Case Study: Dame Josephine Abaijah and Papuan Autonomy in the Independence of PNG

Background: Papua and New Guinea Before Independence

Papua and New Guinea were historically separate territories under colonial rule. The southern region, Papua, was a British (later Australian) colony, while the northern region, New Guinea, was a former German colony administered by Australia after World War I (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). In 1949 Australia joined the two administrations for convenience, but Papuans and New Guineans remained distinct in identity, legal status, and development. By the late 1960s and early 1970s, Australia was preparing both regions for a single nation’s independence, rather than as separate countries (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). This plan set the stage for tensions: many Papuans felt a distinct identity and feared being subsumed by the more populous New Guinea region without their consent. No referendum or separate consultation was offered to Papuans on whether they wished to join with New Guinea in a new state (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). This lack of consultation later became a core grievance of Papuan activists.

(File:Papua Region in Papua New Guinea.svg - Wikimedia Commons) Map showing the Papua region (in red) in the south of what would become Papua New Guinea. Papua was administered separately from New Guinea until 1949, and Papuans developed a distinct regional identity. (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence )

In the early 1970s, as Papua New Guinea (PNG) neared self-government, Papuan and New Guinean leaders had differing perspectives. Many emerging national leaders (like Michael Somare from New Guinea) were eager to form one unified country. However, some Papuans voiced concern that their region’s wishes and unique status were being overlooked. They noted that Papuans had been British subjects (with nominal Australian citizenship rights), whereas New Guineans were not, and argued this entitled Papuans to self-determination as a separate people (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ) (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). Early Papuan political figures had at times advocated for “Papua for Papuans” or even for Papua to remain with Australia, but these calls were largely ignored by colonial authorities (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). This was the backdrop against which a young Papuan woman named Josephine Abaijah entered the political scene.

Rise of Dame Josephine Abaijah and Papua Besena

Josephine Abaijah (born 1940) emerged as a leading voice for Papuan autonomy in the 1970s. In 1972, Abaijah made history as the first woman elected to PNG’s House of Assembly (the colonial legislature) (Josephine Abaijah - Wikipedia). She campaigned on slogans such as “a fair go for Papua” and “Papua for Papuans,” signaling her commitment to Papuan rights (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). Upon taking office, Abaijah immediately began advocating that Papua should not simply be merged with New Guinea on the path to independence (Josephine Abaijah - Wikipedia).

In June 1973, Abaijah founded the Papua Besena movement (the name “Papua Besena” translates roughly to “Papua Tribe” or “One People of Papua”) (Papua Besena - Wikipedia). Papua Besena started as a regional political party and social movement dedicated to Papuan autonomy and independence. Its core stance was that Papua should become a separate independent country, rather than being linked with New Guinea in one nation (Josephine Abaijah - Wikipedia) (Papua Besena - Wikipedia). The movement also opposed mass migration of New Guineans into Papua (Papua Besena - Wikipedia), reflecting fears that Papuans could become minorities on their own land. Abaijah’s message resonated with many Papuans, especially around the national capital area (Port Moresby) and nearby provinces, where colonial development had been centered.

Papua Besena drew on a sense of Papuan identity that was distinct from New Guineans. Abaijah and her supporters argued that their struggle was anti-colonial, not “secessionist” – in their view, Papuans were simply seeking the freedom to rule themselves, just as they would have if Papua had been separated from New Guinea at independence (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ) (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). Abaijah famously said her aim was to “wipe out all forms of colonialism in Papua – white colonialism and black colonialism – and to achieve a free and independent Papua for the Papuan people” (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). Here “white colonialism” referred to Australian rule, and “black colonialism” referred to the prospect of rule by New Guinean-led government in Port Moresby – a vivid illustration of Papuans’ fears of domination by the numerically larger New Guinean population.

Timeline of Abaijah’s Autonomy Campaign (1972–1977)

To understand Abaijah’s impact, it is useful to follow a timeline of key events during the push toward PNG’s independence:

• 1972 – Electoral Breakthrough: Josephine Abaijah wins a seat in the House of Assembly, representing a Central Province electorate. As the only woman in the legislature, she uses her platform to demand a “fair go” for Papua (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). She voices concerns about impending independence as a unified PNG and calls for Papuan rights to self-determination.

• June 1973 – Papua Besena Founded: Abaijah officially launches the Papua Besena movement/party after PNG attains self-government under Chief Minister Michael Somare. Papua Besena’s central goal is separate independence for Papua. It quickly gains support among Papuans disillusioned with the Somare government’s insistence on unity (Josephine Abaijah - Wikipedia) (Papua Besena - Wikipedia).

• 1974 – Local Election Success: Papua Besena demonstrates its popular support in local elections. In the Port Moresby City Council elections of 1974, Papua Besena candidates win a landslide victory, taking control of the city council (Papua Besena - Wikipedia). (Port Moresby, the capital, is in Papuan territory, so this was a strong barometer of Papuan sentiment.) By late 1974, Papua Besena’s influence is evident across Papua – refuting claims by Somare that the movement was just a small fringe (“liklik lain”, meaning “small group”) (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ).

• February 25, 1975 – Council Demands Independence: The Papua Besena-dominated Port Moresby City Council passes a formal resolution supporting independence for Papua (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). This act by an elected local body signals that Papuan leaders are formally pressing the issue. It puts additional pressure on both the Australian administration and Somare’s local government to address Papuan concerns.

• March 16, 1975 – Unilateral Declaration of Papuan Independence: Abaijah takes the boldest step of her campaign. In a public ceremony in Port Moresby, she unilaterally declares Papua’s independence from Australia (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). The event is rich in symbolism: Abaijah presents a collection of items (a hunting knife, a piece of calico cloth, tobacco sticks, ship’s biscuits, and an axe) – replicas of gifts given by colonial administrators to Papuan leaders in 1884 when Papua was first annexed (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). She then dramatically announces, “Take them back, Australia – we wish you well, but we are free now and we claim our own land for ourselves.” (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ) In front of an orderly crowd of Papuans singing a Papuan “national anthem,” she lowers the Australian flag and raises the red, white and blue Papua Besena flag as a symbol of a new nation (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). A delegation even delivers the returned “annexation gifts” to the Australian High Commissioner with the message, “We are going to take back the land that belongs to us.” (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). This event is effectively a Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) for Papua – meant to assert Papuan rights before PNG’s official independence.

• Mid-1975 – Rejection and PNG Independence: Abaijah’s declaration, while dramatic, has no legal force. The Australian authorities and the PNG leadership do not acknowledge Papua’s “independence.” Chief Minister Somare and his government pointedly ignore the UDI and continue with plans for a unified PNG (Papua Besena - Wikipedia). On September 16, 1975, the Independent State of Papua New Guinea is proclaimed, encompassing both Papua and New Guinea. Papua’s unilateral bid for sovereignty is effectively overshadowed by the birth of the new nation. (Notably, in the weeks around PNG’s independence, another region – Bougainville – also attempted secession, declaring the Republic of the North Solomons. Bougainville’s leaders, however, soon entered negotiations with PNG, whereas Papua Besena remained uncompromising in its stance (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ) (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ).)

• February 1976 – Electoral Strength Continues: Even after PNG’s independence, Papua Besena continues to enjoy support among Papuans. In a February 1976 by-election for the Central Regional seat, the Papua Besena-backed candidate, James Mopio, wins a resounding victory over a pro-unity Papuan candidate (Moi Avei of Somare’s party) (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). This is a reminder that Papuan separatist sentiment has not disappeared with independence; voters still rally behind Papua Besena’s cause.

• 1977 – National Elections: In PNG’s first post-independence general election (1977), Papua Besena participates as a political party. The party wins six seats in Parliament, sweeping all constituencies in Port Moresby and Central Province (Papua Besena - Wikipedia) – areas with predominantly Papuan populations. Josephine Abaijah herself is re-elected to Parliament (now as the National Capital District representative) (Dame Josephine Abaijah - Pacific Women in Politics) (Dame Josephine Abaijah - Pacific Women in Politics). This electoral success gives Papua Besena a small but significant bloc in the young nation’s legislature, showing that the movement has transitioned into a parliamentary force even after the failed UDI.

• Late 1970s – Shift to Provincial Autonomy: In 1978–1979, PNG introduces a system of provincial governments, partly in response to separatist pressures. When the first provincial elections are held, Papua Besena wins control of the Central Provincial Government in 1979 (Papua Besena - Wikipedia). This suggests that some of Papua Besena’s goals shifted toward working within PNG’s new decentralization framework to safeguard Papuan interests.

• 1980 – Papua Besena in Coalition Government: By 1980, the Papua Besena party joins a governing coalition under Prime Minister Julius Chan (who replaces Somare in a vote of no-confidence) (Papua Besena - Wikipedia). Abaijah and her allies, while still advocating for Papua, now also engage in the practical politics of running the country. This move into the government indicates a strategic decision to pursue Papuan rights within the PNG political system.

• 1980s – Decline of the Movement: After the early 1980s, Papua Besena’s influence wanes. The party’s parliamentary seats drop to three in the 1982 elections, and by 1987 it loses all its seats (Papua Besena - Wikipedia). Abaijah herself loses her seat in 1982. Without representation, the separatist agenda loses momentum in national politics. Papua Besena does not contest further elections after the 1980s (Papua Besena - Wikipedia), marking the end of its role as an organized political force. (Josephine Abaijah would later make a comeback as an independent politician in 1997, but by then Papua Besena as a movement was largely dormant.)

Reactions of Authorities and Attempts at Dialogue

Colonial Australian authorities and the emerging PNG government both reacted coolly to Abaijah’s campaign. Australia’s official stance was firmly against splitting Papua from New Guinea. In early 1971 the Australian Administration explicitly declared that Papua and New Guinea would go to self-government and independence as one nation, dismissing any notion of separate independence (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). When Abaijah and others raised Papuan concerns, Australian officials largely ignored these pleas. There were no referendums or special councils established by Australia to gauge Papuan opinion on the union; the transition to independence moved forward without Papuan consent as a distinct group (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ).

Michael Somare’s PNG government-in-waiting was similarly unyielding. Somare, who became Chief Minister in 1973 and Prime Minister at independence, viewed national unity as paramount. He tended to dismiss Papua Besena. In March 1975, when Abaijah declared Papuan independence, Somare reacted with irritation. He famously referred to Abaijah in Parliament as “the mentally ill member” and labeled Papua Besena a “liklik lain” (Tok Pisin for “small group”) (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). These derogatory remarks showed the frustration of Somare and other leaders; they were trying to hold a fledgling nation together and saw Abaijah’s actions as disruptive.

Importantly, no formal negotiations took place between Abaijah’s movement and the central government before independence. Abaijah repeatedly called for a referendum to let Papuans decide their political future (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ) (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). Somare flatly refused at the time. He initially said he would not permit a referendum “at any price,” later adding that one could only happen if the national parliament (dominated by New Guineans) approved it – an unlikely scenario (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). In short, Papuan demands for a vote or special status were denied. When Abaijah staged the unilateral independence ceremony in 1975, the Australian High Commission simply received her delegation politely but took no action, and the event was treated as symbolic. Papua Besena’s declaration was effectively ignored by both Canberra and Port Moresby authorities (Papua Besena - Wikipedia).

In the years immediately after independence, PNG’s government kept a close eye on secessionist sentiments but generally opted for political measures rather than heavy-handed repression. Since Papua Besena’s campaign was peaceful and mostly constitutional (participating in elections, etc.), the government did not resort to force against it. Instead, PNG addressed some underlying issues through policy: for example, creating provincial governments in 1977 gave regions like Papua more local autonomy and stake in the system. This move was partly influenced by the unrest in Bougainville, but it also helped placate Papuan leaders by devolving some power.

Not all Papuan leaders sided with Abaijah. Many prominent Papuans, such as Sir John Guise (who became PNG’s first Governor-General), remained loyal to the idea of one Papua New Guinea. This internal division among Papuans meant Papua Besena never had unanimous support even within Papua. Still, Abaijah had a strong following, and Papua Besena’s persistence forced the PNG leadership to acknowledge regional inequalities. Somare’s government, while refusing secession, often had to reassure Papuans that they would not be dominated or robbed of land by “outsiders” from New Guinea.

The Symbolic 1975 Declaration of Papuan Independence

The 16 March 1975 declaration stands out as the high point of Abaijah’s campaign. Though it did not create a new nation in a legal sense, it was rich in symbolism and significance. By reenacting the colonial annexation ritual in reverse – handing back the tokens of colonial rule – Abaijah was sending a message that Papuans were undoing the colonial “contract” on their own terms (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ) (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). The lowering of the Australian flag and raising of the Papua Besena flag, accompanied by Papuan songs, created an emotional assertion of Papuan nationhood (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). In effect, Abaijah declared Papua to be independent several months before PNG’s official independence, hoping to stake Papuans’ claim before it was too late.

The immediate outcomes of the ceremony were entirely symbolic. No country recognized Papuan independence, and Australia did not respond with any official acknowledgment. The event did, however, galvanize many Papuans. It demonstrated Abaijah’s bold leadership and brought international media attention to dissent within PNG (however briefly). Some observers at the time noted that Papua Besena had awakened Papuan nationalism in a way that could not be completely ignored (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ) (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). Indeed, the very next day, Somare’s government had to reassure the public that the situation was under control. Most ordinary people in Port Moresby went about life normally, but they were aware of the declaration – it was a talking point across the city (Papua New Guinea Review - jstor).

Historians often compare this Papuan Unilateral Declaration of Independence to other secession attempts. One key comparison is with Bougainville’s later unilateral declaration in September 1975. Bougainville’s attempt came just before PNG’s independence day and was driven by control of mining revenues, whereas Abaijah’s was months earlier and driven by historical identity. Both were ignored by the central government (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ), but they planted seeds for future conflicts (in Bougainville’s case, a violent decade-long rebellion; in Papua’s case, a lingering political discontent). In PNG’s narrative of independence, Abaijah’s 1975 declaration remains a footnote – often overshadowed by the triumphant raising of the PNG national flag on 16 September 1975. However, for Papuans who participated in or remember the event, it was a proud assertion of their rights, sometimes referred to as the moment Papua “set itself free,” albeit without success.

Impact and Legacy of Abaijah’s Efforts

Dame Josephine Abaijah’s struggle for Papuan autonomy left a complex legacy in Papua New Guinea’s political and cultural landscape. Politically, her movement did not achieve an independent Papua, but it had several lasting effects:

• Papuan Representation and Autonomy: Papua Besena’s agitation ensured that Papuan voices were heard in the formative years of PNG. The fact that PNG adopted a decentralized system with provincial governments by 1977 was in part a response to concerns like those raised by Abaijah (and by Bougainville) (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). This gave Papuan provinces a measure of self-governance and local control over their affairs, addressing some of Papua Besena’s grievances through compromise rather than separation.

• National Unity vs. Regionalism: Abaijah’s campaign tested the strength of PNG’s national unity at its birth. The central government’s ability to weather the Papua Besena challenge (without resorting to violence) set an important precedent for how PNG handled regional cleavages. It demonstrated a preference for dialogue and political solutions over force in dealing with internal dissent. In later years, this approach would be echoed in the peaceful resolution of some conflicts (though not all – Bougainville’s crisis in the late 1980s turned violent). Papua Besena thus influenced PNG’s political culture by highlighting the need to accommodate diversity.

• Papuan Identity and Pride: Culturally and socially, Abaijah’s efforts strengthened a sense of Papuan identity. She and her movement articulated what it meant to be Papuan – distinct from other PNG ethnic groups. Papuans rallied around symbols like the Papua Besena flag and the notion of being a “Papua tribe” unified by shared history. This pride did not vanish after the movement’s decline. To this day, many Papuans continue to identify strongly with their region and celebrate their unique heritage within PNG. For example, the term “Papua Besena” itself became synonymous with Papuan unity; it gave Papuans a collective name for themselves in the political arena. As one analysis noted, Papua Besena essentially invented a political identity for Papuans as one people, even though Papua is internally diverse in languages and cultures (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ) (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ).

• Avoidance of Violence: A crucial aspect of Abaijah’s legacy is that her movement remained peaceful. Unlike the Bougainville separatists who eventually took up arms, Papua Besena chose ballots over bullets. Abaijah consistently urged non-violence and worked through elections and legal forums (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ). This meant that, although Papua Besena didn’t win independence, it also did not result in bloodshed or long-term instability in Papua. The Papuan separatist cause largely subsided by the mid-1980s, allowing PNG’s nation-building to proceed without a civil war in the south. In hindsight, Papuan integration into PNG has been relatively smooth, and Abaijah is often credited with restraining her followers from extreme actions, even when frustrated.

• Continued Debate on Decolonization: Abaijah’s arguments raised enduring questions about the nature of PNG’s decolonization. She highlighted that Papua’s union with New Guinea was “forged” without Papuan consent (PAPUA BESENA BACK IN NEWS - Post Courier) (PAPUA BESENA BACK IN NEWS - Post Courier). Decades later, these legal-historical points are occasionally revisited in academic and political discourse. In recent years, with Bougainville voting in a referendum for independence (in 2019) after its armed conflict, some Papuans have pointed out that they never had a similar referendum (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ) (PAPUA BESENA BACK IN NEWS - Post Courier). Abaijah herself never fully gave up her cause: in the 2010s she renewed appeals, even petitioning the British Crown to revisit Papua’s status, citing the 1884 protectorate agreements and the promise that Papuans could “report grievances” to the Queen (PAPUA BESENA BACK IN NEWS - Post Courier) (PAPUA BESENA BACK IN NEWS - Post Courier). While these efforts have not led to any formal change, they show that the idea of Papuan self-determination has persisted in some quarters. Papua Besena, as one journalist wrote, remained “a thorn in the side” – not powerful enough to alter the state, but never completely disappearing (PAPUA BESENA BACK IN NEWS - Post Courier) (PAPUA BESENA BACK IN NEWS - Post Courier).

• Inspiration and Trailblazing: As a pioneering female leader and an outspoken advocate, Dame Josephine Abaijah herself became an icon. She was later honored with the title “Dame” for her public service, reflecting national respect. Her career inspired other women in PNG politics and showed that even a lone voice can influence national debate. Among Papuans, she is revered by many as “Mama Papua” (Mother of Papua) for championing their rights. The cultural impact of seeing a Papuan woman stand up to powerful figures like Somare was significant in a traditionally male-dominated society.

Today, Papua New Guinea remains one nation, and the Papua region continues to be an integral part of it. The separatist fervor of the 1970s has largely mellowed. Most young Papua New Guineans view themselves as part of one country, though they may still identify by region. The issues Abaijah highlighted – regional inequality, land rights, identity – have been addressed in part through development programs and political representation, but some disparities remain. For instance, the Highlands (in New Guinea) have grown in political influence due to population, which occasionally fuels quiet resentment among Papuans. However, open calls for Papuan independence are rare now, limited to small groups or elder activists. Abaijah’s legacy, therefore, is a mixed one: she did not achieve the dream of an independent Papua, but she succeeded in ensuring that Papuan identity and grievances could not be simply brushed aside in the making of the PNG nation. Her story is a reminder of the diverse aspirations present at PNG’s birth and the importance of inclusive dialogue in holding such a diverse country together.

Conclusion

In summary, Dame Josephine Abaijah’s advocacy for Papuan autonomy during PNG’s march to independence is a remarkable case of peaceful dissent in a decolonization process. It unfolded in a unique historical context – two territories being combined into one country – and her Papua Besena movement gave voice to those who felt left out of that union. Through a clear timeline of events, from her 1972 election to the symbolic 1975 declaration and beyond, we see a determined effort to assert Papuan rights. The lack of formal consultation with Papuans prior to independence was a catalyst for her movement, and although neither the Australian nor PNG governments acquiesced to her demands, they had to respond in other ways. The 1975 unilateral declaration, while not achieving legal independence, became a powerful symbol of Papuan nationalism.

Abaijah’s efforts have had lasting political and cultural impacts: they influenced PNG’s approach to regional autonomy, fostered Papuan pride, and left a legacy of non-violent advocacy. Today Papua New Guinea stands unified, but the story of Papua Besena remains a key chapter in its history – illustrating the challenges of creating national unity amid regional identities. For students of history and politics, this case study highlights how independence movements can take different forms (not always armed rebellion, as Abaijah’s example shows) and how new nations must navigate the delicate balance between unity and diversity. Dame Josephine Abaijah’s campaign ultimately reminds us that the desire for self-determination can persist even after a nation is formed, and that true independence is not only about flags and anthems, but also about ensuring all peoples feel heard in the new nation (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ) (PAPUA BESENA BACK IN NEWS - Post Courier). Her legacy lives on in the ongoing conversations about identity, governance, and the meaning of independence in Papua New Guinea.

Sources: Historical accounts and academic analyses were used to compile this case study, including the writings of Ralph R. Premdas on the Papua Besena movement (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ) (The Crown Possession of Papua | Papuan Independence ), contemporary news reports (e.g., Time magazine and PNG’s Post-Courier), and Papua New Guinea’s own historical records (Papua Besena - Wikipedia) (PAPUA BESENA BACK IN NEWS - Post Courier). These sources provide a factual basis for understanding the chronology and significance of Abaijah’s struggle within the broader context of PNG’s independence.