Letter of allegations sent on 8 April 2008

Letter of allegations sent on 8 April 2008

1130. The Special Rapporteur sent a letter of allegations in relation to the alleged arrest and detention of nine activists from Papua, for displaying the Papua Morning Star flag.

1131. According to information received, on 13 March 2008, a demonstration was organised in Manokwari, in West Papua, to protest against the 2007 Government Regulation 77, which
bans the display of "separatist symbols", including the Morning Star flag. It is reported that during the demonstration, the police arrested nine people, including a 16 year-old boy. It is
further reported that the nine have been charged with breach of regulation 77/2007, as well as with rebellion ("makar"), which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment.
Information received indicates that people have in the recent past been sentenced to penalties of up to 17 years imprisonment for possessing and displaying "separatist symbols".

Response from the Government

1132. By a letter dated 21 October 2008, the Government responded to the letter of allegations, providing the following information: “on 13 March 2008, several individuals decided to shage a demonstration in West Papua to protest against the 2007 Government Regulation 77 in Manokwari. According to our sources, this was a peaceful gathering until certain groups attempted to use this occasion as a political rally to demonstrate their opposition to the constitutionally established national rule of law.

1133. In Indonesia, it is not unlawful to protest against a specific matter or event. However, according to established national norms, it is important that the government is informed of the decision to hold a rally. Indeed, this is clear from the stipulations of national norms such as Law No. 2/2002 of the State Police of the Republic fo Indonesia and Law No. 9/1998 which concerns the freedom of expression in public it is also evident from the provisions of the Criminal Code chapter 510 on the permission to hold public events, that is permissible to hold peaceful demonstrations in Indonesia as long as permission is sought in advance from the concerned law enforcement authorities in the region. This measure exists in order to ensure that the protests take pace in an orderly and peaceable manner with law officials present in case any problems arise. On 13th March 2008, several individuals illicitly unfurled the outlawed separatist "Free Papua" flag during the rally. The police had to break up the gathering when it became evident that the protesters were not respecting the established national norms relative to holding peaceful demonstrations in Indonesia. As a result, nine out of the thirteen protesters arrested were detained and charged. They are now facing trial for breaching Article 106-110 of Cnminal Code regarding "makar”or rebellion.Four out of the thirteen who were originally arrested have since been released. However, the legal process which concerns the nine in custody is one which is determined by the relevant national courts. It should be further recalled that the Indonesian Judiciary is independent from the Executive.

1134. It should furthermore be noted that within the stipulations of national legislation, and in particular, Government Regulation 77/2007 (03/PIM-MRP/2008), the display of separatist symbols in Indonesia is expressly banned. In particular, Article 6 of Government Regulation 77/2007 prohibits the display of the Morning Star Flag in Papua as this is counter to efforts to
maintain peace, national unity and territorial integrity. At this point, it is also important to A/HRC/11/4/Add.1
Page 197 recall that Indonesia is a sprawling archipelago which has long been sensitive to attempts by separatist movements to divine this peaceful nation. Thus, the government has long been concerned about regional divisions. In 2003, the government attempted to divide Papua into three provinces, namely: Central Irian Jaya (Irian Jaya Tengah), Papua (or East Irian Jaya, Irian Jaya Timur), and West Irian Jaya (Irian Jaya Barat). The Constitutional court annulled this decision in 2004 as it was considered to be in opposition to Papua's Special Autonomy status. However, the court did in fact accept the establishment of the West Irian Jaya province, which is in the westerly region of Papua.

1135. Historically, the Papuan People's Council (MRP) was set up under a "Special Autcnomy" law for West Papua, which was passed in 2001, Under the Presidential Decree of 2004, the Papuan People's Council (MRP) was established months later, in January 2005. It was established to give indigenous West Papuans a voice which would be heard directly in the Indonesian central government in Jakarta and also, in order to protect their rights and cultural identity. Since then, the government has continued with efforts to establish and enact other laws which protect and promote the rights of people in the region. Furthermore, it must be understood that the Government of Indonesia considers the spirit of unity and constructive partnership which exists between the various regions of the country as being vital to the future of the county. This diversity of cultures enriches the mosaic patchwork of identities which
together, has created today what is considered as Indonesia's dynamic and multi-ethnic society. Therefore, the illicit actions of a few protesters have served to cause division and destructive regicnal unrest.The government is also currently in the process of issuing an emergency government regulation to justify the formation of Irian Jaya Barat province. It is intended that the Perpu/Law will acknowledge Irian Jaya Barat as province.The new law to be established will be synchronized with the existing 2001 law on special autonomy for Papua. It is hoped that this will help ensure that there is peace in the region and bring clarity to the legal status of the Irish Jaya Rarat province.In the meantime, the government is continuing efforts to improve the situation in the region by investing heavily in local infrastructure. In this regard the President in August 2007 issued a presidential instruction to accelerate the development efforts in Papua and in the West Papua provinces. The central government is expected to spend Rp. 22 trillion, which will be mainly dedicated to building the regions infrastructure.

1136. It is therefore incorrect to allege that the government is in some way not doing its best to ensure that the rights of its citizens, including the right to freedom of expression and
opinion is not protected. In this regard, apart from the stipulations in the 1945 Constitution (Article 28) which implicitly protects this right, it should be notes that all citizens are treated equally. According to Article 27 (1) of the 1945 Constitution, “all citizens shall be equal before the law and the government and shal be required to respect the law and the government, with no exceptions”. Concurrently, taking from the reading of Article 19 of the ICCPR, it is observed that the respect for the right to freedom of expression is expressly limited to instances that do not interfere with the ". . . protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals". Or in Article 22 where it states that limitations are within the rights of the State if they are prescribed by law and.. . are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order (ordre public) . . . or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others." Moreover, the Government of Indonesia takes this occasion to reiterate its commitment to the promotion and protection of fundamental human rights which are established and protected in its national legislation through norms such as law 39/1999 on Human Rights”. A/HRC/11/4/Add.1
Page 198


1137. The Special Rapporteur is grateful for the Government’s reply.

Letter of allegations sent on 29 April 2008

1138. The Special Rapporteur sent a letter of allegations concerning reports that a new law on "Electronic Information and Transaction" was passed on 25 March 2008. While the main
purpose of the law is to combat online crime, pornography, gambling, blackmail, lies, threats and racism, it is reported that provisions in the law prohibit citizens from distributing in any
electronic format information that is defamatory, allegedly punishing transgressors with a maximum of six years in prison or a fine of one billion Rp (approx. US$109,000) or both.

Response from the Government

1139. By a letter dated 27 May 2008, the Government responded to the letter of allegations, providing the following information: “the "Economic information and Transaction Law" is a national law that was passed on 25 March 2008. Primarily, this law was established to cover the use of the Internet and focuses on issues such as web content, information technology and business transactions. The Ministry of Communications and Information was the agency placed in charge of the draft which is formally known as the "UU ITE' Undoing Undang Informasi and Transaksi Elektronik" or Law No. 11/2008 on Economic Information and Transaction Law. This law was issued to ensure that there is a full and complete coverage of many issues such as intellect property rights, economic transfers and consumer protection measures. After five years of consultations and consolidation, in March 2008, the government officially ratified the Undang-undang Informasi and Transaksi Elektronik (UU ITE) and it was expected to come into force as of 1st of April 2008.

1140. This new legislation also forms part of the Government of Indonesia's effort, to establish and enact comprehensive legislation on cyberspace uses while taking into account
the UNCITRAL model law requirements on e-commerce. It was also created to cover issues such as the communications, information technology and cybercrime. It is intended to
complement the existing Undang-undang Hak Cipta (the Indonesian Copyright Law) as well as other such related laws. Therefore, while it is true that one of this new law is intended to restrict access to pornographic websites because such sites raise serious questions on morality and public order, it should also be noted that the new law was however not created exclusively for this purpose but also to encompass, in an updated manner, other aspects of internet use and the defamatory or negative use of information technology.

1141. Moreover, it must be understood that it is was in fact at the instigation and request of concerned members of the general public that the government decided to block access to sites with violent and pornographic content. To this end, the Information and Communications Ministry has made available to the public, software which blocks websites with pornographic
content and which is also be available for download from its official website. This is software which the general public can choose to obtain for their personal use or on the other hand,
choose not to. It was important to impose sanctions to discourage access to such sites and to this effect, there is the possibility that a maximum imprisonment term of three years may be (A/HRC/11/4/Add.1 Page 199) imposed on those found guilty before a court of law of violating this law as well as a possible
fine amounting to a maximum of one billion rupiah.

1142. The Government of Indonesia considers it important to reiterate at this point its commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms.
Indeed, Law No. 9/1998 regarding freedom of expression in public as well as the Indonesian Constitution guarantees the freedom of opinion and expression of its citizens. This is evident from the provisions of Article28 E sub-paragraph (3) and Article 28 F whereby the protection and fulfilment of human rights are considered as the responsibility of the State, especially that
of the government. In addition, Article 28 J sub-paragraph (2) provides that "In exercising his/her rights and freedoms, every person shall have the duty to accept the restrictions established by law for the sole purposes at guaranteeing the recognition and respect of the rights and freedoms of others and of satisfying just demands based upon considerations of morality, religious values, security and public order in a democratic society."
1143. In addition, the government is of the view that such legally binding restrictions will also be beneficial to the wellbeing and social upbringing of the most vulnerable group to such uncensored exposure, which are the children in the country. In this particular reference, the Indonesian Constitution of 1945 as well as its most recent amendments expressly protects the
rights of children. In Article 28 B. it is clearly stipulated that every child has the right to g ow and develop, and has the right to protection from violence. Therefore, as in several
international laws such as the "Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography", it must be clearly
underlined that violations to constitutional freedoms in Indonesia are thus contrary to the provisions of the national constitution.”


1144. The Special Rapporteur is grateful for the Government’s reply.

Urgent appeal sent on 12 June 2008

1145. The Special Rapporteur, together with the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, sent an urgent appeal regarding a joint ministerial decree with regard to members of the Ahmadiyya community in Indonesia. According to the information received, on 9 June 2008, a joint ministerial decree by the Religious Affairs Minister, the Home Minister and the Attorney General warned and instructed adherents, members and/or board members of the Indonesian Ahmadiyya Congregation (Jemaat Ahmadiyya Indonesia), as long as they claim to be Muslims, to stop the spreading of the belief that there is another prophet with his own teachings after the Prophet Muhammad. Members who disobey this instruction of the decree or who spread interpretations that deviate from the principal teachings of the religions in Indonesia are warned that they and their associated organizations will face legal action.
Furthermore, the decree appeals to society to refrain from violent acts against Ahmadiyya followers.

1146. On 1 June 2008, more than 500 people from the Islam Troop Command attacked about 100 activists of the National Alliance for the Freedom of Faith and Religion who were
holding a peaceful rally for religious tolerance at Jakarta’s National Monument. 75 people were injured in the attack and several Ahmadiyya followers had to be hospitalised. Although
(A/HRC/11/4/Add.1, Page 200) police were in the area they reportedly did little to stop the violence and some police officers allegedly blamed the organizers of the rally that keeping the agenda of their peace parade had created the tensions.

Response from the Government

1147. By a letter dated 27 June 2008, the Government responded to the letter of allegations, indicating that: “In reference to the allegation concerning the Ahmadiyya community in Indonesia, it is important to first begin by reiterating that in Indonesia the freedom of religion or belief is constitutionally established and protected. Similarly, the freedom of religion in Indonesia and the practices linked to individual belief are guaranteed under Articles 28 E, 28 I and 29 of the Constitution which clearly states that the exercise of freedom of religion cannot be limited other than by law. Moreover, further guarantees concerning the respect of this fundamental freedom and of religious practice are protected in various laws, and specifically, Law No 39 of 1999 on Human Rights.

1148. Indeed, in addressing the issue, the Government of Indonesia has been mindful of the fact that incidents relating to Ahmadiyya have multiple facets. On the one hand, the doctrinal
aspect of this particular religious movement has long been considered by some communities as deviant. On the other hand, sporadic acts of violence by the mob against members of this
group have resulted in public disturbance and constituted led to acts of intolerance and crimes punishable by law.

1149. As regards the doctrinal aspect of this movement, it should be noted that in recent years, the interaction of this movement with many communities in the country has created major social tension. The government has been endeavouring to resolve the issue through dialogue. It has held a several sessions to dialogue with the leaders of Ahmadiyya on issues such as the protection of their followers. The government is also continuing to promote dialogue between Ahmadiyya and various religious groups in order to enhance mutual respect and understanding.

1150. The second aspect of this matter relates to law enforcement. In particular, there have been incidents of intolerance against the followers of Ahmadiyya. In this regard, on the occasions when members of Ahmadiyya have been at risk, the authorities have stepped in to assure their protection in the same manner they have been obliged to ensure the protection of ordinary citizens against the violence inflicted by any group or persons.

1151. Following such attacks in the past, the perpetrators of the acts of violence have been detained for questioning and several were brought before the law. Hence, at the same time as enforcing the law, the government also takes into account the need to address the related social tension and the need to promote further dialogue among groups.

1152. In light of the need to resolve the issue in a sustainable manner and to prevent its recurrence in the future, the government recently issued a specific decision on this issue
which takes into account the principle of freedom of religion as well as the need to respect the existing relevant laws and regulations in the country. The policy, which comes in the form of the joint decree under reference KEP-033/A/JA16/2008 or SKB No.3/2008, contains among others, the following elements: it does not outlaw lhe Ahmadiyya faith, but rather, orders its
followers to halt their proselytization (Sylar) activities and to fully respect the existing laws (A/HRC/11/4/Add.1
Page 201) and regulations; it appeals to the Ahmadiyya followers to return to the Islamic mainstream religion and at the same time, it appeals to the people in general to refrain from acts of violence against Ahmadiyya followers.

1153. Indeed, the Ahmadiyya organization became legally registered in Indonesia through the Law Minister's Decision of 1953 under reference Rl No. JA123113 of 13th March 1953 and
to date, there is no regulation which annuls the said decision. Furthermore, the issuance of such a decree was never meant to be an intervention by the State in people's right to freedom
of religion. It is merely an effort by the government, as mandated by the Constitution and national laws, to uphold law and public order and protect the followers of Ahmadiyya from
any criminal attacks. It does not interfere with religious doctrines or limit religious freedom.

1154. As regards the acts of violence, on June 1st of this year, on the day marking the 63rd anniversary of Indonesia's Pancasila, it was reported that a group comprised of 500
individuals called the Islamic Defender's Front (FPI) attacked over 100 activists from the National Alliance for the Freedom of Faith and Religion during an interfaith rally on religious
tolerance in front of the National Monument (Monas) in Jakarta. Several people were injured and have since been treated in hospital. However, in response to this illicit act of violence,
there have been several measures taken by the government, including the arrest of two leaders of the FPI, namely Mr. Habib Rizik and Mr. Munarman. Concurrently, there have also been
police investigations into the violence which has led to the arrest of several other individuals who were involved in the violence.

1155. In addition, the government has called upon the local communities and civil societies to keep the peace and not attempt any acts of violence or illegal actions against the Ahmadiyya community. Through the application of the laws on hate crimes, there will also be legal prosecution of those who attack members of Ahmadiyaa.

1156. Therefore, as regards Ahmadiyya, the Government of Indonesia as a budding democracy is not of the view that this is an issue which exceeds the precepts of national sovereignty, nor is it one that infringes on the freedom to practice religions. Therefore, the Government of Indonesia is of the view that the solution to the issues concerning Ahmadiyya needed to also take into account the two-fold perspective, namely, the preservation of public order, and the protection of the followers of Ahmadiyya from any criminal attack by mob. In
other words, the government limits is role to the levels of maintaining public order and protecting its citizens.

1157. Moreover, while it is acknowledged that human rights are universal in character, it is generally understood that their domestic expression and implementation should remain the
responsibility of each individual government. This is consistent with the basic principles contained in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights which in Article 29B
addresses two aspects: ‘On the one hand, there are principles that respect the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual; on the other, there are stipulations regarding the
obligations of the individual to society and state’. The implementation of human rights implies the existence of a balanced relationship between individual human rights and the
obligations of individuals towards their community. Without such a balance, the rights of the community as a whole can be denied, which can lead to instability and anarchy, especially in
developing countries. It is thus important to recall at this point that Indonesia is a multi-ethnic and multi cultural country which prides itself of its harmonious mosaic of diverse (A/HRC/11/4/Add.1, Page 202) communities living together and practicing several religious beliefs of their choice, as long as
their religious practices do not infringe on public order and the harmonious wellbeing of the society as a whole. Additionally, the government considers efforts being undertaken in this respect, to form a vital part of its ongoing commitment to the eradication of religious radicalism and all acts of violence stemming from religious intolerance.”


1158. The Special Rapporteur is grateful for the Government’s reply.

Letter of allegations sent on 14 August 2008

1159. The Special Rapporteur, together with the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, sent a letter of allegations concerning the arrest and detention of Mr Simon Tuturop, Mr Tadeus Weripang, Mr Viktor Tuturop, Mr Tomas Nimbitkendik, Mr Benedidiktus Tuturop and Mr Teles Piahar.

1160. According to information received, in the morning of 19 July 2008, at approximately 4.30 a.m., 46 Papuan nationals were arrested by police during a flag-raising ceremony outside
a government archive office, in the city of Fakfak, western Papua. During the arrests, police officers reportedly beat and kicked the protesters, forcing the men to strip to their underwear in the street, before loading them onto trucks and taking them to Fakfak police station. Reports claim that many of those arrested suffered bruising to their faces and bodies, with two complaining of serious eye injuries.

1161. According to reports, six of those arrested, including Mr Simon Tuturop, Mr Tadeus Weripang, Mr Viktor Tuturop, Mr Tomas Nimbitkendik, Mr Benedidiktus Tuturop and Mr Teles Piahar, have been charged with subversion for threatening the state and by raising a ‘separatist flag’. In accordance with Indonesia’s criminal code subversion carries a maximum
penalty of life imprisonment. On 23 July, five more activists were reportedly arrested while 37 from the original group of detainees were released. The police reportedly stated that it will
investigate allegations related to detainees who suffered eye injuries, but has denied claims that any of the protesters were beaten or that they were subjected to humiliating treatment.

1162. In March 2008, nine Papuan activists were arrested and jailed for displaying the Papuan Morning Star flag. Their trial, on charges of subversion, is ongoing and the nine remain in

1163. Concern was expressed that the arrest and detention of the aforementioned individuals may represent a direct attempt to stifle freedom of expression.

Response from the Government

1164. By a letter dated 21 October 2008, the Government responded to the letter of allegations, providing the following information:

1165. “On 19 July 2008, it was reported that the six abovementioned Papuans were involved in a flag-raising incident which took place outside an Indonesian government archive office in Fak Oak, West Papua. The above individuals were just some of the 46 who were arrested for (A/HRC/11/4/Add.1
Page 203) their participation in this illicit avant which took place without any authorisation in the early hours of Saturday morning at approximately 04.30 am.

1166. As a result of their actions Simon Tuturop, 58 years old, Tadeus Weripang, 52 years old, Victor Tuturop, 42 years old, Tomas Nimbitkendik, 19 years old, Benediktus Tuturop, 35
years old and Telas Piahar, 20 years old were all arrested and charged under section 110 of the Indonesian Criminal Code for Subversion.

1167. Following further investigations the others who were arrested at the same time as the six abovementioned individuals have since been released and the charges against most of
them dropped. At the time, the other 37 detainees were to be sent home after meeting with and being briefed by the Fakfak Regent, Dr Wahidin Puarada.

1168. The incident in question was the result of an illegal flag being raised. The flag bore the insignia and colours of the West Papuan independence which is known as the Vlorning Star
flag and which it is nationally well known under Indonesian law to be a separatist symbol and thus banned. To this effect, Article 6 of Regulation PP 77/2007 (03/PI \/I-MRP/2008) is part
of the 2007 law which expressly bans the display of separatist symbols, including flags in all parts of Indonesia. The six individuals mentioned above were thus in violation of this law for
attempting to cause a rebellion. Their case will be handled in application of the national judicial procedure which will accordingly decide the verdict applicable to the six men.

1169. Additionally, under Article 106 of the Indonesian Criminal Code, those detained by the appointed authorities can be charged with plotting a coup. The charge also carries a maximum punishment of life imprisonment.

1170. As already mentioned at various occasions in the past Indonesia protects the right to freedom of opinion and expression which is constitutionally guaranteed (Articles 27 and 28 of the 1945 Constitution and its subsequent modifications). This right however can not be used in a manner which is detrimental to national norms or the 'state Constitution”.

1171. Indeed, it is the government's view that as is the case with any democratic nation, it is the role of the government to establish parameters within which these rights may be fully
enjoyed without causing untoward harm to others. If these rights should impede the fundamental interests of others, including those of the national community as well as its unity
or territorial integrity, restrictions may be placed to limit the harmful consequences of such a right. To this point, the ICCPR has been clear in supporting this argument. In Article 19 of the
ICCPR, if is observed that the respect for the right to freedom of expression is expressly limited to instances that do not interfere with the "...protection of national security or of public
order (ordre public), or of public health or morals", and in Article 22, it states that any limitations to these rights are within the rights of the State if they are "prescribed by law and
are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order (orders public) ...or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others."

1172. Hence, it must be left within the authority of the judiciary to determine what measures will be taken in the case of the six abovementioned individuals to punish any attempts to
sabotage national democracy and territorial integrity.
(A/HRC/11/4/Add.1, Page 204)

1173. In essence, Indonesia prides itself of being a nation which is united under one banner but which also comprises of a rich patchwork of different cultures, religious beliefs and
languages spoken by a multitude of ethnic groups. As an archipelago which is in fact the largest in the world, this is no easy task for any government to ensure unity and cohesion at
all times with all its citizens. All this said, Indonesia has always sought to achieve the essential balance which is necessary for this unity and thus acts which seek to subvert, destroy
or diminish these efforts are not considered lightly.

1174. As a whole, the government is continuing to do its best to avoid as best possible, regional divisions which would only fracture the peace and the unity in Indonesia. Already in
this year alone, there have been several meetings involving the President and Vice-President of Indonesia in talks, respectively, with various stakeholders on how to improve the situation
in the Papua region.

1175. At this juncture, it should be recalled that Indonesia is a democratic nation which is also a signatory to many international treaties and conventions, a majority of which have been ratified, acceded to and which have since formed part of its national norms. Therefore, allegations that the government does not respect the rights of its citizens are both incorrect
and unjustified.”


1176. The Special Rapporteur is grateful for the Government’s reply.

Letter of allegations sent on 8 September 2008

1177. The Special Rapporteur, jointly with the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and the Special Representative of the Secretary General on the
situation of human rights defenders, sent a letter of allegations on the killing of Mr. Opinus Tabuni, an activist of an indigenous peoples’ organisation in West Papua, at a rally on 9
August 2008. According to the information received:

1178. On 9 August 2008, International Day of the World’s Indigenous People, a peaceful rally took place through the town of Wamena, in the middle mountain region of West Papua.
A march concluded with an event staged near Santa Thomas school in Wamena. Police were stationed around the ground where the event took place. Army and intelligence services were present as well. Only the security forces were carrying guns.

1179. In the course of the event the Morning Star flag, which is a symbol of the West Papua independence movement, was raised. Raising the Morning Star flag reportedly constitutes,
under Indonesian law, the offence of subversion and carries a sentence of up to 20 years imprisonment.

1180. At this point, the police started moving in on the demonstrators and started shooting. Mr. Opinus Tabuni, a leader of the Wamena branch of an indigenous peoples’ organisation in
West Papua, was hit by a bullet and died. An autopsy performed on Mr Tabuni at the hospital in Wamena on 10 August 2008 showed that a bullet travelled through his right side and
through his heart. The bullet has been sent by the police to Makassar for further analysis.
Page 205

1181. Another Papuan man, who was not identified, was reportedly seriously injured by gunshot. This man has disappeared since then. A further man was reportedly beaten by police with rifle butts and has also disappeared. There are concerns that the two men could have been apprehended by the police and may be in police detention.

1182. The Indonesian police are reportedly investigating the incident and have detained a number of witnesses.

Response from the Government

1183. By a letter dated 28 October 2008, the Government responded to the letter of allegations, providing the following information.

1184. “On 9 August 2008, sympathizers to the Dewan Adat Papua/DAP (Papuan Custom Council) cause from the sub-district of VI Lapago Balliem marched from Sinakma Wourma,
Pikhe and Wesaput Wamena. They brought with them traditional defense armaments such as arrows, spears and machetes. They yelled continuously “International Koteka Naire and Independence for Papua”. Their march continued onwards to the conference building on Yos Sudarso Street in the Wamena District of the Papua Province.At 1.45pm, in the public square
of Sinapuk, there was a commemoration of the “International Day of the World’s Indigenous People”. The rally was attended by approximately 10,000 sympathizers of the DAP group and
they chose to celebrate the event by illegally raising the Morning Star flag, a separatist flag. The sympathizers of this movement then marched together with the leaders of the DAP. At 2.15pm, the participants of the “International Day of the World’s Indigenous People” carried the Morning Star flag side by side with the Indonesian flag, the UN flag and the SOS
(emergency) flag on which was written “Papuan are in danger”. Upon seeing the Morning Star flag raised, the county police of Jayawijaya tried to lower and confiscate it. However, there was a strong opposition from the crowds. In order to calm the protestors down, the police officers fired a warning shot in the air and this happened to strike the flag of the DAP sympathizers. Chaos ensued and within 30 minutes, individuals in the crowd started using a gun, arrows, spears and machetes. At 3.30pm, leaders of DAP held a meeting with the head of the county police of Jayawijaya and Dandim 1702, and were informed that the individual(s) who raised the Morning Star flag must be given up to the police officers and thereafter face legal prosecution. At that moment, just as the crowds began to leave the area in order to return home, a man was found dead. He was identified as Mr Opius Tabuni. An investigation into the cause of his death commenced immediately. At 4.45pm, the DAP sympathizers carried the body of Mr Opius Tabuni to the Honai (traditional house) of the DAP Lapago in Mapina. They requested an inquiry into the death of Mr Opius Tabuni. On 10 August 2008, the
autopsy of the body was performed, and it was found that there was a bullet in his heart. On 13 August 2008, at the Sinapuk Wamena public square, a team from the Indonesian Police
Headquarters investigated the third crime scene with regard to the raising of the Bintang Kejora Flag, and the incident which also led to the death of the Mr Opius Tabunil. Another
team from the Indonesian Police Headquarters investigated the fourth crime scene at the public square. It was determined that the individuals responsible for the deterioration of the rally included the head of the DAP (Mr Forkorus Yaboisembut) as well as prominent members of the Presidium Dewan Papua (DPD). It was also discovered that the rally was attended by several prominent figures from the contentious 2000 Papuan People’s Congress and this separatist group was ultimately found to be behind the creation of the Presidium Dewan Papua/PDP and other civilian separatist movements in general. The individuals who (A/HRC/11/4/Add.1, Page 206) raised the Morning Star flag have since been identified as having the initials AW and AH. It
was also found that these individuals originate from the Piramid village in the Assologaima district. Since then, the following steps have been taken by the regional police of Papua to
address this problem: conducting investigations into finding the perpetrators who shot Mr Opius Tabuni; conducting interrogations of the 4 witnesses from the civil society body, 31
members of the county police of Jayawijaya who were on duty and who were supposed to provide security during the rally and 19 members of the county police of Jayawijaya who were armed during the rally; and conducting “back-up” support from the county police of Jayawijaya and assisted the team of forensic experts from the Indonesian Police Headquarters and the Criminal Investigation Body (Bareskrim).”


1185. The Special Rapporteur is grateful for the Government’s reply