29 April 2003

 

Mr Duncan Kerr MP
President
The United Nations Association of Australia
Tasmanian Branch
38 Baynton Street
KINGSTON 7050

 

Dear Mr Kerr,

        Thank you for your letter of 4 April 2003 concerning the current status of the measures so far enacted by my Government to improve the wellbeing of the people of Papua. We appreciate your interest in this matter.

        As you may be aware, the Government has already taken two major initiatives:

        Firstly, Law No. 21 on special autonomy, which is based on the regional autonomy arrangements that came into effect throughout Indonesia in 2001, but with several very important differences, including the guaranteeing of a significant percentage of the revenues earned from certain natural resources and the addition of special clauses for the preservation of Papuan culture. Thus, under what is a very wide-ranging autonomy, responsibility for the provision of most government services has now been devolved from the central government to all Indonesia's provinces, including Papua, and with consequential adjustments made to funding levels. The Papuan people, accordingly, are now better able to determine their own spending and other priorities. The additional funding being allocated to Papua under the new arrangements, I should inform you, is very significant indeed. With a population of only 2,233,530, Papua province received a funding allocation of the amount of 3,556 billion rupiah from the central government, and has become the fifth biggest recipient for the year 2003. This allocation however is very significant compared to East Java province, the largest recipient of funds, which has a population of about 35 million - the second highest population in Indonesia after West Java province - with a funding of 9,953 billion rupiah.

        Secondly, is Presidential Instruction No. 1 of 2003 that received the endorsement of the House of Representatives in February 2003, which is to split the territory of Papua into three provinces as well as create new districts and at least one new city. Contrary to the view of some people, this proposal was never meant to contravene the special autonomy for Papua. One complements the other. As you may appreciate, Papua is four times the size of Java island, and with huge difficulties because of the terrain, it just made a lot more practical sense to increase the number of administrative units, and not just at the provincial level, but at the lower levels of government also.

        Both these measures were designed by the Government to help improve the well being of the Papuan people, to hasten the development of the territory, and to preserve the Papuan culture and traditions. Better still, it will provide a wider opportunity to the Papuans to get involved in the decision-making process. It is disappointing that there are some, fortunately in the minority, who have other political objectives, which we cannot countenance under any circumstances.

        I shall, however, refer your letter to Jakarta for a more complete reply, and I will contact you again when I have received a reply.

 

Yours sincerely,

Trini G. Sualang
Counsellor (Information)