The proposal to establish Papua Utara (North Papua) Province has moved into a new phase of political advocacy, with the Papuan People’s Assembly (MRP) bringing its formal approval to Indonesia’s national legislature and seeking support from the Regional Representative Council (DPD RI). At the heart of the initiative is a longstanding aspiration associated with the Saireri customary territory, which proponents say remains the only one of Papua’s seven customary territories without a corresponding provincial administration.
In late September and early October 2026, the MRP pursued discussions with lawmakers in Jakarta, presenting the proposed province as a means of strengthening indigenous representation, improving public services and addressing regional development needs. The proposal covers four regencies: Biak Numfor, Supiori, Waropen and Yapen Islands. Its progress, however, will depend on legislative deliberations, institutional coordination and the assessment of whether the proposed administrative structure can meet its stated objectives.
A Longstanding Aspiration Reaches the National Legislature
MRP Approval Follows Years of Discussion
The idea of establishing Papua Utara Province is not new. MRP Chairwoman Nerlince Wamuar said the aspiration had circulated for decades and had gained renewed attention among stakeholders in the northern coastal and island communities of Papua.
On September 22, 2026, the MRP formally approved the proposed division during a plenary session. The decision was recorded as MRP Decision No. 16/MRP/2026 and was presented as the institution’s response to aspirations from customary communities in northern coastal Papua.
According to reports on the decision, the assembly considered perspectives from its Indigenous Affairs Working Group, Women’s Working Group and Religious Affairs Working Group. The involvement of these groups was intended to bring different community concerns into the institution’s deliberations.
The MRP cited Article 76(1) of Law No. 2 of 2021, which amended Indonesia’s Special Autonomy Law for Papua, as the legal basis for the required approval process. The provision identifies approval by the MRP and the Papuan House of Representative (DPRP) as part of the framework for regional division.
Formal Submission to Commission II
The next step was to bring the assembly’s decision to the national level. On September 28, according to one report, Nerlince Wamuar formally submitted the approval document to leaders of Commission II of the Indonesian House of Representatives (DPR RI) in Jakarta. Other reports place the handover on September 29, reflecting a discrepancy in the published accounts of the submission date.
The handover was attended by representatives of the Papua provincial administration, regional leaders from Saireri, members of the national parliament and regional representatives from Papua, as well as MRP officials.
Markus Kajoi, head of the MRP working team on regulation and affirmative policy for Indigenous Papuans, said the assembly intended to continue overseeing the proposal after the document’s submission. He added that the MRP was awaiting arrangements for further discussions with the House’s Legislative Body, known as Baleg.
The submission marked an important procedural step, but it did not establish the new province. Further institutional review and decisions remain necessary before the proposal can proceed.
Saireri and the Seven Customary Territories
The Case for Customary Representation
Supporters of Papua Utara Province have framed the proposal partly around the customary territorial structure of Papua. They argue that the establishment of a province for Saireri would complete the representation of the region’s seven customary territories through corresponding provincial administrations.
At a September 30 meeting between the MRP, Saireri regency leaders and members of Baleg, NasDem legislator Tonny Tesar said the proposed division was intended to accommodate the aspirations of Saireri, which he described as having been left behind in the existing provincial arrangement.
Tesar argued that regional expansion should be considered in relation to customary territorial unity. MRP representatives, regional officials, including the regents of Waropen and Supiori, and leaders from the national legislature attended the meeting.
The proposed province would include Biak Numfor, Supiori, Waropen and Yapen Islands. These districts form the geographical basis of the proposal described in the MRP’s approval document.
The customary-territory argument is also reflected in statements by Johanes Wakum, a member of the Papua provincial legislature representing Biak Numfor and Supiori. Wakum said the proposal could complete the provincial representation of the seven customary territories, while stressing the importance of unity among customary, religious and government stakeholders.
For supporters, the issue is therefore not only administrative. The structure of government also reflects local identity, customary institutions, and political representation.
Three Considerations Behind the MRP’s Approval
In explaining its decision, the MRP identified three central considerations: protection of customary rights, affirmative support for Indigenous Papuans and community empowerment through transparent management of Special Autonomy funds.
The first concerns the protection of customary land rights and the cultural identity of Saireri communities. The MRP has highlighted the importance of safeguarding customary territories, languages and traditional knowledge, particularly in coastal and island areas.
The second is the representation of Indigenous Papuans, known as Orang Asli Papua (OAP), in government and public administration. The MRP has called for affirmative measures in strategic positions, including senior administrative roles and leadership within regional government agencies.
The third concerns the use of Special Autonomy funding. The assembly has called for transparent management of these resources to support education, healthcare and community-based economic activity. Its stated priorities include women’s economic participation, indigenous youth and small businesses in fisheries, marine industries and island tourism.
These considerations are presented by the MRP as conditions that should accompany any future administrative expansion. They also provide a framework against which the proposal’s eventual implementation could be assessed.
Yorrys Raweyai and the DPD RI Channel
Seeking Institutional Support Beyond the House
After the submission to the DPR RI, the MRP continued its advocacy through a meeting with Yorrys Raweyai, Deputy Speaker of the DPD RI, on October 2, 2026.
Nerlince Wamuar said the meeting was intended to secure institutional support from the DPD, which represents regional interests at the national level. She expressed confidence that Yorrys could help communicate the proposal within the institution.
Yorrys welcomed the aspiration and noted that stakeholders in Papua, particularly the MRP and DPRP, had considered the proposal. He linked the proposal to the goals of more evenly distributed development, improved public services and greater opportunities for Indigenous Papuans in political, administrative, legal, social and cultural life.
Yorrys also said he would follow up on the proposal in accordance with the DPD’s internal procedures. He emphasised that the MRP would need to maintain internal unity and coordinate with the central government, the DPR RI and the DPD RI.
The DPD meeting added another institutional channel to the MRP’s efforts. While the House of Representatives is central to legislative deliberations, the regional representation provided by the DPD offers a further forum for discussing the proposal’s implications.
From the Long List to Legislative Consideration
One of the issues raised during the discussions concerns the proposal’s position in Indonesia’s legislative planning process.
Yorrys said the Papua Utara proposal had been included in the 2025-2029 National Legislation Programme, or Prolegnas, but remained on the long list rather than being designated as a priority bill. Tesar separately said that among 231 proposals for new autonomous regions, Papua Utara was listed at number 64.
At the September 30 meeting, Baleg Chair Bob Hasan reportedly said the proposal would be included in the 2027 Prolegnas. The MRP delegation welcomed this statement as a sign as an indication that the proposal could receive further legislative attention.
However, inclusion in a legislative programme is not the same as enactment. The proposal still requires consideration through the applicable legal and administrative procedures. Its eventual status will depend on the decisions of the relevant institutions and the completion of the necessary assessments.
Yorrys has stressed the importance of coordinated advocacy, arguing that the MRP’s support alone would not be sufficient to secure the proposal’s progress. Engagement with national and regional institutions will remain central to the process.
Development Expectations and Implementation Questions
Supporters say a separate provincial administration could shorten the distance between local communities and government institutions, improve coordination and make public services more responsive to the needs of the northern coastal and island districts.
Wakum has described a shorter administrative chain as one potential benefit. Yorrys has also linked the proposal to development distribution, public services and the welfare of local communities.
Those expectations, however, will need to be translated into practical plans. A new province would require an administrative structure, public expenditure, staffing and coordination with the existing provincial government. The distribution of responsibilities and resources would be important to avoid duplication and ensure that the proposed administration can operate effectively.
The MRP’s emphasis on customary rights and transparent Special Autonomy funding also raises questions that will matter during implementation. The protection of customary land, meaningful participation by indigenous communities and accountability in public spending would need to be reflected in policies and institutional arrangements, rather than remaining general objectives.
The available reports describe the proposal and its supporters’ expectations but do not provide a comprehensive financial assessment, implementation timetable or independent evaluation of its likely effects on public services. Those issues remain relevant to the legislative process.
Conclusion
The MRP’s advocacy for Papua Utara Province has progressed from a plenary approval in September to formal engagement with the DPR RI and a subsequent meeting with the DPD RI in early October 2026. The initiative is being presented by its supporters as a response to Saireri’s customary aspirations and as a potential means of strengthening regional representation and development.
The proposal’s significance will ultimately depend on what follows the political discussions. Legislative consideration, institutional coordination, fiscal planning and safeguards for customary communities will shape whether the proposed province can deliver the benefits its advocates describe.
For Saireri, the debate brings questions of identity and representation into the national policy arena. The established legal process must assess the set of administrative and development questions that Indonesia’s government and lawmakers face. The next stage will determine how the aspiration is considered and whether its proposed institutional design can be matched by clear responsibilities, sustainable resources and accountable public services.
Read Also
Papua Utara Push Gains Momentum Toward 2027
Voices from the Coast: Why People in Saireri Want Papua Utara Province to Be Formed