(Geneva,
May 1st, 2014) On April 30 and May 1st, 2014, the UN Committee on Economic
Social and Cultural Rights in Geneva assessed the level of implementation of
these rights in Indonesia. The review
process
covered access to health care and education, the problem of land-grabbing, and
the rights of minorities and indigenous peoples. In the discussion the
Committee showed particular concern to the situation in Papua.
After the International Covenant on
Economic Social and Cultural Rights (English, Indonesian) came into force in 1966, Indonesia ratified the treaty in
2005. As a party to the covenant it is required to present its implementation
report every five years. The Committee was now able to conduct its first review
of Indonesia after Jakarta had submitted its initial report with years of
delay.
The Committee asked Indonesia about
the considerable poverty gap between the two Papuan and other Indonesian
provinces. The Head of the Unit for the Acceleration of Development in Papua
and West Papua (UP4B), Mr Bambang Darmono, as a member of the Indonesian
delegation, explained the increase of the
number of regencies as an indicator of success. He also referred to the
reduction of the percentage of poor people in the Papuan provinces over the
past number of years.
He did not explain that the influx
of migrants has largly contributed to the change in numbers while indigenous
Papuans continue to suffer from a high level of poverty and lack of access to
education. Since the enactment of the Special Autonomy Law
for Papua in 2001 the number of regencies has
increased from 9 to the present number of 42, creating an inflated and highly
corrupt public administration. Mr Amirrudin of the Indonesian delegation
alleged that most of these regencies are governed by freely elected Papuans,
sweeping the massive corruption in the allocation of posts in Papua under the
carpet.
In regard to the allegation of
land-grabbing in Papua for development projects, the delegation argued that
indigenous Papuans have been consulted and given a special provision for
benefit sharing. This included the development projects of the Merauke
Integrated Food and Energy Estate (MIFEE), PT Sinar Mas in Jayapura, PTP II
Kerong and PT SDIC in Manokwari.
The Committee asked the delegation
how it conducts human rights impact studies before providing licenses for
extractive industries. It questioned how the government ensures the application
of the process of Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) when corporations
appropriate land from traditional communities. The Indonesian delegation explained
that the FPIC principles have been incorporated in the existing laws, including
the Special Autonomy Law for Papua. However, the delegation was not able to
provide further explanations on the methodology and implementation of the FPIC
principles.
The Committee took into account the
Constitutional Court decision and its possible effect on the affected
communities and FPIC mechanisms in the future. Mr Zudan Arif from the Ministry
of Home Affairs emphazised that the decision is legally binding but did not
explain why it was not implemented on the ground.
Regarding the recognition of Masyarakat Hukum Adat, the delegation of the government of Indonesia rejected the
concept of indigenous as applicable to Indonesia. The delegation explained that
due to the historically static demographic composition of ethnic groups they
“consider all indonesians as indigenous”. They emphazised that Masyarakat Hukum Adat is not referring to a minority or marginalized group and
that the special legal systems used by these communities are respected by the
government of Indonesia.
