PAPUA – Ahead of the anniversary of the Federal State of the Republic of West Papua (NFRPB) on October 19, 2026, the narrative about the declaration of independence announced by the group in 2011 is circulating again on social media. However, the claim for the formation of the country needs to be seen in the context of history and international documents, including United Nations General Assembly Resolution Number 2504 (XXIV) of November 19, 1969, as well as the fact that the NFRPB has not gained international recognition as a sovereign country.
In its official document, Resolution 2504 discusses the Agreement between Indonesia and the Netherlands regarding West Papua or West New Guinea (West Irian). The UN General Assembly recorded the report of the Secretary General regarding the implementation of duties under the 1962 New York Agreement and appreciated the fulfillment of duties by the Secretary General and his representatives. The resolution also noted that both parties to the agreement had accepted the results of the People’s Opinion Determination (Pepera) and stated that they would comply with it.
The document is one of the important international references in the history of Papua’s integration to Indonesia. However, the sound of the resolution needs to be quoted appropriately: Resolution 2504 does not literally state that Papua “is part of the Republic of Indonesia”, but rather records the report and results of the process based on the New York Agreement. The complete document is available through the UN Digital Library.
Views on the status of Papua have also been conveyed by a number of Indonesian figures through media coverage. The Chairman of Commission I of the House of Representatives of the Republic of Indonesia at that time, Mahfudz Siddiq, in the ANTARA report on August 4, 2011 emphasized that Indonesia’s position regarding Papua was based on, among others, the results of Pepera and UN Resolution 2504. He stated, “The result of the People’s Opinion Determination (Pepera) is valid according to the 1962 New York Agreement and this Pepera has been ratified by the United Nations General Assembly through Resolution 2505, on November 19, 1969.”
A similar view was also conveyed by Ramses Ohee, one of the figures involved in the history of Pepera. In the ANTARA news on April 30, 2015, Ramses stated, “Papua has legally been legally in the lap of the motherland, to the Republic of Indonesia through Pepera which was carried out on May 1, 1969 and has been ratified by the United Nations.” The statement is the view of Ramses as a historical actor, while the reference to his international document can be examined through the official text of Resolution 2504.
On the other hand, the NFRPB anniversary scheduled for October 19, 2026 refers to the declaration announced by Forkorus Yaboisembut on October 19, 2011. Based on the digital media monitoring report that became the material for the preparation of this narrative, the warning material said that NFRPB has not yet gained international recognition and is still in process. Thus, the declaration and use of state titles or symbols by the group does not in itself prove that the NFRPB has been recognized as a sovereign state by the international community.
Claims regarding the registration of the NFRPB declaration to the UN Security Council also need to be distinguished from diplomatic recognition. In the reviewed report, the registration claim is sourced from the statement of the NFRPB itself. Registration or submission of documents to an international institution does not automatically mean that the institution recognizes a group as a country.
Although there are different views regarding the Pepera 1969 process, the official document of Resolution 2504 remains the primary source that needs to be used as a reference when discussing the process. A number of parties, including groups supporting Papuan independence, are still questioning the representation and implementation of Pepera. Human Rights Watch, for example, noted that many Papuans and other parties judged that the process did not take place freely, while the Indonesian government based its position on Pepera’s results and acceptance of the results in the United Nations process.
Therefore, the discussion about the history and status of Papua needs to be based on documents that can be verified, not solely on posters, unilateral declarations, or claims on social media. Resolution 2504, the New York Treaty, the UN Secretary General’s report, and credible historical sources need to be read in full so that the public can distinguish document facts, figures’ views, and political claims.
Ahead of the anniversary of October 19, the delivery of accurate and open information is important so that the public can understand the historical context thoroughly. Differences in views on the future of Papua also need to be conveyed peacefully, while still respecting the rights of the community, avoiding misleading information, and prioritizing dialogue and mutual order.
