PAPUA: HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVISTS DENOUNCE ABEPURA

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 04 JAKARTA 012800

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/23/2016
TAGS: PHUM PGOV ID
SUBJECT: PAPUA: HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVISTS DENOUNCE ABEPURA
TRIALS

REF: A. JAKARTA 3404

B. JAKARTA 3464

C. JAKARTA 4035

JAKARTA 00012800 001.2 OF 004


Classified By: Amb. B. Lynn Pascoe, Reasons: 1.4 (b, d)


1. (C) Summary. A church-affiliated task force has asked
Indonesia's National Committee on Human Rights (KomnasHAM) to
open an investigation into the conviction and sentencing of
23 men charged in connection with a March 16 riot in Abepura,
Papua that led to the death of three unarmed policemen and an
intelligence officer (ref. A). The task force submitted a
report to KomnasHAM on October 6 arguing that physical abuse
of the suspects and gross irregularities in their trial
amount to crimes against humanity. Defense lawyers and the
director of KomnasHAM's Papua office elaborated on these
charges in recent meetings. In our assessment, Indonesian
authorities have scapegoated a mix of politically troublesome
activists and innocent Papuan bystanders. The handling of
the case tarnishes what had been improvements of police
behavior in Papua, and justifiably reinforces Papuan mistrust
of the Indonesian legal system. The affair is generating
international concern and has already been the subject of
formal demarches to Jakarta by New Zealand, Australia, and
Finland (as European Union president). End summary.

Papuan Churches Protest Abuse, Trial, and Sentences
-------------- --------------


2. (SBU) Indonesian human rights and civil society groups are
protesting serious irregularities in the prosecution of 24
persons charged in connection with the March 16 riot in
Abepura, Papua, which cost the lives of three police officers
and one plainclothes Air Force intelligence officer
(reftels). The March melee began when police attempted to
break up a demonstration calling for the closure of the
operations near Timika, Papua of the U.S. mining firm P.T.
Freeport Indonesia. The 23 men already tried and sentenced
are either student organizers of the demonstration,
protestors who were alleged to have thrown rocks, or persons
who were implicated by other suspects during police
interrogation.


3. (SBU) The suspects were tried in two tranches. Eleven
were sentenced in late July, and the rest were sentenced in
late September and early October. Steven Wandik, the only
suspect charged with murder, has not yet been sentenced. The
accused were defended by two separate teams. Shortly after
the first arrests, a defense team was formed consisting of
Pieter Ell (the head of the Jayapura office of the human
rights NGO Kontras) and lawyers from the NGOs ALDP (Alliance
for Democracy in Papua) and Elsham (Institute for The Study
and Advocacy of Human Rights). However, in mid-July a group
of six defendants led by Eko Berotabui, dissatisfied with the
passivity and ineffectiveness of these lawyers, engaged
Jakarta-based attorneys from the Indonesian Legal Aid and
Human Rights Association (PBHI). Eko Berotabui is,
incidentally, the son of the Rev. Cornelius Berotabui, new
moderator of the Evangelical Christian Church (GKI),Papua's
most important Protestant denomination.


4. (C) The PBHI lawyers requested "protective accompaniment"
from a Western NGO, Peace Brigades International (PBI). PBI,
whose mission is to deter human rights abuses against
threatened groups or persons, is staffed by volunteers from
Europe and North America. In meetings with poloff, PBI
staffers confirmed reports that in the early stages of the
trial, Indonesian police had created an atmosphere of
intimidation in the courtroom by packing it with armed police
and plainclothes intelligence and by insisting that all
spectators register their names and affiliations. These
practices were later stopped in response to complaints by
defense lawyers.


5. (C) A notable incident during the trial occurred on August
28, when a police officer named Novril assaulted defendant
Nelson Rumbiak as he was being led from a vehicle back to his
cell at Abepura prison. The beating followed a day of
testimony in which Rumbiak named three policemen, including
Chief of Criminal Investigation Paulus Waterpauw, who had
allegedly beaten him and other suspects in the case.
Immediately following this incident, the judge ordered that
all suspects in the case be transferred from Abepura prison
back to the jail at Provincial Police Headquarters, where
much of the initial abuse of the suspects had been committed.
Following an overnight demonstration by families of the

JAKARTA 00012800 002.2 OF 004


suspects, this order was rescinded. The police officer
Novril was reportedly punished with administrative sanctions.
Provincial Police Chief Tommy Jakobus told poloff on October
13 that he would refer the matter to the prosecutor to press
criminal charges as well.

Sentences Handed Dawn
--------------


6. (SBU) Selivius Bobi, an organizer of the demonstration and
leader of the student group Street Parliament, was sentenced
to six years in prison for inciting others to use violence.
Nelson Rumbiak received 6 years on a charge of aggravated
theft for stealing two Brimob tear gas canisters found at the
scene of the demonstration. Othen Dapyal, Elkana Lokobal,
Musa Asso, Monjefri Obaja Pawika, and Mathias Mihel Dimara
were each sentenced to five years for using violence against
other persons. Ferdinando Pakage and Luis Gede each received
15 years for resisting members of the security forces in the
performance of their duties, resulting in the loss of life of
a security force member. Marcus Kayame, Patrisius Arrongear,
Thomas Ukago, Perius Waker, Elyas Tameka, and Bensiur Mirin
received sentences of four and five years for use of violence
in resisting the security forces in performance of their
duties. Sedrik Jitmau, Muhammad Kaitam, Aris Mandowen, Piter
Stevanus Buinei, Yasya Eko Merano Berotabui and Sam Wandik
received sentences of four and five years for disobeying
orders from security officers. Steven Wandik, who has not
yet been sentenced, was convicted of the killing the
plainclothes Air Force officer Agung Prihadi Wijaya and faces
a much heavier sentence. None of these individuals appeared
on the list of wanted persons issued by the Papuan Provincial
Police's Criminal Research Bureau in the aftermath of the
riots last March.

Church Investigates, Demands KomnasHAM Action
--------------


7. (SBU) On September 27, the Federation of Papuan Churches
issued a thorough report on the case, prepared by researchers
affiliated with Evangelical Christian Church (GKI) and the
Catholic Diocese of Jayapura's Truth and Justice Secretariat.
The report argues that the police's actions during and
following the March 16 riot meet the definition of crimes
against humanity stipulated in Indonesia's 2000 law setting
up the Human Rights Courts. The most serious of these
violations are physical abuse of the suspects and denial of
access to legal counsel. The report also asserts that the
police's raids of student dormitories following the riots
resulted in significant property damage and terrorization of
civil society. Moreover, the arbitrary nature of the arrests
led an undetermined number of students to flee the Abepura
area. Most of them returned to the hometowns or sought
refuge in the Jayapura area, while about thirty others fled
to Papua New Guinea. The report's authors verified one
individual was killed in the aftermath of the riot, Jeni
Hisage. According to officials of the Peace and Justice
Secretariat, Ms. Hisage was beaten and then shot by police

SIPDIS
following the killings of the three Brimob officers.


8. (SBU) In addition to criticizing the police, the report
addresses the trial phase, identifying violations by the
judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys of the Indonesian
Criminal Procedure Code and other legal guidelines. The
report concludes there was no presumption of innocence; the
suspects were interrogated without legal counsel; prosecution
witnesses failed to identify suspects definitively; there
were many irregularities involving evidence presented in
court; and the judges made decisions on the custody of the
suspects that jeopardized their safety. Despite the fact
that the trial failed to determine who had killed the four
security officers on March 16, the judges in many cases
imposed sentences heavier than those recommended by the
prosecution.


9. (SBU) The report states that the police and courts'
actions are comparable to those in the first Abepura case
(2000),which the National Commission on Human Rights
(KomnasHAM) formally deemed "gross violations of human
rights" and referred to the Human Rights Court in Makassar.
Accordingly, the report's primary recommendation is that
KomnasHAM form an investigative committee to pursue the
matter. The report also calls for the Attorney General's
office and Indonesian Bar Association to investigate the
actions of the judges, prosecutors, and lawyers during the
trial in Jayapura.

JAKARTA 00012800 003.2 OF 004



Foreign Governments Watching
--------------


10. (C) The trial has already resulted in formal demarches by
the governments of Australia, New Zealand, and, in its
capacity as EU President, Finland. The New Zealand DCM told
us that his government's action was largely in response to a
September 2 letter to Foreign Minister Peters from an NGO
called the Indonesia Human Rights Committee.

Jayapura KomnasHAM, Defense Team Speak Out
--------------


11. (C) During an October 9-14 trip to Papua, poloff met
with contacts who also expressed deep concern with the
trials. Albert Rumbekwan, director of KomnasHAM's Jayapura
office, deplored the maltreatment of the suspects, climate of
intimidation and multiple procedural irregularities during
the trial and flagrant bias of the three judges presiding
over the case. He stated that during interrogation, suspect
Aris Mandowen was shot in the foot by a police officer named
Aris Pulbaya, who had subsequently been promoted and named
district police chief in Bintuni Bay regency. Rumbekwan said
that KomnasHAM in Jayapura would prepare its own report and
submit it to Jakarta for action, but he was not optimistic
that this would produce results. He remarked that KomnasHAM
in Jakarta seemed reluctant to take on new cases because of
an ongoing personnel turnover.


12. (C) In an October 10 meeting with poloff, defense lawyers
with PBHI elaborated on the many irregularities that had
emerged during both the investigative and trial phases. The
use of physical evidence was farcical, they said. At the
time of arrest, the lawyers said, the suspects had been told
to bring the clothing that they had been wearing on the day
of the demonstration; this was then admitted as evidence as
if it had been seized by police. During the trial, rocks and
sticks were piled on a table. Police witnesses were asked
whether demonstrators had used items "like that" against them
during the protest. When the police replied affirmatively,
the rocks and sticks - which had apparently been gathered at
random and were not linked to the demonstrators in any way -
were admitted as "evidence."


13. (C) The lawyers also said that some suspects had not
been positively identified by police. For example, a police
intelligence officer testified that he had seen four
different suspects present at the protest, yet he could not
identify any distinguishing features about them other than
that they were "short Papuans." Some photographic evidence
was introduced in the form of pictures taken by plainclothes
police, but these merely showed some suspects listening to
speeches, not assaulting police officers. Also, despite the
fact that TransTV shot footage showing the lethal attacks on
the Brimob and Air Force officers, this evidence was used
neither in the investigation nor the trial, underscoring the
fact that the authorities made no serious effort to identify,
let alone arrest, the true killers.


14. (C) The PBHI lawyers complained about bias on the part of
judges Moris Genting, Lakonie, and Deni Sunadi. (This was
the team that imposed 15-year sentences on Filip Karma and
Yusuf Pakage in the 2005 independence flag-raising case).
During the trial, the judges attempted to suppress any
reference by the defendants to police abuse. When, during
cross examination, three defendants recanted earlier
statements, saying that these had been elicited by beatings,
the judges requested that the prosecutors initiate perjury
charges against the defendants.


15. (C) The PBHI lawyers claimed that there had been
instances of intimidation. On September 1, Defense attorney
Situmorang had received a threatening text message. In a
phone conversation with ElsHAM lawyer Aloysius Renwarin,
Director of Criminal Investigations Paulus Waterpauw had
threatened to "shut up" Situmorang and her colleague David
Sitorus. (Unbeknownst to Waterpauw, Renwarin had activated a
speakerphone and both Sitorus and Situmorang were listening.)
Some relatives of the defendants had also been subjected to
incidents of verbal harassment and surveillance by unknown
persons that may have been attempts to intimidate, the
lawyers said. The PBHI lawyers also said that the climate of
intimidation had prevented witnesses with exculpatory
testimony from coming forward. For example, three witnesses
who could place Steven Wandik (the only suspect charged with

JAKARTA 00012800 004.2 OF 004


murder) at his workplace on March 16 were refusing to come
forward unless Wandik's defense team could guarantee their
safety.


16. (C) The PBHI lawyers said that they did not plan to
appeal the verdicts, since they feared that this would result
in even harsher sentences. This was seconded by the Rev.
Cornelius Berotabui, father of one of the defendants, in a
separate meeting with poloff on October 13. He noted with
resignation that the authorities' approach to the entire
affair was what Papuans had come to expect.

Case Not Closed?
--------------


17. (C) It is possible that more arrests are still to come.
In late September, Kosmos Yual, a student leader on the list
of persons wanted in connection with the March 16 riot,
turned himself in to police. This was apparently a
negotiated surrender, fueling rumors already in circulation
that he was in fact a police informant. Contacts in Jayapura
speculated to poloff that Yual might provide police with
information that could lead to a new round of arrests.

Comment
--------------


18. (SBU) The causes of the bloodshed on March 16 will be
debated for years to come. Although some Papuans talk of
conspiracy and provocation by intelligence operatives, we
believe that a more likely explanation is spectacularly bad
decision-making on the part of the police on the scene.
However, while the gruesome murder of three unarmed policemen
and an air force officer at the hands of angry mob is
unconscionable, the authorities' handling of the aftermath
has merely added a new chapter to the history of miscarriages
of justice in Papua. It is clear that the police rounded up
a miscellany of perceived trouble-makers and random
individuals and that the prosecutors and judges then
railroaded them in a farcical show trial. While it is
understandable that the police should be angered over the
deaths of their colleagues, this episode will likely only
fuel mistrust between indigenous Papuans and the police and
justice system. This is all the more unfortunate because it
occurs after a period of generally improved performance and
greater professionalism on the part of the police in Papua.
End Comment.
PASCOE