Sorong – Seasoned advocate Jatir Yuda Marau asked to stop efforts to stir public opinion aimed at weakening the cultural representative institution in the Land of Papua, namely the Papuan People’s Assembly (MRP) so that it could lead to conflicts detrimental to all parties.
The issuance of the decision letter of the Southwest Papua People’s Assembly Number 10 / MRP.PBD / 2024 dated September 6, 2024, is considered appropriate based on the results of careful consideration.
Yuda revealed that the decision of the Southwest Papua Province MRP not to approve the candidate pair Abdul Faris Umlati and Petrus Kasihiw as Indigenous Papuans, showed that the MRPBD had carried out its noble duty to protect the basic rights of Indigenous Papuans.
“I emphasize that the KPU Letter Number: 1718/PL.02.2-SD/05/2024 dated August 26, 2024 cannot annul the MRPBD’s decision which has aborted the Candidate Candidates Abdul Faris Umlati and Petrus Kasihiw,” he concluded.
Through a press release received by the editorial staff of MataPapua.com, Yuda said that the Southwest Papua Provincial KPU must declare the Candidate Pair Abdul Faris Umlati and Petrus Kasihiw ineligible to be designated as candidates for governor and deputy governor to take part in the Pilkada contestation on November 27, 2024, because they are not Papuans.
Yuda said that reflecting on the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 29/PUU-IX/2011 on the applicant David Barangkea as Chief of the Yawa Onat Tribe and Komarudin Watubun Tanawani Mora as a party who has been recognized as a member of the customary law community with the Tanawani Mora clan.
In the consideration of the Constitutional Court’s decision number 29/2011, “Article 20 paragraph (1) letter a of Law 21/2001 must be declared contrary to the 1945 Constitution insofar as it is not interpreted that the consideration and approval of the Papuan People’s Assembly regarding a person’s status as an indigenous Papuan as referred to in Article 1 letter t of Law 21/2001 who will become a candidate for governor and/or deputy governor, is a consideration that must be based on the recognition of the indigenous tribe in Papua from which the candidate for governor and/or deputy governor concerned comes from”.
Then the substance of this decision as argued by the Petitioner because the MRP did not accommodate Komarudin Watubun who had been appointed as a member of the Indigenous People with the Tanawani Mora clan given by David Barangkea as the head of the Yawa Onat tribe.
“Reading the decision of the Constitutional Court should start from consideration to the decision, not read half – half and then interpreted at will. Moreover, those who interpret as legal practitioners are inclined and take sides,” Yuda explained.
According to him, legal practitioners should not fool the public by providing legal views without a clear basis. There is a Constitutional Court decision because there is a cause and effect so that a legal decision is issued.
The MRP in the Kamaruddin Watubun case at that time did not give approval as OAP to Kamarudin Watubun who had been adopted by David Barangkea as the Tribal Chief as a customary child, so the Constitutional Court considered the MRP’s decision to be contrary to the Constitutional Rights of the MRP.