A Papua New Guinean anthropologist has warned that a campaign by authorities to remove communities from informal settlements in Port Moresby will not solve growing social problems in PNG’s capital.

The government is determined to end the role of settlements as what Prime Minister James Marape describes as “breeding grounds for terror” as part of its law and order reforms, but recent evictions have run into problems.

Almost half of Port Moresby’s estimated population of around 500,000 live in settlements, often without legal title or access to basic services. Some of the settlements have become notorious as crime hotspots.

• READ MORE: PNG govt defends using tear gas, force to evict illegal settlers in capital
• Other PNG settlements reports

However, in late January, police moved into the settlement at 2-Mile, sparking clashes with residents that resulted in two deaths and numerous injuries.

Police then moved to evict another settlement at 4-Mile, but this met with a legal challenge which led to the National Court placing a stay order on the eviction.

While the campaign is essentially paused, Marape has said his government would soon announce a permanent plan to replace unplanned settlements with properly titled residential allotments.

He also apologised to residents affected by the evictions, in recognition that many law-abiding and hard working families have made settlements their home over the years.

Urban drift
Previous attempts at evicting settlement communities did not exactly lay a template for the success of what authorities are trying to do in 2026.

In numerous cases, homes were destroyed or razed to the ground, people were left homeless and then simply moved to other areas of vacant land or ended up living with wantoks in other parts of Morebsy.

A PNG anthropologist who has done extensive work on settlements, Dr Fiona Hukula, noted that settlements are long-established communities, stretching back decades.

“Essentially, people came to work in the towns and the cities, like in Port Moresby, and so where there was low cost housing, or where people weren’t able to afford housing, they started living in settlements, and some of the settlements on the outskirts, there’s stories that they made some kind of connection and deals with the local landowners.”

Dr Hukula said over the decades, migration to the towns and cities had grown significantly, but the available housing had not kept pace.

“People are just now coming into the city, really, to access better services, health and education. Some Papua New Guineans are coming to the city to escape various forms of conflict and violence.

“And this is now where we’ve seen just an influx of people coming into the city, and obviously there’s nowhere to live, and they live in settlements, and many of Moresby settlements are populated by families who have been there for several generations.”

‘Difficult thing I have to do’
Many of Moresby’s settlements are now populated by families who have been there for several generations. Removing people from these communities is a complex challenge.

“An eviction is not going to solve the problem, because people will just go and find somewhere else to stay (in Moresby), especially if they’re generational families who have lived in these settlements, who don’t necessarily have the ties back to their rural villages and their connections to their people in their village,” Dr Hukula said.

Adding to the complexities of the eviction drive are social connections forged in the National Capital District (NCD) over the years.

The head of the NCD Police Command Metropolitan Superintendent Warrick Simitab admitted that for him personally, leading the eviction exercises such as at 2-Mile had not been easy.

“It’s been difficult, because I grew up here. I grew up in NCD. For example in 2-Mile. Most of my classmates that I went to school together with, they live there. So for me personally, it’s a difficult thing that I have to do,” he told RNZ Pacific.

Simitab would not be drawn on when the evictions would start up again, saying things were paused while political leaders decide next steps.

Criminal hotspot
The local MP for Moresby South Justin Tkatchenko said the 2-Mile settlement had become a notorious criminal hotspot, and that the people of the city had had enough of it.

“Hold ups nearly every night and every day, women have been raped, attacked, citizens have been held up, cars stolen, injured, abused for nearly 20 years,” he said.

Things came to a head when police were shot at and those living in 2-Mile refused an ultimatum given by police to hand over the criminals, he explained.

Tkatchenko said the government was steadily working on resettling settlers with proper, legal allocations of land to live on.

“We have already allocated land and sub-divided that land for over 400 families in the 2-Mile Hill area and other areas. Some have already been resettled and moved, and others will follow suit,” the MP said.

Dr Hukula acknowledged that crime linked to some settlements was an issue that the general population keenly wanted addressed.

But she said persisting with displacing communities from other settlements would not address the underlying cause of the problem.

‘Ticking time bomb’
“It is a ticking time bomb. It’s going to be like this, where there’s evictions and then people move. And the thing is that the cycle of violence continues, and that’s what we’re trying to address here, the crime.”

The anthropologist stressed that “not everybody in settlements are criminals”, saying the people who lived in settlements were often working people, “people who are doing the menial jobs in the offices, the office cleaners, the people who are drivers, all of these kinds of people also live in settlements.

“And so when they’re being kicked out, there are people who can’t go to work, children who can’t go to school”.

Dr Hukula has researched and written about how settlement communities have developed informal systems of settling disputes or addressing law and order problems such as through local komiti groups or village courts.

These provided a way in which the communities could maintain order and general respect between their people. But “because the settlements have just exploded now it’s not like necessarily everybody comes from the same area or the same province” she said, making it harder to maintain a social balance.

In Dr Hukula’s view, “the village courts and the community leaders still play an extremely important role in being that bridge” between the authorities and the settlement community, and should be supported to play that role.

She said one of the other main things the government could do to help the situation was “to make sure that there’s affordable housing for all levels, all kinds of Papua New Guineans”.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

A number of remand prisoners at Papua New Guinea’s Bomana Prison have been injured in a confrontation with Correctional Services officers.

Port Moresby General Hospital has confirmed to local media that nine inmates were rushed to hospital, and that two are in a critical condition.

Sources at the maximum security prison in Port Moresby told RNZ Pacific that on Monday officers conducted a standard activity in a cell block where they ordered 62 men held on remand to vacate their cells and allow a search.

• READ MORE: Other PNG prisons reports

The stated objective of the search was to locate contraband, specifically mobile phones.

However, the inmates allege that officers destroyed property belonging to remandees, including “essential legal and court documents, clothing, bedding, and various personal necessities”.

They also claim officers misappropriated property, including food rations.

When the inmates subsequently protested about their belongings being destroyed or taken away, a confrontation resulted.

Officers responded ‘violently’
They claim officers responded violently, called in off-duty officers for reinforcement and brutally assaulted most of the 62 remandees with bush knives, iron bars and other instruments.

A source within PNG’s Correctional Services has confirmed to RNZ Pacific that a confrontation took place between inmates and officers.

Acting Correctional Services Commissioner Bernard Nepo also confirmed the incident to The National newspaper, but did not address the circumstances around the injuries.

RNZ Pacific spoke briefly with the Minister for Corrections, Joe Kuli, who said he was not aware of the incident, but that he would seek information from officials.

RNZ Pacific has sought comment from Correctional Services.

The inmates are seeking intervention by higher authorities over what they describe as “inhumane treatment” and misconduct by Correctional Services officers.

Many of the inmates are being held in prolonged pre-trial detention. Due to a backlog in PNG’s court system, some remandees wait years in prison before going to trial.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

If elected representatives have their work cut out for them to create the slightest social or political change through Parliament, spare a thought for activists.

For the committed activist, in it for the long term, their work brings them inevitably to engage with the parliament system.

Protesting at Parliament, demonstrating, submitting to select committees, sending in petitions, or just being there to watch, activists are an important, if sometimes misunderstood, part of the system.

And we’re not talking about the agitators who talk about “hanging MPs”.

The House offers a look at four activists who have long participated in the Parliament space — from single or multiple issue campaigners to the lifelong activist who became an MP and got out the other side alive:

Valerie Morse is a well established activist who has organised many campaigns in anti-war and climate justice spaces among others. Over the past 20 years, she’s been part of hundreds of protests to Parliament, and has made “dozens and dozens of submissions on everything from the environment to defence to the SIS to local body matters, everything under the sun”.

In order to get MPs to listen, Morse has sometimes used theatre in her activism. Some of the highlights include a naked protest on the forecourt in support of the genetic engineering moratorium, and entering a select committee hearing on  Security Intelligence Service legislation with a group who blew loud whistles to highlight the importance of whistle-blowing — to the dismay of the MPs.

There have been setbacks. In 2008, during an event to commemorate Vietnam War veterans, Morse attempted to enter Parliament with an A3-sized sign about then-prime minister Helen Clark and former foreign affairs minister Phil Goff’s anti-war activism during the Vietnam War being at odds with their subsequent support for the war in Afghanistan:

“Parliamentary security stopped me from coming to the grounds, and trespassed me from Parliament for two years,” Morse explained.

“Subsequently I challenged that by coming on to Parliament grounds at a protest around slashed funding for adult and community education in the John Key era. I came on to Parliament grounds with thousands of other people and was arrested by parliamentary security. I had to go all the way through the court system, and eventually, the speaker of the house at the time, Lockwood Smith, actually withdrew the trespass.”

There have been some wins too, such as when large protests against the Iraq war 20 years ago helped convince New Zealand’s government to not join it, as well as the work of Morse and others at the committee level to leverage some transparency from the intelligence services amidst heightened public interest in mass surveillance.

“Those processes are often very difficult to see very meaningful change in during the short term. Over the longer term, there’s been changes in the way those agencies operate, so there has been some greater openness.

“But particularly around submissions, unless you’re speaking to some very, very specific item that they (MPs) think is perhaps a mistake or a drafting error, they’re often hardened down party lines, so it can be really hard to make changes in that process.”

The Messenger

To convey a message of activism means to demonstrate it, according to Mike Smith, a leading figure in numerous environmental campaigns. Smith’s activism has encompassed “all manner of things” and he has proven effective at getting his message noticed. Almost three decades ago he took a chainsaw to the great pine on One Tree Hill, or Maungakiekie, to raise attention to Māori rights and shortcomings in the Treaty Settlement process.

In recent times, Smith (Ngā Puhi and Ngāti Kuri) has been absorbed in legal action against major fossil fuel users and suppliers over their polluting activities. But as we sat by the statue of Richard Seddon on Parliament’s forecourt, Smith took stock of his various forays to Parliament, from protests to petitions. He recalled the Foreshore and Seabed hikoi, mobilisations over asset sales as well as protests related to the Treaty — occasions on which he has delivered a message to Parliament.

“I think it was here that we presented the petition to stop deep sea oil drilling after a ten-year campaign. The prime minister came out and greeted us. We handed her a petition to halt deep sea oil drilling. She went back to her office, and within about two weeks the announcement came through that the government had indeed decided to put a moratorium on issuing new exploration permits,” he recalled.

“I think politics and indeed the law should reflect the morality or mood of the society at any particular time. However there will be powerful voices and vested interests that pull against popular opinion. It’s important that there are opportunities for the public to express themselves.

“The word ’demonstration’ sort of sums it up. We’ve got to demonstrate what that feeling is amongst the public.”

The activist from the far north said Parliament should be receptive to the expression of widespread public sentiment, and that it is up to the public to hold politicians’ feet to the fire if they are not responding constructively, or conversely if they are being accountable, to reward them at the polls.

“Anybody can arrange a meeting with ministers and they may or may not be listened to or heard, but there’s something far more powerful about an expression of a substantive section of society. I’ve been on marches where 50, 60,000 people have mobilised in Auckland or Wellington particularly on climate issues or (issues) about mining on conservation land. I know that the politicians, when they see that amount of people, they really do take notice of that.”

The Outsider Insider

Catherine Delahunty isn’t the only activist to have been a member of Parliament, but perhaps what marks her out is the seamlessness with which she has resumed her activism and maintained a critical voice to power forged during her three-term stint, which ended in 2017. If there was any motivation to enter Parliament, she said it was to advance various kaupapa of her many years of activism.

“There were some issues I’d been involved in over many years that I wanted to see if I could advance. For example, the sawmill workers who were poisoned in the Bay of Plenty to whom I’m still deeply connected to and (on their behalf) lobbying ACC for change. I thought well, if I can get into Parliament, maybe I can make some change. And I did actually manage to get the National government to set up a national register of toxic sites and things like that,” the former Green Party MP explained.

In a sense, Delahunty never ceased being an activist when she came to Parliament. She used her wide range of connections with interlocutors from grassroots communities to media to civil society and political leaders in order to advance causes such as sustainable forestry, opposition to mining on conservation land, highlighting human rights abuses and the West Papuan struggle for independence.

“I started by protest. Been on many, many protests here in my life. In fact when I was an MP I probably went to more protests, because you’d see them out the window so you’d just go out to join them,” she explained.

“What you find out of course when you get here is: yes, you can make a difference, and no, you can’t. So if there was any conclusion I came to as an activist after leaving Parliament it’s that we need constitutional transformation of this country based on Te Tiriti (o Waitangi) and He Whakaputanga. But having said that, I still engage with select committees and I still engage with the system to get small things done. But I’m not under any illusion that we’re changing the world.”

“I always felt the system was rotten, but actually when you’ve been inside it you do have more knowledge and more contact. So it’s easier for me to walk in the door here now and have a chat with somebody that I wouldn’t have known before. Whether I can have an impact is another matter, but the first thing is to get through the door.”

When asked about the difference between activists and lobbyists, Delahunty said “we don’t have a PR firm who work for us to massage our messages, we are activists who will take our truth to power. And I don’t think lobbying is necessarily about taking truth to power. It’s about vested interests that pay for their interests to be privileged inside the power system. That’s very different from activists challenging the power system to actually do something in the name of justice.”

The ‘Gallery Stalker’

Gary Chiles was only 13 years old when the Misuse of Drugs Act was passed in 1975, and it remains a bugbear for him that it’s still law 50 years later and that people are being criminalised for cannabis use or association with it. Drug law reform is Chile’s singular focus when it comes to his long running activism at Parliament.

Another regular protester outside Parliament during the Key years, Chiles decided to start going to the House to soak up the action inside the chamber. He made it his mission to attend each Question Time — around 90 days in a typical sitting year.

“It was all a bit of an eye opener. But I decided that I needed to know how things worked inside Parliament if I wanted to make change happen,” he explained.

“You’re not allowed to wave signs or wear sloganed t-shirts and things in parliament. But I found out the dress code allowed me to get in there if I have a suit on, so I bought a cannabis suit.”

Chiles stands out clearly in his dark suit emblazoned with bright green cannabis leaves, worn each time he attends Question Time. There he sits up in the public gallery, on one side or another, moving around to stay visible to MPs across the divide. A silent, persistent reminder of the need for drug reform.

“I think of myself as being the gallery stalker. They all know I’m there whether they’re engaging with me or not, and they all know what I’m about because of what I’m wearing. And it’s about reminding them (about the need for drug reform). What are you going to do about it? Do we have to wait another 50 years, what’s going on?”

Attending Parliament has given Chiles a greater appreciation for the work of the various parts of the system. He said that it has also humanised MPs for him, and that what goes on in parliament is often quite different to what is portrayed in the news media. Getting angry at the news isn’t political engagement, he pointed out, adding that the access the public has to this country’s Parliament is something unique and to be treasured.

“My whole attitude to Parliament changed the day that there was a person who set themselves on fire on the forecourt, and the first people on the scene to try and deal with that were Parliament security. That made me reappraise my attitude to them, because they walk the fine line every day between allowing public access and maintaining security, and I think they do a really good job of it.”

Short-term thinking
The four activists all point to short-term thinking — the focus on retaining power in a quick electoral cycle — as something holding Parliament back from enabling systemic change. On the other hand, their own work to transform these views and inject a public voice into the deliberations of the lawmakers is very much long-term.

RNZ’s The House — parliamentary legislation, issues and insights — is made with funding from Parliament. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

An increased appetite to learn te reo Māori among members and staff from different parts of the Parliamentary system means the work of Parliament’s Māori Language Service is in demand more than ever.

Compared to several years ago there’s now also significantly more acknowledgement of and referral to Māori customs and protocols at Parliament. This is part of the reason why Nga Ratonga Reo Māori recently changed its name to Nga Ratonga Ao Māori, opening up the service’s scope to more than just the language.

“We’re asked for advice on a lot of things — very often — a few a day, several a week, from all parts of the Parliamentary Service and the Office of the Clerk, and they could be reo related, marae related, tikanga related, etc,” says Maika Te Amo, the man who heads the five-person unit.

“I still see my main role as supporting the House with Māori language services, primarily simultaneous interpretation of all sittings of the House and also sittings of the Māori Affairs Select Committee, at every sitting, but also any other committee that requests simultaneous interpretation.

“The other thing is translation — and that can be anything from communications through the Parliamentary Engagement team that go out on the website or the social media channels. A heavy part of our load comes from the Māori Affairs Select Committee — all of their reports are bilingual, so we translate all of those as well.”

From 1868 until 1920 Parliament had interpreters in the House. Then, for most of last century, Parliament didn’t even employ an interpreter to support MPs who spoke in Māori.

It wasn’t until this century, with the reintroduction of interpreters and Māori language services, that te reo began to flow significantly in the chamber again.

People who follow the action in the debating chamber these days will be familiar with numerous MPs fluently using te reo in speeches. If you’re watching the debate on Parliament TV you may see other MPs listening-in via an earpiece.

That is made possible because of simultaneous interpretation by Te Amo and his colleagues.

It is not only Māori MPs who use te reo in the chamber. Many MPs regularly pepper their speeches with the language, or use Māori for all their formal phrasings (e.g. asking for a supplementary question during Question Time).

Furthermore, Te Amo says there is a lot of interest in using the language among staff of the Parliamentary Service and the Office of the Clerk.

There’s also ample evidence that Māori language and practices are being used throughout the Parliamentary system. In the annual reviews where government agencies front before various select committees to give a report on how their year has gone, their representatives often introduce themselves and give closing statements in te reo.

“There is an enormous hunger among our colleagues for the language and everything associated with the language, tikanga and traditional practices, traditional perspectives, metaphors, that kind of thing, and that is very encouraging,” says Te Amo.

“We’re a small team, so we will continue to do our best to support our colleagues with various different learning opportunities.”

Pacific challenge
The struggle to preserve Indigenous language and promote its use in Parliament is an acute challenge in the Pacific Islands.

This much was clear when Maika Te Amo gave the keynote speech at the Australasian and Pacific Hansard Editors Association conference at New Zealand’s Parliament in January. His speech left an impression on other delegates such as Papaterai William, the subeditor of debates in the Cook Islands.

“One statement I enjoyed when Maika was talking says ‘if the language is no more, the Māori people are no more’. Now I can actually rephrase that our Cook Islands people ‘if the language is no more, the Cook Islands Māori are no more’,” he said.

“Nowadays people are speaking English, and not many people are speaking our language, which is the Cook Islands Māori. We’re talking about a language that will fade in the future.

“That is one thing that we are wanting to retain to make sure that it is maintained properly, that it is taught properly, because language revitalisation I believe is important going forward for our Hansard department.”

William tipped his hat to Tonga where in Parliament, unlike in the Cook Islands, proceedings are captured strictly in the Indigenous language, which he said helped keep the language alive for future generations.

Tonga’s Hansard editor, Susanna Heti Lui, was also at the conference, where she explained that the Kingdom’s Parliament felt the need to preserve and revive their Tongan language.

“Our language is the official language that is used in Parliament. That is compared to the government, it uses English as the official language used in the workplace,” she said.

Language must be active to stay alive
Te Amo points out that informal settings at Parliament are also opportunities for growth in the use of te reo, “where people can just bring whatever reo they’ve got and just speak that”.

“What I also hear a lot from members is that they’d also like to increase their knowledge and fluency in the language, and it’s very difficult to find ways of doing that which fit with their schedules which are absolutely hectic of course.

“One thing I’d love to see is members in particular being more comfortable with using their reo in the cafeteria or when you’re breezing through the halls,” he said.

“The only other things really is I wish our team of five was a team of 50 so we could offer to our colleagues everything that they’re asking for, as opposed to having to prioritise.”

RNZ’s The House — parliamentary legislation, issues and insights — is made with funding from Parliament. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Indonesia’s influence in the Pacific Islands is growing, but is shadowed by disquiet over its region of Papua, known widely as West Papua.

The West Papuan independence movement has significant traction in the region, where it continues to push for its self-determination aspirations to be addressed by the international community.

Considering Papua’s political status as non-negotiable, Indonesia has been busy strengthening ties with a number of countries in the three Pacific Islands regions of Melanesia, Polynesia and Micronesia.

READ MORE: Indonesia strengthens ties with Pacific ‘good friends’

Amid a flurry of diplomatic activity in recent months, Indonesian cabinet minister Wiranto attended independence anniversary celebrations on Nauru, and the president of the Federated States of Micronesia was given red carpet treatment in Jakarta.

Jakarta says this is about working together with Pacific island countries on mutual interests. Others say it’s principally about quelling support for West Papuan independence aims.

Some regional observers even suspect the hand of Jakarta was at play behind the change in the Solomon Islands government’s policy on West Papua since Rick Hou replaced Manasseh Sogavare as prime minister last December.

April’s visit by a Solomon Islands delegation to Indonesia’s Papua and West Papua provinces caused an upset among some elements of civil society in Honiara, but showed how extensive Jakarta’s diplomatic outreach has become.

Serious threat
The secretary of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua, Rex Rumakiek, said Australia’s angst about the rising influence of China in the Pacific missed a more serious regional threat.

“The Melanesian countries are not very much concerned about Chinese influence. They are concerned mostly about the Indonesians’ influence in Melanesia, because they’re very destructive, they go right down to village level.

“They bribe people and buy political parties to change the government and so on. It’s already happening. It’s much more serious than the Chinese influence,” Rumakiek said.

LISTEN: RNZ’s Dateline Pacific

A spokesperson from Indonesia’s Embassy in Canberra, Sade Bimantara, said Rumakiek’s accusation was unsubstantiated and false.

He said Indonesia had consistently engaged and worked with Pacific Island nations for many years while respecting each other’s domestic affairs and sovereignty.

“On the contrary, a handful of people claiming Papuan heritage and living overseas are the ones interfering in the domestic politics of Papua and West Papua provinces,” Bimantara said.

“They are not citizens and were never democratically elected into public offices in those provinces by the 2.7 million voters of Papua and West Papua. And yet, they claim to be the rightful heir to the provinces.”

“Demographically, geographically, we are part of the Pacific. One third of the total area of the country, to the east, is inhabited by Melanesians and Polynesians,” he said.

Joku, a West Papuan who frequently represents Indonesia at meetings of the Melanesian Spearhead Group and the Pacific Islands Forum, said the country wanted to help small island countries with their development needs.

He cited Indonesian assistance in plans to build a convention centre in Tuvalu and a sports stadium in Kiribati as examples.

Indonesia is also offering help to Pacific Island countries with efforts to protect their all-important marine environment, although it is not the only larger country doing so.

Foreign governments sometimes take up the issue of human rights abuses in West Papua in their representations to Indonesia’s government.

But few human rights defenders would have been satisfed with wan assurances by Dutch Foreign Affairs minister Stef Blok that he discussed a recent damning Amnesty International report on the issue when in Jakarta last month.

Regional efforts obstructed
Some Pacific governments, notably Vanuatu, are concerned that Indonesia has obstructed efforts in regional forums to address West Papuan grievances.

A former Vanuatu prime minister and leader of the Vanua’aku Pati, Joe Natuman, said the move by some members of the Melanesian Spearhead Group to accept Indonesia into the regional organisation was problematic.

“Whoever had that wise idea is causing us problems,” he explained.

“You know, they said Indonesia comes into join [the MSG] to discuss issues of West Papua; Indonesia comes in and it doesn’t want to discuss West Papua. So I think we have to review the Indonesian membership of MSG.”

But Franz Albert Joku said it was not the responsibility of the MSG or Pacific Islands Forum to speak for Papuans. He said Papuans should be allowed to speak for themselves “by dealing with our own leaders in Jakarta and our own government.

“It’s not for offshore organisations like the Melanesian Spearhead Group and the Pacific Islands Forum to decide what should happen in Papua. Our position and especially our future is firmly within our grip.”

However, the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP), which has observer status at the MSG, argues that West Papuans are not free to express themselves and their political aspirations in their homeland.

Thousands arrested
Indonesian police arrested thousands of Papuans in 2016 when they demonstrated in Papuan cities in support of the Liberation Movement.

Jakarta also remains sensitive to regional calls for West Papua’s political status, and the controversial process by which the former Dutch New Guinea, was incorporated into Indonesia in the 1960s, to be reviewed.

Last month while in Fiji, Papua New Guinea’s Prime Minister Peter O’Neill was reported to have encouraged regional countries to take the issue of West Papua to the United Nations Decolonisation Committee.

Following this, PNG’s Foreign Minister Rimbink Pato made a visit to Jakarta for talks with his Indonesian counterpart Retno Marsudi, reaffirming his country’s support for the status quo in the Papuan provinces.

“They are an integral part of the Republic of Indonesia,” he said.

“There has been some misreporting on this issue. Papua New Guinea’s position has not changed and there is no intention to ever change it.”

Natuman said he understood the sensitivity of the matter for PNG as West Papua’s neighbour.

“But I think they should be honest with themselves and discuss openly with the MSG and with Indonesia, and of course eventually we have to involve the United Nations,” he said.

United Nations mess
“This is a mess created by the United Nations, and the the United Nations have to come clean on this.”

The regional calls for international action on West Papua persist from the likes of New Zealand government MP Louisa Wall, who is among a small but vocal group of local MPs pushing for the issue of West Papuan self-determination to be heard at the UN.

“I believe in self-determination, I believe in indigenous rights. This is a right of the West Papuan indigenous peoples to re-litigate something that has been highlighted, actually was done in an unjust and unfair way,” Wall said.

Wall’s voice is still only part of a minority in New Zealand’s government whose formal position remains in support of Indonesian control of Papua.

New Zealand’s Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, reiterated this support to Indonesia’s president Joko Widodo during his state visit to Wellington earlier this year.

The issue of human rights abuses in Papua is a standing item on the agenda of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF), whose leaders meet in Nauru next month.

Yesterday, the outgoing Forum chairman, Samoa’s Prime Minister Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi, suggested some Pacific leaders sensationalised the alleged abuses by Indonesian military in Papua.

Speaking on national Radio 2AP, Tuilaepa, who has forged closer ties with Indonesia in the past year, conceded that various West Papuans wanted independence and sought to stop infringements of their human rights.

Tuilaepa said that where it concerned human rights issues, they should take up the matter through the United Nations Human Rights Commission.

The Pacific Media Centre has a content sharing partnership with RNZ Pacific.

While a former US President’s visit preoccupied the New Zealand media this week, the state visit of the current president of Indonesia went mostly under the radar. You’ll look in vain for reports about what was discussed at top-level talks about important issues.

Just before former US President Barack Obama flew in to New Zealand, a leader described as “Indonesia’s Obama” by Stuff this week touched down on Monday.

Indonesian President Joko Widodo represents the world’s fourth most populous country and he is an interesting leader. The former furniture maker is a heavy metal fan only turned to politics 12 years ago.

Briefing the reporters last Monday, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern told reporters: “Indonesia is an incredibly important potential economic partner for New Zealand.”

LISTEN TO RNZ MEDIAWATCH

READ MORE: Open letter to PM Ardern: Raise Papua human rights crimes with Jokowi

She went on to say that she had also raised some political sensitive issues including “freedom of speech and access of foreign media in the Papua region.”

The Indonesian Embassy promoted the state visit via social media.

That media freedom issue is important for the disputed Melanesian territory of West Papua. Reporters have found it very difficult to get in to find out what’s going on there.

Stuff, The New Zealand Herald, RNZ and Newshub all noted in their preview pieces that West Papua independence activists had been urging the Prime Minister to raise the issue too.

Witty remarks
On day one of the visit, most media outlets covered the photo opportunities and scheduled walkabouts in Wellington. President Widodo’s witty remarks about Indonesian coffee and New Zealand sheep made for a big headline in the Herald the next day.

RNZ Pacific reported that the President and his team were greeted by Free West Papua protesters and flag-waving Indonesian patriots on parliament grounds, who tried to drown out each other’s songs.

A video of that by RNZ posted on Facebook has been viewed more than 35,000 times.

So far, so good.

But you’ll look in vain for media reports about what was said at those bilateral talks.

Photos were taken on behalf of all media by one photographer when the Indonesians met jacinda Ardern. Judging by the smiles on all the faces, it was going well at that point.

Similarly smiley pictures of a meeting with Simon Bridges appeared on his Twitter feed and that of the Indonesian Embassy afterwards.

Reporters ushered out
But the media reports of both meetings say reporters were ushered out of the room as President Widodo began to speak.

RNZ reported that the Indonesian government had requested “media opportunities for questions . . . were kept to a bare minimum”.

Joko Widodo and Jacinda Ardern did not hold a press conference.

“I’m advised—that as far as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs recalls, there has been never a requirement for post bilateral stand-ups. They’ve always been case by case,” Jacinda Ardern told reporters earlier

A joint statement was released on Tuesday covering areas of cooperation and common ground.

It said both leaders reaffirmed other’s “sovereignty and territorial integrity” – not a comfort to those who hoped he would be pressed on independence for West Papua.

But that was a document drafted by diplomats – not by journalists

No change
In his preview of Joko Widodo’s visit, on Scoop.co.nz Gordon Campbell predicted it would not change a situation once described by David Lange years ago.

“He had said it was almost impossible to get New Zealand to think about the huge nation sitting right on our doorstep,” Campbell wrote.

It seems he is still right about that.

And Joko Widodo seems capable of handling the media.

On The Panel on RNZ National last Tuesday Jim Mora noted Joko Widodo brought the house down with thoughts about politics and the media during a speech last week in Australia.

“Since the arrival of Netflix the politicians have no choice but to turn politics into reality TV, because if we don’t, all of you will watch House of Cards and Stranger Things instead of watching us,” he said.

Republished from RNZ Mediawatch by Pacific Media Watch.

• More West Papua stories
• Gordon Campbell on the Indonesian PM’s guest
• David Robie on Indonesia, West Papua and media freedom
• Audrey Young on Indonesian ‘disrespect’ for failure to have joint media conference

Indonesia’s Statistics Office has produced an ethnic breakdown of the Papua region, based on the last census in 2010 which established an overall population of 3.6 million.

While the proportion of Papuan people as a percentage of the population continues to decline, this process varies widey between different regencies, reports Dateline Pacific.

The percentage of Papuans has fallen catastrophically in some regions, particularly in urban centres, but Papuans still make up the vast majority in the Highlands.

Using the new data, Dr Jim Elmslie of Sydney University’s West Papua Project has produced a new paper at Global Research updating his previous work on Papua’s demographic transition.

He talks to Johnny Blades of Dateline Pacific:

Transcript:
JIM ELMSLIE: You’ve got to handle the figures with some degree of care and you’ve got to sort of doubt the accuracy to some extent because the large area that’s there, the terrain, the fact that large areas of the Highlands, I don’t know if you’d call it a revolt, but there are certain areas that are conflicts between certain areas of the island and the state are fairly entrenched. So the figures – what you can get clearly from them is the trend and the change over time and that’s clearly continuing because of the large-scale inward migration of non-Papuan settlers drawn into the region mostly for economic opportunity, and most of that economic opportunities are on the plains.

JOHNNY BLADES: You’ve established that the Melanesians – the Papuans – their growth rate is quite a bit less than the non-Papuans.

JE: That’s what the research shows and that’s even given that the numbers are a bit rubbery. Because for [Indonesia] to conduct an accurate census would be damn-near impossible and the figures that we have to use, so we use them. But anecdotally as well – from talking to health experts and looking at what’s going on on the ground compared to say PNG – then yeah the birth rate clearly is lower. There’s a whole range of reasons for that. One is the infant mortality and the maternal mortality rate is very high, there are untreated diseases that cause infertility. But that’s fairly clear and it’s also clear that large numbers of migrants are coming in, the government is building new ports, there are ships that come in on a weekly basis, there’s many flights every day from other parts of Indonesia. There’s clearly the demand, and as we’re talking, they are clearing tens of thousands of acres of rainforest and putting in labour-intensive things like oil palm plantations, where the workers are being brought in from Java rather than being recruited locally.

JB: Back in 2010 you had estimated that the total population of West Papuans in West Papua, that whole Papua region, was some 48 percent. And now with these new BPS [Indonesian Statistics Office] figures it’s indicating that their percentage is something like 66 percent. Isn’t that in some ways a positive, given that in the last couple of years a lot of the discourse around the West Papuan diplomatic wrangle has been around them having become a minority in their own land?

JE: Well, when you extrapolate these figures forward, and there’s two different population growth rates, you come up with these figures of the minoritisation of the Papuan population. And that was a projection, I guess, if all else remained the same. And I think the exact figures may vary but the trend is still there. So in terms of whether that’s positive or not… I think it certainly is positive that large areas of the Highlands of West Papua are still populated very strongly by groups of indigenous Melanesian people, even if that’s not the case in the lowlands. But it means that the Papuans, certainly in the Highlands, are not on the verge of disappearing under the weight of inward migration. So yes, I think that’s a positive thing. Some people seem to feel that the general conflict in West Papua would disappear over time as the Papuan population became a minority. Well that’s obviously not going to happen. That is happening in the lowlands, but it’s not going to happen anytime soon in the Highlands, even though – I must stress again – that there’s a lot of development going on there which will bring in outsiders, bring in more military, which will always be a threat to them [Papuans].

JB: Transmigrasi is no longer an official programme, is that right? But these people are still coming in?

JE: Yeah so there’s no official transmigration, but it’s the policy, I think, of the Indonesian government because looking at the bigger picture of Indonesia and the Indonesian  economy – and people talk about it growing – West Papua makes up something like 23 or 24 percent of the land mass of Indonesia and it’s got huge resources: obviously the forestry, when most of the rest of the trees of Indonesia have been cut down, so Papua is really the last place where there’s huge stands of rainforest; there’s also the mineral wealth which is possibly the richest part of the entire world – the Freeport mine is probably the biggest gold mine in the world, the biggest copper mine, it’s also the biggest economic entity in Indonesia and also the biggest taxpayer. So looking into the future, the Indonesians’ capacity to exploit the natural resources of West Papua, and with all that brings, that will be one of the factors that allow Indonesia to grow as people are predicting it to grow, and become one of the main economies in southeast Asia, and certainly bigger than Australia. Which is one of the fears, I guess, which is underlying Australian policy, that in some future when the Indonesian economy overtakes the Australian economy in size, and Indonesia becomes a more important country internationally, then that’s going to be quite a different situation than has been the case in this part of the world up until now, where the Australian economy and therefore its military resources and the rest of it were superior to the Indonesians. So a lot of that long-term growth will come out of West Papua. And if that continues, it will involve shifting more and more people down to that region.

• West Papuan demographics revisited

On an island with the third largest rainforest in the world live an indigenous people who are quickly becoming a minority in their own land.

Sitting north of Australia and occupying the western half of the island of New Guinea is West Papua – a territory rich in natural resources which was formally but controversially absorbed into Indonesia in the 1960s following the withdrawal of Dutch colonial administration.

West Papuans were largely excluded from that decision and for the past 50 years they have raised concerns about the infringement of their basic human rights in modern Indonesia.

Joko Widodo’s government has rejected these concerns saying living standards are improving for people in the Papua region, which appears at odds with the growing number of demonstrations by West Papuans calling for a legitimate self-determination process and an end to rights abuses.

Regardless, Indonesian rule means the face of West Papuan society is changing rapidly, but Radio New Zealand International journalists Johnny Blades and Koroi Hawkins found that the core culture of these Melanesian people is not easily destroyed.

Written and produced by: Johnny Blades

Camera: Koroi Hawkins

Editor: Jeremy Brick

This documentary was first broadcast by RNZ International on 23 December 2016 and has been republished here with permission.

• Media freedom in West Papua ‘exposed’ – Graduate journalist Struan Purdie’s report for the Pacific Media Centre
• Watching this space, West Papua – Johnny Blades in Pacific Journalism Review