The Quest for a Contextual Special-Autonomy for Papua
Muhamad Rosyid Jazuli — August 2021
Last 15 July, the revised Papua Special Autonomy Law or Otsus has been passed by Indonesia’s parliament. Indeed, a considerable milestone for developing the most-eastern part of Indonesia has been achieved. The grand narrative surrounding the new law is that it is all for the development of Papua.
Technically speaking, of course, the new Special Autonomy Law brings some positive values. Among other things is the extension of the granting of special autonomy funds until 2041. In addition, the special autonomy funds are increased from 2 percent to 2.25 percent of the national general allocation fund (DAU). Of the funds, 30 percent is for education, and 20 percent is for health (Kompas, 17/7/2021).
Many understand that infrastructure development is still ongoing in Papua. One would easily spot the development of the Trans-Papua Road. Furthermore, with this ‘new’ Otsus, the government said that it would commit to developing Papua’s human resources (HR). However, it is undeniable that the Otsus is still clouded with debates, especially whether it is a success or a failure.
The positive things above have unfortunately been unable to subside the debates surrounding the Otsus, to some extent. Some even do not see that this new Otsus would solve the Papua problem. In fact, there is no significant agreement on this Papua’ problem’. Is it concerning the infrastructure or the people? Lack of access or representation of local people? It is not easy to define it (Norotow, 2021).
What has emerged so far is that the central government is the one that unilaterally makes decisions. Jakarta’s role is very dominant. In that sense, the role of the Papuan community, which seems to be none, is widely questioned.
Customary aspect
To agree on such a crucial definition issue above, honest and open two-way communication is required. In this context, unfortunately, negotiations between representatives of the Papuan people and the central government are rarely, if not at all, carried out. Indeed, the central government needs to take an ‘extra mile’ role. For instance, the government needs to actively assist the Papuan people to determine who their real representatives are.
People in Papua now have had formal regional leaders (governors and regents or mayors). However, it is well known that the Papuan people also have traditional leaders, the ondoafis, who have significant social influence. These customary leaders, alongside their customary decision-making processes and values, are central to the lives of peoples with an entrenched culture spanning across Indonesia, in this case, of course, especially in Papua.
Discussing, designing, negotiating, debating, ratifying, and testing laws is a modern mechanism that most Indonesians, especially from Papua, are not familiar with. People who are most attached to traditional life and customs will certainly not benefit from this modern, formal situation.
The above discussion should explain why the understanding of the problems in Papua has been rare. Dictating the Papuan people over their problems is clearly not a prudent move. Such a cause, instead, arises resistance. As a result, even if implemented, this Special Autonomy will reap many debates and riots rather than real-world development results.
Whatever the debate, though, the new Otsus has been ratified. This law mandates the establishment of a special agency that is directly responsible to the President. Paying close attention to the formation of the institution is vital. This body should be an executor and a discussion forum for the Otsus implementation, at least to form an understanding of the main issues of Papua. Referring to a simple management mechanism, you can’t take measures or even evaluate them if you can’t explain the problem.
Indigenous Papuans clearly must be involved in the body’s board. However, multilateral discussions must take place, particularly within the agency. Technical debates related to budgets and development targets are undoubtedly important. However, humane and heart-to-heart dialogs must also be carried out (Norotow, 2021). Actors, especially from the government side, who have cross-ethnic skills and sensitivities are needed.
Such a complex engagement should be continuously worked out to avoid potential communication blunders and unnecessary disagreements that have often been a problem when dealing with Papua’s issues so far. Of course, we could still remember the problem of racism in Surabaya and another alleged racism-related comment recently by a minister. The most recent is the inappropriate incident in Merauke, which was very unnecessary.
Otsus: vital
This Special Autonomy, in some sense, resembles the assistance or aids given by developed economies to the developing ones. Experts have agreed that most of the aids arguably fail mainly due to the lack of engagement with the local context, such as the political and customary aspects. But at least there is a record of success, one of which is the case of Singapore, especially during their early years after independence.
At the beginning of its independence, Singapore received assistance from various countries, especially the UK. At that time, leaders of the Lion Land knew that they needed help. However, they did not want to be dictated to by the aid provider. This is because aid providers often do not know the social context of the countries being helped.
Singapore, therefore, actively provided feedback to and negotiated with these aid providers. They selected and sorted out which pieces of advice were appropriate for their domestic context. As a result, despite the long road full of dynamics, there became a developed, high-income Singapore.
Such a successful trajectory hopefully illustrates that two-way communication and negotiation are necessary for the implementation of the Papuan Otsus. In the implementation, the central government must deeply comprehend the social context of Papua and the Papuan people. Papuans indeed need developments in many aspects such as infrastructure, jobs, education, and health. In such a quest, regardless of the debates, the new Otsus will play a pivotal role in providing a foundational aspect, especially in terms of financial support. However, one may need to note that the implementation of the Otsus cannot be equated with that of in, say, Sumatra, Sulawesi, Kalimantan, and Java.
*This piece fully represents the writer’s idea. It does not express any ideas or stances of specific institutions or organizations he works at or is affiliated with.
