The Killing of Yawan Wayeni...

BE ADVISED THE VIDEO CONTAINS GRAPHIC FOOTAGE OF HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES PERPETRATED BY THE MOBILE BRIGADE OF THE INDONESIAN NATIONAL POLICE FORCE. VIEWER DISCRETION IS ADVISED.





I have had this for a few days (and the LA Times went with this story today) and the news relates to events that happened on 3 August 2009. I have been thinking whether I should post it and what I should say about it. I have 99 followers and average about 21 returning visitors every day (according to my statcounter). So, I am hardly a fountain of influence peddling information. If only I had the numbers that Perez Hilton has or the same number of Twitter followers that Ashton Kutchner has, then maybe what I post might influence opinion a little. But, I firmly believe that the flap of a butterfly's wings can cause a tornado at some point in the future. We must start somewhere, and maybe if each of us does a part we can, together, influence opinion and make the world a better place.

This post does not lend itself to a full expose of the litany of abuses perpetrated against the Papuan people since the integration of Papua into Indonesia in 1963 and the alleged act of free choice in 1969. However, it is important to note that there has been resistance to the integration into Indonesia.

It must also be pointed out that the Indonesian government still tightly controls access to the region. The lack of access by Indonesian human rights NGOs and Indonesian press leads to allegations that the Indonesian government is perpetrating crimes against the Papuans in order to stifle this dissent and eradicate it. It is time that the world took a stance on this issue and called the Indonesians to task. Nevertheless, it is also important that Indonesians themselves said, "enough is enough" and moved to bring their government to account for the ongoing atrocities occurring in Papua.

Perhaps, it is more important that Indonesians take a stand on the brutality being perpetrated against the Papuans as this then prevents the Indonesian government playing the "foreigner" card. The foreigner card is the claim, made generally through Commission I of the Indonesian Parliament, that foreigners leveling accusations of Indonesian brutality in its far-flung and restive provinces is nothing more than international meddling in domestic affairs with a view to securing vast swathes of Indonesia's natural resources for themselves.

The video is the of the killing of Yawan Wayeni. Wayeni was an escaped convict. He had been jailed for alleged violence against police and the burning of police property. He was also said to be a member of the Free Papua Movement or Organisasi Papua Merdeka (OPM). The video is graphic. Wayeni has been bayoneted in the stomach and his killers are taunting him through the final moments of his life.

However, in scenes reminiscent of Braveheart, Wayeni to the end can be seen raising his fist and saying as loud as he can "Papua Freedom" (Papua Merdeka). The video shows the police taunting Wayeni as he lies there. It also shows that they are not rendering him any assistance. Even if the claim was that he was wounded in this way while resisting arrest with a home-made rifle, it is clear that he is no longer any threat. The police must render all assistance they can.

The video was taken by the police. So, it has been leaked. By who, and why, remains a mystery.

It must be noted that, aside from Brimob, the other force most active in the restive province of Papua is the special forces. The special forces known by their Indonesian acronym of Kopassus (Komando Pasukan Khusus) have long been a pariah in world military circles with most countries opting not to engage in any joint activities with them. However, the US has recently indicated that they are about to re-engage with them. Australia has been re-engaged with them since 2005.

This is problematic because this force has long been accused of serious and grave breaches of human rights. These abuses have been perpetrated against the Timorese during Indonesia's occupation of East Timor / Timor Leste, and against the Acehnese during the period of Special Military Operations (DOM / Daerah Operasi Militer) and also against the Papuans. For these alleged abuses the special forces have never been called to account. Re-engaging with them suggests that there is no longer any serious intent on the part of most nations to hold either Kopassus or Indonesia accountable for these violations.

There can be no justice without accountability.

Transgender and Sex Discrimination

It is always interesting to see how judges interpret laws and whether these interpretations expand the intent of the original law or restrict it.

There are always critics who voice their concerns when it appears that judges are making law rather than interpreting it.

A recent case involving a transgendered woman, who was a highly decorated soldier as a man, and the Library of Congress in the US. Diane Schroer was offered a position at the Library of Congress as terrorism research analyst when she was a man. This job offer was then revoked when the Library of Congress found out that David Schroer was in a period of transition from being a man and becoming a woman.

Schroer was qualified for the position, of that there seems little dispute, and had in fact been the highest rated candidate for the position. Her experience included being a special forces commander in the US Army and commanding a 120 person unit tasked with tracking terrorists.

She retired in 2004 and ultimately ended up applying for the position at the Library of Congress.

The American Civil Liberties Union took up the case and filed it in Federal Court. The suit alleged discrimination and relied upon the Civil Rights Act and in particular the provisions on sex discrimination.

The ruling of the judge pointed to direct evidence that the Library of Congress had based their hiring decision on sex stereotypes. The stereotypes here were that the Library of Congress felt that Schroer would be less capable of performing her duties as a woman than she would have if she had stayed a man. Although the testimony given in court was that the Library was worried that they would not be able to get a security clearance for Schroer in time.

The judge then went on to compare a situation where a person is denied employment because they are in the transitioning period from one religion to another.

Yet, and perhaps more importantly, this decision says that the laws as they relate to sex discrimination covers individuals who are transgendered and it also covers them during the period of transition.

I do not think that the decision expands the intent but rather clarifies that intent. It would be a difficult argument to sustain that the government's intent was to exclude people from the protections of the sex discrimination clauses in the Act.

Now that the judge has ruled in Schroer's favor the only question that remains is how should she be compensated for the discrimination that she has suffered.

When the damages award is made (assuming one will be made) I will post a postscript to this story.