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 �A;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