[Marinir] Re: The History of the Return of Irian Jaya (West Papua) to Indonesia

[suhartono suhartono]

terima kasih banyak kiriman emailnya.......
ditungggu di cilandak.....!
salam.

On 8/8/05, Yap Hong Gie <ouwehoer at centrin.net.id> wrote:
> http://www.indonesianembassy.org.nz/TheHistoryofthereturnofIrianJaya.htm
> 
> The History of the Return of Irian Jaya (West Papua) to Indonesia
> 
> Background
> 
> 1. West Irian was part of the Dutch colony since 1828.
> When the Dutch recognized Indonesian sovereignty in 1949, the status of
> Irian Jaya was yet to be resolved.
> The Agreement to Transfer the Sovereignty, signed by Indonesia and the
> Netherlands in the Hague in November 1949, stated inter alia:
> "the status quo of the Residency of New Guinea shall be maintained with the
> stipulation that within a year from the date of transfer of sovereignty to
> the Republic of the United States of Indonesia the question of the political
> status of New Guinea be determined through negotiations."
> 
> 2. Noticing that there were no signs of any solution to the Irian issue,
> Indonesia submitted the matter to the United Nations in 1954. Indonesia's
> position was endorsed by the Asia Africa Conference in April 1955 which
> passed a resolution supporting Indonesia and then asked the United Nations
> to assist the two conflicting parties in reaching for a peaceful solution.
> Nevertheless, up until 1961 there was no indication of any peaceful solution
> despite the fact that the matter was discussed at the plenary meetings of
> the United Nations General Assembly and at Committee One.
> Meanwhile, diplomatic relations between the two countries were severed in
> 1961. The Government of Indonesia announced a new policy, Tri Komando
> Rakyat (Trikora), and the confrontation between the two parties was
> inevitable.
> In 1962 an armed fight broke between Indonesia and the Dutch in the western
> coast of Irian.
> 
> 3. Considering the negative development, specifically in an international
> relations which were engulfed in the Cold War era, the United Nations
> Secretary General U Thant appointed US Ambassador Elsworth Bunker as
> mediator to find a solution to the Irian issue between Indonesia and the
> Netherlands. The two countries finally reached an agreement on Irian, as
> made out in the "Agreement between the Republic of Indonesia and the Kingdom
> of the Netherlands concerning West New Guinea (West Irian)", signed on 15
> August 1962 by the Foreign Minister Mr. Subandrio as the representative of
> the Government of Indonesia and Mr. J.H. van Roijen and C. Schurmann as the
> representatives of  the Netherland Government at the United Nations
> Headquarters in New York. This agreement was then known as the New York
> Agreement.
> 
> 4. It was agreed by the two parties that the Agreement had to be ratified
> before the discussion of the Irian issue at the United Nations General
> Assembly and that it would enter into force upon adoption by the United
> Nations General Assembly and terminate when all principles contained therein
> had been executed. Thus, the New York Agreement entered into force at the
> 17th United Nations General Assembly in 1962 by the adoption of Resolution
> No. 1752 regarding the New York Agreement on 21 September 1962.
> The New York Agreement: the Legal Foundation for Self Determination
> 
> 5. The New York Agreement, which was not only agreed by Indonesia and
> the Netherlands, but also accepted by the international community, was in
> principle a legal foundation for the implementation of the rights for self
> determination in West Irian. The implementation of the content and spirit of
> the New York Agreement was monitored by the international community,
> thus proving it was not engineered by the parties involved in the dispute,
> Indonesia and the Netherlands.
> 
> 6. The New York Agreement comprising 29 Articles basically contained
>    the stipulations on:
> 1). The transfer of administration from the Netherlands to the United
>      Nations, in Articles 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11;
> 2). The transfer of administration from the United Nations to Indonesia, in
>      Articles 12 and 13; and
> 3). Self determination, in Articles 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21.
> 
> 7. The transfer of administration from the Netherlands to the United Nations
> was implemented after the United Nations Resolution that adopted the New
> York Agreement was signed. The United Nations temporary administration was
> carried out by the United Nations Executive Authority (UNTEA), an agency
> created for the purpose. The Dutch flag was taken down and the United
> Nations flag flown. The UN Secretary General substituted the Dutch security
> forces with UN security forces, mostly comprised of  West Papuans. The UN
> Secretary General would send periodic reports to Indonesia, the Netherlands
> and the UN General Assembly. Under the Agreement, the Netherlands relinquish
> the governance of Irian to UNTEA effectively on 1 October 1962.
> 
> 8. As determined by the New York Agreement, the UNTEA Administration in
> Irian was divided into two phases, the first started on 1 October 1962 until
> 1 May 1963. In this phase, Dutch officials were replaced by non Dutch and
> non Indonesian officials. UNTEA was also required to disseminate information
> to the West Papuans regarding the transfer of administration to Indonesia
> and the principles of self determination as specified in the New York
> Agreement. The second phase of the UNTEA Administration was to be
> implemented by bringing into consideration the local developments and was
> unbounded by a time limit. When the United Nations found the time as
> appropriate, UNTEA would carry out the transfer of administrative
> responsibility to Indonesia. Following the transfer of administrative
> responsibility to Indonesia, all UNTEA security personnel would be replaced
> by Indonesian security personnel and Indonesian laws and regulations would
> be applicable in the territory. This transfer of administration to Indonesia
> was completed on 1 May 1963.
> 
> 9. Subsequent to the transfer of administration to Indonesia, an act of free
> choice would be carried out. The principles of the act of free choice as
> determined by the New York Agreement were as follows:
> 
> 1) The exercise of the act of free choice would be directed by the advice,
>     assistance, and participation of the United Nations.
> 2) The procedure of the act of free choice would be consulted with the
>     representatives of the people.
> 3) The provisions for participation in the act of free choice would comply
>     with international practices.
> 4) The United Nations and Indonesia would present the report on the act of
>     free choice to the UN General Assembly.
> 5) Indonesia and the Netherlands would acknowledge and be bound by the
>     result of the act of free choice.
> 
> 10. It was evident that the New York Agreement, as the legal basis for the
> act of free choice, did not state that the principle of "one man one vote"
> had to be employed on the act of free choice/self determination in Irian
> (Penentuan Pendapat Rakyat or PEPERA in short).
> The New York Agreement was composed such as to ensure the transparency of
> the implementation of the act of free choice, by encompassing the elements
> of advice, assistance, and participation of the United Nations and UN
> reports to the international community by way of the UN General Assembly.
> 
> 
> PEPERA as the Formal Process of Act of Self Determination
> 
> 11. In realizing its mandate, the United Nations appointed Ambassador
> Fernando Ortiz Sanz from Bolivia as the representative of the UN Secretary
> General to carry out the responsibility of providing advice, assistance, and
> participation, and to report on the implementation of the act of self
> determination. Ambassador Ortiz Sanz arrived in Jakarta on 12 August 1968
> and proceeded to Irian on 22 August 1968 to establish the UN office in
> Jayapura. The office was opened on 4 August 1969.
> 
> 12. The New York Agreement did not specifically stated the procedure and
> method of the implementation of the act of free choice. Therefore, the
> appropriate means that was suitable to the level of social, economic, and
> cultural development and the geography of West Irian needed to be
> established. This was due to the fact that the New York Agreement did not
> require the implementation "one man one vote" system on the act of self
> determination. There was no engineering involved and no cause for suspicion,
> for the reason that according to international law, there was no obligation
> that an act of self determination had to apply a "one man one vote" system.
> 
> 13. To establish the best way to implement the act of self determination in
> Irian, Indonesia held a meeting with the United Nations in Jakarta and in
> New York. Based on the result of the meeting, Indonesia conveyed a note to
> Ambassador Ortiz Sanz on 18 February 1969 that basically contained a
> proposal on the method of the implementation of the act of self
> determination, which was as follows:
> 
> 1) The act of self determination would be carried out by a representative
>   assembly in every regency utilizing the system of democratic
>   deliberation.
> 2) The representative assembly would be comprised of  three representatives:
>   a regional representative elected by the community, a functional
>   representative representing the political, social, cultural, and
>   religious interests, and a traditional representative consisting of
>   directly elected tribal representatives.
> 3) The method had to be first consulted with the people of Irian as
>   determined by the New York Agreement.
> 
> 14. Responding to the proposal, the UN Representative stated that the United
> Nations was prepared to cooperate and participate on the implementation of
> the act of free choice. The United Nations also actively participated in the
> process of consultation between the Indonesian Government and the people of
> West Irian on the method of implementation of the act of free choice. The
> method of consultation was finally decided as the most appropriate for the
> implementation of the act of free choice. The Djakarta Times on 26 February
> 1969 in the article "UN and the Netherlands Approve Indonesian Policy on Act
> of Free Choice" wrote that "the United Nations and the Dutch Government have
> approved the policy of the Indonesian Government on the act of free choice
> in West Irian by way of consultations and not by one-man-one-vote system."
> Meanwhile, The Indonesian Observer on 24 February 1969 in the news article
> "West Irian Legislators Endorse Voting Method" reported that "the Regional
> Legislature of Merauke regency (kabupaten) has issued a statement
> emphasizing that if the act of free choice should be conducted at all it
> should be through the regional legislatures by means of representative
> voting."
> 
> 15. Based on the above, the act of free choice in Irian was conducted
> utilizing the representative and deliberation system. During the process of
> the act of free choice from 14 July to 2 August 1969, the Representative of
> the UN Secretary General actively participated in the process according to
> his mandate and responsibilities as outlined in the New York Agreement. In
> his report to the General Assembly, the Representative of the UN Secretary
> General Envoy stated inter alia:
> 
> a. "The Petitions opposing annexation to Indonesia . show that without doubt
>  certain elements of the population of West Irian held firm convictions in
>  favour of independence. Nevertheless, the answer given by the consultative
>  assemblies to the questions put to them was a unanimous consensus in
>  favour of remaining with Indonesia."
> b. "Finally, on the basis of the facts presented in this report and the
>  documents referred to, it can be stated that with the limitations imposed
>  by geographical characteristics of the territory and the general
>  political situation in the area, the act of free choice has taken place in
>  West Irian in accordance with Indonesian practice, in which the
>  representatives of the population have expressed their wish to remain with
> Indonesia."
> 
> 
> 16. After analyzing Indonesia's and the United Nations's reports and other
> documentation, the 24th UN General Assembly on 19 November 1969 adopted
> Resolution 2504 (XXIV) that legalized the act of self determination in Irian
> Jaya as determined by the New York Agreement:
> "Bearing in mind that, in accordance with article XXI, paragraph 2, both
> parties to the Agreement have recognized these results and abide by them,"
> "Takes note of the report of the Secretary General and acknowledges with
> appreciation the fulfilment by the Secretary General and his Representative
> of the tasks entrusted to them under the Agreement of 15 August 1962 between
> the Republic of Indonesia and the Kingdom of the Netherlands concerning West
> New Guinea (West Irian)".
> 
> 17. Upon the adoption of UN General Assembly Resolution 2504 (XXIV), the
>  act of free choice by way of deliberation, not "one man one vote", was
> accepted by the international community. From that point on, the
> international community recognized, de jure and de facto, that the region of
> Irian Jaya was an integral part of the Unitary State of Indonesia.
> This international recognition could not be annulled or revoked, for not one
> country in the world could challenge the legitimacy of the territory of
> Irian Jaya as part
> of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia.
> The principle of integrity and sovereignty of any state is one of the main
> principles embodied in the United Nations Charter.
> Consequently, any separatist movement would be rejected by the international
> community, as it violated the principles and objectives of the United
> Nations.
> 
> 
> The  Rome Joint Statement
> 
> 18. In accordance with the New York Agreement, apart from consulting the
> United Nations on the implementation of the Act of Self Determination,
> Indonesia also kept the Netherlands informed of any developments. In the
> framework of bilateral meeting between Indonesia and the Netherlands, held
> in Rome on 20-21 May 1969, both parties agreed to issue a Joint Statement on
> the subjects touched and agreements reached at the meeting. Indonesia was
> represented by Foreign Minister Adam Malik at the meeting, whilst the
> Netherlands was represented by Foreign Minister Luns and Developmental
> Cooperation Minister Udink.
> 
> 
> 19. The Rome Joint Statement stated inter alia:
> 
> a. The Indonesian Foreign Minister reiterated the Indonesian Government's
> intention to fully implement the conditions set out in 1962 New York
> Agreement. The Foreign Minister advised the Dutch Ministers in detail about
> the measures taken by the Indonesian Government regarding the act of free
> choice in West Irian after the comprehensive consultation with and the
> approval of the regional representative institutions in West Irian, and with
> the advice, assistance, and cooperation of the Representative of the UN
> Secretary General Ambassador Ortiz Sanz and his assistants.
> 
> b. The Indonesian Foreign Minister reiterated the position of the Indonesian
> Government that due to technical and practical problems, the implementation
> of the act of free choice with the Indonesian system of deliberation was the
> best procedure. The Foreign Minister explained that West Irian would be
> accessible to analysts and foreign correspondence.
> 
> c. On economic cooperation it was agreed that the Netherlands would provide
> the funds for the UN FUNDWI Projects. Projects on air, coast and river
> transportation should be made a priority. Both countries would forthwith
> convey a technical assistance project proposal to the Asian Development Bank
> in the form of a list of the territory's economic potentials.
> 
> 
> Conclusions
> 20. The implementation of the act of self determination was carried out
> democratically and in a transparent manner by involving the people of Irian
> Jaya by way of consultation on the method of the act of free choice. The
> whole process of the act of free choice involved the participation,
> assistance, and advice of the United Nations and in turn was acknowledged by
> the international community (the United Nations General Assembly).
> 
> 21. It was clear that the PEPERA as the implementation of the act of free
> choice was not legally flawed. A unilateral interpretation and
> misinterpretation of the New York Agreement and attempts to twist
> perceptions that the New York Agreement had to exercise 'one man one vote'
> system was certainly not justified and not true to the fact.
> 
> Directorate of International Organizations
> Department for Foreign Affairs
> 
>