People get ready
There’s a train a-coming
You don’t need no baggage
You just get on board
All you need is faith
To hear the diesels humming
Don’t need no ticket
You just thank the Lord

Songwriter: Curtis Mayfield

• READ MORE: Trump’s reaction as bishop pleads for protection of minorities

You might have seen Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde’s speech at the National Prayer Service in the United States following Trump’s elevation to the highest worldly position, or perhaps read about it in the news.

It’s well worth watching this short clip of her sermon if you haven’t, as the rest of this newsletter is about that and the reaction to it:

‘May I ask you to have mercy Mr President.’       Video: C-Span

I found the sermon courageous, heartfelt, and, above all, decent. It felt like there was finally an adult in the room again. Predictably, Trump and his vile little Vice-President responded like naughty little boys being reprimanded, reacting with anger at being told off in front of all their little mates.

That response will not have surprised the Bishop. As she prepared to deliver the end of her sermon, you could see her pause to collect her thoughts. She knew she would be criticised for what she was about to say, yet she had the courage to speak it regardless.

What followed was heartfelt and compelling, as the Bishop talked of the fears of LGBT people and immigrants.

She spoke of them as if they were human beings like the rest of us, saying they pay their taxes, are not criminals, and are good neighbours.

The president did not want to hear her message. His anger was building as his snivelling sidekick looked toward him to see how the big chief would respond.

Vented on social media
So, how did the leader of the free world react? Did he take it on the chin, appreciating that he now needed to show leadership for all, or did he call the person asking him to show compassion — “nasty”?

That’s right, it was the second one. I’m afraid there’s no prize for that as you’re all excluded due to inside knowledge of that kind of behaviour from observing David Seymour. The ACT leader responds in pretty much the same way when someone more intelligent and human points out the flaws in his soul.

Donald then went on his own Truth social media platform, which he set up before he’d tamed the Tech Oligarchs, and vented, “The so-called bishop who spoke at the National Prayer Service on Tuesday morning was a radical left hard-line Trump hater”.

Which isn’t very polite, but when you think about it, his response should be seen as a badge of honour. Especially for someone of the Christian faith because all those who follow the teachings of Christ ought to be “radical left hard-line Trump haters”, or else they’ve rather missed the point. Don’t you think?

Certainly, pastor and activist John Pavlovitz thought so, saying, “Christians who voted for him, you should be ashamed of yourselves. Of course, if you were capable of shame, you’d never have voted for him to begin with.”

I thought it was a bit rich for a man who has used the church and the bible in order to sell himself to false Christians who worship money, who has even claimed divine intervention from God, to then complain about the Bishop not staying in her lane.

Speaking out against bigotry
If religious leaders don’t speak out against bigotry, hatred, and threats to peaceful, decent human beings — then what’s the point?

Wow. Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde fearlessly calls out Trump and Vance to their faces. This is heroic. pic.twitter.com/igyKzC8dRo

— MeidasTouch (@MeidasTouch) January 21, 2025

I admired Budde’s bravery. Just quietly, the church hasn’t always had the best record of speaking out against those who’ve said the sort of things that Trump is saying.

If you’re unclear what I mean, I’m talking about Hitler, and it’s nice to see the church, or at least the Bishop, taking the other side this time around. Rather than offering compliance and collaboration, as they did then and as the political establishment in America is doing now.

Aside from all that, it feels like a weird, topsy-turvy world when the church is asking the government to be more compassionate towards the LGBT community.

El Douche hadn’t finished and said, “Apart from her inappropriate statements, the service was a very boring and uninspiring one. She is not very good at her job! She and her church owe the public an apology!”

It’s like he just says the opposite of what is happening, and people are so stupid or full of hate that they accept it, even though it’s obviously false.

So, the Bishop is derided as “nasty” when she is considerate and kind. She is called “Not Smart” when you only have to listen to her to know she is an intelligent, well-spoken person. She is called “Ungracious” when she is polite and respectful.

Willing wretches
As is the case with bullies, there are always wretches willing to support them and act similarly to win favour, even as many see them for what they are.

Mike Collins, a Republican House representative, tweeted, “The person giving this sermon should be added to the deportation list.”

Isn’t that disgusting? An elected politician saying that someone should be deported for daring to challenge the person at the top, even when it is so clearly needed.

Echoing the teachings of Jesus and calling out Trump’s cruelty, ignorance, and bigotry to his face, Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde delivers a sermon for the ages. Bishop Budde stared down authoritarian fascism and said ‘Not today, motherfucker.’ pic.twitter.com/JDBDa5RAgs

— Bill Madden (@maddenifico) January 21, 2025

Fox News host Sean Hannity said, “Instead of offering a benediction for our country, for our president, she goes on the far-left, woke tirade in front of Donald Trump and JD Vance, their families, their young children. She made the service about her very own deranged political beliefs with a disgraceful prayer full of fear-mongering and division.”

Perhaps most despicably, Robert Jeffress, the pastor of Dallas’s First Baptist Church, tweeted this sycophantic garbage:

Attended national prayer service today at the Washington National Cathedral during which Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde insulted rather than encouraged our great president @realDonaldTrump. There was palpable disgust in the audience with her words. @POTUS

— Dr. Robert Jeffress (@robertjeffress) January 21, 2025

Those cronies of Trump seem weak and dishonest to me compared to the words of Bishop Budde herself, who said the following after her sermon:

“I wanted to say there is room for mercy, there’s room for a broader compassion. We don’t need to portray with a broadcloth in the harshest of terms some of the most vulnerable people in our society, who are, in fact, our neighbours, our friends, our children, our friends, children, and so forth.”

The Republican party has made its pact with the Donald, and the Tech Bros have fallen over each other in their desire to kiss his ass; it will be a dark time for many regular people, no doubt, to stand up for what they believe in even as those with power and privilege fall in line behind the tyrant.

In my view Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde is a hero, and she does herself great credit with this courageous, compassionate, Christian stand

First published by Nick’s Kōrero and republished with permission. For more of Nick Rockel’s articles or to subscribe to his blog, click here.

The Cook Islands has removed a law from its Crimes Act that could jail men for having sex with men.

The law — which was never enforced — said the offence of “indecent acts between males” was punishable by up to five years in prison.

People hosting these acts in their premises faced up to 10 years jail under the Crimes Act 1969.

• READ MORE: Other Cook Islands human rights reports

Under the Crimes (Sexual Offences) Amendment Bill — tabled and passed today — any clauses that make consensual sexual acts between men illegal will be removed from the Crimes Act and will come into force on 1 June.

Prime Minister Mark Brown said in a tweet that it was a “historic day” for his Cook Islands Party “to stomp out discrimination of the LGBT community.”

A historical day in Parliament as my Party has fulfilled its pledge to stomp out discrimination of the LGBT community in our society and to uphold our Constitutional commitments to human rights. pic.twitter.com/u1nuwOEBYl

— Mark Brown (@MarkBrownPM) April 15, 2023

The rainbow community in the Cook Islands says the bill has been a long time coming.

Pride Cook Islands president Karla Eggelton said it was significant moment for the nation.

“It’s massive,” Eggleton said.

‘This is big’
“We are so grateful for all the people and all the organisations throughout our community who have been working tirelessly to make this happen. This is big,” she said.

“And I think the message that we want to tell people is: hug your friend, hug your neighbour, hug your niece, hug your daughter, because now we are truly equal.”

Legislators passed the amendments after the second and third reading on Friday, April 14 Cook Islands time.

Eggleton said the passing of the bill reflected the Cook Islands’ changing society.

All major parties voiced support for the change before the Cook Islands general election last year.

The explanatory note for the bill said there was a growing acceptance to respect privacy and not discriminate against homosexual behaviour.

The bill will also provide more protection for victims of rape.

Rape provision
One provision of the previous law said married women could only be raped by their husbands if they were separated, and this will be removed.

Moves to repeal the anti-rainbow laws in the Crimes Act has faced multiple road blocks and have been in the process since 2017.

In 2019, lawmakers made a u-turn on promises to decriminalise homosexuality after public consultation.

A draft Crimes Bill penned in 2017 had removed “indecent acts between males” and sodomy as crimes, but instead the end result was for sexual acts between women to also be added as a crime.

Select committee chairman and Cook Islands Party member of parliament, Tingika Elikana told Cook Islands News in 2019 there were “concerns” about decriminalising homosexuality.

“There were provisions [on homosexuality] removed from the draft Bill and people said they have got some concerns about it and the committee has taken that into account,” Elikana told the paper.

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

The impending arrival of Kelly-Jean Keen-Minshull — aka Posie Parker — has put the spotlight on the tension between free speech and protecting vulnerable communities in Aotearoa New Zealand.

In particular, it raises questions about Immigration New Zealand’s role in limiting who can visit and speak in the country.

Keen-Minshull is an anti-transgender rights activist and founder of a group called Standing for Women. On the back of a controversial Australian tour, she is planning to speak at a series of events across Aotearoa at the end of March.

• READ MORE: Anti-transgender activist Posie Parker to be allowed into New Zealand
• Being transgender is not a mental illness, and the WHO should acknowledge this
• Polarising, sensational media coverage of transgender athletes should end — our research shows a way forward
• Trans rights and political backlash: five key moments in history

But Immigration New Zealand is now reviewing her status after about 30 members of the far-right Nationalist Socialist Movement supported her rally in Melbourne, clashing with LGBTQI supporters.

The Melbourne police were also criticised by legal observers, accused of protecting and supporting the neo-Nazis while focusing “excessive violence” on the LGBTQI supporters.

Anti-transgender activist Posie Parker to be allowed into New Zealand https://t.co/bx8C3JS2Jg

— RNZ News (@rnz_news) March 22, 2023

Meanwhile, National Party leader Chris Luxon has said Keen-Minshull should be allowed into New Zealand on the grounds of free speech. He argued there should be a “high bar” to stop someone entering the country because of what they say.

At the same time, Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has said he condemned people who used their right to free speech in a way that deliberately sought to create division. Therein lies the core of the debate.

Members of a neo-Nazi group made Nazi salutes on Saturday on the steps of Parliament House in Melbourne, Australia, during a protest against transgender rights. Political leaders said they would move to ban Nazi salutes in the state of Victoria.https://t.co/0CHFICjr93

— The New York Times (@nytimes) March 20, 2023

Threat to public order
Keen-Minshull has allegedly had ties to white supremacist organisations, featuring in videos with Jean-François Gariépy, a prominent far-right YouTuber, and posting a selfie with Hans Jørgen Lysglimt Johansen, a Norwegian neo-Nazi known for Holocaust denial.

Keen-Minshull has also tweeted racist diatribes against Muslims.

The key question is whether the threat of unrest seen at Keen-Minshull’s events poses sufficient risk to public order to justify revoking her visa. It turns out there is a precedent for blocking entry to controversial figures.

In 2014, hip hop collective Odd Future was prevented from entering New Zealand on the grounds they and their audience had been implicated in violence against police and directing harassment towards opponents.

In one instance, members of Odd Future reportedly urged fans to attack police, leaving one officer hospitalised.

Odd Future member Tyler the Creator also unleashed a tirade against an activist who tried to have his Australian concert cancelled. Both instances were offered as reasons to prevent the collective from entering New Zealand.

Character judgements
The Immigration Act stipulates that individuals who are likely to be “a threat or risk” to security, public order or the public interest should not be eligible for a visa or entry permission.

In the past, good character requirements outlined by the act, including criminal background or deportation from other countries, have been used as a reason to block controversial speakers from entering New Zealand.

For example, Steven Anderson of the Faithful Word Baptist Church was denied entry to New Zealand after being deported from other countries.

Anderson has been known to promote Holocaust denial and has confirmed he believes in “hating homosexuals”.

On the flip side, alt-right speakers Stefan Molyneux and Lauren Southern were granted entry visas in 2018 after meeting character requirements, despite calls for the pair to be banned from entering New Zealand.

Potential harm
Arguably, Keen-Minshull should not be granted entry under the banner of free speech. Rallies like those recently held in Australia do appear to cause concrete harm.

Research after the Christchurch Call, a political summit initiated by former prime minister Jacinda Ardern in 2019 after the Christchurch massacre, found expanding extremist communities increased the risk of physical attacks in the future.

According to the 2018 Counting Ourselves survey, some 71 percent of trans people reported experiencing high or very high rates of mental distress, and 44 percent experienced harassment during the 2018 survey period.

Research shows that trans people experience “minority stress” — high levels of chronic stress faced by socially marginalised groups, caused by poor social support, low socioeconomic status and prejudice.

A key part of “minority stress” is linked to anticipating and attempting to avoid discrimination.

Being consistent
Beyond the question of free speech, Immigration New Zealand needs to be consistent in its application of the law. In the case of Odd Future, an Immigration official admitted it was unusual to ban musical acts:

Generally it’s aimed at organisations like white supremacists and neo-Nazis, people who have come in here to be public speakers, holocaust deniers – those kinds of people.

However, Immigration stood by its decision based on the lead singer’s incitement of violence against police and harassment of an activist. Considering the ruling on Odd Future as a risk to public order, it would surely be inconsistent to allow Keen-Minshull entry.

In 2018, she was spoken to by UK police for making videos criticising the chief executive of transgender charity Mermaids. And, in 2019, Keen-Minshull recorded herself in Washington DC confronting trans advocate Sarah McBride after breaking into a private meeting.

Encouraging the far-right?
In the post-covid era, New Zealand has already seen a more visible far-right anti-LGBTQI movement. There has been a rise in harassment and attacks against LGBTQI communities across the country, including the arson of the Tauranga Rainbow Youth and Gender Dynamix building.

We need to listen to those targeted by hate groups — it is their safety that is at risk from speakers who deny their existence and humanity.

The line between free speech and causing harm is complicated to draw. But this case seems clear cut. Whether you agree or disagree with the 2014 decision to bar Odd Future entry to New Zealand, the precedent has been set for visitors who pose a threat to public order.

Kevin Veale, Lecturer in Media Studies, part of the Digital Cultures Laboratory in the School of Humanities, Media, and Creative Communication, Massey University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Indonesian President Joko Widodo (known as Jokowi) addressed Australia’s Parliament yesterday.

Indonesia is often referred to as the democratic success story of Southeast Asia and a model of Muslim democracy, yet it has been responsible for significant backsliding on human rights in recent years.

This backsliding is serious enough that Australian leaders should ask Jokowi some hard questions during his Canberra visit.

READ MORE: Joko Widodo uses historic speech to call for greater action to tackle climate change

Here are five current human rights concerns:

1. Indonesia’s draconian new Criminal Code
Indonesia has been working on updating its colonial-era Criminal Code for decades. Now Indonesia’s Parliament is discussing a new draft code with a raft of problematic provisions that would be disastrous for women and minorities, and for many Indonesians in general.

The new code proposes to punish extramarital sex with up to one year in jail and unmarried couples who live together with six months. Consensual sex between adults should never be a crime, and this law would disproportionately affect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people.

While it does not mention same-sex conduct, same-sex relationships are not legally recognised in Indonesia, so it would effectively criminalise all same-sex conduct.

The code also would criminalise disseminating information about contraception as well as criminalising some abortions. It would expand the toxic blasphemy law, which has been used to target religious minorities.

While Jokowi delayed the vote following mass protests against the proposed code last year, he should show leadership in ensuring that abusive provisions are removed. These provisions not only violate Indonesia’s human rights obligations but will help foment hatred and discrimination against certain groups.

2. Rising discrimination and attacks against LGBT people
While some gay and lesbian Australians might not think twice about visiting Bali for a holiday, they should be concerned about the rise in hateful rhetoric, discrimination and violence against LGBT people in Indonesia.

Since early 2016, Indonesian politicians, government officials, and state offices have issued anti-LGBT statements – calling for everything from criminalisation to “cures” for homosexuality, to censorship of information about LGBT people and of positive reporting on their activities.

The government’s failure to halt arbitrary and unlawful raids by police and militant Islamists on private LGBT gatherings has effectively derailed public health outreach efforts to vulnerable populations. Last November, Indonesia’s ombudsman revealed that a number of ministries openly discriminate against LGBT people in job postings, saying that applicants “must not be mentally disabled and not show sexual orientation or behavioral deviations.”

3. No UN access for West Papua
The 2019 Pacific Island Forum Leaders’ statement, signed by all Pacific nations including Australia, expressed concern about “reported escalation in violence and continued allegations of human rights abuses in West Papua (Papua)” and urged the Indonesian government to honour Jokowi’s 2018 promise to allow the UN Human Rights Office to visit the two provinces and report on the situation before the next Pacific Island Forum’s leaders meeting this year.

But the UN Human Rights Office has still had no access to West Papua. And last year’s protests and violence, in which at least 53 people – both Papuans and migrants from other parts of Indonesia – were killed and hundreds more wounded, make the visit even more urgent. Precise estimates on deaths are difficult because access to Papua is limited.

Indonesian authorities have detained and charged at least 22 people for peaceful acts of free expression – mainly for raising the pro-Papuan independence Morning Star flag or speaking about “West Papua independence” in public. They are charged with  treason (makar) and face up to 20 years in prison.

4. Rising religious intolerance
Indonesia’s blasphemy law punishes deviations from the central tenets of Indonesia’s six officially recognised religions – Islam, Protestantism, Catholicism, Hinduism, Buddhism and Confucianism – with up to five years in prison. The blasphemy law is alarmingly used for political purposes and to target religious minorities.

The highest-profile victim of the law was the former Jakarta governor, Basuki Purnama (Ahok), sentenced in 2017 to two years in prison for allegedly defaming Islam in a speech to fishermen on Seribu Islands, near Jakarta. More recently, a woman was sentenced to 18 months in prison for complaining about the level of a mosque’s loudspeaker.

These are among a number of worrying signs of growing efforts by the government to impose religious conservatism.

Local and provincial-level governments in at least five provinces have introduced decrees mandating that women and girls must wear the hijab in civic buildings, universities and schools. Schools have enforced these regulations in more than a dozen provinces, even on non-Muslim students.

5. Defence Minister implicated in abuses
Imagine what would happen if an Australian soldier discharged from the military for human rights abuses and disobeying orders became our Defence Minister. That is exactly what has happened in Indonesia, when last year Jokowi appointed his presidential opponent, Prabowo Subianto, to the post.

The Indonesian army dismissed Prabowo in 1998 over allegations of kidnapping of more than two dozen activists in 1997-98 during the fall of Suharto. He has also been accused of abuses in East Timor during his time there as a Kopassus commander.

Indonesia’s military has a long  record of impunity for killings and enforced disappearances. That is sadly unlikely to improve under Prabowo’s leadership of one of Indonesia’s most powerful institutions.

President Jokowi has another four years to take concrete steps to protect the human rights and freedoms for  all Indonesians. But unless he takes steps to stop the backsliding, Indonesia may face much bigger social and political crises.

Elaine Pearson is Australia director of Human Rights Watch. This article has been republished from HRW.

Up to 193 million eligible voters in Indonesia will go to the polls today, in what will be the world’s largest single-day election.

The election will see incumbent president Joko “Jokowi” Widodo go head-to-head with Prabowo Subianto, a former general in the Indonesian armed forces who lost to Jokowi in 2014.

This election is also significant as for the first time in Indonesia’s history, the presidential and legislative elections will be held on the same day.

READ MORE: Indonesia’s political system has ‘failed’ its minorities – like West Papuans

Why should New Zealand care? We put the question to some Indonesia experts…

Lester Finch, Director, AUT Indonesia Centre:
“Which country is New Zealand’s most disregarded Pacific neighbour? An archipelago of 17,000 islands, more than 300 languages spoken and 260 million people. Yes, it’s Indonesia.

“This large country is full of economic and social development opportunities for entrepreneurial Kiwis yet we don’t know what’s going on there. Many don’t know that the presidential elections are to be held this month and the outcome of those elections will have an impact on New Zealand.

“Indonesian language is a doorway to the culture. Australia has around 20 institutions teaching the Indonesian language while New Zealand has just one. Why? We just haven’t yet realised the opportunities Indonesia has for us.

“Indonesia is an exciting country with fine traditions and culture, especially its vibrant music and dance. Let’s pay some attention and step out of our comfort zone to get to know wonderful Indonesia and find out about the two individuals vying for the presidency.”

Natasha Hamilton-Hart, Director, New Zealand Asia Institute:
“For New Zealand, the election carries two major points of relevance. First, there are the implications for Indonesia’s future trajectory with regard to human rights and civic freedoms. While neither candidate is a liberal democrat, Prabowo’s platform, history and allies clearly speak to a greater willingness to espouse illiberal limits on individual and minority freedoms.

“Second, there are implications for Indonesia’s trade policy. Both candidates endorse strongly nationalist programmes, including a policy of self-sufficiency in food – which directly impinges on New Zealand’s export prospects in key products, including meat and dairy.

“There is at least a rhetorical difference, however. In the campaign, Prabowo has strongly criticised rising food imports in 2018, leaving Jokowi to defend these imports as necessary to maintain food price stability.

“Jokowi’s administration has been forced to allow these import increases despite an underlying commitment to an ostensibly pro-farmer self-sufficiency strategy. Imports have risen when food prices spiked, but the longer term strategy is likely to be here to stay.”

Sharyn Graham Davies, Associate Professor of Social Sciences at Auckland University of Technology:
“Given New Zealand’s recent overwhelming support of its Muslim community, including women donning the head scarf on the Friday following the Christchurch massacre, it is a shame that New Zealand will not find a kindred spirit in the next president of Indonesia.

“Both of the front-runners have poor track records when it comes to human rights. New Zealand rightly finds it difficult to ignore human rights abuses on the diplomatic stage.

“While the incumbent, Jokowi, is perhaps not malevolent, he has done little to support women or the LGBT community since his election in 2014. While Jokowi’s lacklustre presidency may not be a huge cause for concern, his appointment of vice-presidential candidate, Ma’ruf Amin, is an ultra-conservative Islamic hardliner who thinks Indonesia should be cleansed of its LGBT community.

“Distressingly, though, the Jokowi-Ma’ruf ticket almost looks almost benign compared to the other front-runner, Prabowo. Having married the daughter of former authoritarian ruler Suharto, Prabowo is implicated in a number of mass murders.

“New Zealand needs to pay attention to the upcoming Indonesian election to get to grips with how it will deal with our most populous neighbour when further human rights abuses occur.”

Indi Soemardjan, Chairman of the New Zealand-Indonesia Friendship Council:
“New Zealanders can start looking at the size of this election. There will be 800,000 polling stations, six million election workers, and the most complicated single-day ballot in global history.

“Altogether, there are more than 245,000 candidates running for more than 20,000 national and local legislative seats across hundreds of islands, in addition to the headline presidential contest.

“Paper ballots and nails are simply the method. No electronic nor digital ballots used.

“Unfortunately, this has also been considered the most divisive presidential election in Indonesia due to the fact that both candidates have effectively used social media channels (and millions of chat/WhatsApp groups) to create public opinion regarding their ‘ideological differences’, if any.”

Dewi Fortuna Anwar, Research Professor, Indonesia Institute of Sciences:
“With its population of over 260 million people, its strategic location at the crossroads between the Indian and Pacific Oceans and between Asia and Australia and its dynamic economy, Indonesia is the largest member of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and plays a pivotal role in promoting regional peace, stability and prosperity.

“Indonesia is also the world’s largest Muslim nation, the world’s third largest democracy as well as a member of the G20. Indonesia prides itself as a country where Islam, democracy, modernity and women empowerment walk hand-in hand.

“Indonesia’s legislative and presidential elections serve to affirm its identity as a vibrant democracy, while at the same time the rise in identity politics and the proliferation of fake news have become serious concerns as both can undermine democracy. The results of Indonesia’s elections are clearly of interest to Indonesia’s neighbours, including New Zealand, as they will determine the direction that Indonesia will take in the next five years.”

Chris Naziris, lawyer at MKK Jakarta and Wellington:
“The 2019 election will be defined by competing populist policies, economic nationalism and rising religious conservatism. These could significantly impact New Zealand’s $1 billion worth of exports, the security of the region and the safety of New Zealanders.

“Indonesia has been a pluralistic and largely tolerant nation but continued low mineral prices (Indonesia’s extractive economy mirrors Australia’s) and increasingly ineffective nationalistic economic policies have failed to lift millions out of extreme poverty.

“This has led to frustration and resentment among many, especially outside Jakarta. In a time of growing US-China tensions, BREXIT, and European economic stagnation, the stability of Indonesia, as the largest economy in Southeast Asia is vital to New Zealand.”

Siah Hwee Ang, Chair in Business in Asia:
“Indonesia is a close neighbour to New Zealand and its economic ties with New Zealand have strengthened in the last couple of years. Indonesia’s trade and investment policies might adjust depending on the outcomes of the coming election.

“This will have an impact on New Zealand businesses either currently trading with our Southeast Asia neighbour or those with the market in sight.

“Even intermediaries that engage with Indonesian counterparts will have to keep themselves abreast of the potential change in political and business climate in Indonesia. More broadly, Indonesia’s election will have ramifications for ASEAN as a whole and the wider Asia-Pacific, which New Zealand is a part of.

“There will be ripple effects on trade and investment fronts, even if trade agreements may have ring-fenced some of these potential effects. Overall, clearly the election in the largest economy in ASEAN would have both direct and indirect effects on business engagements with the country and the wider context of the Asia-Pacific.”

Compiled by the Asia New Zealand Foundation’s Asia Media Centre.

• Indonesia election: Widodo, Prabowo vie for presidency

Indonesian President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo did something extraordinary in his annual State of the Nation address this week – he issued a plea for tolerance.

“I am sure if the Indonesian people want to remain united, tolerant, and care for their fellow children of the nation, then Indonesia is no longer just a name or picture of a chain of islands on a world map, but rather a force respected by other nations in the world,” Jokowi said.

That reference, in a speech otherwise dominated by upbeat references to infrastructure spending commitments and economic growth projections, suggests a rare, if ambiguous, public recognition by Jokowi of the worsening harassment and discrimination targeting the country’s religious and sexual minorities.

Religious minorities are particularly vulnerable, because of the country’s dangerously ambiguous blasphemy law.

The law’s latest victim is a Buddhist woman facing a possible 18-month prison term for complaining about the loudspeaker volume of a neighborhood mosque.

The surge since 2016 of anti-LGBT rhetoric by government officials, as well as moves to criminalise same-sex relations are linked to a worsening of the country’s HIV epidemic.

Jokowi’s tolerance plea om Thursday is even more remarkable given that he has largely turned a blind eye to LGBT discrimination, and the role of government officials in fomenting it.

Longstanding commitment
Jokowi also used his speech to reiterate a longstanding commitment to “resolve cases of past rights abuses and to improve protection of human rights to prevent similar cases from taking place in the future”.

However, he did not provide any details or timetable for their resolution.

Jokowi’s first-time reference to tolerance in his annual national address might indicate some recognition that he has failed to translate his rhetorical support for human rights into meaningful policy initiatives.

He could also be responding to criticism from domestic human rights activists of his recent choice for his vice presidential running mate, Ma’ruf Amin, a conservative cleric who has played a major role in fueling discrimination against religious and gender minorities.

Jokowi’s challenge now is to back his rhetoric of toleration with substantive policies that will protect vulnerable populations and bring rights abusers to justice.

Phelim Kine is deputy director, Asia Division, of Human Rights Watch.

“We want to honour our colleague, Oktovianus Pogau, a smart and courageous journalist, who edited Suara Papua news and highlighted human rights reporting. He passed away at a very young age – just 23 years old. We want to honor his legacy by establishing this Oktovianus Pogau award,” said Imam Shofwan, chairman of the Pantau Foundation in a speech to a small gathering at his office.

The Pantau Foundation selected Febriana Firdaus, a Jakarta journalist, to receive the inaugural award.

Firdaus covered Indonesia’s efforts to deal with the 1965-1966 massacres, disappearances and arbitrary detentions. She also covered discrimination, intimidation, and violence against the LGBT community in Indonesia.

“LGBT is a very sensitive subject in Indonesia where many religious communities, including Muslim organisations, still consider homosexuality a psychological disorder. Febriana Firdaus is courageous to stand up for LGBT, to affirm that LGBT is nature, and to expose their side of the story,” said Shofwan.

Firdaus was born in 1983 in Kalisat, a small town in eastern Java, and graduated from Airlangga University in Surabaya in 2007. She has worked for Jawa Pos daily, Tempo magazine and Rappler Online. She is currently a freelance journalist.

Atmakusumah Astraatmadja, a former chairman of Indonesia’s Press Council and himself an award-winning journalist, presented the award to Firdaus, welcoming the launch of the award and congratulating Firdaus.

‘Proto-fascism era’
Allan Nairn, another award-winning journalist based in New York, gave a speech, talking about courage in journalism in Trump’s “proto-fascism era.”

Nairn spoke about the challenges the press faced in covering a president like Donald Trump, who lies constantly yet was also hugely entertaining.

Nairn noted that the US provides a warning to Indonesia because the same proto-fascists that rose to power in the US were also trying to achieve power in Indonesia, although it was not clear whether they would succeed.

On her blog, Firdaus wrote, “This award is not about me or other future winners. This is a gentle reminder of the name Okto Pogau but it’s also more than about his name. His name represents the unsolved human rights abuses in Papua.

“Every year this award will always remind us about the human rights abuses never addressed in Indonesia since the 1965 massacre.”

Oktovianus Pogau was born in Sugapa in the Central Highlands on 5 August 1992 and died on 31 January 2016 in Jayapura.

He won an Indonesian writing competition when he was 14 years old, letting him to travel away from his native West Papua and to take part in a writing course in Yogyakarta, Java Island. He learned WordPress and created his own blog when he was 16 years old. He moved to Jakarta in 2010, studying international relations and becoming a freelance journalist.

Peaceful gathering
In October 2011, he covered a peaceful gathering of thousands of Papuan men and women in Jayapura, discussing their political aspiration to be independent from Indonesia.

Indonesian police used excessive force to disperse them. They fired warning shots, beating and kicking indigenous Papuans. Three men died of gunshot wounds, around 600 were detained and five of their leaders were tried and sentenced to three years imprisonment.

Pogau was upset when seeing that most Indonesian media did not proportionally cover the abuses. He decided to set up Suara Papua (Papuan Voice) on 10 December 2011 — on  international human rights day — to cover rights abuses in West Papua. He made Suara Papua a platform for young Papuans to report and to write their stories.

Pogau also engaged his audience with his sharp political analysis. He used his knowledge and networks to advocate for civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights for ethnic Papuans.

He was also sympathetic to the National Committee of West Papua, a large Papuan youth organisation, which is campaigning for a referendum in West Papua.

In October 2012, when he was covering one of their rallies in Manokwari, he was beaten on a street corner. Several police officers stopped him from taking photos. He suffered bruises and complained.

The West Papua police later apologised but his union, Indonesia’s Alliance of Independent Journalists, refused to help him, arguing that Pogau was also an activist and declaring he had crossed the line between journalism and activism.

Restriction on foreign journalists
Pogau wrote extensively about the restriction on foreign journalists visiting West Papua. He protested against the discrimination against indigenous Papuan journalists and the intensive use of journalists, both Indonesian and Papuan, to be military and police informers.

He indirectly contributed to President Joko Widodo in May 2015 declaring the Indonesian bureaucracy would stop restrictions on foreign journalists covering West Papua.

Jokowi’s command has not been fulfilled completely. He travelled to the US in December 2015, writing about African-Americans dealing with violence and about the similarity of the harsh treatment of Papuans.

The judges of the award included Alexander Mering (Kampong Journalism Movement in Pontianak, Kalimantan), Andreas Harsono (researcher at Human Rights Watch in Jakarta, Java), Coen Husain Pontoh (chief editor at Indo Progress news portal in New York), Made Ali (environmentalist at Jikalahari in Pekanbaru, Sumatra), Yuliana Lantipo (editor at Jubi daily in Jayapura, West Papua).

The mandate of this award is to exclude a financial gift and a generous ceremony, hoping that it will be sustainable and making jurors concentrate only in selecting a winner. The award is to be announced every year on January 31.

When presenting the award, Imam Shofwan talked about his personal experience with Pogau: “Once he called me on my mobile and I heard gunshots in the background. I told him to run but he kept on talking, asking me to tweet. He continuously tried to bring out rights abuses in Papua.

“He died young but his courage should inspire other journalists.”

• Febriana Firdaus and the Pantau award [Bahasa]
• Suara Papua

As the House of Representatives screens 27 candidates for leadership positions at the Indonesian Broadcasting Commission (KPI), it remains to be seen whether the new commissioners will uphold pluralism and give recognition to minority groups.

Of the 15 commissioner candidates undergoing screening by House Commission I overseeing information and communication affairs, most of them voiced opposition to programmes involving lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) characters being aired on TV.

Many of the candidates argue that anything besides heterosexuality is against the country’s values and norms. Among the candidates are news producer of private TV station Trans7 Arif Adi Kuswardono, Indonesian Television Academy (ATVI) mass communication lecturer Agus Sudibyo, Banten KPI chairman Ade Bujaerimi, West Sumatra KPI chairman Afrianto Korga and journalist Mayong Suryo Laksono.

Ade believed that LGBT content in TV programs could destroy the morals of youth because of the lifestyle portrayed.

“Television must be free of LGBT. We should ban all programmes containing LGBT content,” he said.

Arif said programmes, except the news, that exposed LGBT characteristics, such as boys cross-dressing or adopting feminine characteristics, and promoted or starred members of the LGBT community should not be aired.

“If they want to show their LGBT-ness, please do it, but not for screening on TV,” Arif said. “We respect pluralism, but TV should not accommodate such things. I’m sorry that not all things [related to pluralism] are acceptable.”

Discriminatory rules
Since hostility toward LGBT people emerged, the KPI has become one of the institutions to introduce discriminatory rules against them.

The agency previously issued a statement that discouraged broadcasters from airing programmes that promoted activities of the LGBT community. It claimed that the move was aimed at protecting children and teenagers from exposure to a “deviant” lifestyle.

It stated that the broadcasters code of conduct (P3) and broadcasting programme standards (SPS) regulations mentioned the banning of programmes that encouraged children and teenagers to adopt indecent behavior.

Commission I member Djoko Udjianto from the Democratic Party slammed the candidates, claiming that most of them seemed to provide no room for the LGBT community yet provided no solution on how to maintain a balance.

“I see that all of you talk much about LGBT and gender orientation on television, but no one has any way out. And if we talk about the country’s characteristics, what characteristics?” Djoko said.

Of the 27 candidates undergoing screening on July 18 and 19, Commission I will choose nine as the next KPI commissioners who will lead the agency from 2016 to 2019. The 27 are among 47 people proposed by the ministry and who were interviewed by the commission’s selection committee last month.

As the nine selected candidates will still be in charge during the next presidential election, speculation is rife that they could be used as political tools by certain parties in election campaigns.

During the hearing, of the 10 factions at the House, only the Hanura Party raised a question about political intervention through media ownership. The Golkar Party, whose advisory council chairman Aburizal Bakrie runs television stations TVOne and ANTV, and the NasDem Party, chaired by media mogul Surya Paloh, remained silent on the issue.

Indonesia is experiencing an unprecedented wave of anti-LGBT sentiment.

If there was a single event that has incited the current wave of violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people in Indonesia we might settle upon a minister’s affront at LGBT becoming visible in solidarity.

Having been advised of a university-based LGBT support group, Indonesia’s Technology, Research and Higher Education Minister Muhammad Nasir publicly stated in January 2016 that universities must uphold standards of “values and morals” and therefore should not support organisations that promote LGBT activities.

Nasir’s supposed evidence was the existence of the Support Group and Resource Center on Sexuality Studies (SGRC) based at the University of Indonesia—it missed Nasir’s attention that SGRC was not an LGBT organisation and that the LGBT Peer Support group under its auspice was not trying to convert people but provide information to students on such things as sexual health.

The ensuing backlash against the minister’s statement resulted in Nasir stressing that he was not against LGBT and, indeed, that LGBT had the right to join organisations, like every Indonesian citizen.

Nasir further noted, “We are not against LGBTs but the activity … [T]he problem is when they are showing romance, kissing, and making love (in public).”

In other words, Nasir was not concerned about LGBT per se, but rather felt threatened by moves perceived to increase LGBT collective visibility. Similarly, the Speaker of the People’s Consultative Assembly and Chair of the National Mandate Party, Zulkifli Hasan, commented, “As a movement, the existence of LGBT must be opposed. We must limit its room to move. However, as individual people, they must be protected like any other citizen.”

At issue is fear of LGBT being visible in solidarity and, as anthropologist Tom Boellstorff notes, national belonging.

Sanctuary with invisibility
Invisibility has provided many LGBT people in Indonesia with some sanctuary. Invisibility has been achieved by marrying heterosexually, ostensibly reinforcing heteronormativity and being discerning in undertaking political activities.

A few individuals have been staunchly visible and transwomen such as television personality Dorce Gamalama are known by many—indeed, President Joko Widodo has appeared alongside Dorce at public events.

By and large, tolerance, and at times acceptance, has been accorded to LGBT in Indonesia through the community keeping an often reserved profile and through strategic political engagement. Considering this value of invisibility, the event that precipitated the current wave of aggression was unsurprisingly one perceived as an effort to increase a collective profile of LGBT Indonesians.

While homosexuality has never been illegal in Indonesia, persecution of LGBT is not new. Police and extremist Islamist groups, such as the Islamic Defenders Front, have previously targeted LGBT.

In 2013, the Pew Research Centre reported that 93 percent of Indonesians thought homosexuality should not be accepted in Indonesia—a higher percentage than any other Asia-Pacific country surveyed and worryingly close to Nigeria’s score of 98 percent.

We can’t take this figure as reliable though—only 1000 people were surveyed and the framing of the question was loaded towards getting a homophobic response.

While Indonesia is far more accommodating of LGBT than such a figure suggests, homophobia is not new to Indonesia. However, the swiftness and duration of this wave of anti-LGBT sentiment is unprecedented.

Nasir’s comment that universities should not support LGBT activities was reported in inflammatory headlines such as “LGBT not welcome at university”.

Media frenzy
National and international media went into a frenzy, quickly presenting the issue as LGBT being banned from attending university in Indonesia. Buoyed perhaps by the belief that their homophobic sentiments might suddenly get traction and win them support, conservative political ministers and religious leaders weighed in on the debate.

The debate became framed in increasingly polarised and violent terms. In the two months that followed Nasir’s outburst, numerous incendiary statements were issued and actions taken.

Republika, a conservative Islamic publication, ran the headline “LGBT poses serious threat to nation.”

Nahdlatul Ulama, the largest Muslim organisation in Indonesia with possibly 40 million members, stated that non-heterosexual orientation is incompatible with human nature and that LGBT activities must be prohibited by law.

Berliana Kartakusumah, secretary-general of the People’s Conscience Party, claimed: “Being LGBT is an infectious and dangerous disease. LGBT must be banned, like we banned communism and drug trafficking.”

Former communications minister Tifatul Sembiring effectively exhorted his one million Twitter followers to kill any gay people they find.

Direct threat
LGBT were presented as directly threatening Indonesia, with the chair of the commission of the House of Representatives, and the person in charge of defence, foreign affairs, communications, information and intelligence, Mahfudz Siddiq, stating, “LGBT issues can damage national security, identity, culture and the faith of Indonesians.”

Defence Minister Ryamizard Ryacudu described efforts to recognise LGBT rights as an attempt by western nations to undermine Indonesia’s sovereignty and he called the LGBT movement a “proxy war” aimed at brainwashing Indonesians.

Indonesia’s vice-president Jusuf Kalla explicitly rejected UN funding that would support work on ending stigma, discrimination and violence towards LGBT people.

The Indonesian Psychiatrists Association (PDSKJI) classified homosexuality, bisexuality and transgenderism as mental disorders and issued a statement noting, “We need to promote, prevent, cure and rehabilitate LGBT people.”

PDSKJI member Suzy Yusna Dewi commented that “We really do care about them. What we are worried about is, if left untreated, such sexual tendencies could become a commonly accepted condition in society.”

Following the World Health Organisation’s 1990 lead, Indonesia declassified homosexuality as a psychiatric disorder in 1993, although gender identity disorder remained. PDSKJI’s move to now classify homosexuality as a treatable disorder drew on Indonesia’s Law No.18/2014 on Mental Health and the Mental Disorder Diagnostic Guidelines.

While neither the law nor the guidelines mention LGBT, such omission did not stop PDSKJI from using it as support for framing homosexuals and bisexuals as ‘people with psychiatric problems’ and transgender people as having ‘mental disorders.’ That the law has been prejudicially extended to support this classification of LGBT is deeply concerning.

Radio and television bans
The Indonesian Broadcasting Commission banned radio and television stations from airing any program portraying LGBT behaviour as “normal”. This move was supported by law-makers and others who claimed that such a ban would protect children and teenagers ‘susceptible to duplicating deviant LGBT behaviours’.

Efforts were made by politicians to mandate ‘rehabilitation for every person who has LGBT characteristics’ and prohibit online content viewed as promoting homosexuality.

The fear and anxiety caused by these events forced many in the LGBT community into hiding

While it was reported that the Social Affairs Minister advocated bathing LGBT in boiling water infused with spices to cure homosexuality—she actually thinks this would only work for drug addicts—she promoted spiritual training as a cure. The world’s first Islamic school for transwomen was forced to close. A number of anti-LGBT protests took place while pro-LGBT demonstrations were supressed by police.

The fear and anxiety caused by these events, all of which occurred between January and March 2016, forced many in the LGBT community into hiding. LGBT friends in Indonesia have changed their mobile phone numbers so they cannot be contacted; they have moved out of their boarding houses to undisclosed safe houses; and they have deleted social media postings and unfriended people for fear of being identified and potentially blackmailed.

Police are checking identity cards at LGBT hangouts and detaining those without ID or from out of area. Dede Oetomo, who founded the LGBT rights group GAYa NUSANTARA in 1987, has told employees to stay away from the office for fear of harassment. Forced reclusion means, among other things, that people who need sexual health care and HIV treatment are too afraid to access services.

What is behind the intensity of current unrest? I identify six key converging factors:

First, the perception that LGBT were trying to stake a collective claim on Indonesia precipitated outbursts from high-ranking government and religious leaders.

While for Nasir and others, LGBT are not troublesome individually, as a group they are. The view that LGBT were gaining visible solidarity (under university auspice) provoked homophobic rhetoric and media furore painted the issue as an “LGBT crises”. Notably, the homophobia was not sparked by demands amongst the LGBT community for right to marry or adopt children or to ban discrimination.

Communist association
The timing of the “LGBT crises” has not gone unnoticed with at least one commentator noting that that the furore came about just as revisions were to be made to the anti-corruption law. Moreover, framing LGBT as a movement (gerakan) drew on negative connotations of the term in Indonesia, with its association with communism.

Second, once the fire was stoked, the simmering issue of perceived Indonesian moral decay rose to the surface. Tight social controls under authoritarian President Suharto (1965–98) have given way to an era of reformation, synonymous for some with sexual promiscuity.

The passing of the Pornography Bill in 2008 is one reaction to fears of sexual deviance. The current anti-LGBT movement is an extension of this fear.

Third, increasing religiosity in Indonesia is providing ammunition and support for anti-LGBT rhetoric. While religious freedom is felicitous (e.g. the 2013 revoking of a law prohibiting policewomen from wearing the veil at work), the use of Islam to justify killing LGBT, and the support that such messages are receiving, is deeply concerning.

Fourth, antagonistic relations between Indonesia and the West (primarily Australia in the aftermath of spying allegations and Indonesia’s execution of two Australian prisoners) have fuelled anti-LGBT sentiment. LGBT are framed as a western import threatening Indonesia’s sovereignty and security, a dangerous and erroneous message embraced in many parts of Indonesia.

Fifth, economic disenfranchisement among a younger generation has produced a class of men and women with little outlet for their anger. An easy target for the frustrations of neoconservative youth is the LGBT community.

Sixth, Indonesia’s embrace of social media fostered swift and widespread public engagement in the disputation. Twitter hashtags such as #TolakLGBT (RejectLGBT) quickly trended and reactions to the banning of LGBT emojis provoked comment from across the nation, propelling the debate with extraordinary fervour.

Is there hope for an Indonesia that tolerates, accepts and celebrates its LGBT community? I think so, for three key reasons. First, while much of the LGBT persecution has stemmed from a religious base, the vast majority of Indonesians follow an Islam that is accepting and accommodating of diversity.

Second, even ministers who abhor the LGBT community condemn violence and state that LGBT are part of Indonesia. And third, amidst all the malicious rhetoric and violence, the debate is making LGBT visible in a way not previously possible. There is a community of LGBT and their supporters, both in Indonesia and across the world, and while the community is discrete it is one hard to subdue.

Thanks to Dede Oetomo, Tom Boellstorff, Saskia Wieringa, Nurshabani Katjasungkana and Ben Murtagh for helpful comments and suggestions.