Dear Friends,
Below is a Press Statement from the Prime Minister’s office, Aceh, 21st June 2003 regarding the European Parliament Resolution (also below) adopted on 5 June 2003 regarding the situation in Indonesia, particularly in Acheh, Sumatra. (This has been forwarded from the Acheh/Sumatra National Liberation Front, PO Box 130, S-145 01 Norsborg, SWEDEN, Tel: +46 8 531 83833, Fax: +46 8 531 91275).
PRESS STATEMENT
from
THE PRIME MINISTER¡¯S OFFICE
June 21st 2003
Regarding the European Parliament Resolution adopted 5 June 2003 on the situation in Indonesia, particularly in Acheh, Sumatra.
Both the military and political leadership of the ASNLF are united in their gratitude to the European Union for the concern and balance shown in the aforementioned resolution.
We report every day that the ¡®Indonesian military has been attempting to crush the rebellion by means of serious human rights abuses including summary killings, abductions, rape and torture¡¯ (EU Resolution, Para H). More than 20,000 of our people have been killed in the ¡®appalling violence and the persisting conflict in Aceh¡¯ (Para 1). And since the imposition of martial law on 19 May 2003, almost 1,000 innocent civilians have lost their lives.
We thank the EU for reminding President Megawati of her promise to our people: that her government would pursue a peaceful solution to the problem in our homeland. In response to the EU¡¯s request that both sides return to the negotiating table, may we take this opportunity to again reiterate that the ASNLF is willing to enter into further dialogue with the RoI. We insist only that no preconditions are set.
The Resolution echoes one of the main demands of the Achehnese: that those responsible for human rights abuses are held accountable for their actions in a court of law. We believe the EU recognizes that if this demand remains unfulfilled, there will never be real peace in Acheh. In addition, we praise the resolutions sentiments that human rights defenders should be protected, not targeted by the security forces as is currently the case.
In para 9, the resolution ¡®deplores the restrictions on freedom of the press provided for under martial law¡¯. Hour by hour we receive information of more civilians shot, abducted, tortured or raped. The international community has been slow to respond to reports of such atrocities because of the lack of independent verification. Journalists not embedded with the military are being prevented from entering areas where serious atrocities have taken place. In some instances, those who have attempted to reach such incidents have been shot at. The resolution calls on the Indonesian military to withdraw, and also for humanitarian aid to be distributed by NGOs to those so badly in need. Tens of thousand of civilians are now displaced in Acheh. They are mainly women and children, and are without shelter, food and medicine.
This resolution, adopted by the EU Parliament on June 5, 2003, gives international voice to the sufferings of the Achenese people. We ask the EU to provide humanitarian relief to be distributed by independent bodies, not by the Indonesian military as the RoI has suggested. And that an EU member state offer to act as mediator in future dialogue to commence at the earliest possible date.
Stockholm, June 21st 2003
Signed:
Malik Mahmud
Prime Minister
The State of Acheh
–end–
——————-
EU Parliament resolution
———-
European Parliament
Resolution adopted 5 June 2003
Situation in Indonesia, particularly in the Aceh province
The European Parliament,
– having regard to its previous resolutions on the situation in Indonesia and in the Indonesian province of Papua, in particular its resolution of 13 December 2001 on Papua (Irian Jaya) and Sulawesi in Indonesia(1), and its resolution of 16 May 2002 on Indonesia (the Moluccas, Aceh and Papua)(2),
– having regard to the Commission communication of 2 February 2000 on developing closer relations with Indonesia (COM(2000) 50),
– having regard to the report of March 2002 of the EC conflict prevention assessment mission to Indonesia,
– having regard to its resolution of 13 December 2000 on the communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on developing closer relations between Indonesia and the European Union(3),
– having regard to the EC-Indonesia Strategy Paper 2002-2006,
– having regard to the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement (COH) signed on 9 December 2002 between the Government of Indonesia and the Gerakan Aceh Merdeka (GAM),
– having regard to the EU Presidency’s Statement on Aceh of 15 May 2003,
– having regard to the General Affairs Council’s conclusions of 19 May 2003,
A. acknowledging and supporting the importance of Indonesia’s national territorial integrity, while underlining that the only viable way for the Indonesian government to guarantee the territorial integrity of Indonesia is to engage in a genuine dialogue with the provinces in order to tackle the
root causes of separatism, and emphasizing the importance of inter-ethnic, inter-religious and inter-regional dialogue and successful decentralization,
B. whereas at the start of her Presidency Megawati Sukarnoputri vowed to solve the Aceh problem peacefully,
C. having regard to the setting-up in 1976 of GAM, a movement which seeks the creation of an independent State, and whereas GAM is calling for a referendum on self- determination,
D. whereas about 12 000 Acehnese civilians have perished during the 26 years of war, and whereas the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement (COHA) signed on 9 December 2002 between the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) and the Government of Indonesia was an attempt to bring peace to the province,
E. whereas last-minute talks in Tokyo on 17 and 18 May between the Government of Indonesia and GAM failed to reach a peaceful solution to the Aceh conflict,
F. whereas President Megawati Sukarnoputri subsequently announced Presidential Decree 28/2003 establishing a state of military emergency for six months in Aceh, putting an effective end to the internationally negotiated Cessation of Hostilities Agreement and thus allowing the military authorities to replace many local authorities with military and police personnel,
G. whereas the Aceh military campaign by the Indonesian military (TNI) involves up to 40 000 military and police personnel,
H. taking note of reports by several international NGOs that the Indonesian military has been attempting to crush the rebellion by means of serious human rights abuses including summary killings, abductions, rape and torture,
I. noting the international NGOs’ reports referring to GAM’s role in killings, unlawful detentions, forced expulsions of Javanese people and dubious justice systems,
J. whereas the conflict in Aceh is causing massive internal displacement and destruction, especially in relation to schools,
K. whereas the people of the province of Papua have repeatedly asked the Indonesian authorities to engage in a genuine dialogue to tackle the aspirations of, and perceived injustices against, the Papuan people,
L. whereas the Indonesian national Parliament passed the Papuan Special Autonomy Law (Law No 21/2001) on 23 October 2001,
M. whereas the international community, including the EU and the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF), has clearly expressed its support for Special Autonomy for Papua and whereas the EU is ready to provide financial support and technical assistance for the implementation of Special Autonomy,
N. whereas Articles 5.2., 19, 20 and 21 of the Special Autonomy Law for Papua describe the implementation of the Papuan People’s Assembly (Majelis Rakyat Papua or MRP),
O. whereas Article 46 of the Papua Special Autonomy Law provides for a ‘Commission for Truth and Reconciliation’ to be set up and whereas central government has so far failed to approve the governmental regulations needed for the establishment of the MRP and of the Commission for Truth and Reconciliation,
P. whereas the provincial legislature, after strong protests by students, non-governmental organisations, religious leaders and the Papuan tribal council (Lembaga Masyarakat Adat), decided on 16 October 1999 to reject the division of the province into three distinct provinces,
Q. whereas Article 76 of the Special Autonomy Law for Papua states that any plan to divide the region into more provinces can only be executed after approval by the Provincial Government of Papua (DPRD) and the People’s Representative Council (MRP),
ACEH
1. Is deeply concerned about the appalling violence and the persisting conflict in Aceh;
2. Urges the Indonesian Government and GAM to return to the negotiating table in order to reach an agreement to finally implement the COH, with a view to organising free and fair elections in 2004;
3. On the basis of the Geneva Agreement, calls on GAM to pursue its cause through the democratic process and to decommission its weapons, and calls on the Indonesian army to withdraw;
4. Underlines that the only viable way to guarantee the territorial integrity of Indonesia is for the Government to engage in a genuine dialogue with the provinces in order to tackle the root causes of separatism, and emphasizes the importance of inter-ethnic and inter-regional dialogue and successful decentralization;
5. Calls on the Indonesian Government to bring to account those responsible for violations of human rights in Aceh, as well as other parts of the country, whether committed by civilians, separatist groups, militias, paramilitaries or the military;
6. Calls on the Indonesian Government and GAM to ensure protection of and access for human rights defenders and to allow the UN Special Representative on Human Rights Defenders to visit;
7. Calls for all humanitarian organizations to be authorised once again to aid the population in complete safety;
8. Expresses its serious concern about the well-being of internationally recognised Acehnese human rights activists such as Mr Nazar and Mr Kautsar, who have been recognised as prisoners of conscience by international rights organizations, and calls for their immediate release;
9. Calls for religions and freedom of religion to be respected; deplores the restrictions on freedom of the press provided for under martial law;
PAPUA
10. Is deeply concerned about Presidential Decree 1/2003 on the Acceleration of the Implementation of Law No 45/1999 on the division of the Province of Papua into three new provinces, as issued by President Megawati Sukarnoputri on 27 January 2003;
11. Calls on the Government of Indonesia to withdraw the said decree since it undermines the Special Autonomy Law for Papua and consequently the EU commitments regarding this Special Autonomy;
12. Calls on the Indonesian Government to urgently engage in a genuine dialogue with representatives of the people of Papua so as to prevent further violence;
13. Urges the Indonesian Government to work towards the full implementation of the Special Autonomy Law for Papua by finalising and approving government regulations regarding budgeting, legislative drafting and institutional development, including the implementation of the MRP and the Commission for Truth and Reconciliation;
14. Calls on the Government of Indonesia to endorse a National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) investigation into the numerous Papua human rights violations past and present, and to establish a credible and independent inquiry team of national and international human rights experts to investigate the impunity of the security forces;
15. Urges the Indonesian Government to find a peaceful solution to the situation in Papua province, to protect any populations at risk, and to invite the UN Special Rapporteurs on torture and summary executions to visit the Indonesian provinces concerned;
16. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission, the Council, the Government and Parliament of Indonesia, the Governor and the Regional Houses of Representatives (DPRD) of Aceh and Papua, the Indonesian National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM), the Secretary-General of the UN, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the secretariats of ASEAN and the Pacific Islands Forum.
—————————————————————————-
(1) OJ C 177 E, 25.7.2002, p. 312.
(2) P5_TA(2002)0254.
(3) OJ C 232, 17.8.2001, p. 186.
****************
Thank you.
Urgent Appeals Desk
Asian Human Rights Commission
