A.S. Prihatin atas Sikap Indonesia terhadap West Papua

Berita ABC, Updated September 27, 2010 17:33:15 (Terjemahan PMNews)

Keprihatinan mendalam disampaikan Amerika Serikat tentang perlakuan atas orang West Papua dalam kekuasaan Indonesia.

Untuk pertama kalinya Kongress A.S. membuka sesi khusus mendengarkan isu-isu yang berpengaruh terhadap provinsi orang Melansia itu.

Para anggota perwakilan diberitahu tentang pelanggaran HAM yang sedang berlangsung dan tuduhan bahwa Indonesia gagal memberikan Otsus kepada West Papua yang telah ia janjikan 9 tahun lalu.

Yang memimpin penyampaikan ini ialah Anggota Kongress dari Samoa Amerika, Eni Faleomavaega, yang juga adalah Ketua Sub Komisi Parlemen Urusan Asia-Pasifik dan Lingkungan Global.

Presenter: Helene Hofman
Pembicara: Eni Faleomavaega, American Samoa’s Congressman

FALEOMAVAEGA: Setahu saya ini pertama kali Kongres A.S. menyelenggarakan sesi khusus untuk keseluruhan pertanyaan tentang West Papua, menyangkut segala hal, sejarahnya dan situasi sekarang, khususnya era penjajahan Belanda dan bagaimana diambil alih secara militer di bawah pemerintahan Sukarno dan Suharto.

HOFMAN: Jadi, A.S. punya dua keprihatinan utama, sebagaimana saya pahami, satunya mendesak untuk kemerdekaan dan lainnya pelanggaran HAM?

FALEOMAVAEGA: Tidak, isu kemerdekaan selalu menjadi bagian dari pemikiran sejumlah orang West Papua. Saya mengikuti isu ini sudah sepuluh tahun sekarang dan merasa bahwa mengigat tahun-tahun kami bekerjasama dengan Jakarta, khususnya saat Jakarta mengumumkan akan memberikan UU Otsus kepada orang West Papua sejak 2001 dan harapan bahwa orang West Papua akan diberikan otonomi yang lebih. Well, sembilan tahun kemudian, tidak ada kemajuan atau gerakan yang terjadi untuk memberikan otonomi yang lebih banyak itu kepada orang West Papua dan dalam hal ini kami sudah ikuti dalam beberapa tahun belakangan dan kami harap Jakarta cepat tanggap terhadap pertanyaan dan keprihatinan kami.

HOFMAN: Saya mengerti ada isu pelanggaran HAM juga. Saya tahu Anda juga sedang mengklasifikasikan apa yang terjadi di West Papua itu sebagai sebuah perbuatan “genosida” (ed-tindakan yang dimaksudkan untuk dan berakibat penghapusan etnik), yang mana tidak mendapatkan oposisi di Amerika Serikat?

FALEOMAVAEGA: Well, ini isu yang terus berlanjut. Sebelum Timor Leste diberikan kemerdekaan 200.000 orang disiksa dan dibantai. Militer Indonesia lakukan hal yang sama di West Papua, angka konservativ 1000.000 orang, yang dilakukan oleh militer Indonesia. Yang lain mengatakan 200.000 orang orang West Papua dibunuh dan disiksa, dibunuh tanpa belas kasihan oleh militer. Jadi, ya ada persoalan genosida di sana. Saya sangat, sangat prihatin bahwa isu ini terus berlanjut dan kami mau memastikan bahwa orang-orang di sana diperlakukan adil.

HOFMAN: Apa yang dapat dilakukan A.S. tentang ini? Sekarang ada penyampaian khusus tentang West Papua? Apa harapan Anda yang akan jadi sebagai hasil dari ini?

FALEOMAVAEGA: Well, sistem pemerintahan kami agar berbeda dari sistem parlementer dan dalam sistem kami cabang yang setara dengan pemerintahan dan kami bekerjasama. Kami semua tahu bahwa Indonesia itu negara Muslim terbesar di dunia. Baru-baru ini mulai muncul untuk menjadi demokratis dan kita semua mendukung itu. Tetapi pad waktu bersama ada legacy tentang apa yang ia telah lakukan kepada orang West Papua, pertama dalam kolonialisme Belanda, kini penjajah lain menjajah orang-orang ini yang tidak punya hubungan budaya, etnik, hubungan sejarah sama sekali dengan orang-orang Indonesia, atau bisa dikatakan orang-orang Jawa ini yang tinggal di tanah air Indonesia. Ini orang-orang Melanesia dan secara budaya ada keprihatinan yang sangat, amat bahwa orang-orang ini semakin lama semakin menjadi minoritas di tanah mereka sendiri dan di dunia mereka sendiri, dan memang ada keprihatinan mendalam tentang apa yang Jakarta lakukan terhadap isu ini.

HOFMAN: Jadi apa pesisnya yang dapat dilakukan A.S.? Kenapa orang Indonesia harus dengarkan A.S.?

FALEOMAVAEGA: Indonesia tidak harus dengarkan A.S. Tetapi saya yakin negara-negara lain di dunia akan lihat, Hey, kami bisa katakan hal yang sama dengan apartheid, isu Afrika Selatan, apa yang terjadi dengan mereka. Kalau dunia tidak menekan Afrika Selatan untuk merubah apa yang dilakukannya, mereka tidak buat apa-apa, tidak akan terjadi apa-apa terhadap kebijakan apartheid di sana, dan saya pikir cara yang sama kita berikan perhatian ke Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa untuk mengikuti jalan-jalan yang telah dilalui orang Timor Leste.

HOFMAN: Jadi, apa langkah berikutnya setelah sesi ini?

FALEOMAVAEGA: Well, penyampaian terbuka ini bagian dari proses itu. Ini cara operasi sistem pemerintahan kami. Kami lakukan dengar pendapat, dan Pemilu November mendatang mungkin akan terjadi perubahan dan kami menjembatani saat kami melewati proses itu, dan bila saya terpilih kembali saya jani kepada Anda bahwa saya akan angkat isu itu terus, tidak hanya dengan Jakarta, tetapi juga di Kongres dan juga dengan Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa. Kami perlu menaruh perhatian lebih kepada masalah-masalah yang dihadapi orang West Papua sekarang.

via ScribeFire

A.S. Prihatin atas Sikap Indonesia terhadap West Papua

Berita ABC, Updated September 27, 2010 17:33:15 (Terjemahan PMNews)

Keprihatinan mendalam disampaikan Amerika Serikat tentang perlakuan atas orang West Papua dalam kekuasaan Indonesia.

Untuk pertama kalinya Kongress A.S. membuka sesi khusus mendengarkan isu-isu yang berpengaruh terhadap provinsi orang Melansia itu.

Para anggota perwakilan diberitahu tentang pelanggaran HAM yang sedang berlangsung dan tuduhan bahwa Indonesia gagal memberikan Otsus kepada West Papua yang telah ia janjikan 9 tahun lalu.

Yang memimpin penyampaikan ini ialah Anggota Kongress dari Samoa Amerika, Eni Faleomavaega, yang juga adalah Ketua Sub Komisi Parlemen Urusan Asia-Pasifik dan Lingkungan Global.

Presenter: Helene Hofman
Pembicara: Eni Faleomavaega, American Samoa’s Congressman

FALEOMAVAEGA: Setahu saya ini pertama kali Kongres A.S. menyelenggarakan sesi khusus untuk keseluruhan pertanyaan tentang West Papua, menyangkut segala hal, sejarahnya dan situasi sekarang, khususnya era penjajahan Belanda dan bagaimana diambil alih secara militer di bawah pemerintahan Sukarno dan Suharto.

HOFMAN: Jadi, A.S. punya dua keprihatinan utama, sebagaimana saya pahami, satunya mendesak untuk kemerdekaan dan lainnya pelanggaran HAM?

FALEOMAVAEGA: Tidak, isu kemerdekaan selalu menjadi bagian dari pemikiran sejumlah orang West Papua. Saya mengikuti isu ini sudah sepuluh tahun sekarang dan merasa bahwa mengigat tahun-tahun kami bekerjasama dengan Jakarta, khususnya saat Jakarta mengumumkan akan memberikan UU Otsus kepada orang West Papua sejak 2001 dan harapan bahwa orang West Papua akan diberikan otonomi yang lebih. Well, sembilan tahun kemudian, tidak ada kemajuan atau gerakan yang terjadi untuk memberikan otonomi yang lebih banyak itu kepada orang West Papua dan dalam hal ini kami sudah ikuti dalam beberapa tahun belakangan dan kami harap Jakarta cepat tanggap terhadap pertanyaan dan keprihatinan kami.

HOFMAN: Saya mengerti ada isu pelanggaran HAM juga. Saya tahu Anda juga sedang mengklasifikasikan apa yang terjadi di West Papua itu sebagai sebuah perbuatan “genosida” (ed-tindakan yang dimaksudkan untuk dan berakibat penghapusan etnik), yang mana tidak mendapatkan oposisi di Amerika Serikat?

FALEOMAVAEGA: Well, ini isu yang terus berlanjut. Sebelum Timor Leste diberikan kemerdekaan 200.000 orang disiksa dan dibantai. Militer Indonesia lakukan hal yang sama di West Papua, angka konservativ 1000.000 orang, yang dilakukan oleh militer Indonesia. Yang lain mengatakan 200.000 orang orang West Papua dibunuh dan disiksa, dibunuh tanpa belas kasihan oleh militer. Jadi, ya ada persoalan genosida di sana. Saya sangat, sangat prihatin bahwa isu ini terus berlanjut dan kami mau memastikan bahwa orang-orang di sana diperlakukan adil.

HOFMAN: Apa yang dapat dilakukan A.S. tentang ini? Sekarang ada penyampaian khusus tentang West Papua? Apa harapan Anda yang akan jadi sebagai hasil dari ini?

FALEOMAVAEGA: Well, sistem pemerintahan kami agar berbeda dari sistem parlementer dan dalam sistem kami cabang yang setara dengan pemerintahan dan kami bekerjasama. Kami semua tahu bahwa Indonesia itu negara Muslim terbesar di dunia. Baru-baru ini mulai muncul untuk menjadi demokratis dan kita semua mendukung itu. Tetapi pad waktu bersama ada legacy tentang apa yang ia telah lakukan kepada orang West Papua, pertama dalam kolonialisme Belanda, kini penjajah lain menjajah orang-orang ini yang tidak punya hubungan budaya, etnik, hubungan sejarah sama sekali dengan orang-orang Indonesia, atau bisa dikatakan orang-orang Jawa ini yang tinggal di tanah air Indonesia. Ini orang-orang Melanesia dan secara budaya ada keprihatinan yang sangat, amat bahwa orang-orang ini semakin lama semakin menjadi minoritas di tanah mereka sendiri dan di dunia mereka sendiri, dan memang ada keprihatinan mendalam tentang apa yang Jakarta lakukan terhadap isu ini.

HOFMAN: Jadi apa pesisnya yang dapat dilakukan A.S.? Kenapa orang Indonesia harus dengarkan A.S.?

FALEOMAVAEGA: Indonesia tidak harus dengarkan A.S. Tetapi saya yakin negara-negara lain di dunia akan lihat, Hey, kami bisa katakan hal yang sama dengan apartheid, isu Afrika Selatan, apa yang terjadi dengan mereka. Kalau dunia tidak menekan Afrika Selatan untuk merubah apa yang dilakukannya, mereka tidak buat apa-apa, tidak akan terjadi apa-apa terhadap kebijakan apartheid di sana, dan saya pikir cara yang sama kita berikan perhatian ke Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa untuk mengikuti jalan-jalan yang telah dilalui orang Timor Leste.

HOFMAN: Jadi, apa langkah berikutnya setelah sesi ini?

FALEOMAVAEGA: Well, penyampaian terbuka ini bagian dari proses itu. Ini cara operasi sistem pemerintahan kami. Kami lakukan dengar pendapat, dan Pemilu November mendatang mungkin akan terjadi perubahan dan kami menjembatani saat kami melewati proses itu, dan bila saya terpilih kembali saya jani kepada Anda bahwa saya akan angkat isu itu terus, tidak hanya dengan Jakarta, tetapi juga di Kongres dan juga dengan Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa. Kami perlu menaruh perhatian lebih kepada masalah-masalah yang dihadapi orang West Papua sekarang.

via ScribeFire

The Status of Papua, Indonesia

Joe Yun
Deputy Assistant Secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs 

Statement Before the House Foreign Affairs Committee Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific and the Global Environment

Washington, DC

September 22, 2010

---

Chairman Faleomavaega, Mr. Manzullo, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to testify today on the situation in Papua.

U.S. Policy

Developments affecting Papua, which includes the Indonesian provinces of Papua and West Papua, are closely followed by the Department of State and represent an important aspect of our overall relations with Indonesia. The United States recognizes and respects the territorial integrity of Indonesia within its current borders and does not support or condone separatism in Papua, or in any other part of the country. At the same time, we strongly support respect for universal human rights within Indonesia, including the right of peaceful assembly, free expression of political views, and the fair and non-discriminatory treatment of ethnic Papuans within Indonesia.

Within this context, we have consistently encouraged the Indonesian government to work with the indigenous Papuan population to address their grievances, resolve conflicts peacefully, and support development and good governance in the Papuan provinces. The Administration believes the full implementation of the 2001 Special Autonomy Law for Papua, which emerged as part of Indonesia’s democratic transition, would help resolve long-standing grievances. We continue to encourage the Indonesian government to work with Papuan authorities to discuss ways to empower Papuans and further implement the Special Autonomy provisions, which grant greater authority to Papuans to administer their own affairs.
Human Rights

Advancing human rights is one of our primary foreign policy objectives not only in Indonesia, but also throughout the world. We believe that respect for human rights helps to strengthen democracy. We want to see the right of peaceful, free expression of political views and freedom of association observed throughout the world, including in Papua.

We monitor allegations of human rights violations in Papua and West Papua, and we report on them in the annual Country Report on Human Rights. With the growth of democracy over the past decade in Indonesia, there has been substantial improvement in respect for human rights, although there remain credible concerns about human rights violations. The improvement includes Papua, although, as our annual reporting has documented, there continues to be some credible allegations of abuse. We regularly engage the Government of Indonesia on the importance of respect for human rights by security forces, and we continue to emphasize our strong support for an open and transparent legal system to look into any claims of excessive use of force. We also urge them to increase accountability for past human rights abuses. We deplore violence committed by armed groups, including in Papua, against civilians and government security forces.

It is critical that independent and objective observers have unrestricted access to Papua in order to monitor developments. At present, Indonesian journalists, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and Indonesian citizens may travel freely to Papua and West Papua. However, the Indonesian government requires that foreign journalists, NGOs, diplomats, and parliamentarians obtain permission to visit Papua. We continue to encourage the Indonesian government to give these groups, including the International Committee of the Red Cross, full and unfettered access to Papua and West Papua.

Papuans are Indonesian citizens and are free to travel to other parts of Indonesia.

Demographic Shifts

Migration from other parts of Indonesia has increased the number of non-Papuan residents to about 40 percent of the current population in Papua and West Papua. The total population of both provinces is 2.4 million, of which 900,000 are migrants. Past government-sponsored transmigration programs, which moved households from more densely populated areas to less populated regions, account for part of the influx. The majority of the population shift has resulted from natural migration trends from Indonesia’s large population centers to Papua where there is relatively low population density. Some Papuans have voiced concerns that the migrants have interfered with their traditional ways of life, land usage, and economic opportunities.

Economic Development

Although the region is rich in natural resources, including gold, copper, natural gas, and timber, Papua lags behind other parts of Indonesia in some key development indicators. Poverty is widespread in Papua and Papua has the lowest level of adult literacy in Indonesia at 74 percent. The region also has a disproportionately high number of HIV/AIDS cases compared with the rest of Indonesia and high rates of infant and maternal mortality.

According to the World Bank, the two greatest challenges to economic development are Papua’s topography and climate—great distances between towns, steep mountains, swampy lowlands, fragile soils, and heavy seasonal rainfall—and its social structure—low population density and cultural fragmentation.

Special Autonomy

Indonesia’s parliament in 2001 granted Special Autonomy to Papua, which, along with Aceh, was one of the two areas in Indonesia that harbored high-profile separatist movements. This law devolved to provincial and local authorities all government functions outside of five national competencies; defense, foreign affairs, religious affairs, justice, and monetary/fiscal policy.

The Special Autonomy Law has not been fully implemented in Papua. Implementation has been delayed due to lack of implementing regulations. In addition, the provincial governments have lacked the capacity to take on certain key responsibilities and some central government ministries have yet to cede their authorities. Although full implementation of Special Autonomy has not yet been realized, Indonesian government officials point to increased funding to Papua, which has totaled Rp 27 trillion or approximately US$3 billion in the past nine years, higher per capita than any other area in Indonesia. The Special Autonomy Law created the Papuan People’s Council (MRP) to protect Papuan culture. Recently, the MRP rejected Special Autonomy, symbolically handing Special Autonomy back to Indonesian authorities. This action had no practical legal effect, but it did highlight the need for increased dialogue between Papua and Jakarta to resolve the region’s outstanding differences.

We continue to encourage the Indonesian government and the provincial governments of Papua and West Papua to fully implement the Special Autonomy Law. This would include the promulgation of implementing regulations for all provisions of the law, central government action to ensure that provincial or local laws take precedence in areas of delegated authority, and actions to increase the capacity for development and good governance. We believe that full implementation would help to address Papuans’ grievances against the central government. Dialogue between central authorities and the indigenous Papuan population could facilitate full implementation of Special Autonomy, and result in actions that would support development and boost good governance in Papua.

U.S. Assistance

The United States is working in partnership with the government of Indonesia and the provincial governments of Papua and West Papua to find ways to address the key developmental challenges of Papua, including increasing good governance, access to quality healthcare and education, and protecting the environment. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) implements programs in Papua to foster improvements in these sectors with activities that total $­­­­11.6 million, or 7 percent of USAID’s budget for Indonesia for fiscal year 2010.

In addition to USAID programs, the Department of State also brings Papuans to the United States for thematic engagement on issues such as resource distribution. Our Fulbright programs have had over 22 grantees from Papua. We also partner with the private sector to leverage resources. For example, in a public-private partnership, the Fulbright-Freeport Scholarship Program has funded 18 individuals from Papua for study in the United States.

Embassy Jakarta maintains a vigorous schedule of engagement with Papua and West Papua. U.S. Mission officers routinely travel to the provinces. Ambassador Marciel, who arrived at post in mid-August, plans to travel to Papua soon after he presents his credentials to the Indonesian government. Officers maintain a wide base of contacts concerning Papua, including central and provincial government officials, human rights activists, military and police personnel, traditional and religious leaders, and NGO staff. In addition to official meetings, Embassy officers conduct regular public outreach in Papua and West Papua.

Conclusion

In closing, I would like to emphasize that Papua plays an important role in our sustained engagement with the Government of Indonesia. While Indonesia’s overall human rights situation has improved along with the country’s rapid democratic development, we are concerned by allegations of human rights violations in Papua and continuously monitor the situation there. We urge increased dialogue between the central government and Papuan leaders and the full implementation of the Special Autonomy Law. We will continue to provide assistance to build a strong economic and social foundation in Papua.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify before you today. I am pleased to answer your questions.

Australian Church seeks mediation in Papua

Published Date: September 23, 2010

Tags: Evangelical Christian Church Papua, indigenous Papuans, Indonesian government, Special Autonomy law, Uniting Church

Rosemary Hudson Miller, Associate General Secretary at the podium during voting by delegates of the JPIC and International Mission (Photo courtesy of Uniting Church in Australia)

Today’s Indian News Christian hospitals’ licenses restored Delhi archbishop appeals for peace Religious’ forum supports dismissed professor Karnataka Christians urged to join politics Parties refuse ticket to church-backed candidates

The Uniting Church in Western Australia will call on Australian Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd to encourage the Indonesian Government to hold a national dialogue with indigenous Papuans.

“A mediated dialogue by an independent third party can ensure fairness and secure Papua’s future,” said Synod Moderator Reverend Ken Williams.

Agenda items include the marginalization of Papuans and violence against them, militarization of provinces and the Papuans’ desire for self-regulation.

“The Papuans feel isolated and vulnerable,” said John Barr, Associate Director of UnitingWorld Asia. UnitingWorld works with the Evangelical Christian Church in Papua (GKI-TP).

The GKI-TP noted that after 10 years under the Special Autonomy Law, indigenous Papuans remain marginalized. The law was passed by the Indonesian government following growing separatist sentiments.

Following this appeal, the Joint Presbytery and Synod meeting passed the resolution this weekend in Perth. This was the first action made by an Australian church since Papuans rejected the Special Autonomy Law in a massive demonstration last August.

This law “failed to fulfill Papuans’ aspirations,” Barr said, quoting church leaders. “They want to live in peace, but they don’t have land ownership, economic control and the proper education.”

The Uniting Church has cooperated with the GKI-TP through various development projects. They agreed to continue working jointly on human rights advocacy, peace building, emergency relief, health services and economic development.

Meanwhile, Papuans demonstrated today in front of the US embassy and the Indonesian consulate in Perth coinciding with a US congressional hearing entitled Crimes Against Humanity: When Will Indonesia’s Military Be Held Accountable for Deliberate and Systematic Abuses in West Papua?

The GKI-TP wrote US President Barack Obama to “support a Dialogue between Papua and Jakarta and ensure the right to freedom of expression as guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”

Reverend Socratez Sofyan Yoman, Chairmain of the Communion of Baptist Churches in Papua claimed that the Special Autonomy law failed. “It increases the suffering of indigenous Papuans in their ancestral land,” he stated.

In 1969, Indonesia took over western Papua based on the “Act of Free Choice,” a referendum of 1,000 Papuan leaders.

Since then, Australia has recognized Indonesian rights to exercise authority in Papua, where government-sponsored migration led to population decline. Most Papuans remain Christians while the rest of the country is predominantly Muslim.

The General Assemblies of the World Council of Churches and the World Alliance of Reformed Churches urged all members to “support Papuans in their struggle for justice and peace.”

Australian investments in Papua include the giant Freeport mine, the world’s largest gold mine and third largest copper mine. Environmentalists and Papuans have protested against Freeport’s operations.

Source: ucanews.com

Share this article:

More »

Rate this article:

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading …

451 words

blog comments powered by Disqus

via cathnewsindia.com

US CONGRESS: The Status of Papua, Statement by US STATE Dep

US CONGRESS: The Status of Papua, Statement by US STATE Dep

 

September 23rd, 2010 No Comments

1. watch hearing at http://www.hcfa.house.gov/
2. http://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rm/2010/09/147551.htm
3. September 22, 2010
4. Crimes Against Humanity: When Will Indonesia’s Military Be Held Accountable for Deliberate and Systematic Abuses in West Papua? US CONGRESS Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific and the Global Environment

Joe Yun
Deputy Assistant Secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs

Statement Before the House Foreign Affairs Committee Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific and the Global Environment

Washington, DC

September 22, 2010  

Chairman Faleomavaega, Mr. Manzullo, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to testify today on the situation in Papua.

U.S. Policy

Developments affecting Papua, which includes the Indonesian provinces of Papua and West Papua, are closely followed by the Department of State and represent an important aspect of our overall relations with Indonesia. The United States recognizes and respects the territorial integrity of Indonesia within its current borders and does not support or condone separatism in Papua, or in any other part of the country. At the same time, we strongly support respect for universal human rights within Indonesia, including the right of peaceful assembly, free expression of political views, and the fair and non-discriminatory treatment of ethnic Papuans within Indonesia.

Within this context, we have consistently encouraged the Indonesian government to work with the indigenous Papuan population to address their grievances, resolve conflicts peacefully, and support development and good governance in the Papuan provinces. The Administration believes the full implementation of the 2001 Special Autonomy Law for Papua, which emerged as part of Indonesia’s democratic transition, would help resolve long-standing grievances. We continue to encourage the Indonesian government to work with Papuan authorities to discuss ways to empower Papuans and further implement the Special Autonomy provisions, which grant greater authority to Papuans to administer their own affairs.

Human Rights

Advancing human rights is one of our primary foreign policy objectives not only in Indonesia, but also throughout the world. We believe that respect for human rights helps to strengthen democracy. We want to see the right of peaceful, free expression of political views and freedom of association observed throughout the world, including in Papua.

We monitor allegations of human rights violations in Papua and West Papua, and we report on them in the annual Country Report on Human Rights. With the growth of democracy over the past decade in Indonesia, there has been substantial improvement in respect for human rights, although there remain credible concerns about human rights violations. The improvement includes Papua, although, as our annual reporting has documented, there continues to be some credible allegations of abuse. We regularly engage the Government of Indonesia on the importance of respect for human rights by security forces, and we continue to emphasize our strong support for an open and transparent legal system to look into any claims of excessive use of force. We also urge them to increase accountability for past human rights abuses. We deplore violence committed by armed groups, including in Papua, against civilians and government security forces.

It is critical that independent and objective observers have unrestricted access to Papua in order to monitor developments. At present, Indonesian journalists, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and Indonesian citizens may travel freely to Papua and West Papua. However, the Indonesian government requires that foreign journalists, NGOs, diplomats, and parliamentarians obtain permission to visit Papua. We continue to encourage the Indonesian government to give these groups, including the International Committee of the Red Cross, full and unfettered access to Papua and West Papua.

Papuans are Indonesian citizens and are free to travel to other parts of Indonesia.

Demographic Shifts

Migration from other parts of Indonesia has increased the number of non-Papuan residents to about 40 percent of the current population in Papua and West Papua. The total population of both provinces is 2.4 million, of which 900,000 are migrants. Past government-sponsored transmigration programs, which moved households from more densely populated areas to less populated regions, account for part of the influx. The majority of the population shift has resulted from natural migration trends from Indonesia’s large population centers to Papua where there is relatively low population density. Some Papuans have voiced concerns that the migrants have interfered with their traditional ways of life, land usage, and economic opportunities.

Economic Development

Although the region is rich in natural resources, including gold, copper, natural gas, and timber, Papua lags behind other parts of Indonesia in some key development indicators. Poverty is widespread in Papua and Papua has the lowest level of adult literacy in Indonesia at 74 percent. The region also has a disproportionately high number of HIV/AIDS cases compared with the rest of Indonesia and high rates of infant and maternal mortality.

According to the World Bank, the two greatest challenges to economic development are Papua’s topography and climate—great distances between towns, steep mountains, swampy lowlands, fragile soils, and heavy seasonal rainfall—and its social structure—low population density and cultural fragmentation.

Special Autonomy

Indonesia’s parliament in 2001 granted Special Autonomy to Papua, which, along with Aceh, was one of the two areas in Indonesia that harbored high-profile separatist movements. This law devolved to provincial and local authorities all government functions outside of five national competencies; defense, foreign affairs, religious affairs, justice, and monetary/fiscal policy.

The Special Autonomy Law has not been fully implemented in Papua. Implementation has been delayed due to lack of implementing regulations. In addition, the provincial governments have lacked the capacity to take on certain key responsibilities and some central government ministries have yet to cede their authorities. Although full implementation of Special Autonomy has not yet been realized, Indonesian government officials point to increased funding to Papua, which has totaled Rp 27 trillion or approximately US$3 billion in the past nine years, higher per capita than any other area in Indonesia. The Special Autonomy Law created the Papuan People’s Council (MRP) to protect Papuan culture. Recently, the MRP rejected Special Autonomy, symbolically handing Special Autonomy back to Indonesian authorities. This action had no practical legal effect, but it did highlight the need for increased dialogue between Papua and Jakarta to resolve the region’s outstanding differences.

We continue to encourage the Indonesian government and the provincial governments of Papua and West Papua to fully implement the Special Autonomy Law. This would include the promulgation of implementing regulations for all provisions of the law, central government action to ensure that provincial or local laws take precedence in areas of delegated authority, and actions to increase the capacity for development and good governance. We believe that full implementation would help to address Papuans’ grievances against the central government. Dialogue between central authorities and the indigenous Papuan population could facilitate full implementation of Special Autonomy, and result in actions that would support development and boost good governance in Papua.

U.S. Assistance

The United States is working in partnership with the government of Indonesia and the provincial governments of Papua and West Papua to find ways to address the key developmental challenges of Papua, including increasing good governance, access to quality healthcare and education, and protecting the environment. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) implements programs in Papua to foster improvements in these sectors with activities that total $11.6 million, or 7 percent of USAID’s budget for Indonesia for fiscal year 2010.

In addition to USAID programs, the Department of State also brings Papuans to the United States for thematic engagement on issues such as resource distribution. Our Fulbright programs have had over 22 grantees from Papua. We also partner with the private sector to leverage resources. For example, in a public-private partnership, the Fulbright-Freeport Scholarship Program has funded 18 individuals from Papua for study in the United States.

Embassy Jakarta maintains a vigorous schedule of engagement with Papua and West Papua. U.S. Mission officers routinely travel to the provinces. Ambassador Marciel, who arrived at post in mid-August, plans to travel to Papua soon after he presents his credentials to the Indonesian government. Officers maintain a wide base of contacts concerning Papua, including central and provincial government officials, human rights activists, military and police personnel, traditional and religious leaders, and NGO staff. In addition to official meetings, Embassy officers conduct regular public outreach in Papua and West Papua.

Conclusion

In closing, I would like to emphasize that Papua plays an important role in our sustained engagement with the Government of Indonesia. While Indonesia’s overall human rights situation has improved along with the country’s rapid democratic development, we are concerned by allegations of human rights violations in Papua and continuously monitor the situation there. We urge increased dialogue between the central government and Papuan leaders and the full implementation of the Special Autonomy Law. We will continue to provide assistance to build a strong economic and social foundation in Papua.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify before you today. I am pleased to answer your questions.

–

 

US CONGRESS: The Status of Papua, Statement by US STATE Dep

US CONGRESS: The Status of Papua, Statement by US STATE Dep September 23rd, 2010 No Comments LIVE watch hearing at http://www.hcfa.house.gov/ http://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rm/2010/09/147551.htm September 22, 2010 Crimes Against Humanity: When Will Indonesia’s Military Be Held Accountable for Deliberate and Systematic Abuses in West Papua? US CONGRESS Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific and the Global Environment Joe Yun Deputy Assistant Secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Statement Before the House Foreign Affairs Committee Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific and the Global Environment Washington, DC September 22, 2010 ——————————————————————————– Chairman Faleomavaega, Mr. Manzullo, and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to testify today on the situation in Papua. U.S. Policy Developments affecting Papua, which includes the Indonesian provinces of Papua and West Papua, are closely followed by the Department of State and represent an important aspect of our overall relations with Indonesia. The United States recognizes and respects the territorial integrity of Indonesia within its current borders and does not support or condone separatism in Papua, or in any other part of the country. At the same time, we strongly support respect for universal human rights within Indonesia, including the right of peaceful assembly, free expression of political views, and the fair and non-discriminatory treatment of ethnic Papuans within Indonesia. Within this context, we have consistently encouraged the Indonesian government to work with the indigenous Papuan population to address their grievances, resolve conflicts peacefully, and support development and good governance in the Papuan provinces. The Administration believes the full implementation of the 2001 Special Autonomy Law for Papua, which emerged as part of Indonesia’s democratic transition, would help resolve long-standing grievances. We continue to encourage the Indonesian government to work with Papuan authorities to discuss ways to empower Papuans and further implement the Special Autonomy provisions, which grant greater authority to Papuans to administer their own affairs. Human Rights Advancing human rights is one of our primary foreign policy objectives not only in Indonesia, but also throughout the world. We believe that respect for human rights helps to strengthen democracy. We want to see the right of peaceful, free expression of political views and freedom of association observed throughout the world, including in Papua. We monitor allegations of human rights violations in Papua and West Papua, and we report on them in the annual Country Report on Human Rights. With the growth of democracy over the past decade in Indonesia, there has been substantial improvement in respect for human rights, although there remain credible concerns about human rights violations. The improvement includes Papua, although, as our annual reporting has documented, there continues to be some credible allegations of abuse. We regularly engage the Government of Indonesia on the importance of respect for human rights by security forces, and we continue to emphasize our strong support for an open and transparent legal system to look into any claims of excessive use of force. We also urge them to increase accountability for past human rights abuses. We deplore violence committed by armed groups, including in Papua, against civilians and government security forces. It is critical that independent and objective observers have unrestricted access to Papua in order to monitor developments. At present, Indonesian journalists, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and Indonesian citizens may travel freely to Papua and West Papua. However, the Indonesian government requires that foreign journalists, NGOs, diplomats, and parliamentarians obtain permission to visit Papua. We continue to encourage the Indonesian government to give these groups, including the International Committee of the Red Cross, full and unfettered access to Papua and West Papua. Papuans are Indonesian citizens and are free to travel to other parts of Indonesia. Demographic Shifts Migration from other parts of Indonesia has increased the number of non-Papuan residents to about 40 percent of the current population in Papua and West Papua. The total population of both provinces is 2.4 million, of which 900,000 are migrants. Past government-sponsored transmigration programs, which moved households from more densely populated areas to less populated regions, account for part of the influx. The majority of the population shift has resulted from natural migration trends from Indonesia’s large population centers to Papua where there is relatively low population density. Some Papuans have voiced concerns that the migrants have interfered with their traditional ways of life, land usage, and economic opportunities. Economic Development Although the region is rich in natural resources, including gold, copper, natural gas, and timber, Papua lags behind other parts of Indonesia in some key development indicators. Poverty is widespread in Papua and Papua has the lowest level of adult literacy in Indonesia at 74 percent. The region also has a disproportionately high number of HIV/AIDS cases compared with the rest of Indonesia and high rates of infant and maternal mortality. According to the World Bank, the two greatest challenges to economic development are Papua’s topography and climate—great distances between towns, steep mountains, swampy lowlands, fragile soils, and heavy seasonal rainfall—and its social structure—low population density and cultural fragmentation. Special Autonomy Indonesia’s parliament in 2001 granted Special Autonomy to Papua, which, along with Aceh, was one of the two areas in Indonesia that harbored high-profile separatist movements. This law devolved to provincial and local authorities all government functions outside of five national competencies; defense, foreign affairs, religious affairs, justice, and monetary/fiscal policy. The Special Autonomy Law has not been fully implemented in Papua. Implementation has been delayed due to lack of implementing regulations. In addition, the provincial governments have lacked the capacity to take on certain key responsibilities and some central government ministries have yet to cede their authorities. Although full implementation of Special Autonomy has not yet been realized, Indonesian government officials point to increased funding to Papua, which has totaled Rp 27 trillion or approximately US$3 billion in the past nine years, higher per capita than any other area in Indonesia. The Special Autonomy Law created the Papuan People’s Council (MRP) to protect Papuan culture. Recently, the MRP rejected Special Autonomy, symbolically handing Special Autonomy back to Indonesian authorities. This action had no practical legal effect, but it did highlight the need for increased dialogue between Papua and Jakarta to resolve the region’s outstanding differences. We continue to encourage the Indonesian government and the provincial governments of Papua and West Papua to fully implement the Special Autonomy Law. This would include the promulgation of implementing regulations for all provisions of the law, central government action to ensure that provincial or local laws take precedence in areas of delegated authority, and actions to increase the capacity for development and good governance. We believe that full implementation would help to address Papuans’ grievances against the central government. Dialogue between central authorities and the indigenous Papuan population could facilitate full implementation of Special Autonomy, and result in actions that would support development and boost good governance in Papua. U.S. Assistance The United States is working in partnership with the government of Indonesia and the provincial governments of Papua and West Papua to find ways to address the key developmental challenges of Papua, including increasing good governance, access to quality healthcare and education, and protecting the environment. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) implements programs in Papua to foster improvements in these sectors with activities that total $­­­­11.6 million, or 7 percent of USAID’s budget for Indonesia for fiscal year 2010. In addition to USAID programs, the Department of State also brings Papuans to the United States for thematic engagement on issues such as resource distribution. Our Fulbright programs have had over 22 grantees from Papua. We also partner with the private sector to leverage resources. For example, in a public-private partnership, the Fulbright-Freeport Scholarship Program has funded 18 individuals from Papua for study in the United States. Embassy Jakarta maintains a vigorous schedule of engagement with Papua and West Papua. U.S. Mission officers routinely travel to the provinces. Ambassador Marciel, who arrived at post in mid-August, plans to travel to Papua soon after he presents his credentials to the Indonesian government. Officers maintain a wide base of contacts concerning Papua, including central and provincial government officials, human rights activists, military and police personnel, traditional and religious leaders, and NGO staff. In addition to official meetings, Embassy officers conduct regular public outreach in Papua and West Papua. Conclusion In closing, I would like to emphasize that Papua plays an important role in our sustained engagement with the Government of Indonesia. While Indonesia’s overall human rights situation has improved along with the country’s rapid democratic development, we are concerned by allegations of human rights violations in Papua and continuously monitor the situation there. We urge increased dialogue between the central government and Papuan leaders and the full implementation of the Special Autonomy Law. We will continue to provide assistance to build a strong economic and social foundation in Papua. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify before you today. I am pleased to answer your questions. –

Intervensi Papua New Guinea dalam Sidang Komisi Hak Asasi Manusia PBB, 2 September 2010

Sumber: http://itake.se/spcoldwar/index.php?showtopic=19671

Robert Guba Aisi; Permanent Representative aof Papua New Guinea to the United Nations

Papua New Guinea telah memajukan solusi damai di masa-masa lampau untuk menyelesaikan isu West Papua, tetapi kini PNG sangat terganggu dengan kekerasan yang dilakukan baru-baru ini oleh serangan militer terhadap penduduk sipil keturunan orang Melanesia. Kami punya hubungan bak dengan Indonesia karena mereka sedang membangun menuju demokrasi dan perlakuan baik terhadap orang West papua, tetapi intervensi ini akan mengganggu semuanya dan akan merusak negosiasi yang sudah berlangsung selama ini kalau tidak ada langkah yang diambil.

Intervensi militer hampir pasti terkait dengan ketegangan etnik antar kelompok dan harus diakhiri, untuk memberikan jalan kepada pemerintahan yang demokratis dan untuk sebuah referendum atau otonomi sebagaimana yang baru-baru ini diselenggarakan di Timor Timur.

Kami memohon kepada semua delegasi untuk mendukung upaya-upaya untuk kepada Dewan Hak Asasi Manusia (PBB) dan (kalau isu kehadiran militer ini menjadi isu mengganggu sekali lagi, maka) ke Dewan Keamanan.

Papua New Guinea melihat isu ini secara langsung penting sekali dan percaya bahwa sekarang perlu ada penyelesaian diplomatik sebelum perang sipil menyebar di West Papua.

————–
Papua New Guinea dengan hormat minta delegasi untuk memberhatikan secara khusus kepada dokumen-dokumen berikut :

1.    Reports of Indonesion military operations;
2.    Allegations of excessive use of force during police operations;
3.    Alleged extrajudicial killings during previous Indonesian operations in West Papua

Tanggapan Indonesia:

The Republic of Indonesia mengakui pernyataan Papua New Guinea dan menghargai pendapat mereka.

Akan tetapi wilayah West Papua adalah bagian dari Republik Indonesia; dan Indonesia tidak menambah pasukan militer di provinsi itu;

Perang-perang yang terjadi di sana hanyalah perang-perang suku (Ed – perang di antara orang Papua sendiri karena orang Papua suka dengan perang suku).

Kami mau katakan hal ini sekarang,

“Pemerintah Indonesia tetap berpegang teguh kepada pendapat untuk bergabung dengan Indonesia lewat Referendum yang disebut Penentuan Pendapat Rakyat pada 1969.”

Banyak pembicaraan sedang berlangsung bagaimana menyelenggarakan referendum di dalam West Papua, dan untuk mencari penyelesaian yang demokratis.
———————
Tanggapan Balik PNG: Robert Guba Aisi; Permanent Representative of Papua New Guinea to the United Nations

Penentuan Pendapat Rakyat, sebagaimana telah ditunjukkan dokumentasi Amerika Serikat, tetapi legitimasinya sendiri sudah dipertanyakan berulang-kali, dan setelah berkonsultasi dengan Vanuatu tentang hal ini, ditambah lagi dengan intervensi militer ke West Papua baru-baru ini, membuat kami secara tegas mengadvokasi untuk penarikan pasukan miiter dari West Papua, mengakhiri peperangan dan melakukan suatu investigasi yang benar dan independen tentang status orang Papua di West Papua. Kami percaya bahwa investigasi sebagaimana diusulkan oleh Vanuatu merupakan langkah logis menuju penyelesaian yang legal dan secara politis atas isu West Papua.

Keputusan Internatioanl Court of Justice tentang legalitas Kemerdekaan Kosovi pada Juli 2010 menjadi satu presenden untuks secara angsung mempertimbangkan pengusulan kasus ini ke lembaga dimaksud.

Pembicaraan-pembicaraan tentang West Papua harus dilangsungkan dalam suatu forum yang terbuka, untuk mengizinkan sebuah negosiasi yang bebas dan adil yang akan menghindari kesalahan-kesalahan yang lalu terulang dalam menangani kasus ini. Penentuan Pendapat Rakyat dimaksud hanya melibatkan kurang dari 5% penduduk West Papua waktu itu, yang perlu dipertimbangkan saat ini, mengingat situasi di West Papua membutuhkan perhatian kemanusiaan yang segera.

————————
Tanggapan William Hague, Menlu Inggris:

Foreign Secretary

Saya setuju dengan delegasi Papua bahwa perlu ada investigasi dari PBB. Hak menentukan nasib sendiri harus menjadi presenden di sini, masyarakat West Papua harus diberikan peluang untuk menyampaikan pendapat.
————-
Tanggapan Selandia Baru: Murray McCully, New Zealand Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade

Pemerintah Selandia Baru berpendapat sama dengan pemerintah Inggris bahwa perlu ada investigasi dari PBB untuk mengurangi ketengan di wilaya itu, dan menyerukankepada pemerintah Papua New Guinea dan pemerintah Indonesia untuk menghindari peningkatan krisis dimaksud.
——————————
Tanggapan Indonesia:
Indonesia akan menghadiri pembicaraan-pembicaraan seperti ini.

Akan tetapi, kami sekarang ini percaya bahwa West Papua harus tetap menjadi bagian dari Republik Indonesia. Saat ini Indonesia tidak akan menarik pasukan militer dari West Papua, karena kami perduli atas penduduk sipil yang tidak bersalah yang perlu perlindungan dari militer kami. Rali-rali kemerdekaan sekarang ini semakin dipenuhi kekerasan, dan keterlibatan militer perlu untuk menjaga keamanan memang berguna untuk sementara waktu dalam waktu singkat, hanya penyelesaian jangka panjang harus dicari sekarang ini.

Kami menghargai pendapat Inggris dan Selandia Baru, dan terimakasih untuk menyampaikan hal ini kepada kami. Kami akan menaati semua aturan PBB yang sudah ada tentang West papua, akan tetapi kami percaya bahwa provinsi ini harus tetap ada di dalam Indonesia. Kami rasa orang West Papua lebh aman (Ed- lebih selamat) kalau mereka tinggal di dalam Indonesia (Ed-artinya kalau mereka merdeka, mereka tidak selamat. Selamat dari apa, atau siapa?”).

——————–
Tanggapan Papua New Guinea: Robert Guba Aisi; Permanent Representative of Papua New Guinea to the United Nations

Intervensi militer di West Papua bukan sebuah solusi. Secara historis, kehadiran militer tidak membawa hasil apa-apa untuk memperbaiki krisis, resikonya justru membakar situasi berakibat kematian di pihak orang West Papua. Kehadiran militer juga penyebab utama krisis kemanusiaan bagi negara-negara tetangga seperti Australia dan Papua New Guinea, karena kami tidak punya sumberdaya untuk pelarian pengungsi berikutnya menyeberang perbatasan.

———————–
Tanggapan dari Fiji: Commodore Frank Bainimarama, CF, MSD, OStJ,
Prime Minister of the Republic of Fiji,
Commander of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces

Laporan berita begitu jelas bagi kami, campurtangan miiter dimulai sebagai tanggapan terhadap protes pro kemerdekaan yang semakin meningkat, jadi tidak secara langsung dilihat sebagai upaya untuk menghindari kemerdekaan. Ini harus dilihat sebagai upaya untuk menghindari kampanye yang semakin dipenuhi kekerasan, walaupun aksi-aksi yang dilakukan tidak direncanakan secara baik.

Fokus sekarang harus diarahkan kepada penanganan (isolasi) demonstrasi yang penuh kekerasan, sementara itu mengizinkan protes-protes secara damai. Ini dapat dilakukan dengan dua cara, pertama dengan mendorong dan melengkapi anggota polisi dan pejabat pemerintah yang berasal dari West Papua untuk bernegosiasi dengan para demonstran secara damai itu, sambil itu menarik pasukan dari wilayah itu untuk menghindari kleim kelompok yang memprotes itu mengatakan tindakan militeristik teradap penduduk sipil

Diskusi keseluruhan harus diarahkan diantara berbagai faksi, dan langkah-langkah normalisasi hukum dan lingkungan yang tertib hukum.
————————
Tanggapan dari Denmark:

Heir Apparent Crown Prince Frederik, elder son of the monarch

Saya berbicara dari perwakilan Denmark untuk PBB dalam diskusi ini. Walaupun saya setuju dengan Menlu Inggris William Hague, orang West Papua harus diberi kesempatan untuk menyampaikan pendapat, sebuah penyampaian suara dengan jalan damai, dan tidak dengan pertumpahan darah. Saya katakan bahwa referendum di dalam West Papua harus diselenggarakan.

Papua New Guiena Intervention on West Papua at the United Nations Sessions, 2 September 2010

Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 <!– /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:”Cambria Math”; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:”"; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {mso-style-priority:99; color:blue; mso-themecolor:hyperlink; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; color:purple; mso-themecolor:followedhyperlink; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph {mso-style-priority:34; mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto; text-align:center; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} p.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst {mso-style-priority:34; mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-type:export-only; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto; text-align:center; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} p.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle {mso-style-priority:34; mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-type:export-only; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto; text-align:center; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} p.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast {mso-style-priority:34; mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-type:export-only; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto; text-align:center; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} .MsoPapDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; text-align:center;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} /* List Definitions */ @list l0 {mso-list-id:879708456; mso-list-type:hybrid; mso-list-template-ids:-1532228326 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;} @list l0:level1 {mso-level-tab-stop:none; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in;} ol {margin-bottom:0in;} ul {margin-bottom:0in;} –>