Jakarta, The level of confidence of Papuan civil society towards the central government has declined as the result of a number of basic problems. despite the fact that improving confidence in the central government represents the most important aspect in achieving reconciliation.

This is one of the most important points to emerge from a study by LIPI, the Indonesian Institute of Sciences that was carried out in 2006. The investigation was conducted in order to consider ways of achieving reconciliation in Papua.

The chief researcher of the Tim Kajian Konflik Papua LIPI (Team to Investigation Conflict in Papua), Adriana Elisabeth, said that the central government still considers any demands made by Papuans concerning justice as being nothing more than a reflection of the desire to separate from the Indonesian Republic, NKRI. The fact is that Papuans always talk about their aspirations for independence whenever they are involved in talks with the central government.

"The government's approach tends to be very one-sided. The government thinks that it alone understands what the problems are and what the solutions are,' she said at a discussion held by the Papuan Pokja (Working Group) on Thursday, 5 April.

Take for instance the role of the Majelis Rakyat Papua (MRP). According to Law 21/2001 on Special Autonomy (Otsus) the MRP is acknowledged as occupying a key position but it does not enjoy optimal support. This is because the centre suspects that the MRP is dominated by pro-independence elements,' said Adriana.

Another member of the team, Amiruddin Al Rahab was of the same opinion. "This makes things very difficult for the MRP even though society as a whole places great expectations in that body,' he said.

Amiruddin said that this means that the formation of a Commission for Truth and Reconciliation (KKR) as provided for in the Special Autonomy law is very important as a way of achieving reconciliation.

"KKR Papua would function as a way of helping to transform the understanding of history. As things stand at present, everything is too Jakarta-centred. It would open up the whole question of history, with the Papuans being seen as the subject and not as the object,' according to Amiruddin.

Adriana also said that reconciliation as defined in Otsus is very limited. The repeal of Law 27/2004 on the KKR by the Constitutional Court has created a legal barrier. "While we await the creation of a new legal basis, it is of great important to engage in reconciliation,' she said.

Although having a KKR, would not alone resolve the human rights violations that occur in Papua, the creation of such a body would be a positive sign from the central government of its desire to resolve the conflict openly and with dignity.

But in addition, the Indonesian government needs to take action on social reconciliation as an essential part of efforts to transform the conflict in Papua. Unless there is widespread reconciliation, any efforts towards achieving a peaceful solution will only be temporary.

"Such efforts would only help to prevent open conflict. What is needed is reconciliation that can replace the resort to violence by non-violence, and strengthen the nature of democracy in Papua' she said.

LIPI believes that the formation of KKR is not simply a pledge contained in the Otsus law but a public indicator of the government's political commitment to reaching reconciliation in Papua.