Transcript
AGUS SUMULE: It hasn't been done before. And we believe this should be seen as a way forward where there's very important issues, which has been really the reason for antagonistic relationship between Jakarta and Papua. We hope that this will provide an opportunity for the people in Papua but also for the Republic of Indonesia, the state, to have this issue be discussed; the issue of Act of Free Choice. Because basically, the phrases in that law, Law Number 12 Year 1969, are basically saying that the Act of Free Choice has been properly done according to the wishes of the people and so forth. Well, the lawyers found, it's totally different, that it's against the human rights, which is definitely against the Fourth Amendment of the Indonesian constitution, and therefore it has to be reviewed, it has to be annulled, it has to be cancelled. So that's the reason why the lawyers decided to bring that piece of legislation to the attention of the Constitutional Court in Jakarta.
JOHNNY BLADES: It's the core of the political conflict. So why hasn't a review been sought previously?
AS: Well, yes, it is a very fair question, and you are talking about at least 18 years time frame. But we need to understand that the Constitutional Court in Indonesia is not something that has been around for a long time. It's basically the result of the Reformasi in the late 90s. Also, we have to take into consideration the fact that the amendment to the Indonesian constitution has also been made not a long time ago, you know. Yes the law number 12 1969, which was the sort of product of the Act of Free Choice has been around for many years. But to have that piece of legislation reviewed, well it (has to) be done at the constitutional court, and to be reviewed, we have to make arguments that there are parts of that law against the Indonesian constitution, especially articles with regards human rights.
JB: So what's the basis of that argument, is it there was not a 'one man one vote' scenario, or that people voted under duress?
AS: No, the most important one is because the wish of the people have not been respected. There were intimidation during that process. People were killed. So it's very much against the spirit of the New York Agreement, which, as we know, is to provide the open and peaceful and lawful opportunity for the people in Papua to decide.
JB: In that sense, it's a real test of reformasi and the spirit of the Special Autonomy Law...
AS: Yes, there's a clause in Special Autonomy Law, which has specifically asked for the government to establish the Truth & Reconciliation Commission. And the role of the commission is to rectify the history of Papua for the strengthening of the Republic of Indonesia. Now, it's already approaching 20 years, or nearly 20 years, and there has not been anything done with that specific clause. So I would like to see what is happening right now at the constitutional court as a part of the whole overall spirit in Indonesia to find a proper and just solution to the problem in Papua.
