Indonesia, West Papua – On 19 November 2025, judges at the Makassar District Court in Makassar City, South Sulawesi Province, sentenced four Papuan political prisoners from Sorong City to seven months' imprisonment on treason charges.
The four activists, Mr Abraham Goram Gaman, Mr Maksi Sangkek, Mr Piter Robaha, and Mr Nikson Mai, were convicted under Article 106 jo. Article 55(1) of the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP) for allegedly taking part in a plan to "separate a part of the territory of the Republic of Indonesia". Human rights defenders have raised concerns over the criminalisation of peaceful political expression and efforts to pursue peace dialogue on the West Papua Conflict.
The verdict came after months of proceedings marked by the transfer of the trial from Sorong to Makassar, delays, and reports of intimidation of families and supporters. Although the seven-month sentence is one month lower than the eight months requested by the public prosecutor, defence lawyers emphasised that the trial failed to establish any act of violence, incitement, or concrete steps towards treason.
Defence counsel Yan Christian Warinussy stated that, while he respected the court's decision institutionally, he fundamentally disagreed with the verdict because the facts established at trial did not support the prosecutor's allegations. He stressed that his clients were effectively "messengers", delivering letters calling for peaceful dialogue between the Indonesian president and the leadership of the Federal Republic of West Papua (NFRPB).
The panel of judges argued that the activists' actions had "the potential to disturb the stability and sovereignty of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia", although acknowledging mitigating factors such as their cooperative attitude, family responsibilities, admission of guilt, and lack of prior convictions.
Background: Arrest and indictment in Sorong, Southwest Papua
On 14 April 2025, the four NFRPB activists visited government offices in Sorong City peacefully. They delivered a letter on NFRPB letterhead addressed to the Governor of Southwest Papua, wearing NFRPB "federal police" and "federal military" uniforms, but being unarmed. The letter requested the governor to facilitate peace talks between President Prabowo Subianto and NFRPB President Forkorus Yaboisembut, seeking a peaceful resolution to the long-standing conflict in West Papua.
Approximately two weeks later, in late April 2025, Sorong City Police issued summonses to the four men. On 28 April 2025, they were arrested and charged with treason. Investigators relied on Article 106 KUHP (treason/separatism) in conjunction with Article 110 KUHP (conspiracy against the State) and Article 55 KUHP (participation in a criminal act), arguing that the letter and associated activities constituted a criminal conspiracy to separate West Papua from the territory of Indonesia. The four were detained, and their pre-trial detention was extended several times.
On 11 August 2025, the police transferred the case file and the detainees to the public prosecutor, who continued detaining the activists. The first hearing at Sorong District Court was scheduled for 27 August 2025, with the reading of the indictment. However, local authorities requested the transfer of the venue to the Makassar District Court in South Sulawesi, citing "security and other reasons". On the morning of 27 August 2025, under heavy police and military escort, the four detainees were flown from Sorong to Makassar.
The decision to transfer the trial was reportedly based on a request from the Sorong City Regional Leadership Coordination Forum (Forkopimda) to the Supreme Court and triggered public protests in Sorong. From the evening of 26 August 2025 through 27 August 2025, solidarity groups protested in front of Sorong City Police Headquarters, opposing the transfer and demanding that the four be tried locally. Tensions escalated on 27 August, with clashes between protesters and police, the use of tear gas, stone-throwing, and damage to government buildings, including the residence of the Governor of West Papua. Police reportedly arrested protestersand shot down one bystander during the crowd control operation. Between 27 and 30 August 2025, security forces carried out a series of arbitrary arrests and home searches linked to the protests against the transfer.
Trial process in Makassar, South Sulawesi
In Makassar, the four men were brought before the Makassar District Court on 28 August 2025. Their lawyer had only been informed of the transfer and hearing schedule at the last minute and was still in West Papua when the indictment was read at the Makassar Court. He advised the defendants by phone from their detention centre in Makassar to exercise their right to legal representation and request a postponement. The panel of judges therefore adjourned the reading of the indictment to 8 September 2025.
On 8 September 2025, amid tight security and the deployment of barbed wire around the court complex, the Makassar District Court held the indictment hearing. Outside, Papuan students and youths organised solidarity demonstrations, demanding the release of the four political prisoners and denouncing the treason charges as unfounded. The Prosecutor based the indictment largely on the letter and annexes delivered on 14 April 2025.
Subsequent hearings, including those on 30 September and 7 October 2025, heard testimony from prosecution witnesses. According to observers and student solidarity groups, the witnesses testified that the four men did not carry weapons, did not incite the public, and delivered letters peacefully to government offices.
Throughout September and October, the trial was characterised by repeated postponements, inflicting additional psychological pressure on the defendants. On 30 October 2025, the University and High School Student Papua People's Solidarity Forum/Papuan People's Concern (FSPM-PRP) in Makassar staged a demonstration in front of the Makassar District Court. The protesters condemned the misuse of treason articles as "systematic criminalisation"
Human rights and legal analysis
According to various witness testimonies, the four NFRPB activists engaged in peaceful political activity. They drafted and delivered a letter requesting the facilitation of peace talks between the Indonesian government and the NFRPB leadership. All were unarmed, did not incite violence, and operated transparently, using official NFRPB letterhead and uniforms that openly identified their political affiliation.
Criminalising such conduct as "treason" is inconsistent with Indonesia's obligations under international human rights law and its own constitutional framework. Peaceful advocacy for political change, including self-determination, is protected under the right to freedom of expression, the right to freedom of association and peaceful assembly, and the right to participate in public affairs.
By prosecuting and convicting the four men under treason provisions merely for delivering a letter and expressing political aspirations, the authorities send a repressive message that peaceful advocacy regarding the conflict in West Papua may be punished as a serious criminal offence. This aligns with a broader pattern documented by human rights organisations, which have recorded dozens of cases of "politicisation of treason" articles in West Papua since 2019. This pattern suggests that treason laws are being deployed as a political tool to stigmatise Papuan dissent as separatism, rather than as a narrowly tailored response to genuine threats involving violence or incitement.
The charges against the four men relied on Article 106 KUHP (makar – treason) and Article 110 KUHP (conspiracy), in conjunction with Article 55 KUHP (participation). Under international standards, treason and national security offences must be interpreted restrictively, and their application must be limited to acts involving actual or imminent violence or genuine threats to the stability and survival of the state. Treating the drafting and delivery of political documents as "treason" stretches these provisions beyond a permissible interpretation and is incompatible with the principle of legality (nullum crimen sine lege), which requires that criminal offences be clearly and narrowly defined.
The cases raise serious concerns regarding the fairness of the proceedings and the defendants' effective enjoyment of the right to a fair trial. The case was transferred from Sorong, Southwest Papua Province, to Makassar, South Sulawesi Province, on security grounds under Articles 85-87 of the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP). Human rights defenders and local activists argue that Sorong was relatively stable and well-secured, challenging the necessity and proportionality of the transfer. Moving the trial hundreds of kilometres away from the defendants' home region significantly hampered family access, local monitoring, and public scrutiny.
The defence lawyer was reportedly notified of the transfer and initial hearing schedule only at very short notice, preventing him from being present at the first hearing in Makassar. Defendants then had to request a postponement because they had no lawyer physically present. In serious criminal cases carrying potential sentences of five years or more, such as treason, Indonesian law itself requires legal representation.
The combination of a distant trial venue, late notice, extended pre-trial detention, and repeated delays may amount to violations of the right to be tried without undue delay, the right to adequate time and facilities to prepare a defence, and the right to access counsel of choice.