of Pacific Island States whose
ocean resources have been subjected to predatory practices by external powers over the
years.
The coastal indigenous knowledge of Pacific communities have been passed down
over generations and the UN’s World Intellectual Property Organisations (WIPO) has developed protocols to protect indigenous knowledge to ensure sustainability and survival
of vulnerable groups.
The MOU not only undermines the spirit of WIPO, it also threatens the knowledge sovereignty of Pacific people and this directly contravenes the UN Convention of Biodiversity which attempts to protect the knowledge of biodiversity of indigenous
communities.
In this regard, it also goes against the protective intent of the UN Convention on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which protects resources of marginalised groups.
This threat is heightened by the fact that the Access Benefit and Sharing protocol under the Nagoya Convention has not been developed in most of the Pacific Island Countries. Fiji has developed a draft but it still needs to be refined and finalised and key government departments are made aware of it.
Traditional knowledge of coastal eco-systems of Pacific people are critical in mitigation and adaptation to the increasing threat of climate change as well as a means of collective survival.
For Indian government scientists (who will run the institute), masquerading as USP
academics, claiming ownership of data generated from these knowledge systems will pose
serious issues of being unethical, culturally insensitive, predatory and outright illegal in
relation to the laws of the sovereign states of the Pacific as well as in terms of international
conventions noted above.
Furthermore, India, which is a growing economic power, would be interested in Pacific
Ocean resources such as seabed mining of rare metals for its electrification projects as well
as reef marine life for medicinal or cosmetic use and deep sea fishing.
The setting up of SCORI will enable the Indian government to facilitate these interests using USP’s regional status as a Trojan horse to carry out its agenda in accessing our sea resources across the vast Pacific Ocean.
India is also part of the QUAD Indo-Pacific strategic alliance which also includes the US, Australia and Japan.
There is a danger that SCORI will, in implicit ways, act as India’s strategic maritime connection in the Pacific thus contributing to the already escalating regional geo-political contestation between China and the “Western” powers.
This is an affront to the Pacific people who have been crying out for a peaceful and harmonious region.
The 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent, signed by the leaders of the Pacific, tries to guard against all these. Just a few months after the strategy was signed, USP, a regional
institution, has allowed a foreign power to access the resources of the Blue Pacific Continent without the consent and even knowledge of the Pacific people.
So in short, USP’s VCP, Professor Pal Ahluwalia, has endorsed the potential capture of the sovereign ownership of our oceanic heritage and opening the window for unrestricted exploitation of oceanic data and coastal indigenous knowledge of the Pacific.
This latest saga puts Professor Ahluwalia squarely in the category of security risk to the region and regional governments should quickly do something about it before it is too late, especially when the MOU had already been signed and the plan is now a reality.
Together with Professor Sushil Kumar (Director of Research) and Professor Surendra Prasad (Head of the School of Agriculture, Geography, Ocean and Natural Sciences), both of whom are Indian nationals, he has to be answerable to the leaders and people of the region.
Usurpation of state protocol
The second major issue relates to why the Fiji government was not part of the agreement,
especially because a foreign government is setting up an institute on Fiji’s territory.
This is different from the regular aid from Australia, New Zealand and even China where state donors maintain a “hands-off” approach out of respect for the sovereignty of Fiji as well as the independence of USP as a regional institution.
In this case a foreign power is actually setting up an entity in Fiji’s national realm in a regional institution.
As a matter of protocol, was the Fiji government aware of the MOU? Why was there no
relevant provision relating to the participation of the Fiji government in the process?
This is a serious breach of political protocol which Professor Ahluwalia has to be accountable for.
Transparency and consultation
For such a major undertaking which deals with Pacific Ocean resources, coastal people’s
livelihood and coastal environment and their potential exploitation, there should have been
a more transparent, honest and extensive consultation involving governments, regional
organisations, civil society and communities who are going to be directly affected.
This was never done and as a result the project lacks credibility and legitimacy. The MOU itself provided nothing on participation of and benefits to the regional governments, regional organisations and communities.
In addition, the MOU was signed on the basis of a concept note rather than a detailed plan
of SCORI. At that point no one really knew what the detailed aims, rationale, structure,
functions, outputs and operational details of the institute was going to be.
There is a lot of secrecy and manoeuvrings by Professor Ahluwalia and academics from mainland India who are part of a patronage system which excludes regional Pacific and Indo-Fijian scholars.
Undermining of regional expertise
Regional experts on ocean, sustainability and climate at USP were never consulted, although some may have heard of rumours swirling around the coconut wireless. Worse still, USP’s leading ocean expert, an award-winning regional scholar of note, was sidelined and had to resign from USP out of frustration.
The MOU is very clear about SCORI being run by “experts” from India, which sounds more like a takeover of an important regional area of research by foreign researchers.
These India-based researchers have no understanding of the Pacific islands, cultures, maritime and coastal environment and work being done in the area of marine studies in the Pacific. The sidelining of regional staff has worsened under the current VCP’s term.
Another critical question is why the Indian government did not provide funding for the
existing Institute of Marine Resources (IMR) which has been serving the region well for
many years. Not only will SCORI duplicate the work of IMR, it will also overshadow its operation and undermine regional expertise and the interests of regional countries.
Wake up to resources capture
The people of the Pacific must wake up to this attempt at resources capture by a big foreign power under the guise of academic research.
Our ocean and intellectual resources have been unscrupulously extracted, exploited and stolen by corporations and big powers in the past. SCORI is just another attempt to continue this predatory and neo-colonial practice.
The lack of consultation and near secrecy in which this was carried out speaks volume about a conspiratorial intent which is being cunningly concealed from us.
SCORI poses a serious threat to our resource sovereignty, undermines Fiji’s political protocol, lacks transparency and good governance and undermines regional expertise. This
is a very serious abuse of power with unimaginable consequences to USP and indeed the
resources, people and governments of our beloved Pacific region.
This has never been done by a USP VC and has never been done in the history of the Pacific.
The lack of consultation in this case is reflective of a much deeper problem. It also manifests ethical corruption in the form of lack of transparency, denial of support for regional staff, egoistic paranoia and authoritarian management as USP staff will testify.
This has led to unprecedented toxicity in the work environment, irretrievable breakdown of basic university services and record low morale of staff. All these have rendered the university dysfunctional while progressively imploding at the core.
If we are not careful, our guardianship of “Our Sea of Islands,” a term coined by the
intellectually immortal Professor Epeli Hau’ofa, will continue to be threatened. No doubt Professor Hau’ofa will be wriggling around restlessly in his Wainadoi grave if he hears about this latest saga.
This article has been contributed to Asia Pacific Report by researchers seeking to widen debate about the issues at stake with the new SCORI initiative.
Are the voters responsible for the corruption in the country?
Papua New Guinea’s Health Minister and Member for Wabag, Dr Lino Tom, seems to think so and he is partly right in his public statement on the matter in the PNG Post-Courier last month.
Unlike in the past, when our people were more self-reliant and attended to their own problems or meet every community obligation on their own, the generation today vote in their Members of Parliament to fix their personal problems and not the country.
And that’s a fact.
Our people think that their MPs are automatic teller machines (ATMs), like the ones deployed by the commercial banks that dispatches cash on demand that they have abandoned our honourable and historical self-reliant way of life.
We agree with our Health Minister that MPs spend too much time and resources managing their voters than on projects and programmes in their electorates for public benefit and development of the country.
The office occupied by MPs does not restrict them to electoral duties only, but as legislators they also have a country to run, and their performances are badly affected when their time is taken up by minute matters from their voters.
On the flip side, the MPs have themselves to blame for creating the culture they are dealing with in the contemporary PNG we are living in.
The structural and legislative reforms to the governance and accountability mechanisms in the public service, combined with the funding of key government programmes that they themselves initiated for self-preservation, is fueling this culture of corruption.
Thus, the blame for corruption must be shared by the politicians too because they are in control of so much money that is going into the districts right now.
The root of corruption . . . “The blame for corruption must be shared by the politicians too because they are in control of so much money that is going into the districts right now.” Image: PNG Post-Courier screenshot APR
For instance, the District Development Authority (DDA), the District Service Improvement Programme (DSIP) and the Provincial Service Improvement Programme (PSIP) are all scams that have directly contributed to the unprecedented rise in the expectations and demands from the voters.
Under the DSIP and PSIP alone, K2.4 billion is channeled to the districts every year, controlled by the both the provincial governors and the open electorate members. That is a lot of cash. How else do you expect our people to behave?
Corruption is a very serious challenge confronting PNG at the moment and we agree with our good minister that our people must stop placing these demands on their MPs. Our people must return to our old ways and that is to work hard to enjoy better lives and meet our life goals.
However, to totally rid corruption in the public sector, we also have to abolish all government programmes that legitimise corruption.
In the current situation, the people are colluding with their Members of Parliament to plunder this nation of its hard-earned cash without putting any thing tangible on the ground to generate more money and to grow the economy.
Otherwise, if the MPs really want to retain their multibillion kina DSIP and PSIP and at the same time kill corruption, they have the solution on their hands.
They only have to apply the funds honestly in their electorates to empower our people to become financially independent so that they leave their MPs alone to focus on development and the economy.
That is the way to go and the most honourable way.
This PNG Post-Courier editorial was published under the title “Corruption- who is to blame?” on 24 May 2023. Republished with permission.
Chiefs are to serve people and not to be served, Fiji President Ratu Wiliame Katonivere told the Great Council of Chiefs (GCC) on Bau Island in Fiji today.
The Council — regarded as the apex of traditional Fijian leadership and also accused of being a racist institution — was discarded by former prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama following his 2006 military coup.
Today, 16 years since it was removed, the Great Council is returning under Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka’s coalition government.
Ratu Wiliame Katonivere said the Great Council was now challenged more than ever in their decision making as traditional leaders to safeguard, collaborate and promote inclusivity in the dynamics of an evolving Fiji.
He said the Turaga Tui Macuata urged chiefs to stand to together in unity in their service, while expecting challenges and changes.
Ratu Wiliame said the chiefs met in a new dawn and they needed to welcome those who made up Fiji’s multicultural society and have made Fiji their home.
“We are chiefs in our own right — we have subjects, we are inheritors of our land, sea, and its flora and fauna,” Ratu Wiliame said.
‘Unifying vision’
“As we meet, we bring with us the hopes and the needs of our people and our land that depend on our vision in unifying our wise deliberations that shall lead to inclusive decisions that encompasses all that we treasure as a people and a nation.”
“As it reconvenes, the GCC must focus on two principles, firstly, we need to be conscious of the existence of those who will challenge the status quo; and secondly, to encourage our people to work together for our advancement as a people, where no one is left behind,” he said.
Ratu Wiliame said the reinstatment of the Great Council was happening at a critical stage in Fiji’s development and the challenge was for the chiefs to stand up and be counted by playing their roles that they were born into, reminding them of the words of the late Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna that being a chief was not an ornament.
“The title of chief is not an ornament. An ornament is adorned to be marveled and admired, or as fashionable wear, rather as chiefs we are bound by duty and responsibility that require our intentional and undivided attention,” he said.
With this new beginning, it was “paramount that we reflect on our traditional ties with one another as iTaukei, to the government of the day and to the church.”
He said it was crucial that the reconvened Great Council of Chiefs delivered on the very purpose with which it was initially established, for the preservation of the iTaukei land, marine and natural ecosystem, guided by relevant legislation.
“The Great Council of Chiefs is duty-bound to safeguard, defend, liberate all-encompassing matters of all Fijians respecting the rule of law,” Ratu Williame said.
Ratu Sukuna’s legacy Speaking to the gathering on Bau Island, Ratu Wiliame also referred to the late Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna.
“He was predestined for leadership that included military training and he was awarded the Croix de Guerre for his gallant role in World War I under the French Foreign Legion.
“The preordained life of Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna became the gateway to his life of servitude to his people, the land and the crown.”
He said these were traits that the late Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna was renowned for, a visionary, decisive and intellectual leader that was indicative only of a leader who was divinely anointed.
Ratu Sukuna was Fiji’s older statesman and he helped in setting up iTaukei leadership and land systems.
New vision and mission Ratu Wiliame said it was therefore crucial that the Great Council of Chiefs establish and build on its previous accomplishments and embark on a new vision and mission to be able to better navigate the new changes and developments as we chart our way forward.
He said their role as leaders remained to be the fiercest defender of Fiji’s natural resources both on land and at sea, particularly with protecting their frontier from the current effects and impact of climate change.
He also called on chiefs to remember their role equally lay in encouraging iTaukei and people to contribute to growing the economy and to promote economic empowerment and stability to better enhance their livelihoods.
“Should we want a better Fiji, it is pertinent that our younger generations are groomed in iTaukei protocol, leadership and all mannerism befitting a servant leader,” he said.
“The Great Council of Chiefs is now challenged more than ever in our decision making as traditional leaders to safeguard, collaborate and promote inclusivity in the dynamics of our evolving Fiji.”
Ratu Wiliame acknowledged the Turaga na Vunivalu na Tui Kaba, Ratu Epenisa Cakobau for inviting the Great Council to be held on Bau Island.
Ratu Epenisa is the paramount chief of Fiji in his traditional title as the high chief of the Kubuna Confederacy.
The Fiji government apologises (presenting a matanigasau) for the actions of the previous government and for any offence it had caused to the chiefs. Image: Kelvin Anthony/RNZ Pacific
Forgiveness The opening ceremony also saw the seeking of forgiveness from government and the Christian churches in Fiji for past events that had caused splits within the Great Council and Fiji as a nation.
The government’s traditional apology, or matanigasau, was presented by Apimeleki Tola, Acting Commissioner of the Native Lands Commission and was accepted by the Marama Bale Na Roko Tui Dreketi, Ro Teimumu Kepa, the traditional head of the Burebasaga confederacy.
Tola asked the chiefs to forgive the past government and its decision to de-establish the Great Council and also asked for their blessings and support in the work that government is doing for the people of Fiji.
Ro Teimumu accepted on behalf of the chiefs and urged government and civil servants to continue their service to the people of Fiji.
Two other apologies were presented and accepted.
The first was from the government to the church and religious leaders and the second from the religious leaders to the chiefs of Fiji.
The official opening ceremony was preceded by a church service conducted by the president of the Methodist Church in Fiji and Rotuma and full traditional Fijian ceremony of welcome.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Many different arguments for and against the Voice to Parliament have been heard in the lead-up to this year’s referendum in Australia. This has included some media and politicians drawing comparisons between the Voice and South Africa’s apartheid regime.
Cory Bernardi, a Sky News commentator, argued, for instance, that by implementing the Voice, “we’re effectively announcing an apartheid-type state, where some citizens have more legal rights or more rights in general than others”.
As legal scholar Bede Harris has pointed out, it’s quite clear Bernardi doesn’t understand apartheid. He said,
How the Voice could be described as creating such a system is unfathomable.
Comparisons to apartheid
Apartheid was a system of racial segregation implemented by the South African government to control and restrict the lives of the non-white populations, and to stop them from voting.
During apartheid, non-white people could not freely visit the same beaches, live in the same neighbourhoods, attend the same schools or queue in the same lines as white people. My wife recalls her white parents being questioned by police after visiting the home of a Black colleague.
The proposed Voice will ensure First Nations peoples have their views heard by Parliament.
It won’t have the power to stop people swimming at the same beaches or living, studying or shopping together. It won’t stop interracial marriages as the apartheid regime did. It doesn’t give anybody extra political rights.
It simply provides First Nations people, who have previously had no say in developing the country’s system of government, with an opportunity to participate in a way that many say is meaningful and respectful.
Apartheid and the Voice are polar opposites. The Voice is a path towards democratic participation, while apartheid eliminated any opportunity for this.
Evoking emotional responses, like Bernardi attempted to do, can inspire people to quickly align with a political cause that moderation and reason might not encourage. This means opinions may be formed from limited understanding and misinformation.
“Whether you vote yes or no in the coming referendum, your choice deserves respect.” #CharlesSturtUni constitutional law expert has challenged claims made by a SKY TV host likening the proposed Voice to Parliament to an apartheid-type state.https://t.co/EePzMcIksO
— Charles Sturt University (@CharlesSturtUni) May 9, 2023
Misinformation doesn’t stop at apartheid comparisons The Institute of Public Affairs, a conservative lobby group, has published a “research” paper claiming the Voice would be like New Zealand’s Waitangi Tribunal and be able to veto decisions of the Parliament.
The truth is the tribunal is not a “Maori Voice to Parliament”. It can’t veto Parliament.
The Waitangi Tribunal is a permanent commission of inquiry. It is chaired by a judge and has Māori and non-Māori membership. Its job is to investigate alleged breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi.
The tribunal’s task is an independent search for truth. When it upholds a claim, its recommended remedies become the subject of political negotiation between government and claimants.
The Voice in Australia would make representations to Parliament. This is also not a veto. A veto is to stop Parliament making a law.
We need to raise the quality of debate Unlike the apartheid and Waitangi arguments, many objections to the Voice are grounded in fact.
Making representations to Parliament and the government is a standard and necessary democratic practice. There are already many ways of doing this, but in the judgment of the First Nations’ people who developed the Voice proposal, a constitutionally enshrined Voice would be a better way of making these representations.
Many people disagree with this judgment. The National Party argues a Voice won’t actually improve people’s lives.
Independent Senator Lidia Thorpe says she speaks for a Black Sovereignty movement when she advocates for a treaty to come first. The argument is that without a treaty, the system of government isn’t morally legitimate.
Other people support the Voice in principle but think it will have too much power; others think it won’t have enough.
Thinking about honest differences of opinion helps us to understand and critique a proposal for what it is, rather than what it is not. Our vote then stands a better chance of reflecting what we really think.
Lies can mask people’s real reasons for holding a particular point of view. When people’s true reasons can’t be scrutinised and tested, it prevents an honest exchange of ideas.
Collective wisdom can’t emerge, and the final decision doesn’t demonstrate each voter’s full reflection on other perspectives.
Altering the Constitution is very serious, and deliberately difficult to do. Whatever the referendum’s outcome, confidence in our collective judgment is more likely when truth and reason inform our debate.
In my recently published book, Indigeneity, Culture and the UN Sustainable Development Goals, I argue the Voice could contribute to a more just and democratic system of government through ensuring decision-making is informed by what First Nations’ people want and why.
Informed, also, by deep knowledge of what works and why.
People may agree or disagree. But one thing is clear: deliberate misinformation doesn’t make a counter argument. It diminishes democracy.
The Fiji Parliament has voted to “kill” a draconian media law in Suva today, sending newsrooms across the country into celebrations.
Twenty nine parliamentarians voted to repeal the Media Industry Development Act, while 21 voted against it and 3 did not vote.
The law — which started as a post-coup decree in 2010 — has been labelled as a “noose around the neck of the media industry and journalists” since it was enacted into law.
While opposition FijiFirst parliamentarians voted against the bill, Fiji’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance Professor Biman Prasad said binning the act would be good for the people and for democracy.
Removing the controversial law was a major election promise by Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka’s coalition government.
Emotional day for newsrooms The news was “one for the ages for us”, Fiji Times editor-in-chief Fred Wesley, who was dragged into court on multiple occasions by the former government under the act, told RNZ Pacific in Vanuatu.
He said today was about all the Fijian media workers who stayed true to their profession.
“People who slugged it out, people who remained passionate about their work and continued disseminating information and getting people to make well-informed decision on a daily basis.”
“It wasn’t an easy journey, but truly thankful for today,” an emotional Wesley said.
“We’re in an era where we don’t have draconian legislation hanging over our heads.”
He said the entire industry was happy and newsrooms are now looking forward to the next chapter.
“The next phases is the challenge of putting together a Fiji media council to do the work of listening to complaints and all of that, and I’m overwhelmed and very grateful.”
Holding government to account He said people in Fiji should continue to expect the media to do what it was supposed to do: “Holding government to account, holding our leaders to account and making sure that they’re responsible in the decisions they make.”
Fiji Times editor-in-chief Fred Wesley and Islands Business editor Samantha Magick embrace each other after finding out the the Fijian Parliament has repealed the MIDA Act. Image: Lydia Lewis/RNZ Pacific
Journalists ‘can be brave’ Islands Business magazine editor Samantha Magick said getting rid of the law meant it would now create an environment for Fiji journalists to do more critical journalism.
“I think [we will] see less, ‘he said, she said’, reporting in very controlled environments,” Magick said.
“Fiji’s media will see more investigations, more depth, more voices, different perspectives, [and] hopefully they can engage a bit more as well without fear.
“It’ll just be so much healthier for us as a people and democracy to have that level of debate and investigation and questioning, regardless of who you are,” she added.
RNZ Pacific senior sports journalist and PINA board member Iliesa Tora said the Parliament’s decision sent a strong message to the rest of the region.
“The message [this sends] to the region and the different regional government’s is that you need to work with the media to ensure that there is media freedom,” said Tora, who chose to leave Fiji because he could not operate as a journalist due of the act.
“The freedom of the media ensures that people are also able to freely express themselves and are not fearful in coming forward to talk about things that they see that governments are not doing that they [should] do to really govern in the countries.”
‘Step into the light’ – corruption reporting project Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project co-founder and publisher Drew Sullivan told RNZ Pacific that anytime a country that was not able to do the kind of accountability journalism that they should be doing, this damaged media throughout the region.
“It creates a model for illiberal actors in the region to imitate what’s going on in that country,” Sullivan said.
“So this has really moved forward in allowing journalists again to do their job and that’s really important.”
Fiji journalists, Sullivan said, had done an amazing job resisting limitations for as long as they could.
“Fiji was really a black hole of journalism [in] that the journalists could not participate in on a global community because they couldn’t find the information; they weren’t allowed to write what they needed to write.
“So this is really a step forward into the light to really bring Fiji and media back into the global journalism community.”
Korean cult investigation
Last year, OCCRP published a major investigation on Fiji, working with local journalists to expose the expansion of the controversial Korean Chirstain-cult Grace Road Church under the Bainimarama regime.
Rabuka’s government is currently investigating Grace Road.
Sullivan said OCCRP will continue to support Fijian journalists.
“But [the repealing of the act] will allow a lot more stories to be done and a lot more people will understand how the world really works, especially in Fiji.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Fred Wesley and Rakesh Kumar from The Fiji Times, Samantha Magick from Islands Business, and OCCRPs co-founder and publisher Drew Sullivan in Port Vila. Image: Lydia Lewis/RNZ Pacific
About 3000 activists of French Polynesia’s pro-independence Tavini Huiraatira party met for six hours at the weekend with the executives insisting that they were “united’ after a recent upheaval over leadership.
The party also presented a “renewed” slate of 73 candidates for next month’s territorial elections which includes many new and younger faces in the lineup for the ballot on April 16 and 30.
Party chair Oscar Temaru got the ball rolling at Motu Ovini in Faa’a on Saturday. Appearing tired, he nevertheless remained on the stage for the entire congress along with the other party executives.
Antony Géros, the party’s number two, delivered a long-awaited speech after the recent party rift over the candidacy of Moetai Brotherson for the territorial presidency if the party wins the elections.
“It created a stir in the party because the Tony-Moetai divide started to be felt. And it was necessary to sort that out,” he explained after his speech.
Calling for “union”, “unity” and even respect for the new vision of “rising youth ” within the party, Géros ruled out any hint of a possible challenge to Brotherson’s candidacy.
A call for unity was also echoed in the two speeches by young deputies Tematai Le Gayic and Steve Chailloux in the French National Assembly, both once again impressive in their mastery of public speaking.
Tavini Huiraatira leaders Antony Géros, Oscar Temaru and Moetai Brotherson . . . patching up their differences befire next month’s territorial elections. Image: Tahiti Infos
Tributes by Brotherson
The third and leading deputy Brotherson, emphasised respect and gave tributes to the “elders” of Tavini huiraatira.
“It’s something to walk in the footsteps of these giants,” he said, before also paying tribute to the man who was his chief-of-staff between 2011 and 2013 — Antony Géros.
Géros, mayor of Paea, will lead section 2 (Mahina, Hitia’a o te Ra, Taiarapu East and West, Teva i Uta, Papara and Paea).
Deputy Brotherson heads of the Leeward Islands section.
Section 1 (Papeete, Pirae, Arue, Moorea) will be led by the young deputy Temata’i Le Gayic.
Elections treated as ‘referendum’ RNZ Pacific reports that Temaru had said last December that he would treat the elections as if they would be an independence referendum.
He said that if his party won the election by a large margin, he questioned the point in holding a vote on independence from France.
Temaru said in the case of such a victory he would visit neighbouring Pacific countries and the United Nations to secure support for French Polynesia’s sovereignty.
He said Kosovo and Vanuatu became independent countries without a referendum.
In the last territorial election in 2018, the Tavini won less than 20 percent of the seats, but in the French National Assembly election in June, it secured all three of French Polynesia’s seats in the run-off round.
Brotherson has questioned Temaru’s stance, saying a local election should not be “mixed up” with a decolonisation process under the auspices of the United Nations.
In 2013, the UN General Assembly re-inscribed the French territory on its decolonisation list, but Paris has rejected the decision and keeps boycotting the annual decolonisation committee’s debate on French Polynesia.
While France has partially cooperated with the UN on the decolonisation of New Caledonia, the French government has ignored calls by the Tavini to invite the UN to assess the territory’s situation.
Republished from Tahiti-Infos and RNZ Pacific with permission.
The President of the Federated States of Micronesia has made a series of disturbing claims against China, including alleging spying, threats to his personal safety and bribery.
President David Panuelo made the claims to his Congress, governors and the leadership of the country’s state legislatures in a letter which has been leaked to 1News.
Panuelo said the point of his letter was to warn of the threat of warfare.
The president, who has just two months left in office, has publicly attacked China in the past.
“We can play an essential role in preventing a war in our region; we can save the lives of our own Micronesian citizens; we can strengthen our sovereignty and independence,” he said in his latest letter.
President Panuelo said he believed that by informing the leaders of his views he was creating risks to his personal safety along with that of his family and staff.
Outlined in the letter are a series of startling allegations.
Chinese activity within EEZ
The president said there had been activity by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) within his country’s Exclusive Economic Zone.
The “purpose includes communicating with other PRC assets so as to help ensure that, in the event a missile — or group of missiles — ever needed to land a strike on the US Territory of Guam that they would be successful in doing so”.
President Panuelo said he had stopped China research vessels in FSM waters after patrol boats were sent to check “but the PRC sent a warning for us to stay away”.
He also claimed that at the Pacific Islands Forum in Suva in July last year he was followed by two Chinese men, one of them an intelligence officer.
“To be clear: I have had direct threats against my personal safety from PRC officials acting in an official capacity,” he said.
In another claim, Panuelo said that after the first China-Pacific Island Countries Foreign Ministers Meeting, the joint communique was published with statements and references that had not been agreed to “which were false”.
He said he and other leaders such as Niue Premier Dalton Tagelagi and Fiji’s now former prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama had requested more time to review the joint communique before it went out but their requests were ignored.
Trying to strongarm officials
President Panuelo also claimed China had been trying to strongarm officials when it came to bilateral agreements such as a proposed memorandum of understanding (MoU) on the “Deepening Blue Economy” which had “serious red flags”.
One of those was that the FSM “would open the door to the PRC to begin acquiring control over the island nation’s fibre optic cables and ports”.
President Panuelo said in his latest letter that while he advised cabinet to reject the MOU in June last year, in December he learned that it was back in “just mere hours from its signing”.
He said that when Foreign Minister Khandhi Elieisar raised this with Chinese Ambassador Huang Zheng, he suggested “that he ought to sign the MOU anyway and that my knowing about it — in my capacity as Head of State and Head of Government — was not necessary”.
President Panuelo said he found out Ambassador Huang’s replacement, Wu Wei, had been given a mission to shift the FSM away from its allies the US, Japan and Australia. He therefore denied the Ambassador designate his position.
“I know that one element of my duty as President is to protect our country, and so knowing that: our ultimate aim is, if possible, to prevent war; and, if impossible, to mitigate its impacts on our own country and on our own people.”
There are also allegations of bribery. President Panuelo claimed that shortly after Vice-President Aren Palik took office in his former capacity as a Senator, he was asked by a Chinese official to accept an envelope filled with money.
‘Never offer bribe again’
“Vice-President Pakik refused, telling the [official] to never offer him a bribe again,” President Panuelo said.
In October last year, Panuelo said that when Palik visited the island of Kosrae he was received by a Chinese company, which has a private plane.
“Our friends told the Vice-President that they can provide him private and personal transportation to anywhere he likes at any time, even Hawai’i, for example; he need only ask,” President Panuelo claimed.
He said senior officials and elected officials across the whole of the national and state governments had received offers of gifts as a means to curry favour.
The President concluded the letter by saying he wanted to inform his fellow leaders, regardless of the risk to himself, because the nation’s sovereignty, prosperity and peace and stability were more important.
The Chinese embassy in the Federated States of Micronesia and in Wellington have been asked to comment on the allegations by 1News.
The West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) has released a new video about New Zealand hostage pilot Philip Mehrtens and a Papuan news organisation, Jubi TV, has featured it on its website.
The Susi Air pilot was taken hostage on February 7 after landing in a remote region near Nduga in the Central Papuan highlands.
In the video, which was sent to RNZ Pacific, Mehrtens was instructed to read a statement saying “no foreign pilots are to work and fly” into the Papuan highlands until the West Papua is independent.
Previously, a West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) spokesperson said they were waiting for a response from the New Zealand government to negotiate the release of Mehrtens.
A Papua independence movement leader, Benny Wenda, and church and community leaders last month called for the rebels to release Mehrtens.
Wenda said he sympathised with the New Zealand people and Merhtens’ family but insisted the situation was a result of Indonesia’s refusal to allow the UN Human Rights Commissioner to visit Papua.
The latest video featuring NZ hostage pilot Philip Mehrtens. Video: Jubi TV
According to Jubi News, the head of Cartenz Peace Operation 2023, Senior Commander Faizal Ramadani, says negotiations to free Mehrtens, who is held hostage by a TPNPB faction led by Egianus Kogoya, has “not been fruitful”.
Senior Commander Faizal Ramadani . . . “The situation in the field is very dynamic.” Image: Alexander Loen/Jubi News
But Commander Ramadani said that the security forces would continue the negotiation process.
According to Commander Ramadani, efforts to negotiate the release of Mehrtens by the local government, religious leaders, and Nduga community leaders were rejected by the TPNPB.
“We haven’t received the news directly, but we received information that there was a rejection,” said Commander Ramadani in Jayapura on Tuesday.
“The whereabouts of Egianus’ group and Mehrtens are not yet known as the situation in the field is very dynamic,” he said.
“But we will keep looking.”
Republished with permission from RNZ Pacific and Jubi TV.
“To have had two category four cyclones in less than a week is history in itself,” Vanuatu’s only female Member of Parliament, Gloria Julia King, told RNZ Pacific.
“[It’s] something that even the elders in our families haven’t seen before.”
She said her island nation has had its fair share of severe weather events, highlighting the destruction caused by Cyclone Pam in 2015 from which the country has still not fully recovered.
“A lot of our schools are still in makeshift classrooms, [children] still sitting on the floor without desks and chairs.”
Hopeful over challenges
But she is hopeful that the ni-Vanuatu people will get through the challenges in front of them.
“I have seen Vanuatu come back from Pam, I’ve seen Vanuatu come back from Harold, and I am positive Vanuatu will be able to bounce back from Kevin,” King said.
A property flattened in Port Vila following the wrath of Tropical Cyclone Judy followed by TC Kevin. Image: Shiva Gounden/RNZ Pacific
The country was hit by a category 4 TC Judy first on March 3, but just as people started to pick up the pieces, they had to rush to evacuation centres the following day as Kevin arrived as a category 3, intensifying to a category 4 and then reaching 5 over open water.
“People [were] carrying people with disabilities on their back to an evacuation building,” Greenpeace Australia Pacific’s advisor Shiva Gounden, who is in the capital Port Vila, said.
He said three to four families huddled in homes while properties around them were being wiped out.
“Roads are completely blocked or flooded. There’s no access for anyone to leave the village for any type of emergencies.”
‘No power, no water’ “There’s no power. There’s no water,” he added.
Gounden was in a village on Efate island helping people prepare for TC Kevin when it hit with a force much more violent than anyone was prepared for, he told RNZ Pacific.
He had to hold the doors of the house he was residing in for almost 10 hours in shin high water to remain safe.
“It was extremely strong,” he said, describing Kevin’s ferocity.
“I’ve seen and responded to several cyclones in my life and I felt Kevin was as strong as Cyclone Winston which wiped out Fiji.”
“I was trying to hold my door from 5pm till about 3am. I was using all my [strength] with my hands and my back and my legs to try and hold the door because if I didn’t, it would snap. There was water everywhere,” he said.
‘It’s a tough go for many’, says Vanuatu journalist Vanuatu journalist Dan McGarry, who has been on the frontlines documenting the disaster, visited vulnerable communities in the aftermath.
Taila Moses and her son Tom stand in front of what was once their home of 16 years. Countless houses in informal communities such as hers were damaged or destroyed. Cyclones dole put their damage indiscriminately, but society’s most vulnerable feel it more than anyone else. pic.twitter.com/cXBDuznMTz
He said people were living in “impromptu housing” in various parts of Port Vila.
“What I found was quite disturbing,” he said.
“It’s becoming obvious that the increasing reliance on a cash economy is creating inequalities in terms of people’s ability to cope with this kind of disaster cycle.”
McGarry said informal settlements up on the hillside in the capital were covered with clothing lines because everything had been soaked.
“There were tarpaulins pulled across roofs to provide some sort of temporary shelter.”
He has spoken with several residents and shared the story of one woman who has lost everything.
“She has no livelihood at the moment because her employer, of course, isn’t calling her into work,” he said.
“She’s lost everything and she is without the means to return it. It’s a tough, tough go for a great many people here in Port Vila,” he explained.
Hundreds of people in Vanuatu’s capital Port Vila have been evacuated after TC Judy which was followed just a day later by a second cyclone, TC Kevin. Image: Hilaire Bule/RNZ Pacific
Climate crisis issue Climate crisis is front of mind for Ni-Vanuatu residents as they start to rebuild.
“[Climate change] turns what used to be sort of periodical issues for Pacific island nations into chronic ones,” he said.
“In this case, we’ve had two severe cyclones in the course of a week an as New Zealanders have seen these weather systems are moving further south.”
He believes development partners of the Pacific cannot afford to walk away; a sentiment echoed by Gounden.
“We have the most resilient people, but there is a deep hurt that is within us,” Gounden said.
He said the “the hurt” stems from fossil fuels being burned across the world which exacerbates climate change.
“The people of the Pacific contribute the least to climate change, yet we face the greatest consequences of it all.”
“The biggest thing we can do is pressure world leaders right now to phase out [the use of fossil fuels.”
Meanwhile, Australia, France and New Zealand have been the first to send support to assist with emergency response.
“We will appreciate any help we can get,” King said.
“The biggest challenge now is just getting power and water back into full circuit around the country.”
Taking off for Vanuatu with assistance following TC Judy & TC Kevin. Australia has a rapid assessment team in Vanuatu & is delivering shelters & other items for communities.
The Papuan Church Council has called on the West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) unit led by Egianus Kogoya to immediately release the New Zealand hostage pilot Philip Mehrtens.
The council’s request was delivered during a press conference attended by Reverend Benny Giai as moderator and member Reverend Socratez Sofyan Yoman at the secretariat.
Reverend Yoman said he had written an open letter to Kogoya explaining that hostage-taking events like this were not the first time in Papua. There needed to be a negotiated settlement and not by force.
The plea comes as news media report that Indonesian security forces have surrounded the rebels holding 37-year-old Mehrtens captive, but say they will exercise restraint while negotiations for his release continue.
Mehrtens, a Susi Air pilot, was taken hostage by the TNPB on February 7 after landing in the remote mountainous region of Nduga.
“The council and the international community understand the issue that the TPNPB brings — namely the Papuan struggle [for independence], Reverend Yoman said.
“We know TPNPB are not terrorists. Therefore, in the open letter I asked Egianus to free the New Zealand pilot.”
‘Great commander’
Reverend Yoman also explained that Kogoya was a “great commander”, and the liberation fight had been going on since the 1960s, and it must be seen as the struggle of the entire Papuan people.
This hostage-taking, he said, was psychologically disturbing for the family of the pilot. He asked that the pilot be released.
Reverend Yoman said he was sure that if the pilot was released, Kogoya would also get sympathy from the global community and the people of Indonesia.
His open letter had also been sent to President Joko Widodo.
“There must be a neutral mediator or negotiator trusted by both the TPNPB, the community, and the government to release the pilot. Otherwise, many victims will fall,” said Reverend Yoman.
Reverend Benny Giai said there were a number of root problems that had not been resolved in Papua that triggered the hostage-taking events.
“If the root problems in Papua are not resolved, things like this will keep occurring in the future,” he said.
‘Conditions fuel revenge’
“There are people in the forest carrying weapons while remembering their families who have been killed, these conditions fuel revenge.”
The council invited everybody to view that the hostage-taking occurred several days after the humanitarian pause agreement was withdrawn by the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) when it should have continued.
Reverend Giai said he regretted that no negotiation team had been formed by the government to immediately release the pilot.
He was part of a negotiating team resolving a similar crisis in Ilaga in 2010.
At that time, Reverend Giai said, security guarantees were given directly by then Papua police chief I Made Pastika, and “everything went smoothly”.
“In our letter we emphasise that humanity must be respected.
“If the release is not carried out, it is certain that civilians will become victims. Therefore, we ask that the hostage must be released, directly or through a negotiating team,” he said.
Indonesian forces ‘surround rebels’
Meanwhile, RNZ Pacific reports the rebels say they will not release Mehrtens unless Indonesia’s government recognises the region’s independence and withdraws its troops.
Chief Security Minister Mahfud MD said security forces had found the location of the group holding the pilot but would refrain from actions that might endanger his life.
“Now, they are under siege and we already know their location. But we must be careful,” Mahfud said, according to local media.
He did not elaborate on the location or what steps Indonesia might take to free the pilot.
Susi Air’s founder and owner Susi Pudjiastuti said 70 percent of its flights in the region had been cancelled, apologising for the disruption of vital supplies to remote, mountainous areas.
“There has to be a big humanitarian impact. There are those who are sick and can’t get medication … and probably food supplies are dwindling,” Pudjiastuti told reporters.
A Pacific journalism academic has warned proposed amendments to media laws in Papua New Guinea, if “ill-defined”, could mirror the harsh restrictions in Fiji.
Prime Minister James Marape’s government is facing fierce opposition from local and regional journalists for attempting to fasttrack a new media development policy.
The draft law has been described by media freedom advocates as “the thin edge of the web of state control”.
PNG’s Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Department released the Draft Media Development Policy publicly on February 5. It aims “to outline the objectives and strategies for the use of media as a tool for development”.
The department gave stakeholders less than two weeks to make submissions on the 15-page document, but after a backlash the ICT chief extended the consultation period by another week.
“I recognise the sensitivity and importance of this reform exercise,” ICT Minister Timothy Masiu said after giving in to public criticism and extending the consultation period until February 24.
ICT Minister Timothy Masiu . . . “I recognise the sensitivity and importance of this reform exercise” Photo: PNG govt/RNZ Pacific
Masiu said he instructed the Information Department to “facilitate a workshop in partnership with key stakeholders”, adding that the Information Ministry “supports and encourages open dialogue” on the matter.
“I reaffirm to the public that the government is committed to ensuring that this draft bill will serve its ultimate purpose,” he said.
The new policy includes provisions on regulating the media industry and raising journalism standards in PNG, which has struggled for years due to lack of investment in the sector.
But media leaders in PNG have expressed concerns, noting that while there are areas where government support is needed, the proposed regulation is not the solution.
“The situation in PNG is a bit worrying if you see what happened in Fiji, even though the PNG Information Department has denied any ulterior motives,” University of the South Pacific head of journalism, Associate Professor Shailendra Singh, told RNZ Pacific.
“There are concerns in PNG. Prominent journalists are worried that the proposed act could be the thin edge of the wedge of state media control, as in Fiji,” Dr Singh said, in reaction to Masiu’s guarantee that the policy is for the benefit of media organisations and journalists.
“If you look at the Fiji situation, the Media Act was implemented in the name of democratising the media, ironically, and also improving professional standards.”
Dr Singh said this is what is also being said by the PNG government but “in Fiji the Media Act has been a disaster for media rights”.
USP’s Associate Professor Shailendra Singh . . . “In Fiji the Media Act has been a disaster for media rights.” Image: RNZ Pacific
“Various reports blame the Fiji Media Act for a chilling effect on journalism and they also hold the Act responsible for instilling self-censorship in the Fiji media sector,” he said.
“If the PNG media policy provisions are ill-defined, as the Fiji Media Act was, and if it has harsh punitive measures, it could also result in a chilling effect on journalism and this in turn could have major implications for democracy and freedom of speech in PNG.”
The Media Industry Development Act (MIDA) 2010 and its implementation meant that Fiji was ranked 102nd out of 180 countries by Reporters without Borders in 2022.
Earlier this month Fiji’s Attorney-General Siromi Turaga publicly apologised to journalists for the harassment and abuse they endured during the Bainimarama government’s reign.
But Dr Singh said PNG appeared to have been “emboldened” by the Fijian experience.
Media freedom a Pacific-wide issue He said other Pacific leaders had also threatened to introduce similar legislation and “this is a major concern”.
“Fiji and PNG are the two biggest countries in the Pacific [which] often set trends in the region, for better or for worse. The question that comes to mind is whether countries like Solomon Islands or Vanuatu will follow suit? [Because] over the years and even recently, the leaders of these two countries have also threatened the news media.”
A major study co-authored by the USP academic, which surveyed more than 200 journalists in nine countries and was published in Pacific Journalism Review in 2021, revealed that “Pacific journalists are among the youngest, most inexperienced and least qualified in the world”.
Dr Singh warned the research showed that legislation alone would not result in any significant improvements to journalism standards in Pacific countries, which is why committing money in training and development was crucial.
“Training and development are an important component of the Fiji Media Act. However, our analysis found zero dollars was invested by the Fiji government in training and development,” he said.
“If we are to take any lessons from Fiji, and if the PNG government is serious about standards, it needs to invest at least some of its own money in this venture of improving journalism.”
This is a sentiment shared by Media Council of PNG president, Neville Choi, who said: “If the concern is poor journalism, then the solution is more investment in schools of journalism at tertiary institutions, this will also improve diversity and pluralism in the quality of journalism.
“We need newsrooms with access to training in media ethics and legal protection from harassment,” Choi added.
Dr Singh said that without proper financial backing in the media sector “there is unlikely to be any improvement in standards, [but] just a cowered down or subdued media [which] is not in PNG’s public interest, or the national interest, given the levels of corruption in the country.”
APMN calls for ‘urgent rethink’
The publisher of the Pacific Journalism Review, the Asia Pacific Media Network, has also condemned the move, calling for an “urgent rethink” of the draft media policy.
The group is proposing for the communications ministry to “immediately discard the proposed policy of legislating the PNG Media Council and regulating journalists and media which would seriously undermine media freedom in Papua New Guinea”.
The network also cited the 1999 Melanesian Media Declaration as a guideline for Pacific media councils and said the draft PNG policy was ignoring “established norms” for media freedom.
The statement was co-signed by the APMN chair Dr Heather Devere; deputy chair Dr David Robie, a retired professor of Pacific journalism and author, and founding director of the Pacific Media Centre; and Pacific Journalism Review editor Dr Philip Cass, who was born in PNG and worked on the Times of Papua New Guinea and Wantok newspapers.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Enga Governor Sir Peter Ipatas has told the Papua New Guinean government and national leaders to allow the media to carry out its role “unfettered” and accept public criticism.
“You are in a public office. As leaders, we must be prepared for anything. If they write negative reports, let’s learn to build on criticisms,” Sir Peter said.
He was responding to a government statement last week saying that a proposed national media development policy circulated to all stakeholders for comment was not meant to control the media or the freedom of expression.
Sir Peter said: “The government needs to understand that the office we hold is a public office, and we are answerable to the people. The media’s job is to hold us accountable.”
He questioned why the government was wasting money and time on a draft media policy when it had bigger issues to worry about.
Detrimental for democracy
Sir Peter warned that the Constitution provided for a free media and any attempt to put restrictions on that crucial role would be detrimental to a democratic society.
“Do not look at today only. Look at the future too because you will not be in office forever,” he said.
“There are also avenues provided for in the Constitution to address issues.
“If you have an issue with a news report, take it to court and get it sorted out there.
“I’ve been a politician for over 20 years. I don’t care what the media reports — positive news or negative news so long as it’s not [lies],” he said.
“It is the media’s job to report facts as it is. Let the media do its job and let’s do our job.”
Rebecca Kukuis a reporter with The National. Republished with permission.
“We are proud Fijians and Melanesians today” — Fiji Council of Social Services executive director Vani Catanasiga said this in the wake of news that Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka has confirmed his support for West Papua’s bid for full membership of the Melanesian Spearhead Group.
“We are overjoyed and are in celebration right now as the news is being conveyed through various social media channels to our members across the country,” she said.
“This is the principled and compassionate leadership we have all been waiting for and were denied in the past 16 years.
“Vinaka vakalevu Mr Rabuka — we are proud Fijians and Melanesians today.
“Thank you to the chiefs who welcomed and committed support to the case, Ratu Epenisa Cakobau and Ro Teimumu Kepa.
“Thank you to the Reverend Kolivuso of Faith Harvest Church and his congregation for hosting the West Papua Delegation last Sunday.
‘Historical day’
“It is a historical day for Fiji and I’m sure this will be celebrated by our kinfolk in West Papua.
“This decision and announcement takes West Papua closer to their goal for self determination and freedom from oppression and abuse.”
Catanasiga issued the statement following a meeting between United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) president Benny Wenda and Prime Minister Rabuka in Nadi on Thursday.
After the historic meeting, Rabuka tweeted, “Yes, we will support them (United Liberation Movement for West Papua) because they are Melanesians. I am more hopeful (ULMWP) gaining full MSG membership. I am not taking it for granted.
“The dynamics may have changed slightly but the principles are the same”.
Yes, we will support them [United Liberation Movement for West Papua] because they are Melanesians. I am more hopeful [ULMWP gaining full MSG membership]. I am not taking it for granted. The dynamics may have changed slightly but the principles are the same. pic.twitter.com/9J8qpAVhak
Speaking to The Fiji Times prior to meeting with Rabuka, Wenda said that by gaining full membership of the MSG he hoped to engage in discussions with Indonesia on the human rights abuses and issues facing his people and seek a way forward that would benefit both parties.
Felix Chaudharyis a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.
A West Papuan independence movement leader, Benny Wenda, says the release of New Zealand pilot Phillip Mehrtens held hostage by armed rebels is out of his hands.
The West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) fighters kidnapped Mehrtens on February 7 after he landed a small commercial passenger plane in Nduga regency.
The group then burned the Indonesian-owned Susi Air plane and demanded the New Zealand government negotiate directly for Merhtens’ release.
He told RNZ Pacific he did not condone the actions of the liberation army rebels and had called for them to release the pilot peacefully.
He said he sympathised with the New Zealand people and Merhtens’ family but insisted the situation was a result of Indonesia’s refusal to allow the UN Human Rights Commissioner to visit West Papua.
“Because the place where it’s actually happening is where hundreds of thousands [of indigenous Papuans] have been displaced from 2018 up to now — in Nduga, Intan Jaya, Mybrat and also Oksibil,” Wenda said.
‘Warning to Indonesia’
“So this happening right now is a warning to Indonesia to let the UN High Commissioner visit which they have been ignoring these last three years.”
Philip Mehrtens, the New Zealand pilot taken hostage at Paro, Nduga regency, and his aircraft set on fire. Image: Jubi News
“We are not enemies [with New Zealand]. We are very good,” Wenda said.
“New Zealand is a very strong supporter of West Papua.
“I do not think the [TPNPB] group can harm the pilot unless Indonesia uses the situation to do harm. That is my concern.”
He said Indonesia should consider TPNPB’s demands.
Wenda is leading a delegation from the ULMWP that is currently in Fiji ahead of the Pacific Islands Forum.
The group has observer status in the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) and is lobbying to become a full member.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
The new media development policy being proposed by the Papua New Guinea Communications Minister, Timothy Masiu, could lead to more government control over the country’s relatively free media.
The initial deadline for feedback has been extended by another seven days from today. However, the Media Council of PNG (MCPNG) has requested a consultation forum with the government, as it seeks wider input from research organisations, academia and regional partners.
The government’s intention to impose greater control over aspects of the media, including the MCPNG, is ringing alarm bells through the region. This is to be done by re-establishing the council through the enactment of legislation.
The policy envisages the council as a regulatory agency with licensing authority over journalists.
The MCPNG was established in 1989 as a non-profit organisation representing the interests of media organisations. Apart from a brief period in the earlier part of its existence, it has largely been unfunded.
Over three decades, its role has shifted to being a representative body for media professionals and a voice for media freedom.
The president of the council, Neville Choi, says there are aspects of the media that need government support. These include protection and training of journalists. However, the media is best left as a self-regulating industry.
According to Choi:
“Media self-regulation is when media professionals set up voluntary editorial guidelines and abide by them in a learning process open to the public. By doing this, independent media accept their share of responsibility for the quality of public discourse in the country, while preserving their editorial autonomy in shaping it. The MCPNG was set up with this sole intent.
“It is not censorship, and not even self-censorship. It is about establishing minimum principles on ethics, accuracy, personal rights while preserving editorial freedom on what to report, and what opinions to express.
The regulatory framework proposed for the new media council includes licensing for journalists. Licensing is one of the biggest red flags that screams of government control.
Communications Minister Timothy Masiu . . . Licensing is one of the biggest red flags that screams of government control. Image: PNG govt
While the PNG media has been resilient in the face of many challenges, journalists who have chosen to cover issues of national importance have been targeted with pressure coming directly from within government circles.
In 2004, the National Broadcasting Corporation’s head of news and current affairs, Joseph Ealedona, was suspended for a series of stories on the military and the government. The managing director of the government broadcaster issued the notice of suspension.
In 2019, Neville Choi, then head of news for EMTV, was sacked for disobeying orders not to run a story of a military protest outside the Prime Minister’s office in Port Moresby. Choi was later reinstated following intense public pressure and a strike by all EMTV journalists and news production staff.
Two years later, a similar scenario played out when 24 staff and EMTV’s head of news were sacked for protesting against political interference in the newsroom.
For many within the industry, licensing just gives the government better tools to penalise journalists who present an unfavourable narrative.
On paper, the government appears to be trying to remedy the desperately ailing journalism standards in PNG. But the attempt is not convincing enough for many.
Fraser Liu, an accountant by profession and an outspoken observer of national issues, says the courts provide enough of an avenue for redress if there are grievances and that an additional layer of control is not needed.
Liu said: “Media agencies and agents must be left alone to their own ends, being free from coercion of any sort, and if media reporting does in fact raise any legal issues like defamation, then the courts are the avenue for resolution. There is no shortage in common law of such case precedent. This is clearly an act by government to control media and effectively free speech.
“Government cannot self-appoint itself as a referee for free speech. Free speech is covered under our Constitution and the courts protect this basic right. The policy talks about protection of reporters’ rights. Again, what is this? They already have rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
Coming back to poor journalism standards, Minister Masiu, a former broadcast journalist himself, has been challenged on many occasions to increase investment into PNG’s journalism schools. It is a challenge he has not yet taken up despite the abundant rhetoric about the need for improvement.
The energy of government should be put into fixing the root problem contributing to the poor quality of the media: poor standards of university education.
Scott Waide is a journalist based in Lae, Papua New Guinea. He is the former deputy regional head of news for EMTV and has worked in the media for 24 years. This article was first published on the DevPolicy Blog and is republished here under a Creative Commons licence.
Authorities in Indonesia’s Melanesian province Papua will negotiate with indigenous pro-independence rebels to secure the release of a New Zealand pilot the insurgents took hostage last week, say police and military officials.
However, a spokesperson for the rebel group West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) said that while they were ready to negotiate, they would do so only if another country was involved as a mediator.
The Jakarta government’s negotiation plan came after the TPNPB released a video on Tuesday in which the group said it would kill pilot Philip Mehrtens if government security forces came for them.
The Papuan police have been coordinating with the local government as well as indigenous and religious leaders to communicate with the local rebel group led by Egianus Kogoya, provincial police spokesman Benny Adi Prabowo said.
“Regional authorities . . . and customary and religious leaders have access,” he said.
“We are allowing them to take the lead in opening a space for communication with the Egianus Kogoya group,” he said.
Some people tasked with the negotiations have arrived in Nduga regency’s Paro district, where rebels set fire to a plane belonging to Susi Air and took Mehrtens hostage on February 7.
Mehrtens ID confirmed Early yesterday, Papua military chief Major-General Muhammad Saleh Mustafa confirmed that the person in the photo and video released by the rebel group was Mehrtens.
“Based on the visible features, it is true that the photos and videos circulating on social media are of the Susi Air pilot, namely Captain Philip Mark Mehrtens,” Saleh said in a statement.
In the video, Mehrtens repeated the pro-independece group’s demand for the Indonesian military to withdraw from Papua.
“The Papuan military has taken me captive in their fight for Papuan independence. They ask for the Indonesian military to go home, if not I will remain captive and my life is threatened,” Mehrtens said.
Donal Fariz, a lawyer for Susi Air, also said the person in the video was Mehrtens.
‘Return to the motherland’s fold’ Early indications from comments on the government’s and the rebels’ side do not bode well.
TPNPB spokesman Sebby Sambom said that if Jakarta insisted on negotiating without involving the international community, there would be no talks.
“We don’t want to deal with the Indonesian government only,” Sambom said.
Meanwhile, Indonesian military spokesman Colonel Herman Taryaman called the rebel group’s demand for Indonesia to withdraw from Papua impossible to fulfill and “absurd”.
“In fact, we hope that their group will come to their senses and return to the motherland’s fold,” Taryaman said.
He added that New Zealand Embassy staff had met with Lieutenant General I. Nyoman Cantiasa, the commander of the joint military and police operation in Papua.
“They basically stated that the most important thing is that Philip is safe. Secondly, they asked us to have a medical team and medical equipment on stand-by in the event Philip is evacuated,” Nyoman said.
Earlier hostage-taking
In 2021, another Susi Air pilot from New Zealand and his three passengers were held by pro-independence rebels in Papua’s Puncak regency but were released after two hours.
Security forces were trying to locate Mehrtens by conducting air and land surveillance, Colonel Herman Taryaman said.
“We have not been able to pinpoint Captain Philip’s location yet,” he said.
Violence and tensions in Papua, a region that makes up the western half of New Guinea island, have intensified in recent years.
The region has a history of human rights violations by Indonesian security forces and police. Papuan pro-independence rebels also have been accused of attacking civilians.
In 1963, Indonesian forces invaded Papua, a former Dutch colony like Indonesia, and annexed it. In 1969, the United Nations sponsored a referendum where only 1025 people voted.
Despite accusations that the vote was a farce, the UN recognised the outcome, effectively endorsing Indonesia’s control over Papua.
Tria Dianti reports for BenarNews. Arie Firdaus in Jakarta also contributed to this report.
The University of the South Pacific’s vice-chancellor and president, Professor Pal Ahluwalia, was given a rousing welcome at Nadi International Airport today returning to Fiji from exile.
He returned two years after he and wife Sandra Price were detained and deported by the former FijiFirst government for allegedly breaching provisions of the Immigration Act.
“We have arrived in Nadi. What a fabulous reception. USP staff, students and so many well wishers to meet us fills out hearts with joy. Beautiful singing and prayer. Thank you Fiji,” he wrote on Twitter, as the couple were received by USP deputy vice-chancellors and vice-presidents, Professor Jito Vanualailai and Dr Giulio Paunga.
USP Council Secretariat representative Totivi Bokini-Ratu, Lautoka campus director Pramila Devi, and representatives from the USP Students Association, USP Staff Association and Association of the USP Staff were also at the airport to greet Professor Ahluwalia.
“I’m so humbled to see everyone. It is an absolute joy to be back and an opportunity for us to continue serving USP,” he said in a statement.
We have arrived in Nadi. What a fabulous reception. USP Staff, Students and so many well wishers to meet us fills our hearts with joy. Beautiful singing and prayers. Thank you Fiji.
“The support from staff, students and regional governments has just been incredible.
“It was so beautiful to see how much our staff fought. The fight wasn’t just for me; it was for a bigger cause and I’m just a catalyst for the bigger change they wanted to see.”
Next step for students
Professor Ahluwalia said the next step was to work with his senior management team to ensure they got the best out of their students and the region.
He is expected to visit the USP Pacific TAFE Centre in Namaka and Lautoka campus today with other events and meetings scheduled for the coming week, including a launch of the Alumni Relationship Management Service, and the welcoming of international students.
Professor Ahluwalia and wife Sandra Price at the Nadi International Airport today. Image: USP/Wansolwara
Professor Ahluwalia and his wife’s controversial exile from Fiji followed months of increased tensions between USP and the previous government over allegations of financial mismanagement and corruption.
With the new People’s Alliance-led coalition government in power after ousting the FijiFirst administration in the 2022 general election, Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka has vowed to right the wrongs of the past administration.
Last December, he declared that Professor Ahluwalia and Dr Padma Lal, widow of another exiled academic, the late Professor Brij Lal, were free to enter the country.
“I am ready to meet Dr Lal and Professor Ahluwalia personally. I will apologise on behalf of the people of Fiji for the way they were treated,” Rabuka had said.
Working from Samoa
He said prohibition orders against Professor Ahluwalia, Dr Lal and the late Professor Lal, were “unreasonable and inhumane”, and “should never have been made”.
Professor Ahluwalia has been working out of USP’s Samoa campus since 2021, and said he looked forward to working with the coalition government to strengthen the relationship between USP and Fiji.
“As a regional institution, USP will continue to serve its island countries — particularly Fiji — and work hard to shape Pacific futures,” Professor Ahluwalia said.
Meanwhile, USP and the Fijian government are expected to conduct a joint traditional welcome ceremony for Professor Ahluwalia, followed by a thanksgiving service at the Japan-Pacific ICT Multipurpose Theatre, Laucala campus next Tuesday.
Geraldine Panapasa is editor-in-chief of the University of the South Pacific’s journalism newspaper and website Wansolwara News. Republished in collaboration with the USP journalism programme.
Former Vanuatu Prime Minister Joe Natuman says allowing Indonesia — by former Prime Minister Sato Kilman — into the Melanesian Spearhead Group was a mistake.
“We (Melanesians) have a moral obligation to support West Papua’s struggle in line with our forefathers’ call, including first former Prime Minister Father Walter Lini, Chief Bongmatur, and others,” he said.
“Vanuatu has cut its canoe over 40 years ago and successfully sailed into the Ocean of Independence and in the same spirit, we must help our brothers and sisters in the United Liberation Movement of West Papua (ULMWP) to cut their canoe, raise the sail and also help them sail into the same future for the Promised Land.”
The former prime minister graced the West Papua lobby team on its appointment with the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Jotham Napat, this week when he agreed to an interview to confirm his support for the West Papua struggle as above and admitted the mistake.
During their discussions with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Natuman thanked the Minister and Minister for Climate Change Ralph Regenvanu and Prime Minister Ishmael Kalsakau for their united stand for the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) to achieve full membership into the Melanesian Spearhead Group.
“When we created MSG, it was a political organisation before economic and other interests were added,” he said.
“After our independence on July 30 of 1980, heads of different political parties in New Caledonia started visiting Port Vila to learn how to stand up strong to challenge France for their freedom.
Political umbrella
“I joined the team this week because I was involved under then Prime Minister Father Walter Lini. We advised the political leaders of New Caledonia at the time to form one political umbrella organisation to argue their case, and they formed the FLNKS (Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front).
“We created ULMWP in 2014 here in Port Vila, to become your political umbrella organisation. After the child that we helped to create, we must continue to work with it to develop it towards its destiny.”
Like the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Natuman challenged both the government and the lobby team to continue to press for ULMWP victory with all MSG leaders unanimously voting West Papua in as the latest full member of MSG.
“But now that Indonesia is inside, it is not interested in the ULMWP issue but its own interests. So we must be careful here.
“We have passed resolutions regarding human rights and the United Nations have agreed for the UN Human Rights Commissioner to visit West Papua to report on the situation on the ground and Jakarta has blocked the visit,” he said.
Natuman challenged the government over whether to allow Indonesia to continue to behave towards MSG by ignoring the ULMWP demands.
Meanwhile, then Prime Minister Kilman had the same reasoning for allowing Indonesia into the MSG believing that the occupier would sit on the same table to be allowed to discuss the West Papua dilemma.
However, it did not work out.
Hopes for Fiji
In the latest development, Natuman thinks new Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka is not going to govern in the same manner as former prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama, now that he had ordered the revival of Fiji’s Great Council of Chiefs which his predecessor had revoked.
“I also think Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare (of the Solomon Islands) still stands in support of ULMWP. I think the Foreign Affairs Minister of Papua New Guinea has to talk to Prime Minister James Marape,” he added.
In his opinion, based on Vanuatu Foreign Minister Napat’s briefing to the lobby team this week, the MSG Secretariat seemed to “follow every line to the book” regarding the ULMWP application for full membership of MSG.
“There is no need for the Committee of Officials to control the processes towards a positive outcome to the ULMWP Application. I suggest that you recommend to the Prime Minister to revisit the process,” Natuman suggested.
“At the Leaders’ Summit, it is the (MSG) Leaders who decide what to talk about in their meeting and do not allow ‘smol-smol man’ to dictate to you what or how you should talk about in your meeting.”
In addition, he said he was a member of an Eminent Group made up of Ambassador Kaliopate Tavola of Fiji, Roch Wamytan of FLNKS of New Caledonia and Solomons Prime Minister Sogavare who produced an MSG Report.
“In the report we suggested that it was good that Indonesia came in and I personally recommended a Melanesian Nakamal Concept which in Polynesia and Fiji, it is called Talanoa (process),” Natuman continued.
Independent chair
“This would allow Indonesia to sit down within a Melanesian umbrella to discuss their issues. Such a session should be chaired by an independent person such as a church leader or chief.
“The report is there and it should allow Indonesia to talk about their human right issues. Indonesia could use the avenue to hear ULMWP’s view on their proposed autonomy in West Papua.”
Indonesia could also bring in their other supporters to place their issues on the table for discussion.
Foreign Affairs Minister Napat recommended his “top to the bottom” approach instead of from a bottom up approach, allowing the ‘smol-smol man’ to dictate to the leaders how to make their decisions.
Len Garae is a Vanuatu Daily Post journalist. Republished with permission.
On Friday 10 February 2023, it will be one month since the Papua Governor Lukas Enembe was “kidnapped” at a local restaurant during his lunch hour by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and security forces.
The crisis began in September 2022, when Governor Enembe was named a suspect by the KPK and summoned by Indonesia’s Mobile Brigade Corps, known as BRIMOB, after being accused of receiving bribes worth one million rupiah (NZ$112,000).
Since the governor’s kidnapping, Indonesian media have been flooded with images and videos of his arrest, his deportation, being handcuffed in Jakarta while in an orange KPK (prisoner) uniform, and his admission to a heavily armed military hospital.
Besides the public display of power, imagery, morality and criminality with politically loaded messages, the governor, his family, and his lawyers are still enmeshed in Jakarta’s health and legal system, while his health continues to steadily deteriorate.
His first KPK investigation on January 12 failed because of his declining health, among other factors such as insufficient or no concrete evidence to be found to date.
During the first examination, the governor’s attorney, Petrus Bala Pattyona, stated his client was asked eight questions by the KPK investigators. However, all eight questions, Petrus stressed, had no substance to relevant matters involved — the alegations against the governor.
None of the questions from the KPK were included in the investigation material, according to the attorney. Enembe’s health condition was the first question asked by the investigator, Petrus told Kompas TV.
“First, he was asked if Mr Lukas was in good enough health to be examined? His answer was that he was unwell and that he had had a stroke,” Petrus said.
But the examination continued, and he was asked about the history of his education, work, and family. According to the governor’s attorney, during the lengthy examination no questions were asked about the examination material.
To date, authorities in Jakarta continue to question the governor and others suspected of involvement in the alleged corruption case, including his wife and son.
Meanwhile, the governor’s health crisis is causing a massive rift between the governor’s side, civil society groups and government authority.
Governor Lukas Enembe pictured with two Indonesian presidents – with current President Joko Widodo (top left) and with previous President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (top right). Bottom left the Governor is quoted saying: “I will plant a tree of new life and new civilisation”. Image” Montage: YK/APR
Fresh update
“The governor of Papua is critically ill today but earlier the KPK still forced an examination and wanted to take him to the Gatot Subroto Hospital, owned by the Indonesian Army; the governor refused and requested treatment in Singapore instead” said the governor’s family last Thursday (February 2), after trying to report the mistreatment case to the country’s Human Rights Commission, who have been dispersed by the Indonesian military and police.
It appears, they continued, that the Indonesian Medical Association (IDI) and Gatot Subroto Hospital did not transparently disclose the real results of the Papua governor’s medical examination.
Instead, they hid and kept the governor’s illness quiet. As a result, Lukas Enembe was forced to undergo an investigation by the KPK.
Angered by this treatment, the governor’s team said, “only those who are unconscious and dead to humanity can insist that the governor is well.”
They said that IDI, Gatot Subroto Hospital and KPK had “played with the pain and the life” of Papua’s Governor Lukas Enembe.
“Still, the condition hurts. The governor complained that in KPK custody, there was no appropriate bedding for sick people. Earlier today, the governor’s family complained about the situation to the country’s human rights commission, but they refused to accept it.
“That’s where the governor is, and that’s where we are now. They even call for security forces to be deployed at the human rights office as if we were committing crimes there,” the governor’s family stated.
“Save Lukas Enembe and save Papua. Papuans must wake up and not be caught off guard. They keep the governor in KPK’s facilities even though he is very ill,” the statement continued.
Grave concerns
In his statement, Gabriel Goa, board chair at the Indonesian Law and Human Rights Institute, criticised the Human Rights Commission. He said he questioned the integrity of the chair of the National Human Rights Commission, Atnike Nova Sigiro, for not independently investigating the violations of the rights of the governor by the KPK.
Goa stated that he had “never seen anything like this” in his 20 years of handling cases related to violations of human rights.
This was the first he had seen the office of Human Rights Commission involving security forces attending victims seeking help. The kind of treatment that is being perpetrated against Indigenous Papuans is indeed of a particular nature.
Goa warned: “If this is ignored, and something bad happens to Governor Lukas Enembe, the Human Rights Commission and KPK Indonesia will be held responsible, since victims, their families, and their legal companions have made efforts as stipulated by law.”
Despite these grave concerns for the Governor’s health and rights violations, the deputy chair of the KPK, Alexander Marwata, stated: “Governor Enembe is well enough to undergo the KPK’s investigation and doesn’t need to go to Singapore.
“The Indonesian authority says Gatot Subroto Hospital and IDI can handle his health needs, institutions the governor and his family refused to use because of the psychological trauma of the whole situation.”
Images of the harsh treatment of Governor Lukas Enembe after the KPK “kidnapped” him on 10 January 2023. Image: Montage 2/YK/APR
‘Inhumane’ treatment of Enembe condemned
In response to Jakarta’s mistreatment of Governor Enembe, Papua New Guinea’s Vanimo-Green MP Belden Namah condemned Jakarta’s “cruel behaviour”.
Namah, whose electorate borders Papua province, said it was very difficult to ignore this issue because of Namah’s people’s traditional and family ties that extend beyond Vanimo into West Papua.
According to the PNG Post-Courier, he urged the United Nations to investigate the issue, particularly the manner in which Governor Enembe was being treated by the Indonesian government.
The way PNG’s Namah asked to be investigated is the way in which Jakarta treats the leaders of West Papua — cunning deceptions that undermine their efforts to deliver their own legal and moral goods and services for Papuans.
This manner of conduct was criticised even last September when the drama began.
Responding to the way KPK conducted itself, Dr Roy Rening, a member of the governor’s legal team, stated the governor’s designation as a suspect had been prematurely determined.
This was due to the lack of two crucial pieces of evidence necessary to establish the legitimacy of the charge within the existing framework of Indonesia’s legal procedural code.
Dr Rening also argued that the KPK’s behaviour in executing their warrant, turned on a dime. The governor was unaware that he was a suspect, and that he was already under investigation by the KPK when he was summoned to appear.
In his letter, Dr Rening explained that Governor Enembe had never been invited to clarify and/or appear as a witness pursuant to the Criminal Procedure Code. The KPK instead declared the governor as a suspect based on the warrant letters, which had also changed dates and intent.
Jakarta’s deceptive strategies targeting Papuan leaders
There appears to be a consistent pattern of Indonesia’s behaviour behind the scenes as well — setting traps and plotting that ultimately led to the kidnapping of the governor, the same manner as when West Papua’s sovereignty was kidnapped 61 years ago by using and manipulating the UN mechanism on decolonisation.
As thousands of Papuans guarded the governor’s residence, Jakarta employed two cunning ruses to kidnap the governor, the humanist approach and what the Jakarta elites now proudly refer to as “nasi bungkus” (“pack of rice strategy”).
A visit by Firli Bahuri, chair of KPK, to the governor in Koya Jayapura, Papua, on 3 November 2022, was perceived as being “humane”, but it was a false approach intended to gain trust, thereby weakening the Papuan support for their final attack on the governor.
Recently leaked information from the governor’s side alleged that the chair had advised the Governor to put his health first, allowing him to travel to Singapore for routine medical check-ups as he had in the past.
KPK, however, stated that it had never said such things to Governor Enembe during that meeting.
With hindsight, what seemed to have resulted from the KPK chief’s visit to the Governor’s house had “loosened” the governor’s defence.
This then, processed by Indonesian intelligence began keeping a daily count of the number of Papuan civilians guarding the governor’s house by calculating the number of “nasi bungkus” purchased to feed the hungry guardians of the Governor.
Moreover, critics say information was fabricated regarding an alleged plan for the ill Governor to flee overseas through his highland village in Mamit a few days prior to the kidnapping which would justify this act.
Kidnapping, sending into exile, imprisoning, and psychologically torturing of Papuan leaders within the Indonesia’s legal system may be part of Indonesia’s overall strategy in maintaining its control over West Papua as its frontier settler colony.
In order to achieve Jakarta’s objectives, eliminating the power and hope emerging from West Papuan leaders appears to have been the key strategy.
Victor Yeimo’s fate in Indonesia
Victory Yeimo, a Papuan independence figure facing similar health problems, has also been placed under the Indonesian judiciary with no clear outcome to date.
He faces charges of treason and incitement for his alleged role in anti-racial protests that turned into riots in 2019, following the attack on Papuan students in Surabaya by Indonesian militia.
Yeimo provided a key insight into how this colonial justice system operated in a short video that recently appeared on Twitter. He explained:
“Although I have not been charged, but I have already been charged with the law, as if I wanted to be punished, so I have been sentenced. It appears as if the decision has already been made. Ah, this seems unfair to me and is a lesson to the Papuan people. You [Indonesia] decide whether or not there is legal justice in this country?
“Does the law in this country provide any guarantees to Papuans so that we feel we are proud to live in the Republic of Indonesia? If the situation is like this, I am confused.”
Tragically, choices and decisions of existence for Papuan leaders like Governor Enembe and Victor Yeimo are made by a shadowy figure, camouflaged in a human costume, incapable of feeling the pain of another.
Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic/activist who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University and who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Dr Sitiveni Halapua, former deputy leader of Tonga’s Democratic Movement, has died aged 74.
Born on February 13, 1949, he was a respected academic, a pioneer of Tonga’s democratic reforms and pioneer of a conflict resolution system based on traditional practices.
Halapua earned a doctorate in economics from the University of Kent in the UK and went on to lecture in economics at the University of the South Pacific in Suva, Fiji.
He was director of the Pacific Islands Development Programme at the East-West Centre at the University of Hawai’i for more than 20 years.
It was while working at the East-West Centre that he developed a conflict-resolution system based on the Polynesian practice of Talanoa, known as the “Talanoa conflict-resolution” system.
It has been used in the Cook Islands, Fiji and Tonga.
In November 2005, Dr Halapua was appointed to the National Committee for Political Reform, aimed at producing a plan for the democratic reform of Tonga.
Blame over report
In October 2006 the commission recommended a fully elected Parliament. He later accused Prime Minister Feleti Sevele’s of hijacking the report and blamed this for the 2006 Nuku’alofa riots, which destroyed much of central Nuku’alofa.
Dr Halapua was elected to Parliament as a People’s Representative for Tongatapu 3 in the 2010 elections.
Four years later, he was ousted as candidate for the Democratic Party after party leader and Prime Minister ‘Akilisi Pohiva’s newspaper, Kele’a, accused him of being at the centre of a plot to seek the premiership.
As Kaniva News reported at the time, Kele’a claimed that three Democratic Party members, including People’s Representatives Semisi Tapueluelu and Sione Taione planned in 2012 to replace Pohiva with fellow parliamentarian Dr Sitiveni Halapua.
Kele’a alleged that the plan was made in 2012 when the Democratic government lodged a motion of no confidence against the Prime Minister, Lord Tu’ivakano.
Relations between Pohiva and Halapua had been strained since October 2013 when Dr Halapua abstained from voting for a bill that would have let the Prime Minister be popularly elected.
Popular bill lost
The bill was laid before the Tongan Parliament by Democrat MP Dr ‘Aisake Eke and had received massive support from many of the 17 popular electorates, nine of which elected Democrat Members of Parliament. However, the motion was lost 15-6.
Dr Halapua’s abstention drew strong criticisms from the local media and the Democrats.
Kele’a lashed out at Dr Halapua’s behaviour, with the editor saying he no longer trusted him as one of the front benchers of the party.
Dr Halapua had long been an advocate of what he called Pule’anga Kafataha or “Coalition Government”.
Under the proposal all parliamentarians, whether nobles or commoners, would work together as a coalition.
In 2010 Halapua told Kaniva News that Democratic Party Parliamentarians voting as members of a coalition could elect a noble rather than his party leader, ‘Akilisi Pohiva, but still keep their allegiance to Pohiva and the Democratic Party.
After he was removed as a Democrat candidate, Dr Halapua said he would stand as an independent at the next election, but did not run. He stood unsuccessfully in the 2017 election.
Republished from Kaniva Tonga with permission from the authors.
Another house done, and onto the next . . . Volunteers working in Mount Roskill community over the past few days helping those suffering from Auckland’s flash flood devastation have done us proud.
Tremendous work by everybody. Here are some random photos of our volunteer teams on the job.
New Zealand-based Fijian academic Professor Steven Ratuva says that if the coalition government is strong, resilient and lasts, “this will reflect well as a future model for coalitions in Fiji”.
“It’s a learning process for a new government and a new democracy and we expect teething problems in the beginning and hopefully we settle down quickly and move on,” said the director of the University of Canterbury’s Macmillan Brown Centre for Pacific Studies.
However, he said that if it collapses, it would “signal a rather dark future of political instability for the country”.
Professor Ratuva said failure would “send out a negative message to investors, tourists and the rest of the world”.
“Thus it is imperative to make sure that the coalition works and for this the politicians need to be politically smart, strategic, humble and empathetic in their dealings and approaches with each other for the sake of the country, beyond the narrow political party agenda,” he said.
Professor Ratuva was referring to recent claims by Sodelpa general secretary Lenaitasi Duru that senior party members were unhappy with the lack of Sodelpa appointees to government statutory boards by the coalition government.
However, Sodelpa leader Viliame Gavoka said the party remained committed to the deal it struck with the People’s Alliance (PA) and National Federation Party (NFP) that resulted in the formation of the coalition Government.
‘Vast majority’ in support
He said the “vast majority” of the Fijian people wanted the coalition government to prevail.
Professor Ratuva said Sodelpa would need to innovatively address its internal issues as a party while ensuring that the coalition government worked for the sake of the country.
“Fiji’s current coalition experiment has great implications for the future of Fiji’s democracy because governments in the foreseeable future under our constitutionally-prescribed proportional representation (PR) system will most likely be in the form of coalitions,” he said.
He said a large number of countries which used the PR system had coalition governments.
“Thus we have to make sure that this coalition works by being strategic and smart about having a watertight agreement between the coalition partners as well as making everyone happy through give and take compromises.
“This is challenging, especially when you still have fractures and differences within Sodelpa, an important partner.
Need for innovation
“Sodelpa will need to innovatively address its internal issues as a party while ensuring that the coalition works for the sake of the country.”
The PR system was introduced by the Bainimarama-led regime which overthrew the democratically elected Laisenia Qarase government in December 2006.
The 51 members of Parliament after the 2014 General Election were elected from a single nationwide constituency by open list proportional representation with an electoral threshold of five percent.
The seats were allocated using the d’Hondt method.
Felix Chaudharyis a Fiji Times journalist. Republished with permission.
Breakfast they say, is the most important meal of the day.
But last Wednesday it was possibly also the most dangerous. Because that’s when many people were likely to be reading The Fiji Times and choking over their corn flakes.
They could have been reading more pontification from the former attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum about “constitutionalism” and “rule of law” and “the embodiment of the values and principles surrounding constitutions” . . . etc.
I am not often at a loss for words. But the sheer brazenness of someone who, in the course of nearly 16 years in government, paid little regard to any of these things, brought me pretty close.
Last weekend Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum gave a rambling press conference complaining about all manner of things the new coalition government was doing. I was so irritated I put out a long statement debunking the so-called “breaches of the Constitution” he was alleging.
But the man doesn’t give up.
He is clearly unmoved by any embarrassment he may feel about having first accepted a Constitutional Offices Commission appointment that got him kicked out of Parliament under the Constitution he drafted; and then resigning the COC position when he realised he could not do that job and also be the FijiFirst party general secretary.
All in the space of three days. That’s the legal equivalent of shooting yourself in both feet.
So let’s begin by talking about “rule of law”, because I am beginning to wonder if anyone in the FijiFirst party even understands what it means.
Rule of law Let’s begin with what it does not mean. Rule of law does not mean “I made the laws, so I rule”. Rule of law is a much more complicated idea than that. Many people have tried to define it, in many different ways.
For those of us who are interested in it, it’s one of those things you sort of know when you see. But a central point of it, I think, is the idea that the law is more important than the people who make it or exercise power under it.
So that means that our rulers — like the people they make the rules for — must respect it in the same way that we have to. Lord Denning, a famous British judge (millennials — look up his role in Fiji’s history) repeated (and made famous) the words of the 18th century scholar, Thomas Fuller: “Be you ever so high, the law is above you.”
For more than a decade, the government of which Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum was part of, paid little heed to this idea. It followed the law when it suited them, but ignored it when it didn’t suit them.
Let’s assume, for the moment, that he believed that the 2006 military coup (which the grovelling Fiji Sun once memorably described as “a change in direction of the government”) was lawful, together with the military government which followed.
That government continued to tell us it would follow the 1997 Constitution. But in April 2009 Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum could no longer believe that the military government was lawful. Because, in a case brought by deposed by deposed Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase, the Fiji Court of Appeal clearly told him that it wasn’t.
If you believed in rule of law, you would accept what the court had told you, quit your post and allow the lawful government to return, as the court required. He did not. Instead, he and his government decided that the 1997 Constitution had become inconvenient.
So they just trashed it. This was not rule of law. Aiyaz and the then government had instead decided that they were above the law.
The new constitution Fast forward to 2012 and the process of a new constitution. We were told (in a pompous government media statement on 12 March 2012) that the then government was “looking to the future of Fiji and all Fijians”.
“During the process of formulating a genuine Fijian constitution,” we were told, “every Fijian will have the right to put their ideas before the constitutional commission and have the draft constitution debated and discussed by the Constituent Assembl . . .
“As the process continues with the Constitution Commission and the Constituent Assembly all Fijians will have a voice.”
What actually happened?
The well-known constitutional scholar Professor Yash Ghai was flown in to chair a new constitutional commission. His commission travelled around the country, gathering the views of the people on what a new constitution should say.
Hardly a perfectly democratic process, but better than nothing. The Ghai Commission drafted a new constitution. But the government didn’t like it. So much for the “voices” of Fijians. Out it went — constitution, commission and all. Six hundred printed copies of the draft constitution were dumped into a fire.
Professor Ghai was sent packing. Instead we were handed the 2013 Constitution, pretty much from nowhere. No “Constituent Assembly”. Nobody “had a voice”. So, was that all a process Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum might call (his word) “constitutionalism”?
Did things get any better?
So, at least the new Constitution, and the elections of 2014, were a new start. Maybe we could expect the new elected government, of which Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum was chief legal adviser, to begin thinking about “rule of law” and “constitutionalism” and “embodying values and principles surrounding constitutions”?
Here’s one more important point about rule of law. It’s not just about the laws which tell you what to do and what not to do. It’s also about the law protecting your rights and freedoms — and protecting what you are allowed to do.
Your rights and freedoms under the 2013 Constitution include your rights of free expression, your rights to assemble and protest, your right to personal liberty — yes, the right not to be locked up at whim — among many others.
They even include the right to “executive and administrative justice” — that is, to be treated fairly by the government and its institutions. So a government that is applying the laws of the land ought to, while applying them (in the words of Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum) “embody the values and principles” of that Constitution.
How, then, were the “values and principles” of our Constitution being embodied when unions were repeatedly being denied the right to assemble and protest? How were they being embodied when under our media laws, journalists were threatened with jail for writing stories which were “against the national interest” (whatever that meant)?
How were the “values and principles” of our Constitution being embodied when public servants lived in permanent fear of arbitrary dismissal?
How were the “values and principles” of our democratic Constitution being embodied when the government passed important laws in Parliament, affecting things like our voting rights, citizenship, our rights to a fair trial and the regulation of political parties, all by surprise, on two days’ notice?
No cell time There was an outcry earlier this week when police, over two days of questioning our former attorney-general, did not put him in a cell overnight. After all, former opposition politicians such as Sitiveni Rabuka, Biman Prasad and Pio Tikoduadua, when taken in for questioning for objecting to bad laws, were not so fortunate.
They got to spend a night in police custody. Why, people asked, was Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum getting special treatment? The answer? He was not getting special treatment. What was actually happening was that — for the first time in many years — the police were applying the law correctly.
If the person you are questioning is not a flight risk, there’s no need to lock him up. He is innocent until proven guilty. His personal freedom is more important than the convenience of the police.
He can sleep in his own bed and come back for more questioning tomorrow.
That would be, in Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum’s words, “embodying the values and principles of the Constitution”. But that is not something his government appeared to extend to its opponents when the police came calling. So I think we all deserve to be spared his lectures on “constitutionalism” for a little while.
Perhaps instead our former attorney-general might find it more valuable to take some time to quietly reflect on how well the governments of which he was part “embodied constitutional values and principles”. He has a total of nearly 16 years to reflect on — and not all of us have forgotten.
That ought to take a little while. And a few of us might then be able to enjoy more peaceful breakfasts.
Richard Naidu is a Suva lawyer and former journalist (although, to be honest, not a big breakfaster). The views in this article are not necessarily the views of The Fiji Times. Republished with permission.
The first time Sitiveni Rabuka was elected into office was more than 30 years ago. Today marks a little over a month since he became Fiji’s Prime Minister for a second time. He catches up with Tagata Pasifika’s John Pulu to discuss his return to office, Fiji’s covid-19 recovery and the investigation of Fiji’s former attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum.
It’s been a busy start for the newly elected leader of Fiji, Sitiveni Rabuka.
And while he’s only held the role for a little over a month, walking into the Prime Minister’s office felt familiar for the leader of the People’s Alliance (PA) party.
“The office dynamics are still the same,” he says.
“It was just like going back to an old car or an old bicycle that you have driven before or ridden before.
“The people are new…[there’s] possible generational difficulties and views but I have not encountered any since the month I came into the office.”
However, his journey into office was not an easy one. After the initial tally of votes at last years’ December election, neither Rabuka nor his predecessor Voreqe Bainimarama had gained a comfortable majority to take Parliament.
Sodelpa (Social Democratic Liberal Party) became the kingmakers, voting to form a coalition with the PA, and they were joined by the National Federation Party (NFP).
Bainimarama out of office
For the first time since 2014, Bainimarama was out of office. Rabuka says they have not spoken since the election.
“There has been no communication since the outcome,” he says.
“It was something I tried to encourage when I was in the opposition and opposition leader, for across-the-floor discussions on matters that affect the nation.
“We grew up in the same profession…we are friends,” Rabuka insists.
Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka talking to Tagata Pasifika . . . returning to office as PM is like “going back to an old car . . . you have driven before”. Image: TP Plus screenshot APR
However, there’s plenty else to keep Rabuka busy at this time.
The coalition trinity means more cooks in the kitchen, but Rabuka is confident that they can work together to lead Fiji.
“I worked with the National Federation Party in 1999. Sodelpa was the party I helped to register,” he recalls.
‘Differences in past’
“There might have been differences in the past but we are still family and it’s only natural for us to come together and work together again.”
They’ve already enacted a number of changes including lifting a ban on a number of Fijians who were exiled by the previous government.
“It’s interesting that many of those returning thought they were on a blacklist,” Rabuka muses.
“When we asked Immigration, Immigration [said] ‘there is no such thing as a blacklist, or anyone being prohibited from coming back’.
“They all came back and they were very happy. But it also reflected the freedom in the atmosphere.”
And speaking of freedom, investigations into former attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum have reportedly been suspended.
Under investigation
According to FBC News, Sayed-Khaiyum was under investigation for allegedly inciting communal antagonism.
Rabuka says Sayed-Khaiyum is a person of interest, but isn’t yet subjected to any prosecution processes at this time.
“But if it develops from there, there might be restrictions on his movement – particularly out of Fiji.”
Public Interest Journalism funded through NZ On Air. Republished from Tagata Pasifika with permission.
Leaders in Aotearoa New Zealand’s Pacific community believe the appointment of the country’s first deputy prime minister of Pacific descent will bring positive change.
Incoming Prime Minister Chris Hipkins — who is taking over the reins from Jacinda Ardern just nine months away from the general elections — chose Carmel Sepuloni as his deputy yesterday.
She also made history 15 years ago when she became New Zealand’s first Tongan MP.
Reverend Setaita Veikune of the Methodist Church of NZ told RNZ Morning Report the Kelston MP’s promotion would serve as an inspiration for the younger generation, particularly girls.
“This is a visible example of what we can achieve and proof that for our people, the sky really is the limit,” she said.
“Carmel being a Tongan, Samoan woman as deputy prime minister, is a profound contribution in my opinion to eliminating negative stereotypes and reducing unconscious bias against us.
“This alone does more for our communities than many realise, such as reducing advancement barriers, which are biased against us in different spaces.”
Historic moment
Pacific community leader Sir Collin Tukuitonga told Morning Report this was a historic moment not just for their community, but the whole country.
“I think it’s a statement of ourselves as a nation that perhaps we’re maturing and being serious about inclusivity.”
Sepuloni’s experiences and networks in Pasifika and Māoridom communities would bring benefits as she supported Hipkins’ leadership, he said.
Veikune hoped Sepuloni — who currently holds portfolios for social development, Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC), and arts, culture and heritage — would work to bring the Pasifika community forward with her.
“I find her very strong in her quiet and humble way . . . She brings strength, courage, and determination, to do what is required, and I believe her humility is something that will take us forward greatly.”
In an interview with E-Tangata in 2017, Sepuloni said she had thought of entering politics from a young age, with the ambition of helping create a fairer society.
“Interestingly, growing up — and friends still remind me of this — I used to say that this is what I would do. That I would be a politician. And they found it so funny at the time,” she said.
‘Unfairness around us’
“We can see the unfairness unfolding around us, whether it be health statistics or educational outcomes. Pay inequality. All of those things that we see in our own lives, our families’ lives, and our communities. So, I think it’s really difficult not to feel political in some way.”
As Minister of Social Development for the past five years, Sepuloni has been steadily reforming the system via measures including raising benefit levels, adopting a less punitive approach to sanctions and overseeing a review of the Working for Families welfare scheme.
Writing in the Herald at the time of ram raids last August, Sepuloni reflected on her time as an at-risk youth educator with tertiary students.
“I’ve seen what works and what doesn’t, and punitive approaches to young people – or people in general, really – already experiencing complex challenges don’t. I liken it to pushing someone over who is wanting and trying to get up, while yelling at them to get up.”
But in 2021, a report from Child Poverty Action Group found almost three years on from the Welfare Expert Advisory Group’s 42 recommendations for overhauling the system, none had been fully implemented.
Sir Collin Tukuitonga . . . “Perhaps she will have a bit more sway and influence in getting . . . things done.” Image: University of Auckland/RNZ Pacific
Sir Collin said it would be tough to lay all of the blame on Sepuloni alone — it was more complex than that.
Building consensus
“She would have to build consensus from among a number of parties to get those implemented, she has moved on some of the recommendations but I think it’s a bit rough to just put it on her.
“There will be expectations and some would say she’s now in a deputy prime minister role that perhaps she will have a bit more sway and influence in getting these things done.
“There’s no question there are serious social issues in our communities that need to be addressed, I expect that Carmel would need to lead that process of building consensus and acting on those priorities.”
While Sir Collin acknowledged he was among those who criticised the government in the early days of the covid-19 pandemic over the “sluggish and slow” response to the outbreak in Pacific communities specifically, he said they got it right in the end.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Churches across Tonga have commemorated the victims and the struggles endured as a result of the eruption of the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai volcano on 15 January 2022.
The eruption, the largest atmospheric explosion recorded during modern history, was estimated to be hundreds of times more powerful than the atomic bomb that destroyed Hiroshima.
It generated a huge sonic boom that could be heard as far away as Alaska — more than 9000km away.
Hundreds packed the Cathedral of St Mary in Nuku’alofa — one of the largest churches in Tonga — where sermons were delivered, commending Tongans for showing resilience over the past year.
“All the different churches are commemorating,” said Monsignor Vicar Lutoviko Finau, who overlooked the service at the cathedral.
“We’re coming together to thank God, and to encourage one another,” he said.
“Listening to the various people on the radio across this week, there’s been a lot of conviction from people that January 15th was a miracle.”
A conviction that is shared by vicar Lutoviko himself. The cathedral he oversees sits less than 100m away from Nuku’alofa’s waterfront. Remarkably, the church suffered little damage, thanks in part to a reef system entrenching Nuku’alofa’s bay area.
“I was with parishioners cleaning up this place, preparing for the liturgy on Sunday … all of a sudden I heard the big bang. We took off right away because we knew there would be a tsunami . . . I took my family and went to higher ground.
“I couldn’t sleep that night because I wanted to know what happened to the cathedral because it [was] so close to the seafront,” vicar Lutoviko said.
“When I drove around to the seafront the next day . . . the seawater flooded the area of the cathedral, but there was none inside the cathedral . . . the only damage to the building was from the ashfall which . . . covered it.”
Tongans gather at The Cathedral of St Mary in Nuku’alofa to commemorate the one year anniversary of the eruption and tsunami. Image: Angus Dreaver/RNZ Pacific
Three people died as a result of the eruption, a remarkably low number of deaths considering the magnitude of the disaster. Thousands of Tongans were left homeless as a result, and livelihoods destroyed.
“For myself, today marks history”, said Kilistiana Moala, a member of the congregation.
“Being alive today, I’m just glad to be still here.”
St Mary’s Cathedral in Tonga during a ceremony to mark one year since the eruption on 15 January 2022. Image: Angus Dreaver/RNZ Pacific
For many Tongans, the commemorations did not just pay tribute to Tonga’s survival of the eruption. Less than a month afterwards, the covid-19 pandemic reached Tonga, resulting in the deaths of at least a dozen people and leaving thousands ill.
“It was a very tough year,” Moala said. “I worked with Tonga’s Geological Services, so we did a lot of work in the aftermath of the volcanic eruption.
“After the volcanic eruption, we had to work during lockdowns because of the Covid outbreak . . . it was really hard because we couldn’t be with our families whenever we wanted.”
It is a sentiment shared by Tonga’s Prime Minister Siaosi Sovaleni Hu’akavameiliku, who came into power just days before the eruption. Three months later, he fell ill to covid-19.
“Thank the Lord that we are still here,” Hu’akavemeiliku told RNZ Pacific.
“Moving into a new year, hopefully things will continue to get better.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Following months of legal limbo and a health crisis, Papua Governor Lukas Enembe was arrested this week by the country’s Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) in a dramatic move condemned by critics as a “kidnapping”.
At noon on Tuesday, January 10, Governor Enembe was dining in a local restaurant near the headquarters of Indonesia’s Mobile Brigade Corps, known as Brimob.
After the arrest the Brimob transported him directly to Sentani Theys Eluay airport — an airport named in honour of another prominent Papuan leader who was callously murdered by the same security forces in 2002, not far from where the governor was arrested.
Governor Enembe was immediately flown to Jakarta to arrive at the Army Central Hospital (RSPAD), Gatot Soebroto, Central Jakarta, reports Kompas.com.
In what seems to be a cautiously premeditated arrest, Jakarta targeted Governor Enembe while he was alone and without the support of thousands of Papuans who had barricaded his residence since September last year.
Once the news of his arrest was leaked, supporters attempted to gather in Sentani at the airport, but they were outnumbered by heavy security forces. A few protesters were shot, and several were injured, with one protester dying from his injuries.
1 shot dead, several wounded
Papua Police Public Relations Officer Kombes Ignatius Benny Prabowo said when contacted by Tribunnews.com in Jakarta: “Yes, it is true that someone was shot dead on Tuesday.”
Among those who were shot were Hemanus Kobari Enembe (dead), Neiron Enembe, Kano Enembe, and Segira Enembe.
Surprisingly, they share the same clan names of the governor himself, indicating that only his immediate family were informed of his arrest.
Hemanus Kobari Enembe paid the ultimate price at the hand of Jakarta’s calculated planning and arrest of Papua’s governor.
The crisis began in September 2022, when Governor Enembe was named a suspect by the KPK and summoned by Brimob after it accused him of receiving bribes worth 1 million rupiah (NZ$112,000). This amount was then escalated into a rush of accusations against the governor, including a new allegation that the governor had paid US$39 million to overseas casinos, disclosing details of his private assets such as cars, houses, and properties.
Governor Lukas Enembe . . . ill, but heavily guarded by the BRIMOD police after his arrest. Image: CNN/APR
Voices of prominent Papuan figures
A prominent Papuan, Natalius Pigai, Indonesia’s former human rights commissioner, was interviewed on January 11 by an INews TV news presenter regarding these extra allegations.
“If that’s the case,” Pigai replied, “then why don’t we use these wild extra allegations to investigate all the crimes committed in this country by the country’s top ministerial level, including the children of the president, as a conduit for investigating some of the crimes committed by his office in this country?
“Are we interested in that? Why just target Governor Lukas?”
Papuan Dr Benny Giay . . . his view is that the arrest of Governor Lukas Enembe serves the “interests of the political elite” in Jakarta. Image: Jubi screenshot APR
Papuan public intellectual Dr Benny Giay was seen in a video saying that the arrest of Governor Enembe by the KPK in Jayapura was to serve the interests of Jakarta’s political elite, whom he described as “hardliners” in relation to the power struggle to become number one in Papua’s province.
According to him, Governor Lukas Enembe was a victim of this power struggle.
Dr Socrates Yoman, president of the West Papua Fellowship of Baptist Churches, described the arrest as a “kidnapping”. He said the governor had been arrested illegally, without following any legal procedures — and neither the governor nor legal counsel was informed of his arrest.
According to Dr Yoman, Governor Enembe is ill and in the process of recovering from his illness. Thus, this pressure exerted by the state through the military and police violated Governor Enembe’s basic rights to health and humanity.
The behaviour of the state through BRIMOB constituted a crime against humanity or a gross violation of human rights because the governor was arrested during lunchtime without an arrest warrant and while he was unwell, he said.
“The governor is not a terrorist — he was elected Governor of Papua by the Papuan people.
“This kidnapping shows that the nation or country has no law. The country is controlled by people who have lost their humanity, opting instead for animalistic rage and a senseless lust for violence.
“Our goal is to restore their humanity so that they can see other human beings as human beings and become whole human beings,” said Dr Yoman.
The governor’s health
The governor’s health has deteriorated since he was banned from traveling to Singapore for regular medical aid since September last year.
The 23 November 2022 letter from the Singaporean doctors appealing for Governor Enembe’s medical evacuation . . . ignored by the Indonesian authorities. Image: APR screenshot
Last October, Governor Enembe received two visits from Singapore medical specialists who have been treating him for a number of years.
Despite these visits, his health has continued to deteriorate, which led Singapore’s medical specialists to send a letter in November to authorities in Indonesia requesting that the governor be airlifted to Mount Elizabeth hospital.
The letter from Royal Healthcare in Singapore said:
“We have treated Governor Lukas remotely with routine blood tests, regular zoom consults and monitoring of his glucose and blood pressure levels since November 1, 2022. However, his condition has deteriorated rapidly the last week. His renal function is at a critical range (5.75mg/dl), and he may require dialysis sooner than later. His blood pressure is hovering 190-200/80-100 increasing his risk of morbidity and mortality. He has been advised on immediate evacuation to Singapore with direct admission to Mount Elizabeth Novena Hospital.”
The letters were ignored, and the sick governor was arrested and taken to a hospital in Jakarta, where he had previously refused to go.
Governor Enembe had previously written to KPK requesting that he receive urgent medical treatment in Singapore. Papuan police chiefs and KPK members were asked to accompany him, but this did not happen.
On November 30, 2022, Firli Bahuri, Chairman of KPK, visited the governor at his barricaded residence in Koya Jayapura, Papua, in what appeared to be a humane approach.
But what happened on Tuesday indicates that KPK had already decided to arrest him and take him to the Indonesian capital of Jakarta — almost 4500 km from his home town.
Many Papuan figures who go to Jakarta return home in coffins. Papuan protesters did not want their leader to be taken out of Papua, partly due to this fear.
Despite these protests, letters, and requests, Jakarta completely disregarded the will of the people and of the governor himself.
The plot to kidnap Governor Enembe appears to have been well planned over a period of four months since September, providing enough space for the situation in Papua to calm down and allowing the governor to leave his barricaded house alone without his Papuan “special forces”.
It was during the lunch hour of noon on Tuesday that KPK targeted him in a cunningly calculated manner.
Governor’s image in social media
Governor Enembe is portrayed in the Indonesia’s national narrative as a representative of the so-called “poor and backward” majority of Papuans, while portraying him as a man of a lavish lifestyle, owning properties and cars, and with great wealth.
Comments on social media are flooded with a common theme — portraying Papua’s governor as a “criminal”, with some even calling for his “execution”.
Some social media comments emerging from those fighting for West Papua’s liberation are echoing these themes by claiming that Governor Enembe’s case has nothing to do with the Free Papua Movement– his problem is with Jakarta only as he is a “colonial puppet ruler”.
It is true that Lukas Enembe is governor of Indonesian settler colonial provinces. However, Papuans have failed to understand the big picture — the ultimate fate of West Papua itself.
What would happen if West Papua remains part of Indonesia for the next 20-50 years?
Our failure to see the big picture by both Papuans and Indonesians, as well as the international community, is a result of Jakarta fabrication that West Papua is merely a national sovereignty issue for Indonesia. That is the crux of that fatal error.
The isolation of the governor from the rest of the Papuans as a “corruptor” and other dehumanising labels are designed to destroy Papuans’ self-esteem, stripping them of their pride, dignity, and self-respect.
The images and videos of the governor’s arrest, deportation, handcuffing in Jakarta in KPK uniform, and his admission to the military hospital while surrounded by heavily armed security forces are psychologically intimidating to Papuans.
Through brutal silence, politically loaded imagery has been used to convey a certain message:
“See what has happened to your respected leader, the big chief of the Papuan tribes; he is no longer a person. Jakarta still has the final say in what happens to all of you.”
Papuans are facing a highly choreographed state-sponsored terror campaign that shows no signs of abating.
For Papuans, the new year of 2023 should be a time of hope, new dreams, and new lives, but this has been marred once again by the arrest and kidnapping of a well-known and popular Papuan figure, as well as the death of a member of the governor’s family on Tuesday.
As human miseries continue to unfold in the Papuan homeland, Jakarta continues to conduct business as usual, pretending nothing is happening in West Papua while beating the drum of “development, prosperity, and progress” for the betterment of the backward Papuans.
With such prolonged tragedies, it is imperative that the old theories, terminologies, and paradigms that govern this brutal state of affairs be challenged.
A new paradigm is needed
The very foundation of our thinking between West Papua and Indonesia must be re-examined within the framework of what Tunisian writer, Albert Memmie, described as “coloniser and colonised”, when examining French treatment of colonised Tunisians, who emerged concurrent with Franz Fanon, the leading thinker of black experience in white, colonised Algeria.
The works of these thinkers provide insight into how the world of colonisers and colonised operates with its psychopathological manipulations in an unjust racially divided system of coloniser control.
These great decolonisation literature treasures will help Papuans to connect the dots of this last frontier to a bigger picture of centuries of war against colonised original peoples around the world, some of which were obliterated (Tasmania), able to escape (Algeria), or escaped but are still trying to reorganise themselves (Haiti).
Therefore, the coloniser and colonised paradigm is a useful mental framework to view Jakarta’s settler colonial activities and how Papuans (colonised) are continuously being lied to, manipulated, dissected, remade and destroyed — from all sides — in order to prevent them from uniting against the entity that threatens their very existence.
The real culprits in West Papua and proper Papuan justice
Most ordinary Papuans are unable to gain access to information regarding who exploits their natural resources, how much they are making, who receives the most benefits and how or why.
But Jakarta is too busy displaying Governor Enembe’s personal affairs and wild allegations in headline news — his entire existence is placed on public display, as an object of humiliation, just as the messianic Jesus was crucified on a Roman cross in order to convince Galilean followers that their beloved leader failed.
Let us not forget, however, that it was this publicly humiliated and crucified Jesus who forever changed the imperial world order and human history.
If true justice is to be delivered to colonised Papuans, then Papuans must put the Dutch on trial for abandoning them 60 years ago, and then hold the United Nations and the United States responsible for selling them, to Indonesia, 60 years ago.
In addition to arresting all international capitalist bandits that are exploiting West Papua under the disguise of multinational corporations, Indonesia should also be arrested for its crimes against Papuans, dating back over 61 years.
However, the question remains… who will deliver this proper justice for the colonised Papuans? Jakarta has certainly set itself on a pathological path of arresting, imprisoning, and executing any figure that appears to be a messianic figure to unite these dislocated original tribes for its final war for survival.
Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic/activist who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University and who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Climate change is forcing people around the world to abandon their homes. In the Pacific Islands, rising sea levels are leaving communities facing tough decisions about relocation.
Some are choosing to stay in high-risk areas.
Our research investigated this phenomenon, known as “voluntary immobility”.
The government of Fiji has identified around 800 communities that may have to relocate due to climate change impacts (six have already been moved). One of these is the village on Serua Island, which was the focus of our study.
Coastal erosion and flooding have severely damaged the village over the past two decades. Homes have been submerged, seawater has spoiled food crops and the seawall has been destroyed.
Despite this, almost all of Serua Island’s residents are choosing to stay.
We found their decision is based on “vanua”, an Indigenous Fijian word that refers to the interconnectedness of the natural environment, social bonds, ways of being, spirituality and stewardship of place. Vanua binds local communities to their land.
Residents feel an obligation to stay
Serua Island has historical importance. It is the traditional residence of the paramount chief of Serua province.
A house on Serua Island is submerged by seawater. Image: A Serua Island resident/The Conversation
The island’s residents choose to remain because of their deep-rooted connections, to act as guardians and to meet their customary obligations to sustain a place of profound cultural importance. As one resident explained:
“Our forefathers chose to live and remain on the island just so they could be close to our chief.”
Sau Tabu is the burial site of the paramount chiefs of Serua. Image: Merewalesi Yee/The Conversation
The link to ancestors is a vital part of life on Serua Island. Every family has a foundation stone upon which their ancestors built their house. One resident told us:
“In the past, when a foundation of a home is created, they name it, and that is where our ancestors were buried as well. Their bones, sweat, tears, hard work [are] all buried in the foundation.”
Many believe the disturbance of the foundation stone will bring misfortune to their relatives or to other members of their village.
The ocean that separates Serua Island from Fiji’s main island, Viti Levu, is also part of the identity of men and women of Serua. One man said:
“When you have walked to the island, that means you have finally stepped foot on Serua. Visitors to the island may find this a challenging way to get there. However, for us, travelling this body of water daily is the essence of a being Serua Islander.”
The ocean is a source of food and income, and a place of belonging. One woman said:
“The ocean is part of me and sustains me – we gauge when to go and when to return according to the tide.”
The sea crossing that separates Serua Island from Viti Levu is part of the islanders’ identity. Image: Merewalesi Yee/The Conversation
Serua Islanders are concerned that relocating to Viti Levu would disrupt the bond they have with their chief, sacred sites and the ocean. They fear relocation would lead to loss of their identity, cultural practices and place attachment. As one villager said:
“It may be difficult for an outsider to understand this process because it entails much more than simply giving up material possessions.”
If residents had to relocate due to climate change, it would be a last resort. Residents are keenly aware it would mean disrupting — or losing — not just material assets such as foundation stones, but sacred sites, a way of life and Indigenous knowledge.
Voluntary immobility is a global phenomenon As climate tipping points are reached and harms escalate, humans must adapt. Yet even in places where relocation is proposed as a last resort, people may prefer to remain.
Voluntary immobility is not unique to Fiji. Around the world, households and communities are choosing to stay where climate risks are increasing or already high. Reasons include access to livelihoods, place-based connections, social bonds and differing risk perceptions.
As Australia faces climate-related hazards and disasters, such as floods and bushfires, people living in places of risk will need to consider whether to remain or move. This decision raises complex legal, financial and logistical issues. As with residents of Serua Island, it also raises important questions about the value that people ascribe to their connections to place.
Serua Island is one of about 800 communities in Fiji being forced to consider the prospect of relocation.
A decision for communities to make themselves
Relocation and retreat are not a panacea for climate risk in vulnerable locations. In many cases, people prefer to adapt in place and protect at-risk areas.
No climate adaptation policy should be decided without the full and direct participation of the affected local people and communities. Relocation programs should be culturally appropriate and align with local needs, and proceed only with the consent of residents.
In places where residents are unwilling to relocate, it is crucial to acknowledge and, where feasible, support their decision to stay. And people require relevant information on the risks and potential consequences of both staying and relocating.
This can help develop more appropriate adaptation strategies for communities in Fiji and beyond as people move home, but also resist relocation, in a warming world.
The Kanak Socialist National Liberation Front (FLNKS) of Kanaky New Caledonia has congratulated Fiji’s Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka and his three deputies on their election in Parliament last month.
In a statement, FLNKS’s Victor Tutugoro also congratulated the 55 Members of Parliament and the newly-constituted government.
The liberation front also congratulated Speaker Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu and deputy Speaker Lenora Qereqeretabua.
“FLNKS looks forward to continuing to work closely with government in the future,” Tutugoro said.
“Our political, cultural and historical ties will continue within our great Melanesian family.
“FLNKS is ready to pursue our exchanges through the Melanesian Spearhead Group in the coming weeks.”
Tutugoro also acknowledged former prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama for his “strong support” to the FLNKS cause.
Tutugoro is second vice-president of New Caledonia’s Northern provincial government and a member of the territory’s Congress.
Timoci Vulais a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.
“Whether you vote yes or no in the coming referendum, your choice deserves respect.” 
