Special Autonomy: Not A Panacea, but The Best Solution
NEWS — April 2021
There has been a growing debate on the revised Law number 21/2001 on Papua Special Autnonomy which has brought significant impacts to the political and security situations at both national and provincial levels, especially in Papua and West Papua Provinces. Despite the noble visions of the Law which aimed at guaranteeing the rights of Papuans to prosper; critics and rejections toward the continuation of the Law, including the disbursement of regional fundings, still persist.
As the law will expire by this year, Indonesian House of Representatives (DPR RI) has formed the Special Committee (Pansus) to revise Law number 21 of 2001 on Papua’s Special Autonomy led by Komarudin Watubun (F-PDIP). He believed that for the past 20 years, the debates are always about the sharing of government authority at both national and regional levels which eventually hindered the vision to achieve significant results emphasizing on the rights of Papuans. Thus, he recommended that in this ongoing process, DPR RI should take the thought and advices of native Papuans into account in order to better respond to the situation on the ground.
Pros and Cons around the Deliberation of Special Autonomy
However, there were mixed reactions on the extent to which the special autonomy could give opportunity for enhancing the wellbeing of Papuans. JP Solossa, the Governor of Papua (2000–2005) considered the Special Autonomy Law as an opportunity not only for self-government and improving the welfare of Papuans; but also the ultimate solution to resolve political independence in Papua. While the leader of Dewan Adat Sairei in charge of Tanjung Ayomi until Tamakuri customary territories believed that special autonomy mechanism and its funding should be carefully monitored so that there would be no more corruption and hoping that Papuans could benefit from this special status. He also urged all Papuans to support the continuation of this special autonomy.
Meanwhile, a number of Papuan community group also proclaimed their supports to the revised law on Papuan Special Autonomy by hoping that the bid to extend special autonomy will also be followed by the improvement on the critical sectors such as coordination, delegation of powers, accountability, and transparency which need to be urgently fixed.
Aliansi Pemuda Merah Putih Indonesia chapter Papua Province on Wednesday (17/3) proclaimed their support to the continuation of Special Autonomy. Besides, Leaders of Lembaga Masyarakat Adat (LMA) Sorong Raya also supported the Special Autonomy in West Papua in order for ensuring the sustainability of regional development and supporting the future of Native Papuans or Orang Asli Papua (OAP). It is further strengthened on the press release by the Representative of LMA Cornelis Usili on Thursday (1/4) in which he advised all Native Papuans not to be easily triggered nor influenced by such provocations against the idea of Special Autonomy.
Another support was also conveyed by the Leader of LMA Lanny Jaya District, Yele Wenda, and representative of LMA Fakfak District Fabianus Valentinus Kabes hoping that the revised law will always support the development of all native Papuans. In his statement, Fabianus said “I hope this program (Special Autonomy) will continue, and if there are any obstacles, we must try to fix them. Papua is Indonesia, and Indonesia without Papua is not Indonesia.”
In addition, a group of people and leaders in Jayawijaya Regency also held public gathering led by the Chairperson of the Papua and West Papua Province PEPERA Deliberative Council Alex Silo Karno Doga and the Leader of LMA Jayawijaya Karlos Huby. They agreed that Special Autonomy is the best solution for Papua’s acceleration to sustainable development.
However, there are also those who voice opposition to the special autonomy status given the continuing social and economic inequality that keeps happening in Papua. Besides, the issue of human rights is one of the most challenging issues that central government must be reckoned with, as it involves various actors — and if it is not managed carefully, it will surely contribute to the growing distrust between Papuans and the central government. To reduce this tension, however, there should be an open and constructive dialogue between Jakarta and Papua, especially through the Commission for Truth and Reconcilliation, which hopefully could ensure justice is done, no matter how complex and difficults the process could be.
Visions to Prosperity, Peace, and Justice
In response to the pros and cons around the continuation of the special autonomy, it is critical for central government to reconsider the process and directions of the revised Law. The vision of prosperity is as important as the vision to peace and justice. For the past 20 years, a strong emphasis has been given to the advocacy of promoting prosperity to Papuans, but little did the government knew that the peace and justice aspects remain untapped.
To this end, the Indonesian President Instruction number 9 of 2020 about the Acceleration of Welfare Development in Papua and West Papua Province should be amplified by all national and regional stakeholders, including all ministries and institutions, to foster development in Papua, especially by emphasizing on the importance of (1) dialogue with all elements of societies, mass organizations, and regional governments, (2) assistance and capacity building to regional governments in implementing the special autonomy, (3) active participation of the local communities and Papuans in general, (4) improvement of integrated governments’ public communication and diplomacy, and (5) intense coordination and cooperation among stakeholders to ensure stability and peace in Papua.
Special Autonomy is indeed not a panacea that can heal all problems in Papua. But, it can be a vehicle for Papuans, to articulate their aspirations which at the same time could promote welfare with a special emphasis on the holistic development. Therefore, trust should be built between Jakarta and Papua as the foundation for assuring the succeed of Special Autonomy, not only during the ongoing process of the deliberation of the Law, but also in the whole process of implementing the Special Autonomy status in Papua and West Papua.(*)
This piece fully represents the writer’s idea. It does not express any ideas or stances of specific institutions or organizations she works at or is affiliated with.
