For Papua Development

The revisions to the Papua Special Autonomy Law have been passed. One stage has been achieved. The revised law is intended for sustainable development in Papua.

Although the revision of Law (UU) No. 21/2001 on Papua Special Autonomy is only one tool to develop Papua, the law’s embodiment should be optimized. Positive provisions in the Papua Special Autonomy bill include an extension to the special autonomy fund until 2041. The amount of the special autonomy fund has als been increased from 2 percent to 2.25 percent of the national general allocation fund. Of the special autonomy fund, 30 percent is for education and 20 percent is for health.

We understand that the administration of President Joko Widodo has made efforts to build infrastructure such as the Trans-Papua highway. It is appropriate that after some of the infrastructure have been built, the focus now should be to develop Papua’s human resources.

Kompas/AGUS SUSANTO

Dusk on the Holtekamp Bridge, Jayapura, Papua.

Article 34 regulates supervision in line with the increased funding. Many parties have frequently pointed out the importance of supervision. The details as to management, guidance and supervision are to be legislated later in government regulations.

Also read :

Immediate Solution Needed for Papua

Volume II of Papua’s Special Autonomy?

The most important thing, however, is of course how the supervision is implemented, so that this bill will not be considered a mere “toothless tiger” in hindsight.

To accelerate the implementation of special autonomy and development in Papua, the bill also mandates the establishment of a special agency that responds directly to the President. Considering that the Vice President has been appointed as the agency’s chairman, the selection of personnel for the agency’s secretariat is very important, because they must be capable of working optimally towards Papuan progress.

The most important thing, however, is of course how the supervision is implemented, so that this bill will not be considered a mere “toothless tiger” in hindsight.

If something should be noted as regards this Special Autonomy Bill, of course it relates to the public demands that have not been accommodated. Reportedly, the public\'s voice has not been fully absorbed. The Papuan people, thanks to this bill, were given a greater opportunity to play a role in politics. However, their request for independent management of the natural resources of Papua and West Papua has not been met.

KOMPAS/AGUS SUSANTO

An aerial photograph of Papua Bangkit Main Stadium and the athletic arena in Jayapura, Papua, as seen on Saturday (29/2/2020). The biggest obstacle in completing the construction of 56 arenas for the National Games (PON), which will be held on Oct. 20 - Nov. 2 is the limited time, geographical condition, and lack of development materials, which are almost all from outside Papua.

For the record, rarely is there a bill that fully meets the expectations of all parties. There are interests from all sides. If there are objections, people can petition for a judicial review with the Constitutional Court.

Those that request a judicial review can present their arguments. This method is clearly constitutional while it also reduces the potential for societal tensions, since this could actually reduce welfare or hinder development, which would be contrary to the purpose of this law. We certainly remember the tensions in Yalimo, which was actually harmful to Papua.

Discussing, designing, deliberating, debating, validating and testing a law is one issue. Again, however, another issue is how the Papua Special Autonomy Law can be implemented quickly and to the letter to develop a better Papua.

(This article was translated by Kurniawan Siswoko)