An event in the form of discussion and consolidation was held by the Papuan Student Alliance (AMP) involving several committees in various cities in preparation for the 60th anniversary of the New York Agreement (15 August 1962 – 15 August 2022). In the publication circulating on social media, his party stated that the New York Agreement or the New York agreement was an illegal agreement or agreement, both legally and morally.
Through a caption that was packaged like a media release TOR, his party stated that the agreement did not involve official Papuan representatives during the process. It was also mentioned that since May 1, 1963, coinciding with the United Nations Temporrary Executive Administratins (UNTEA) or the United Nations Provisional Government in West Papua transferring its power to Indonesia, then the Indonesian government began to deploy its military forces in large numbers throughout the land of Papua, resulting in political rights. and human rights were brutally violated beyond the bounds of humanity by the Indonesian Military (ABRI).
According to him, August 15, 1962 was a very important day in the history of the development of politics and democracy and human rights in Papua. There was an agreement between the Indonesian government and the Dutch kingdom under the auspices of the United States to discuss the fate of Papua, but during the process it did not involve representatives from Papua. So to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the illegal agreement, AMP welcomed the joint discussion and consolidation activities simultaneously involving several inter-city committees, inviting community elements.
The 1962 New York Agreement and the Partly Public Question
The month of August, two days before the Indonesian Independence Day to be exact on the 15th, has always been a momentum for some Papuan activists to hold a commemoration of the New York Agreement. Several points of the New York Agreement include the Netherlands having to hand over Papua to the United Nations Temporary Executive Authority (UNTEA) no later than October 1, 1962.
The New York Agreement was also the basis for the 1969 People's Opinion (Pepera) that was held. In the Agreement, the referendum must be held with a one-man-one-vote mechanism. In other words, every Papuan citizen has a voice to make his/her choice. However, the Pepera mechanism is in question. Papuan leader Socratez Sofyan Yoman said the Act was not in accordance with the wishes of the New York Agreement because the one man one vote mechanism was not implemented.
The Indonesian government at that time had stated the reasons for using the many man one vote method in carrying out the West Irian poll. This is related to the adjustment of the system used in Indonesia, namely deliberation. The decision was then considered contrary to the international mechanism, one man one vote.
This has become a question for a number of activists, including AMP, who are trying to continue to question the legitimacy of the New York agreement in relation to the fate of the Papuan people, which affects life today, especially with regard to self-determination.
The 1962 New York Agreement Is Legitimate Undisputed
It is an interesting thing to study in every commemoration of the 1962 New York Agreement by a number of Papuan activists including AMP in the form of distrust because of the electoral system and mechanism used at that time. They considered that the voting process to determine the fate of the Papuan people contained a lot of fraud, one of which was 809,337 Papuans who had rights, only 1,025 people were represented who had previously been quarantined and only 175 people gave their opinions.
Citing a statement from a Young researcher at the Galesong Institute Jakarta, Stefi Vellanueva Farrah, that this matter needs to be reviewed in terms of data sources and facts that occurred. The campaign that the Act of Free Choice is illegal because of various practices that are not in accordance with human rights, as well as international legal standards, at first glance seems logical and rational. However, this is actually part of a foreign party's effort to separate Papua from Indonesia. If the human rights aspect is prioritized, which one is more essential then: escaping from colonialism or technically one people one vote democracy? Democracy can only be enjoyed if the colonizers have been successfully expelled. There is no democracy in the occupied territories.
In short, we have succeeded in expelling the invaders from the archipelago, and the 1969 Act of Free Choice became a moment of affirmation that Papuans are Indonesians based on the Possedetis Juris principle which stipulates that the boundaries of the former colonies which later became independent follow the territorial boundaries before the country became independent. It was not an easy job for Bung Karno and the founding fathers at that time to organize a newly independent country. The Dutch, which had colonized Indonesia for hundreds of years, were reluctant to let it go in a short time. So the handover of power over the territory of the Republic of Indonesia that had been proclaimed was carried out in stages by the Dutch to the Indonesian government.
Papuan researcher from LIPI, Pupilan Wijoyo also explained that Pepera was held to carry out orders from the New York agreement in 1962, which stated that to determine whether Papua is part of the Republic of Indonesia or not, Pepera must be carried out. The 1969 Act of Free Choice was attended by around 1025 representatives of the Papuan people, held in a number of districts, including Jayapura, Biak, and Merauke. Based on the results of the Pepera at that time, all representatives expressed their willingness to join the Republic of Indonesia. The results of the 1969 Act of Free Choice were then recognized by the United Nations and a resolution was issued which declared Papua as a legitimate part of the Unitary Republic of Indonesia. This resolution was also approved by 80 UN member states and only 20 countries abstained. There is no country in the world that refuses the entry of Papua into Indonesia.
From an ideological perspective, the complexity of Papua's problems is substantially related to issues surrounding the understanding and relation of Indonesian and Papuan concepts. The parameters can be investigated from the answer whether the Indonesian concept has been built by providing a more just and friendly space for the growth of the Papuan concept so that the inclusion process of both parties develops mutually. The concept of contemporary Indonesianism is largely determined by the expertise of Indonesian leaders in resolving the conflicts between Aceh and Papua today. A new Indonesia that is more just and friendly to the concept of Aceh has been born and is now growing in Aceh. The same enthusiasm, optimism and opportunity will also grow in Papua. Like Aceh, Papua is also an important part of the construction of Indonesia. Former President Soekarno once said that Papua was the last chapter of Indonesia's struggle against the Dutch. Indonesia's struggle against colonialism was practically completed following the handover of Papua to Indonesia through UNTEA in 1963.
Therefore, it is better for the Papuan people, especially the students, to ignore the invitations for discussion and consolidation by AMP which are hype being held in several cities. As we know that AMP is an organization that tends to be oppositional and has been proven to be affiliated with separatist groups such as KNPB. AMP is also one of the parties who reject a number of government policies, one of which is the division of the province. Even the existence of the AMP and the KNPB itself has been rejected by the indigenous Papuans because they hinder the progress of the land of Papua.
SOURCE: https://time.online/2022/08/13/9725/
0 Komentar