Home / News / Urgent Appeals / INDONESIA: Authorities refuse to treat political prisoner with tumour

INDONESIA: Authorities refuse to treat political prisoner with tumour

January 27, 2012

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-008-2012

27 January 2012
---------------------------------------------------------------------
INDONESIA: Authorities refuse to treat political prisoner with tumour

ISSUES: Indigenous people; inhuman and degrading treatment; prison conditions
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information regarding the condition of Kimanus Wenda, a political prisoner at Nabire prison, Papua, who has a tumor in his stomach and must be operated on. Although Indonesian law clearly notes that it is the state’s obligation to provide medical fees, the Papua legal and human rights department is refusing to pay for Mr. Wenda's surgery due to a lack of funds. Moreover, the goverment is now claiming that Mr. Wenda does not require surgery, although local activists found the opposite to be true.

CASE NARRATIVE:

According to the information received from KontraS, ALDP and SKPHP, on April 4, 2003, at around 1am, there was a burglary at 1702/ Jayawijaya Wamena military district staff headquarters armory.

Eight perpetrators were arrested in connection to this theft: Yafrai Murib, Numbungga Telenggen, Enos Lokobal, Linus Hiluka, Kanius Murib, Kimanus Wenda, Des Wenda and Mikael Haselo. On January 15, 2004, according to the verdict declared by the Wamena district court, all the victims were found guilty for rebellion under articles 106 and 110 of the Criminal Code. Yafrai Murib and Numbungga Telenggen were sentenced to lifetime imprisonment, while the others were sentenced to 20 years imprisonment. Civil society considers this verdict to not be based on legal facts.

Since 2010, Mr. Wenda has had a tumor in his stomach and is constantly vomiting. He informed the health staff at Nabire prison but was not given any adequate response. On February 2, 2011, the Nabire hospital issued a reference letter regarding Mr. Wenda's sickness and the need for him to be operated at Jayapura hospital. Two days later, Mr. Wenda’s legal counsel sent a medical leave letter to the head of Papua’s regional office of law and human rights and the head of Nabire prison, but received no response. On September 19, SKPHP met the head of Papua legal and human rights department but the department said it has no money and thus cannot pay for Mr. Wenda's operation. This violates Indonesian law under Indonesian Government Regulation No. 32/1999 on Terms and Procedures on the Implementation of Prisoners’ Rights in Prisons, which states that it is a state obligation to provide medical fees and treatment. While civil society is now gathering funds to pay for the operation in Jayapura hospital, it is not yet enough.

Furthermore, on December 16, at the hearings between KontraS and the ministry of law and human rights, the staff of Nabire prison said that based on their report and the statement of the prison chief, Mr. Wenda was seen playing volley ball in prison and therefore his stomach tumour is not dangerous and does not need to be operated in Jayapura hospital. However, on December 21, when local activists brought Mr. Wenda to be examined at Nabire hospital, John, the surgery doctor who examined Mr. Wenda, stated that the tumour is severe and should be operated as soon as possible. The government denial to treat Mr. Wenda has resulted in much civil society concern about his safety.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
The AHRC has recorded that political prisoners, especially in Papua, face ill-treatment and torture in prison, as in the case of Fendinand Pakage, who was tortured by a Abepura prison officer in 2008, resulting in permanent damage to his right eye, and in the case of Buchtar Tabuni in 2009, also beaten and tortured by a Abepura prison officer. Political prisoners’ rights are bare fulfilled, especially the right to health, as seen by Filep Karma, who was neglected at Dok II Jayapura hospital although his ureter should be operated.

Furthermore, on August 28, 2007, Mikael Haselo, a political prisoner arrested and charged in the same case as Mr. Wenda, died after being treated at Bayangkara hospital, Makasar, South Sulawesi, due to the complication of some diseases, such as cough, enteritis, bronchitis and lung inflammation.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write letters to the authorities listed below asking them to intervene in this case immediately.

Please be informed that the AHRC is also sending letters to the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous people, and the Working Group on arbitrary detention, calling for their intervention into this matter.

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear ___________,

INDONESIA: Authorities refuse to treat political prisoner with tumour

Name of victim: Kimanus Wenda
Names of alleged perpetrators: Staff of Nabire prison
Date of incident: 2010-now
Place of incident: Nabire prison, Nabire, Papua

I am writing to voice my deep concern regarding the condition of Kimanus Wenda, a political prisoner at Nabire prison.

According to the information received from the Asian Human Rights Commission, on 4 April 2003, at around 1am local time, there was a burglary at 1702/ Jayawijaya Wamena military district staff headquarters armory and eight perpetrators were arrested, namely Yafrai Murib, Numbungga Telenggen, Enos Lokobal, Linus Hiluka, Kanius Murib, Kimanus Wenda, Des Wenda and Mikael Haselo.

I also know that on 15 January 2004, according to the verdict declared by the Wamena district court, all the victims were found guilty for rebellion under articles 106 and 110 of the Criminal Code. Yafrai Murib and Numbungga Telenggen were sentenced to lifetime imprisonment, while the others were sentenced to 20 years imprisonment. Civil society considers this verdict to not be based on legal facts.

I learnt that since 2010, Mr. Wenda has had a tumor in his stomach and is constantly vomiting. He called the health staff at Nabire prison, but received no serious response. On February 2, 2011, the Nabire hospital issued a reference letter regarding Mr. Wenda's sickness and the need for him to be operated at Jayapura hospital. Two days later, Mr. Wenda’s legal counsel sent a medical leave letter to the head of Papua’s regional office of law and human rights and the head of Nabire prison, but received no response. On September 19, SKPHP met the head of Papua legal and human rights department but the department said it has no money and thus cannot pay for Mr. Wenda's operation. I am aware that this violates Indonesian law under Indonesian Government Regulation No. 32/1999 on Terms and Procedures on the Implementation of Prisoners’ Rights in Prisons, which states that it is a state obligation to provide medical fees and treatment. While civil society is now gathering funds to pay for the operation in Jayapura hospital, it is not yet enough.

I wish to point out that on December 16, at the hearings between KontraS and the ministry of law and human rights, the staff of Nabire prison said that based on their report and the statement of the prison chief, Mr. Wenda was seen playing volley ball in prison and therefore his stomach tumour is not dangerous and does not need to be operated in Jayapura hospital. However, on December 21, when local activists brought Mr. Wenda to be examined at Nabire hospital, John, the surgery doctor who examined Mr. Wenda, stated that the tumour is severe and should be operated as soon as possible. The government denial to treat Mr. Wenda has resulted in much civil society concern about his safety.

Based on the information stated above, I urge you to promptly pay the medical fees necessary for Mr. Wenda’s proper treatment, in accordance with government obligations to do so. I also urge you to look into all the allegations in this case and to take appropriate action against those found responsible, and prevent any future recurrence.

Yours sincerely,

----------------
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono
The President of Indonesia
Jl. Veteran No. 16
Jakarta Pusat
INDONESIA
Tel: +62 21 3863777, 3503088.
Fax: + 62 21 3442223

2. Head of National Commission on Human Rights of Indonesia
Jalan Latuharhary No.4-B,
Jakarta 10310
INDONESIA
Tel: +62 21 392 5227-30
Fax: +62 21 392 5227
Email: info@komnas.go.id

3. Ms. Harkristuti Harkrisnowo
General Director of Human Rights
Department of Law and Human Rights Republic of Indonesia
Jl. HR Rasuna Said Kav.6-7 Kuningan, Jakarta 12940
INDONESIA
Tel: +62 21 525 3006, 525 3889, 526 4280
Fax: +62 21 525 3095

4. Director General of Prisons
Drs. Untung Sugiyono
Ministry of Justice and Human Rights
Jl. Veteran No. 11
Jakarta Pusat
INDONESIA
Fax: +62 21 384 171

5. Head of the Papuan Provincial Department of Justice and Human Rights
Daniel Biantong
Jl. Raya Abepura No. 37,
Kotaraja - Jayapura 99117, Papua
INDONESIA
Fax +62 967 586112

6. Head of Nabire Prison
Arif Rachman
Lapas Klas IIb Nabire, Jl. Padat Karya,
Nabire 98801, Papua,
INDONESIA
Fax: +62 984 24721


Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrc.asia)

 

 

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-008-2012
Countries :
Campaigns :
Issues :
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.