Fiji’s Prime Minister, Sitiveni Rabuka, says he will “apologise” to fellow Melanesian leaders later this month after failing to secure agreement from Indonesia to visit its restive West Papua province.

At last year’s Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) leaders meeting in Cook Islands, the Melanesian Spearhead Group appointed Rabuka and PNG Prime Minister James Marape as the region’s “special envoys” on West Papua.

Several Pacific officials and advocacy groups have expressed anguish over alleged human rights abuses committed by Indonesian forces in West Papua, where an indigenous pro-independence struggle has simmered for decades.

• READ MORE: Other West Papua reports

Rabuka and Marape have been trying to organise a visit to West Papua for more than nine months now.

But in an exclusive interview with the ABC’s Pacific Beat, Rabuka said conversations on the trip were still “ongoing” and blamed Indonesia’s presidential elections in February for the delay.

“Unfortunately, we couldn’t go . . .  Indonesia was going through elections. In two months’ time, they will have a new substantive president in place in the palace. Hopefully we can still move forward with that,” he said.

“But in the meantime, James Marape and I will have to apologise to our Melanesian counterparts on the side of the Forum Island leaders meeting in Tonga, and say we have not been able to go on that mission.”

Pacific pressing for independent visit
Pacific nations have been pressing Indonesia to allow representatives from the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to conduct an independent visit to Papua.

A UN Human Rights committee report released in May found there were “systematic reports” of both torture and extrajudicial killings of indigenous Papuans in the province.

But Indonesia usually rejects any criticism of its human rights record in West Papua, saying events in the province are a purely internal affair.

West Papua Resistance Leader, Victor Weimo: I must thank the colonialists for continuously teaching us to aspire to true humanity by means of rebellion. pic.twitter.com/h9n4rN9yyN

— Sina Brown-Davis سينا (@uriohau) December 1, 2022

Rabuka said he was “still committed” to the visit and would like to make the trip after incoming Indonesian president Prabowo Subianto takes power in October.

The Fiji prime minister made the comments ahead of a 10-day trip to China, with Rabuka saying he would travel to a number of Chinese provinces to see how the emerging great power had pulled millions of people out of poverty.

He praised Beijing’s development record, but also indicated Fiji would not turn to China for loans or budget support.

“As we take our governments and peoples forward, the people themselves must understand that we cannot borrow to become embroiled in debt servicing later on,” he said.

“People must understand that we can only live within our means, and our means are determined by our own productivity, our own GDP.”

Rabuka is expected to meet Chinese president Xi Jinping in Beijing towards the end of his trip, at the beginning of next week.

Delegation to visit New Caledonia
After his trip to China, the prime minister will take part in a high level Pacific delegation to Kanaky New Caledonia, which was rocked by widespread rioting and violence earlier this year.

While several Pacific nations have been pressing France to make fresh commitments towards decolonisation in the wake of a contentious final vote on independence back in 2021, Rabuka said the Pacific wanted to help different political groups within the territory to find common ground.

“We will just have to convince the leaders, the local group leaders that rebuilding is very difficult after a spate of violent activities and events,” he said.

Rabuka gave strong backing to a plan to overhaul Pacific policing which Australia has been pushing hard ahead of the PIF leaders meeting in Tonga at the end of this month.

Senior Solomon Islands official Collin Beck took to social media last week to publicly criticise the initiative, suggesting that its backers were trying to “steamroll” any opposition at Pacific regional meetings.

Rabuka said the social media post was “unfortunate” and suggested that Solomon Islands or other Pacific nations could simply opt out of the initiative if they didn’t approve of it.

“When it comes to sovereignty, it is a sovereign state that makes the decision,” he said.

Republished with permission from ABC Pacific Beat.

A West Papuan pro-independence leader has condemned the “sadistic brutality” of Indonesian soldiers in a torture video and called for an urgent United Nations human rights visit to the colonised Melanesian territory.

“There is an urgent need for states to take more serious action on human rights in West Papua,” said president Benny Wenda of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP).

Describing the “horror” of the torture video in a statement on the ULMWP website, he called for the immediate suspension of the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) membership of Indonesia.

• READ MORE: Other West Papua human rights reports
• The torture video cited in this report — WARNING: Graphic violent content

Citing the 1998 Rome Statute, Wenda said torture was a crime against humanity.

“Indonesia has not signed this treaty — against torture, genocide, and war crimes — because it is guilty of all three in West Papua and East Timor,” Wenda said. His statement said:

‘Horror of my childhood’
“I am truly horrified by the video that has emerged from of Indonesian soldiers torturing a West Papuan man. More than anything, the sadistic brutality on display shows how urgently West Papua needs a UN Human Rights visit.

“In the video, a group of soldiers kick, punch, and slash the young Papuan man, who has been tied and forced to stand upright in a drum full of freezing water.

“As the soldiers repeatedly pummel the man, they can be heard saying, ‘my turn! My turn!’ and comparing his meat to animal flesh.

“Watching the video, I was reminded of the horror of my childhood, when I was forced to watch my uncle being tortured by Suharto’s thugs.

“The Indonesian government [has] committed these crimes for 60 years now. Indonesia must have their MSG Membership suspended immediately — they cannot be allowed to treat Melanesians in this way.

“This incident comes during an intensified period of militarisation in the Highlands.

“After an alleged TPNPB fighter was killed last month in Yahukimo, two Papuan children were tortured by Indonesian soldiers, who then took humiliating ‘trophy’ photos with their limp bodies.

“Such brutality, already common in West Papua, will only becoming more widespread under the genocidal war criminal [newly elected President Prabowo Subianto].

‘Torture and war crimes’
“According to the Rome Statute, torture is a crime against humanity. Indonesia has not signed this treaty, against torture, genocide, and war crimes, because it is guilty of all three in West Papua and East Timor.

“Though it is extreme and shocking, this video merely exposes how Indonesia behaves every day in my country. Torture is such a widespread military practice that it has been described as a ‘mode of governance’ in West Papua.

“I ask everyone who watches the video to remember that West Papua is a closed society, cut off from the world by a 60-year media ban imposed by Indonesia’s military occupation.

“How many victims go unnoticed by the world? How many incidents are not captured on film?

“Every week we hear word of another murder, massacre, or tortured civilian. Over 500,000 West Papuans have been killed under Indonesian colonial rule.

“There is an urgent need for states to take more serious action on human rights in West Papua. We are grateful that more than 100 countries have called for a visit by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

“But Indonesia clearly has no intention of honouring their promise, so more must be done.

“International agreements such as the [European Union] EU-Indonesia trade deal should be made conditional on a UN visit. States should call out Indonesia at the highest levels of the UN. Parliamentarians should sign the Brussels Declaration.

“Until there [are] serious sanctions against Indonesia their occupying forces will continue to behave with impunity in West Papua.”

The United Kingdom’s commitments to upholding human rights have come under question this week over the West Papua issue, resulting in a heated exchange between a government representative and five members of the House of Lords.

The exchange occurred on Monday after the Minister of State for the United Nations, Lord Tariq Ahmad of Wimbledon, responded to a question posed by Lord Harries of Pentregarth on what progress had been made in obtaining access to West Papua for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Lord Ahmad said the UK government welcomed recent engagements between the UN and Indonesia to meet the recommendations of a Universal Periodic Review, calling for the UN to access and review the human rights situation in West Papua.

• READ MORE: Other West Papua reports

He said Indonesia was an important bilateral partner.

“We recognise that a significant amount of time has passed since the visit was first proposed, but we hope that both parties can come together to agree dates very soon,” Lord Ahmad said.

The statement was unsatisfactory for Lord Harries, who pointed out that the UK was not among the eight countries which had endorsed the universal periodic review, and demanded clarity on where the UK stood.

“He (Lord Ahmad) mentioned the universal periodic review of Indonesia. He will know that, at that review, a number of major countries, including the United States, Australia and Canada, called for an intervention from the UN in Indonesia and an immediate visit by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights,” Lord Harries said.

Support not clear
“It is not at all clear that the United Kingdom was among those supporting that call. Perhaps the minister will be able to enlighten us.”

Lord Ahmad acknowledged a visit by the UN human rights chief to West Papua had been “pending for a long time” but added that the conservative government supported an earlier visit.

The answer was not well received by Lord Lexden, who condemned Indonesia’s control over the Melanesian region.

“Is it not clear that this small country is suffering grievously under a colonial oppressor,” Lord Lexden said.

“Indonesia, which is busily exploiting the country’s rich mineral resources and extensive forests in its own interests? Will the government do all in their power, in conjunction with Commonwealth partners in the region, to get the UN to act and to act decisively?”

Lord Hanny of Chiswick, Lord Kennedy of Southwark and Lord Purvis of Tweed shared their frustrations, describing the details of human right reports on West Papua and pressing Lord Ahmad on why the UK was not among 8 countries that endorsed the Universal Periodic Review.

“It is over a year since the UN special rapporteur’s allegations of extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, and the forced displacement of thousands of indigenous Papuans,” Lord Kennedy said.

Foreign Office ‘does nothing’
“What is the point of the Foreign Office highlighting human rights concerns if it does nothing about them in its negotiations with the country in question?,” Lord Purvis said.

“Why the UK does not seem to have been part of that group of eight countries that pressed for an early visit by the High Commissioner for Human Rights?” Lord Hannay of Chiswick said.

“It is surely reasonable to ask a democratic country such as Indonesia to admit the high commissioner to look into abuses of human rights. That is what it should do, and I hope that we will press that strongly,” Lord Hannay added.

Lord Ahmad said he had spoken to the High Commissioner of Rights about the situation, and acknowledged that a visit was overdue.

He said, the alleged human rights abuses, are regularly brought up in bilateral talks between Indonesia and the UK.

“My Lords, I assure the noble Lord that we engage with them quite regularly,” he said.

“As I said earlier, Indonesia is an important bilateral and regional partner with which we engage widely on a range of issues of peace, conflict and stability in and across the region; it is a key partner.

“In all our meetings, we raise human rights in the broad range of issues, and we are seeing some progress in Indonesia, including on freedom of religion or belief,” he added.

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

Thank you to Lord Harries for your tireless support, as well as Lords Lexden, Kennedy, Hannay, and Purvis.
Pressure is growing on Indonesia. They cannot ignore the international call for a UN visit any longer @MsgSecretariat @ForumSEC @UNHumanRights pic.twitter.com/hjlLxXLDN9

— Benny Wenda (@BennyWenda) April 18, 2023

In solidarity with West Papua, the Pacific Conference of Churches (PCC) has called for a boycott of all Indonesian products and programmess by the Indonesian government.

The Fiji-based PCC said this should be done until Indonesia facilitated a visit by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to investigate alleged human rights abuses in West Papua, which included torture, extrajudicial killings, and systemic police and military violence.

General secretary Reverend James Bhagwan said the call for a boycott came in response to the lack of political will by the Indonesian government to honour its commitment to the visit, which had been made four years ago.

• READ MORE: Happy West Papua Day – and the brutal truth about where we are now
• Pacific marks 61st year flying of Papua’s banned Morning Star flag
• The Morning Star flag background
• Revelations on the murky fate of flag ‘treason’ prisoners in West Papua
• Oceania Indigenous ‘guardians’ call for self-determination on West Papua day
• Other West Papua reports

“Our Pacific church leaders are deeply concerned that the urge by our Pacific Island states through the Pacific Islands Forum has been ignored,” he said.

“We are also concerned that Indonesia is using ‘cheque-book diplomacy’ to silence some Pacific states on this issue. Our only option in the face of this to apply our own financial pressure to this cause.

“We know that the Pacific is a market for Indonesian products and we hope that this mobilisation of consumers will show that Pacific people stand in solidarity with our sisters and brothers of Tanah Papua.”

On Thursday, the Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre (FWCC) held a flag-raising ceremony to mark 61 years since the Morning Star, the West Papuan national flag, was first raised.

Women, girls suffered
FWCC coordinator Shamima Ali said as part of the 16 Days of Activism campaign, FWCC remembered the people of West Papua, particularly women and girls, who suffered due to the increased militarisation of the province by the Indonesian government.

“We also remember those women, girls, men and children who have died and those who are still suffering from state violence perpetrated on them and the violence and struggle within their own religious, cultural and societal settings,” she said.

Ali said Pacific islanders should not be quiet about the issue.

“Fiji has been too silent on the issue of West Papua and the ignorance needs to stop,” she said.

“Keeping quiet is not the answer when our own people are suffering.”

Shayal Devi is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

The solidarity group West Papua Action Aotearoa has criticised New Zealand for not “being stronger” over growing global concern about Indonesian human rights violations in West Papua, and contrasted this with Vanuatu’s leadership.

The group was reacting to the UN Human Rights Council Universal Periodic Review into Indonesia report in Geneva last week.

“Eight countries raised issues about human rights in West Papua and it is good to see our government among them,” said Catherine Delahunty, spokesperson for West Papua Action Aotearoa, in a statement.

• READ MORE: Other West Papua human rights reports

New Zealand called for Indonesia to uphold, respect and promote human rights obligations in West Papua, but did not call for Indonesia to immediately allow the visit of the UN Commissioner for Human Rights.

Of the eight countries raising the issues only Vanuatu and the Marshall Islands made direct statements calling for the visit and Australia “made a better statement” than New Zealand, calling for Indonesia to “ensure access, including by credible, independent observers”.

“In the light of recent events including the concerns around the death of Filep Karma and the attacks on demonstrators in West Papua by the state, just calling for human rights to be upheld is clearly not enough,” said Delahunty.

“We need our government to speak out strongly in all UN Forums in support of the UN Commissioner of Human Rights proposed visit to West Papua.

“The Pacific Island Forum (PIF) has supported this call and our Foreign Minister has told our group that she supports it. However the UNHR review was an opportunity missed.

“Our foreign policy position should support the position of Vanuatu whose clear, sustained challenge to the violent colonisation of West Papua by Indonesia is admirable.

“Human rights will never be upheld when a regime occupies a country against the will of the people, and other Pacific countries need to demand better, starting with greater transparency over human rights violations, opening the borders to the UN High Commissioner and all international journalists.”

Since Jacinda Ardern described the state of world affairs as “bloody messy” earlier this year there have been few, if any, signs of improvement. Ukraine, China, nuclear proliferation and the lasting impacts of a global pandemic all present urgent, unresolved challenges.

For a small country in an increasingly lawless world this is both dangerous and confronting.

Without the military or economic scale to influence events directly, New Zealand relies on its voice and ability to persuade.

• READ MORE: Putin plays the annexation card, pushing the war in Ukraine into a dangerous new phase
• How will China interact with the world over the next 5 years? Xi’s new speech holds clues
• Nukes, allies, weapons and cost: 4 big questions NZ’s defence review must address

But by placing its faith in a rules-based order and United Nations processes, New Zealand also has to work with — and sometimes around — highly imperfect systems. In some areas of international law and policy the machinery is failing. It’s unclear what the next best step might be.

Given these uncertainties, then, where has New Zealand done well on the international stage, and where might it need to find a louder voice or more constructive proposals?

Confronting Russia
Strength and clarity have been most evident in New Zealand’s response to the Russian attack on Ukraine. There has been no hint of joining the abstainers or waverers at crucial UN votes condemning Russia’s actions.

While it can be argued New Zealand could do more in terms of sanctions and support for the Ukrainian military, the government has made good use of the available international forums.

Joining the International Court of Justice case against “Russia’s spurious attempt to justify its invasion under international law” and supporting the International Criminal Court investigation into possible war crimes in Ukraine are both excellent initiatives.

Unfortunately, similar avenues have been blocked when it comes to other critical issues New Zealand has a vested interest in seeing resolved properly.

UN vote to ignore human rights abuses in China leaves west in dead end https://t.co/mTWo4ETubU

— The Guardian (@guardian) October 7, 2022

China and human rights
This has been especially apparent in the debate about human rights abuses in China, and allegations of genocide made by some countries over the treatment of Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang.

New Zealand and some other countries correctly avoided using the word “genocide”, which has a precise legal meaning best applied by UN experts, not domestic politicians. Instead, the government called on China to provide meaningful and unfettered access to UN and other independent observers.

While not perfect, the visit went ahead. The eventual report by outgoing UN Human Rights Commissioner Michelle Bachelet concluded that China had committed serious human rights violations, which could amount to crimes against humanity.

This should have forced the international community to act. Instead, 19 countries voted with China to block a debate at the UN Human Rights Council (17 wanted the debate, 11 abstained). The upshot was that China succeeded in driving the issue into a diplomatic dead-end.

Allowing an organisation designed to protect victims to be controlled by alleged perpetrators isn’t something New Zealand should accept. The government should make it a diplomatic priority to become a member of the council, and it should use every opportunity to speak out and keep the issue in the global spotlight.

Ardern’s Russia warning: New nuclear age dawns – countries want to start and win new nuclear war https://t.co/ft03c2FAI5 pic.twitter.com/DRoA4IDRFN

— nzherald (@nzherald) September 23, 2022

Arms control
Elsewhere, New Zealand’s foreign policy can arguably be found wanting — most evidently, perhaps, in the area of nuclear arms regulation.

Advocating for the complete prohibition of all nuclear weapons, as the prime minister did at the UN in September, might be inspiring and also good domestic politics, but it doesn’t make the world safer.

With the risk of nuclear conflagration at its highest since the Cuban missile crisis, a better immediate goal would be improving the regulation, rather than prohibition, of nuclear weapons. This would entail convincing nuclear states to take their weapons off “hair-trigger alert”.

The other goals should be the adoption of a no-first-use policy by all nuclear powers (only China has made such a commitment so far), and a push for regional arms control in the Indo-Pacific to rein in India, Pakistan and China.

Pandemic preparedness
Finally, there is the danger of vital law and policy not just failing, but not even being born. This is the case with the World Health Organisation’s so-called “pandemic treaty”, designed to better prevent, prepare for and respond to the next global pandemic.

New Zealand set out some admirable goals in its submission in April, but these have been watered down or are missing from the first working draft of the proposed agreement.

This shouldn’t be accepted lightly given the lessons of the past two-and-a-half years. Transparency by governments, a precautionary approach and the meaningful involvement of non-state actors will be essential.

Similarly, improved oversight of the 59 laboratories spread across 23 countries that work with the most dangerous pathogens is critical. Currently, only a quarter of these labs score highly on safety. The proposed treaty does little to demand the kind of biosecurity protocols and robust regulatory systems required to better protect present and future generations.

As with the other urgent and difficult issues mentioned here, New Zealand’s future is directly connected to what happens elsewhere in the world. The challenge now is to keep adapting to this changing global order while being an effective voice for reason and the rule of law.

Dr Alexander Gillespie is professor of law, University of Waikato. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

While ostensibly about improving Aotearoa New Zealand’s water infrastructure, the government’s proposed Three Waters reforms have instead become a lightning rod for political division and distrust.

Critics cite concerns about local democracy, de facto privatisation and co-governance with Māori as reasons to oppose the Water Services Entities Bill currently before Parliament.

With the mayors of Auckland and Christchurch now proposing an alternative plan, the reforms may be far from a done deal.

• READ MORE: The UK’s water industry is broken – here’s how to fix it
• 11,000 litres of water to make one litre of milk? New questions about the freshwater impact of NZ dairy farming
• If we want to improve NZ’s freshwater quality, first we need to improve the quality of our democracy

But behind the debate lies an undeniable truth: clean water is a necessity of life. In fact, 20 years ago this month the United Nations Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights first affirmed that water is a human right.

The anniversary is a timely reminder of what Aotearoa’s proposed water reforms are essentially about.

Covering drinking water, wastewater and stormwater (hence the “three waters” label), the reforms would have a wider remit than the human right to water. They fold in environmental and cultural considerations alongside public health concerns.

But the human right to water, as well as lessons learned from implementing that right, have important implications for the Three Waters debate, not least around water quality and affordability.

An alternate three waters plan has been proposed by the mayors of Auckland and Christchurch, with control and ownership remaining with local councils, and the type and degree of iwi involvement decided locally.https://t.co/prVSbJuuSL

— RNZ (@radionz) October 31, 2022

A fragile right
By acknowledging it to be a human right in 2002, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights argued water is indispensable for leading a dignified life and essential for other human rights.

Since then, the human right to water has been repeatedly declared, including by the UN General Assembly and the European Union. This right is included in the constitutions and laws of numerous countries.

Despite this, 1 billion people still lack access to safe drinking water, and six out of ten people live with inadequate sanitation. More than 2 billion people live in areas of water scarcity, likely to become an even bigger issue due to climate change.

The human right to water covers five essential factors:

• access to enough water for drinking, personal sanitation, washing clothes, preparing food, personal and household hygiene
• water that is clean and won’t cause harm
• the look and smell of water should be acceptable
• water sources should be within easy reach and accessible without danger
• the cost should be low enough to ensure everyone can buy enough water to meet their needs.

Access and affordability
Internationally, there is evidence that the adoption of a human right to water has made a difference. In South Africa, where access to sufficient water is a constitutional right, the courts have repeatedly referred to the human right to water when determining government obligations around water services.

In 2014, the first European Citizens’ Initiative pushed the European Union to exclude water supply and water resources management from the rules governing the European internal market. This means EU citizens have a stronger voice in water governance decisions.

In 2016, Slovenia became the first EU country to make access to drinkable water a fundamental right in its constitution.

New Zealand’s Three Waters reforms are not unrelated to these basic issues of safety, accessibility and affordability. They aim to address significant problems with the country’s existing water services model, including ageing infrastructure, historical under-investment, the need for climate change resilience, and rising consumer demand.

These all require a serious programme of water service transformation — one the government believes is beyond what local councils (which currently administer most water assets) will be able to deliver.

The projected cost is estimated at between NZ$120 billion and $185 billion (on top of currently planned investment), rolled out over the next 30 years.

Three Waters debates need to be based on fact – Ardernhttps://t.co/mNtkdKTjpw pic.twitter.com/NxvlJgtpeR

— 1News (@1NewsNZ) July 20, 2022

Ambition and equity
One way or another, the work has to be done. Last year elevated lead levels were found in the water in east Otago. Ageing infrastructure and increasing demand are likely to increase the risk of similar incidents unless expensive upgrades are undertaken.

Without reform, the government argues, the huge cost of those upgrades will be unevenly spread across households, with a substantially higher burden on rural consumers.

To be affordable and equitable for everyone, therefore, the Three Waters plan involves creating four publicly owned, multi-regional entities. These will benefit from greater scale, expertise, operational efficiencies and financial flexibility compared to local councils.

But because councils could still contract out water services for 35 years, concerns have been raised about the potential for creeping privatisation.

Indeed, similar concerns, including failed attempts to privatise water services in other countries, were a significant catalyst for asserting the human right to water more than two decades ago.

While international acknowledgment of water as a human right doesn’t automatically create binding obligations on New Zealand’s government, it can still inform the Three Waters debate.

Over the past 20 years, many of the benefits of this right have accrued from its ability to focus attention on securing high-quality and sustainable water services for everyone. That remains an essential ambition for New Zealand in 2022 and beyond.

Dr Nathan Cooper is associate professor of law, University of Waikato. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

The United Nations Human Rights Council has adopted a resolution aimed at assisting the Marshall Islands to get justice in the aftermath of the United States nuclear testing.

“We have suffered the cancer of the nuclear legacy for far too long and we need to find a way forward to a better future for our people,” says Samuel Lanwi, deputy permanent representative of the Marshall Islands to the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva.

The Marshallese people are still struggling with the health and environmental consequences of nuclear tests, including higher cancer rates.

• READ MORE: Other reports on nuclear tests legacy in Marshall Islands

Many people displaced due to the tests are still unable to return home.

The US conducted 67 US nuclear tests from 1946-1958 and a settlement was reached in 1986 with the United States, a Compact of Free Association, which fell short of addressing the extensive environmental and health damage that resulted from the tests.

The U.S government asserts the bilateral agreement settled “all claims, past, present and future”, including nuclear compensation.

Today at #HRC51, res. L.24/Rev.1 on RMI’s nuclear legacy was adopted by consensus. 64 years after the last nuclear test, RMI will receive UN assistance in upholding the rights of the Marshallese people that still bear the scars of this dark chapter of our past. #Nuclearlegacy pic.twitter.com/u15GKcAX6l

— Marshall Islands Permanent Mission in Geneva (@RMIGeneva) October 7, 2022

The new text tabled by five Pacific Island states called on the UN rights chief to submit a report in September 2024 on the challenges to the enjoyment of human rights by the Marshallese people, stemming from the nuclear legacy.

It called on the UN rights chief to submit a report in September 2024 on the challenges to the enjoyment of human rights by the Marshallese people stemming from the nuclear legacy.

The US as well as other nuclear weapons states such as Britain, India and Pakistan expressed concern about some aspects of the text but did not ask for a vote on the motion.

Japan did not speak at the meeting.

Observers say some nuclear states fear the initiative for the Marshall Islands could open the door to other countries bringing similar issues to the rights body.

A concrete dome on Runit Island containing radioactive waste is of concern, especially about rising sea levels as a result of climate change, according to the countries that drafted the resolution.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. Reporting also by Kyodo News/Pacnews.

The potential extradition and prosecution of Australian whistleblower Julian Assange raises concerns for media freedom and could have a “chilling effect” on investigative journalism, says UN rights chief Michelle Bachelet.

Assange, who has been held in a high-security London prison since 2019, has filed an appeal against his extradition from Britain to the United States.

The WikiLeaks founder is wanted to face trial for allegedly violating the US Espionage Act by publishing classified US military and diplomatic files in 2010 related to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

• READ MORE: Other reports on the Julian Assange case

The 51-year-old could face decades in jail if found guilty, reports Agence France-Presse. But supporters portray him as a martyr to press freedom after he was taken into British custody following nearly seven years inside Ecuador’s Embassy in London.

“I am aware of health issues which Mr Assange has suffered during his time in detention, and remain concerned for his physical and mental well-being,” Bachelet said in a statement at the weekend after meeting with the WikiLeaks founder’s wife and lawyers on Thursday.

“The potential extradition and prosecution of Mr Assange raise concerns relating to media freedom and a possible chilling effect on investigative journalism and on the activities of whistleblowers.

“In these circumstances, I would like to emphasise the importance of ensuring respect of Mr Assange’s human rights, in particular the right to a fair trial and due process guarantees in this case.

“My office will continue to closely follow Mr Assange’s case.”

Term ending
Bachelet’s term as the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights finishes on Wednesday, after four years in the post. The former Chilean president’s successor has not yet been appointed.

The US-based Assange Defence Committee coalition fighting to free the former computer hacker said the legal battle over his extradition was heating up on multiple fronts.

“Assange’s attorneys stressed the legal and human rights implications of the case, while Stella Assange updated Bachelet on the impact years of confinement have had on Julian’s health and family,” the statement said.

The Assange case has become a cause celebre for media freedom and his supporters accuse Washington of trying to muzzle reporting of legitimate security concerns.

A Fiji women’s advocacy group has condemned their government for remaining silent over the human rights violations in West Papua amid the Pacific Islands Forum being hosted by Prime Minister Voreqe Bainmarama this week.

Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre (FWCC) coordinator Shamima Ali with other staff members and activists made the criticisms at a ceremony raising the independence flag Morning Star, banned in Indonesia.

The women raised the flag of West Papua on Wednesday to show their solidarity.

• READ MORE: Kiribati ‘cooking something with China’, says ex-Kiribati president
• Fiji police evict two Chinese defence attaches amid Pacific Forum tensions
• US announces major Pacific push, embassies in Tonga, Kiribati
• Climate crisis top Pacific agenda item and it’s a security issue, says Ardern
• $10m climate funding to support Pacific seed crops
• More Pacific Islands Forum summit leaders pull out as crisis grows
• Pacific Islands Forum ‘on course’ as China issue casts shadow
• Kiribati exit from Pacific forum ‘out of order’, says founding president
• Other Pacific Islands Forum reports

Ali said this ceremony was done every Wednesday to remember the people of West Papua, particularly women and girls who were “suffering twofold” due to the increased militarisation of the two provinces of Papua and West Papuan by the “cruel Indonesian government”.

She said this was a perfect time since all the Pacific leaders were in Fiji for the forum but the Fiji government stayed silent on the issue.

Ali added that with Fiji as the chair of the forum, Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama should have negotiated for West Papua to be on the agenda.

Wenda appeals to Pacific Islands Forum
Meanwhile, United Liberation Movement of West Papua interim president Benny Wenda has appealed to Pacific leaders to show “timely and effective leadership” on the great issues facing the Pacific — “the human rights crisis in West Papua and the existential threat of climate change”.

“West Papua is a green land in a blue ocean. Our blue Pacific has always united our peoples, rather than dividing them,” he said in a statement.

Shamima Ali speaking out on West Papua in Suva. Video: Fijivillage

“In this spirit of Pacific solidarity, we are grateful for the support our Pacific family showed for our struggle in 2019 by calling for Indonesia to allow the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, to visit West Papua.”

However, Indonesia continued to undermine the forum by refusing to allow a UN visit to take place.

“For decades, we have been crying that Indonesia is bombing our villages and killing our people, but we have been ignored,” Wenda said.

“Now, the world is taking notice of our struggle. The United Nations has shown that up to 100,000 West Papuan civilians have been internally displaced by Indonesian military operations in the past three years alone.

“They have fled into the bush, where they lack access to shelter, food, water, and proper medical facilities. This is a rapidly worsening human rights disaster, requiring immediate attention and intervention by the United Nations.

“Indonesia hears the increasing calls for a UN visit, but is employing delaying tactics to avoid exposing their crimes against my people to the world.”

Rusiate Baleilevuka is a Fijivillage reporter.

A wrap up of this week’s #BluePacific village. Youngsolwara & PRNGO+ partners hosted the morning star flag in solidarity with #WestPapua. A reminder to our @ForumSEC leaders that West Papua needs to be addressed. #FreeWestPapua #Pacific2050 #HumanRights pic.twitter.com/0U1WjmefYQ

— Youngsolwara Pacific (@YoungsolwaraP) July 17, 2022

Indonesia’s National Human Rights Commission (Komnas HAM) has discussed the plan to hold a peaceful dialogue to resolve the problems in Papua during its visit to the United Nations headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland.

During the meeting, the Komnas HAM was represented by commission chairperson Taufan Damanik and two commissioners, Beka Ulung Hapsara and Mochamad Choirul Anam. They met with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet.

“Komnas HAM conveyed the initiative for a peaceful dialogue on Papua,” said Damanik in a media statement, reports CNN Indonesia.

• READ MORE: Other West Papua reports

Damanik said that the peaceful dialogue was initiated by Komnas HAM as an approach to resolve the various human rights problems in Papua. He claimed that the UN has welcomed the plan.

“Michelle Bachelet conveyed her appreciation for the move by Komnas HAM,” he said.

The commission is confident that a peaceful dialogue on Papua can be realised and Damanik hopes that all parties will support the effort.

“[We] hope that more and more parties will lend their support to the initiative that exists so that a Papua which is just, peaceful and prosperous can be quickly achieved,” he said.

Rights violations of concern
Damanik said that they also took the opportunity to explain to the UN about various human rights developments and challenges in Indonesia, including resolving cases of rights violations which are of concern to the public.

“Including within this were changes related to progress in human rights policies and the obstacles which still exist,” he said.

Komnas HAM has visited Papua on several occasions to discuss the planned peace dialogue.

It claims that many different parties have welcomed the peaceful dialogue it has initiated.

The West Papua National Liberation Army-Free Papua Organisation (TPNPB-OPM) however has rejected peace talks with the government if it is only mediated by Komnas HAM.

They have also called on President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo to be prepared to sit down together with them at the negotiating table.

Earlier this year TPNPB-OPM spokesperson Sebby Sambom said that they wanted any peace dialogue or negotiations to be mediated by the UN because the armed conflict in Papua was already on an international scale.

“In principle we will agree if the negotiations are in accordance UN mechanisms, but we are not interested in Indonesia’s methods,” said Sambom in a press release on Friday February 23.

Translated by James Balowski of IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was Komnas HAM Bahas Dialog Damai Papua dengan Komisioner Tinggi HAM PBB.

The Papuan people have rejected the investigation team formed by the Indonesian state through the Attorney-General’s Office (AGO) to investigate alleged gross human rights violations in Paniai on 8 December 2014.

“To this day Indonesia has never solved any cases of gross human rights violations in the land of Papua, especially not the bloody Paniai case,” said Papuan activist Andi Yeimo about the massacre when Indonesian troops killed five teenagers and wounded 17.

“So, we the people of Paniai and the families of the victims are [instead] hoping for a visit by the United Nations High Commissioner [on Human Rights] to see for themselves the evidence and facts on the ground in Karel Gobai, the location of the shootings.”

• READ MORE: Other West Papua reports

Yeimo believes that the Indonesian government is incapable of resolving cases of gross human rights violations and the Papuan people are asking for the United Nations to visit Papua.

“We already know that the government talks nonsense. Indonesia once offered four billion [rupiah] (NZ$419,000) in money as compensation. But we, the families of the victims, rejected this evil attempt outright,” he said.

In relation to a UN visit to Papua, Yeimo said that 85 countries had already urged the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to visit Papua.

But Indonesia had used the covid-19 pandemic situation as grounds to prevent the visit.

Indonesian ‘distractions’
“Domestically, Indonesia [tries] to distract the Papuan people’s focus with the agenda of Otsus (the extension of special autonomy), the creation of new autonomous regions, the National Sports Week and military operations in West Papua,” said Yeimo.

“All students, youth, religious figures, state civil servants and all OAP (indigenous Papuans) unite now, take part in rejecting the [investigation] team formed by the state. We Papuans all know that Indonesia has never taken responsibility for its actions.”

Earlier, Amiruddin, the head of the investigation team into gross human rights violations, said he hoped that the newly formed team of investigators would be able to work transparently.

“The Attorney-General’s move to form the Paniai incident investigation team is a good move”, said Amiruddin in a press release.

• Notes from Indo Left News: On 8 December 2014, barely two months after President Joko Widodo was sworn in as president, five high-school students were killed and 17 others seriously wounded when police and military opened fire on a group of protesters and local residents in the town of Enarotali, Paniai regency. Shortly after the incident, while attending Christmas celebrations in Jayapura on December 28, Widodo personally pledged to resolve the case but seven years into his presidency no one has been held accountable for the shootings.

Translated by James Balowski of IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was “Kasus Paniai Berdarah, Rakyat Tolak Tim Investigasi Buatan Negara”.

To cover up the humiliating defeat for the United States and its allies in Afghanistan, the Anglo-American media is spinning tales of a great “humanitarian” airlift to save Afghani women from assumed brutality when the Taliban consolidate their power across Afghanistan.

But, at the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in Geneva, last week the Chinese changed the narrative, calling for the US, UK, Australia and other NATO countries to be held accountable for alleged violations of human rights committed during the two-decade-long war in Afghanistan.

“Under the banner of democracy and human rights the US and other countries carry out military interventions in other sovereign states and impose their own model on countries with vastly different history, culture and national conditions [which has] brought severe disasters to their people,” China’s ambassador in Geneva Cheng Xu told the council.

• READ MORE: Other Afghanistan reports

“United States, the United Kingdom and Australia must be held accountable for their violations of human rights in Afghanistan, and the resolution of this Special Session should cover this issue,” he added.

Amnesty International and a host of other civil society speakers have also called for the creation of a robust investigative mechanism that would allow for monitoring and reporting on human rights violations and abuses, including grave crimes under international law.

They have also asked for the mechanism to assist in holding those suspected of criminal responsibility to justice in fair trials.

However, they were looking at the future rather than the past.

Adopted by consensus
The UNHRC member states adopted by consensus a resolution which merely requests further reports and an update by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in March 2022.

China was extraordinarily critical of Australia in May this year when the so-called Brereton Report was released by the Australian government into a four-year investigation of possible war crimes in Afghanistan by Australian forces.

The findings revealed that some of Australia’s most elite soldiers in the SAS (Special Air Services) had been involved in unlawful killing, blood lust, a warrior culture and cover-up of their alleged atrocities.

It came as a surprise to an Australian public, which believes that Australian military engagement in Afghanistan was designed to keep the world safe from terrorists.

Today, Australians and the rest of the world are fed by a news narrative that the West saved Afghani women from the brutality of the Islamic fundamentalist Taliban regime, and now they need to be airlifted by Western forces to save them from falling into the hands of the Taliban again.

Rather than airlifting Afghans out of the country, China’s ambassador Xu told UNHRC: “We  will continue developing a good neighbourly, friendly and cooperative relationship with Afghanistan and continue our constructive role in its process of peace and reconstruction.”

Reporting this, Yahoo Australia pointed out that Afghanistan was sitting on precious mineral deposits estimated to be worth US$1 trillion and the country also had vast supplies of iron ore, copper and gold. Is believed to be home to one of the world’s largest deposits of lithium.

The report suggested that China was eyeing these resources.

Accountability for the West
However, such suspicions should not come in the way of calling for the West to be accountable for its war crimes in Afghanistan, which have been well documented even by such organisations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.

The UNHRC has not taken up these issues so far, fearing US retaliation.

Speaking on Sri Lankan Sirasa TV’s Pathikade programme, Professor Prathiba Mahanamahewa, a former member of the Sri Lankan Human Rights Commission who went to Afghanistan on a fact-finding mission on the invitation of the Afghanistan Human Rights Commission in 2014, argued that Western nations had been instrumental in creating terrorist groups around the world like the Taliban to destabilise governing systems in countries.

“At the core of the Taliban is the idea of spreading Islamic fundamentalism and they have inspired similar movements in the region; thus, it is a big threat to countries in Asia, especially in South Asia,” argued Professor Mahanamahewa.

“There are parties that pump a lot of funds to the Taliban.”

He said that in 2018, Sri Lanka (with several other countries) fought at the UNHRC to come up with a treaty to stop these financial flows to terrorist groups.

“Until today, nothing has been done,” said Professor Mahanamahewa.

Producer of opium and hashish
He added that Afghanistan was a large producer of opium and hashish, and the West was a big market for it, thus “Talibans would obviously like to have some form of relations with the West”.

In April 2019, the International Criminal Court (ICC) rejected its prosecutor Fatou Bensouda’s November 2017 request to open an investigation into possible war crimes and crimes against humanity during Afghanistan’s brutal armed conflict.

Such an investigation would have investigated war crimes and brutality of both the Taliban and the US-led forces and activities of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

The panel of judges concluded that since the countries concerned had not taken any action over the perpetrators of possible “war crimes”, ICC could not act because it was a court of last resort.

In March 2011, the Rolling Stones magazine carried a lengthy investigative report on how war crimes by US forces were covered up by the Pentagon.

After extensive interviews with members of a group within the US forces called Bravo Company, they described how they were focused on killings Afghan civilians like going to the forests to hunt animals, and how these killings of innocent villages who were sometimes working in the fields were camouflaged as a terror attack by Taliban.

The soldiers involved were not disciplined or punished and US army aggressively moved to frame the incidents as the work of a “rogue unit”. The Pentagon clamped down on information about these killings, and soldiers in the Bravo Company were barred from speaking to the media.

Documented incidents
While the US occupation continued, many human rights organisations have documented incidents like these and called for independent international investigations, which have met with lukewarm response.

Only a few were punished with light sentences that did not reflect the gravity of the crime.

After losing the elections, in November 2020 President Trump pardoned two US army officials who were accused and jailed for war crimes in Afghanistan. While some Pentagon leaders expressed concern that this action would damage military discipline, Trump tweeted “we train our boys to be killing machines, then persecute them when they kill”.

It is perhaps now time that the US indulged in some soul-searching about their culture of killing, rather than using a narrative of “saving Afghani women” to cover up barbaric killing when the US-led forces were involved in Afghanistan.

Pratap Bhanu Mehta, president of one of India’s top think-tanks, the Centre Policy Research, argued in an Indian Express article that terrorist groups like the Taliban or ISIS were “products of modern imperial politics” that was unsettling local societies, encouraging violence, supported fundamentalism, thus breaking up state structures.

He listed 7 sins of the US Empire that contributed to the debacle in Afghanistan. These included corruption that drives war; self-deception like what happened in Vietnam and now Afghanistan; lack of morality where the empire drives lawlessness; and hypocrisy, a cult of violence and racism.

It is interesting that the Rolling Stones feature reflected the last two points in the way the Bravo Company went about picking up innocent villages for killing. But Mehta argued that “the modality of US withdrawal exuded the fundamental sin of empire. Its reinforcement of race and hierarchy”.

‘Common humanity’
He noted: “Suddenly, the pretext of common humanity, and universal liberation, which was the pretext of empire, turned into the worst kind of cultural essentialism. It is their culture, these medieval tribalists who are incapable of liberty”.

Hamid Dabashi, professor of Iranian studies and comparative literature at Columbia University, writing on the Al Jazeera website asked: “What can the Taliban do to Afghanistan that it and the US, and their European allies have already not done to it?”

He described the Doha deal between the US and the Taliban as a deal to hand Afghanistan back to the Taliban.

“As for Afghan women and girls, they are far better off fighting the fanaticism and stupidity of the Taliban on their own and not under the shadow of US military barracks,” argued Professor Dabashi.

“Iranian, Pakistani, Turkish and Arab women have been fighting similar, if not identical, patriarchal thuggery right in their neighbourhood, so will Afghan women.”

Republished under Creative Commons partnership with IDN – In-Depth News.

By Rambo Talabong in Manila

After her repeated urgings were unheeded, Erlinda Echanis formally has formally demanded that Pink Petals Memorial Homes release the body of her husband, assassinated Anakpawis chair Randall “Randy” Echanis.

The QCPD wants either a fingerprint or a DNA test to establish the body’s identity.

Meanwhile, the International Coalition for Human Rights in the Philippines has protested in the very strongest terms over the murder of Randall Echanis. Its statement published online says:

‘Crime of state terrorism’
“In a letter to the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet, ICHRP reports the crime of state terrorism in the killing of veteran activist and peace consultant Echanis.

“At about 1.20am Manila time, on August 10, 2020, five men were seen leaving the Echanis’ rented home in Novaliches, Quezon City. Inside the bodies of Echanis and an unnamed neighbour were found, with stab and gunshot wounds. Echanis was at home receiving medical attention.

“‘This murder is almost certainly a calibrated operation of the Duterte counter-insurgency programme, Oplan Kapanatagan. It is designed to destroy any dialogue that may resolve the five-decade long armed conflict in the Philippines, and instead pursue all out political violence against civilians,’ says ICHRP chairperson Peter Murphy in a letter to the UN High Commissioner.

“Echanis was a peace consultant for the National Democratic Front of the Philippines, a member of the 2016-17 Reciprocal Working Committee on Social and Economic Reforms in the formal peace talks sponsored by the Royal Norwegian Government.

“He advocated for the mass of poor peasant farmers, for he was the deputy secretary-general of the Peasant Movement of the Philippines (KMP) and chairperson of the Anakpawis Party-List, a political party for peasants, fisherfolk and workers.

“On the same day, Erlinda Echanis, wife of the slain peace consultant, reported that police officers forcibly took the body of her husband which is now being guarded by state authorities.

“‘I have positively identified his lifeless body which bore torture marks, multiple stab and gunshot wounds,’ says Echanis.

UN plea for justice
“ICHRP urged the UN High Commissioner’s office and the United Nations Security Council to lead international condemnation of the murder of Echanis, and to urge the Philippines government to bring the perpetrators to justice. In the same letter, it also appeals to the government to abandon its war on all political opposition, and instead to release all political prisoners and resume the stalled peace talks.

“‘We call on all member states of the UN Human Rights Council to be seized of the seriousness of the human rights situation in the Philippines and to adopt all the recommendations in your June 30 report on the human rights situation in the Philippines,’ says ICHRP.

“Lastly, Murphy addresses the international community, calling on it ‘to unequivocally condemn the state killing of Echanis’.