Leaders call for a return to Pancasila

HEADLINESWed, 05/25/2011 7:00 AM

Leaders call for a return to Pancasila

Bagus BT Saragih, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

Re-energizing: Constitutional Court chief Mahfud MD (left) hosts a talk Tuesday on the revitalization of state ideology Pancasila, which was also attended by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (second left), Vice President Boediono (second right) and People’s Consultative Assembly Speaker Taufik Kiemas. JP/Wendra Ajistyatama

President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and the heads of seven key state institutions agreed to “strengthen” the state ideology Pancasila amid fears of rising radicalism among the nation’s youth.

“All state institutions are committed to actively strengthening Pancasila as the nation’s ideology according to each institution’s role, position and authority,” Constitutional Court chief justice Mahfud MD said in a joint statement following a meeting attended by the President, House of Representatives Speaker Marzuki Alie, Regional Representatives Council Speaker Irman Gusman, Supreme Court chief justice Harifin Tumpa, Judicial Commission chief Eman Suparman, State Audit Agency chief Hadi Purnomo and People’s Consultative Assembly Speaker Taufik Kiemas.

The meeting comes on the heels of several alleged attempts to “degrade” the values of Pancasila by hard-line Islamic groups campaigning for the creation of an Islamic state.

“Pancasila has been sidelined from people’s way of life, so a collective awareness from all national elements is needed to revive the state ideology,” the joint statement read.

Recently, fears of radicalism have abounded with extremists preaching radical religious and political ideologies that threaten pluralism and tolerance in the country. Radicalism has also reportedly been “detected” among university students following police investigations in recent acts of terrorism.

During Soeharto’s New Order, Pancasila was imposed by coercion. It was taught in schools as part of the government’s effort to forcibly embed the values of Pancasila among students.

When the New Order fell in 1998, old ideologies repressed by Soeharto reemerged and Pancasila has since become less relevant. This has proven costly for the nation, which has been hit by a series of terror attacks and witnessed increasing incidents of violence against religious minorities.

Pepi Fernando, a former member of the outlawed radical movement Indonesian Islamic State (NII), allegedly orchestrated a plan to plant a bomb next to a gas pipeline near a Protestant church in Serpong, Banten. The bomb was disarmed by the National Police. The police later responded by launching a nationwide crackdown on the group, and in the process uncovered alleged attempts by the NII to kidnap, recruit and brainwash university students in several regions.

In another example, members of the Ahmadiyah Islamic sect have been the recipients of increasing threats across the country. Tensions came to a peak when three Ahmadis were murdered by a mob that attacked them in Cikeusik, Banten. The attackers are believed to be members of Islamic hard-line groups, but the government continues to dawdle on the issue.

All institutions attending the closed-door meeting agreed on three other points after discussing proposals to strengthen the role of the government and institutions in empowering Pancasila.

“Pancasila should be our ideology and inspiration in building the nation in a harmonious way and to keep from placing self interests of certain groups above common goals,” Mahfud said.

He added that all institutions agreed to implement the four pillars of the nation: Pancasila, the Constitution, the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia and the state slogan Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (Unity in Diversity) into the life of the nation.

“We need a national action plan for certain institutions to roll out and strengthen the values of Pancasila formally through education,” he said.

Copyright © 2008 The Jakarta Post - PT Bina Media Tenggara. All Rights Reserved
URL: www.thejakartapost.com/news/2011/05/25/leaders...pancasila.html

Government to Simplify Disbanding Mass Organizations

NEWS

Government to Simplify Disbanding Mass Organizations

Camelia Pasandaran | February 19, 2011

Little boy sells “Suara Islam” (“Islamic Voice”) tabloid during the FPI rally at Hotel Indonesia traffic circle on Friday. (Beritasatu Photo/Ulin Yusron)

Mamuju, West Sulawesi. In response to concerns over attacks on minority religious groups, the government is drafting a law that will make it easier to disband violent mass organizations, according to Home Affairs Minister Gamawan Fauzi.

“We’re revising the law, and this year it will be part of the national legislation program,” Gamawan told the Jakarta Globe on Saturday. “The new law is expected to be more strict and to shorten the time it takes to disband an organization.”

Under the current Mass Organization Law, there is a lengthy process required of collecting evidence of illegal behavior, followed by freezing the organization before disbanding it.

In increasingly harsh language, groups like the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) have issued ultimatums to the government demanding the disbanding of the minority Ahmadiyah sect and a halt to the building of Christian churches in many areas. Critics have said the FPI and others incite their followers to violence.

On Friday, FPI chairman Habib Riziq sadi in his weekly sermon that “Ahmadiyah must not exist in Indonesia.” He warned that unless the president forces Ahmadiyah out of existence there would be “revolution.”

Gamawan said that under the current law the government cannot not easily disband an organization, including ones like the FPI that plan to oust the president.

“It needs evidence, because if we did it without evidence, the government would be blamed for violating the law,” Gamawan said.

President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono recently called for the disbanding of violent organization following the deadly Feb. 6 attack on Ahmadiyah in West Java and a mob attack two days later in Central Java that burned churches.

Gamawan said the new law would give the government more authority to disband violent organizations quickly.

Copyright 2010 The Jakarta Globe
URL: www.thejakartaglobe.com/news/government.../423637

Blasphemy Law Review Demanded Amid Strife

HOME

Blasphemy Law Review Demanded Amid Strife

Ulma Haryanto | February 19, 2011

The Constitutional Court should now consider the consequences of upholding the 1965 Blasphemy Law, a top human rights watchdog has said, arguing that it should go, based on the recent evidence of the law’s complete failure to protect social harmony.

The Human Rights Working Group pointed out that recent nationwide displays of religious intolerance in the form of attacks and demonstrations since the start of the year alone were enough to once again review whether or not the Blasphemy Law was actually serving its purpose of keeping peace among Indonesians.

Last year, the Constitutional Court rejected a motion to revise or annul the 1965 law, saying the request had “no legal basis.”

The ruling was made by the nine-member panel of judges with one dissenting opinion.

The demand for a judicial review was filed by several human rights organizations, who had argued that the state should not restrict people’s right to freedom of worship.

Religious Affairs Minister Suryadharma Ali had publicly opposed the petitioners at the time, and warned that the law was needed to “maintain social harmony and prevent an explosion of new religions.”

The law was used in 2008 to force followers of the Islamic Ahmadiyah sect to go underground and has regularly been cited by minority groups as a justification for discrimination and intimidation.

“We want to appeal to the consciences of the Constitutional Court judges, who at one time said in their ruling that the law was necessary to keep the peace,” HRWG deputy chairperson Choirul Anam told the Jakarta Globe. “Look what’s happened. Attacks on religious minorities have instead increased, and continue to rise.”

Under the Constitution, six religions are officially recognized and protected by the state — Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Catholicism, Protestantism and Confucianism. The 1965 Blasphemy Law makes it illegal to “publicize, recommend or organize public support” for unorthodox versions of those six religions or other faiths.

Almost a year after the court’s ruling, representatives from a number of human rights organizations on Friday invited the public to discuss the impact of the ruling and the future of Indonesia’s struggle to express religious freedom.

Speaking alongside Choirul were Islamic scholar Azyumardi Azra, Rumadi from the Wahid Institute, Mansyur Zaini from the Coordinating Board for Monitoring Mystical Beliefs in Society (Bakor Pakem) and Zainal Abidin of the Institute for Policy Research and Advocacy (Elsam).

“It’s difficult to have unbiased public officers serving the public for the nation’s interests, and not their own religious beliefs, Choirul said.

“Even the Constitutional Court judges could not remain impartial during the hearing. Some judges referred to Koranic verses and hadiths [words and deeds of the Prophet Muhammad] at the time, which should not have been allowed since it was a discourse in the Constitutional Court, not [a recital of] religious scriptures,” Choirul said.

There have been a number of attacks against religious minorities in recent weeks. Most notably the killing of three Ahmadiyah followers in Banten, West Java, and attacks on churches in the Temanggung area of Central Java.

Azyumardi pointed to a recent dialog held between leaders of the Ahmadiyah community with House of Representatives VIII, which oversees religious affairs.

“I could see that a lot of political party members who claim to be secular turned out to be religiously biased,” Azyumardi said, adding that through those sessions alone he could see that not just major bodies like the Religious Affairs Ministry and the Indonesian Council of Ulema (MUI) had been infiltrated by hard-liners but also political parties.

Jakarta Legal Aid Foundation director Nurkholis Hidayat told of when he was attacked in March by the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI), following one of the Constitutional Court hearings.

“We were chased off. They asked us what our religion was. Even though I am a Muslim, they kept on shouting that we were infidels,” he said.

The gloomy outlook however, would not stop the organizations from advocating religious freedom at various levels, Choirul said.

“The next step will be to push the government and the legislative to draft a law on religious freedom, not religious harmony as has been discussed until now,” he said.

Copyright 2010 The Jakarta Globe
URL: www.thejakartaglobe.com/news/blasphemy...strife/423571

Judges Bowed to Fear in Blasphemy Ruling, Rights Activists Say

---Jakarta Globe, Indonesia    

April 20, 2010 | Camelia Pasandaran & Ulma Haryanto

Judges Bowed to Fear in Blasphemy Ruling, Rights Activists Say

Members of the Islamic Defenders Front rallying in front of the Constitutional Court in Jakarta against any changes to the controversial 1965 Blasphemy Law. (JG Photo/Yudhi Sukma Wijaya)

Indonesia’s Constitutional Court was guided by fear when it rejected a motion to revise the 1965 Blasphemy Law, critics from local and international human rights and civic organizations claimed on Tuesday.

The criticism came a day after the court ruled that the bid to review or annul the law, which recognizes only six religions, had no legal basis.

Pungky Indarti, from human rights watchdog Imparsial, said the judges had opted to take the safer, conservative route by neglecting the voices of the minority, whose rights were trodden on in the name of the law.

“The fear of anarchy stemming from the possible annulment of this law is baseless,” Pungky said. “If a conflict occurs, it is only because law enforcers are unable to prevent it from happening.”

The ruling was backed by seven members of the nine-member panel, with one dissenter.

The law makes it illegal to “publicize, recommend or organize public support” for non-orthodox versions of six religions recognized and protected by the state, but it does not stop followers of minor faiths, such as Sikhs.

New York-based Human Rights Watch said the ruling dealt a severe blow to religious freedom, and urged Indonesia to revoke the blasphemy law and other laws that infringed on the right to freedom of religion, belief and conscience.

“In 2006, a Jakarta court sentenced three leaders of a spiritual movement called the Eden Community – Lia Eden, M. Abdul Rachman and Wahyu Andito Putro Wibisono – to prison terms of two to three years for violating the blasphemy law,” said the group’s deputy director for Asia, Elaine Pearson. “The blasphemy law criminalizes the peaceful expression of certain religious beliefs. It hangs like a Sword of Damocles over the heads of religious minorities and those who practice traditional religions.”

Human Rights Watch praised Judge Maria Farida Indrati, who issued the sole dissenting opinion. Indrati said the law was a product of the past, and even if it was still valid according to the Constitution, it had been substantially weakened over the years with amendments made to the 1945 Constitution itself, particularly in respect to articles regarding human rights.

She said wrongful acts were being carried out against minority groups in its name and the articles in the law itself were in violation of the Constitution under amendments made in 1945 that explicitly guarantee freedom of religion.

In addition, Indrati said, under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Indonesia ratified in 2006, states are to respect the right to freedom of religion.

Ifdhal Kasim, the chairman of the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas Ham), said the court still followed the voice of the majority instead of focusing on the protection of human rights.

“The court’s image as an institution that provides constitutional protection to the people was not displayed through this ruling,” Ifdhal said.

The court still tends to favor the interests of larger groups, rather than individuals discriminated against by the law, he said.

The law was used in 2008 to force followers of the Islamic Ahmadiyah sect to go underground and is regularly cited by minority groups as a source of discrimination and intimidation.

Pressure also came in the form of an attack within the court’s compounds.

Members of the hard-line Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) assaulted four people in the court’s basement on the last day of arguments in the case.

But Syafi’i Anwar, of the International Center for Islam and Pluralism, said he chose to remain optimistic.

“The proceedings in the court itself were historic, with various testimonials delivered by a number of analysts and human rights activists,” Syafi’i said.

“As a human rights activist I am disappointed, and I think that this is a setback for protection of minority rights, but I think there will still be other ways to challenge the law.”

One of the review’s applicants, Hendardi, who chairs the Setara Institute for Democracy and Peace, suggested that President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and the House of Representatives consider drafting a bill focused on eliminating religious intolerance.

According to his institute, there were 291 reported cases of religious-based violence in 2009 nationwide, up from 265 cases in 2008.

Copyright 2010 The Jakarta Globe
URL: www.thejakartaglobe.com/news/judges-bowe...ivists-say/370604

Indonesia: Court Ruling a Setback for Religious Freedom

---Human Rights Watch

Indonesia: Court Ruling a Setback for Religious Freedom

Blasphemy Law Puts Religious Minorities at Risk
April 19, 20109

The Constitutional Court’s decision on the blasphemy law poses a real threat to the beliefs of Indonesia’s religious minorities. If President Yudhoyono is serious about promoting religious pluralism in Indonesia, he should work to have this law and others like it taken off the books. Elaine Pearson, deputy Asia director

(Jakarta) – Indonesia’s Constitutional Court dealt a severe blow to religious freedom by upholding a controversial law prohibiting “blasphemy,” Human Rights Watch said today. Human Rights Watch urged the Indonesian government to revoke this and other laws that infringe upon the rights to freedom of religion, belief, and conscience.

The court, in an 8-1 decision on April 19, 2010, ruled that the blasphemy law, which provides criminal penalties for those who express religious beliefs that deviate from the central tenets of the six officially recognized religions, is a lawful restriction of minority religious beliefs because it allows for the maintenance of public order.

“The Constitutional Court’s decision on the blasphemy law poses a real threat to the beliefs of Indonesia’s religious minorities,” said Elaine Pearson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “If President Yudhoyono is serious about promoting religious pluralism in Indonesia, he should work to have this law and others like it taken off the books.”

At the opening of the Sixth Assembly of the World Movement for Democracy on April 12, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono spoke with pride about Indonesia’s democratic development, proclaiming: “We in Indonesia have shown, by example, that Islam, democracy, and modernity can grow together. We are a living example that there is no conflict between a Muslim’s spiritual obligation to Allah SWT [and] his civic responsibility as a citizen in a pluralist society.”

The constitutional challenge to the blasphemy law was filed in October 2009 by a group of Indonesian nongovernmental organizations and individuals led by former president Abdurrahman Wahid, a longtime Muslim supporter of religious freedom and tolerance. The petitioners argued that the law violated the constitutional right to freedom of expression and Indonesia’s obligations under international human rights treaties.

Indonesia’s blasphemy law, article 156a of the Indonesian criminal code, punishes deviations from the central tenets of the six officially recognized religions with up to five years in prison. It is based on a 1965 government regulation, issued by then-President Sukarno, which declared that five religions were officially recognized in Indonesia: Islam, Protestantism, Catholicism, Buddhism, and Hinduism. Confucianism was added to this list in 1998.

The blasphemy law has been used to prosecute and imprison members of religious minorities and of traditional religions. In 2006, a Jakarta court sentenced three leaders of a spiritual movement called the Eden Community - Lia Eden, M. Abdul Rachman, and Wahyu Andito Putro Wibisono - to prison terms of two to three years for violating the blasphemy law. Others prosecuted under the law include members of the many traditional religions practiced in Java, Sumatra, Borneo, Sulawesi, and other parts of Indonesia.

“The blasphemy law criminalizes the peaceful expression of certain religious beliefs,” Pearson said. “It hangs like a ‘Sword of Damocles’ over the heads of religious minorities and those who practice traditional religions.”

The blasphemy law also serves as the legal basis for a number of government regulations that facilitate official discrimination on the basis of religion. These include a June 2008 government decree that ordered members of the Ahmadiyah religious community to cease all public religious activities on the grounds that they deviated from the principal teachings of Islam and threatened violators with up to five years in prison. The decree was issued in the aftermath of a violent attack on June 1, 2008, by more than 500 Islamist militants on a group of peaceful demonstrators supporting religious pluralism. More than 60 demonstrators were wounded by the group, who called themselves the Islam Troop Command, and several Ahmadiyah members were hospitalized.

Members of Islamist groups including the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) attended the Constitutional Court’s weekly hearings on the law. The group’s members are alleged to have led a violent attack on lawyers for the petitioners at the Constitutional Court building following the last court hearing on March 24.

While the court majority said that religion is a private matter with which the state should not interfere, it upheld the blasphemy law’s restrictions, finding that religious minorities could become targets of violence by intolerant members of the public who were not sufficiently educated to support religious pluralism. Top government officials who served as witnesses in the court’s examination, Suryadharma Ali, minister of religious affairs, and Patrialis Akbar, minister for law and human rights, both argued in favor of the constitutionality of the law, saying that if it were overturned, violent mobs would probably attack religious minorities.

Judge Maria Farida Indrati issued the sole dissenting opinion, arguing that the law should be found unconstitutional because it explicitly discriminated against religious minorities and would force individuals to abandon traditional and minority beliefs against their will.

“Indonesia’s laws should protect those who peacefully express religious views and punish those who threaten to use violence against others, not the other way around,” Pearson said. “If the government wants to prevent violence, it should send a message by punishing violent behavior.”

Indonesia’s 1945 constitution explicitly guarantees freedom of religion in article 28(E). Under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Indonesia ratified in 2006, states are to respect the right to freedom of religion. This right includes “freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.” Restrictions on the right to freedom of religion to protect public safety or order must be strictly necessary and proportional to the purpose being sought.

URL:  http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2010/04/19/ind...us-freedom

Demonstrations Planned Ahead of Blasphemy Verdict

---Jakarta Globe, Indonesia    

April 19, 2010

Demonstrations Planned Ahead of Blasphemy Verdict

A demonstration — most likely by members of the hard-line Islamic Defenders Front — can be expected outside the Constitutional Court on Jalan Merdeka Barat in Central Jakarta at 1 p.m., one hour before the court is due to deliver its verdict on the highly controversial 1965 Blasphemy Law.

On the final day of legal arguments on March 23, members of the organization, also known as the FPI, allegedly assaulted four people in the basement of the court building.

Sidik, a member of the petitioners’ legal team, also known as the Religious Freedom Advocacy Team, said he observed several men clad in the FPI’s Arabic-style uniforms intimidating colleagues Uli Sihombing and Nurkholis Hidayat near the cafeteria and prayer room during a two-hour lunch break.

All four were held with arms around their necks and punched and kicked by the FPI members.

Though the Traffic Management Center did not say on its Web site on Monday which groups would demonstrate, during the course of the trial, members of the FPI and Hizbut Tahrir — who are pushing for Shariah law — have held noisy protests outside the court, and often disrupted court proceedings with shouting.

With the court due to begin delivering its verdict at 2 p.m., a final decision may not be known till around 4 a.m., with any unrest likely to impact on peak hour traffic flows.

The 1965 law recognizes only six religions: Islam, Protestantism, Catholicism, Buddhism, Hinduism and Confucianism. Others are officially banned. It also prohibits alternative interpretations of recognized religions, including Islam.

The review was filed by human rights groups and the late former President Abdurrahman “Gus Dur” Wahid, who was also a longtime former chairman of Nahdlatul Ulama, Indonesia’s largest Muslim organization, on the grounds the law limits freedom of religion and is unconstitutional.

If the law is indeed declared unconstitutional, the impact will open the door for a number of religions to begin worshiping in Indonesia.

Copyright 2010 The Jakarta Globe
URL: www.thejakartaglobe.com/home/demonstrations-p...verdict/370250

House Roots for Upholding Blasphemy Law as it Stands

---Jakarta Globe, Indonesia    

April 19, 2010 | Anita Rachman & Amir Tejo

House Roots for Upholding Blasphemy Law as it Stands

Legislators overseeing religious affairs say they expect the Constitutional Court today to issue the “correct” verdict in regard to the 1965 Blasphemy Law — to dismiss the request for its review and put a stop to sensitive debate that has increased tensions between religious hard-liners and rights activists.

Abdul Kadir Karding, chairman of the House of Representatives’ Commission VIII, expressed his concern on Sunday over the possible social impact should the court agree to review or annul the law. Any change to the law, Abdul said, would lead to debate and trigger disharmony between religious groups.

“It would be hugely negative and the benefits minuscule if the law is to be reviewed,” the National Awakening Party (PKB) legislator told the Jakarta Globe.

After at least 12 hearings filled with controversy, the Constitutional Court is expected to rule at 2 p.m. today on a judicial review request filed by human rights groups.

“What if there are religions with only one or two followers conducting rituals, much like rituals in Islam or Christianity, but these people believe in neither Islam or Christianity?” Abdul said. “Of course people will get mad.”

Toward the end of March, members of the hard-line Islamic Defenders Front assaulted four people in the basement of the Constitutional Court on the last day of arguments in the case. The court’s chief, Mahfud MD, has himself made controversial statements linked to attempts to influence him, made by religious groups petitioning against the law’s annulment.

“As long as the statements are made within the courtroom hearings, we will accept them,” Mahfud previously said.

“Nothing outside is acceptable. If expert witnesses from Mecca are presented, we will accept them [in the courtroom]. Even if expert witnesses from hell are presented, we cannot refuse them.”

The 1965 Blasphemy Law recognizes only six religions: Islam, Protestantism, Catholicism, Buddhism, Hinduism and Confucianism. All others are officially banned.

House Commission VIII legislator Hasrul Azwar said on Sunday that the review of the law would “tarnish the sanctity” of the recognized religions. He said he understood that some groups believed the law violated the right to freedom of worship, but said no one should be allowed to defame a religion.

“In the case of the Ahmadiyah [minority sect], they say they are Muslims but that their last prophet is not Muhammad. That’s blasphemy,” the United Development Party (PPP) legislator said.

“Members of the entire House Commission VIII share the same beliefs as I do. [Any sane person] would want this law maintained as it is.”

In 2008, the government used the law to ban the Ahmadiyah, a minority Islamic sect, because its members held that its founder, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, was the last prophet of Islam, a claim that contradicts mainstream Muslim beliefs. [*]

Minister of Religious Affairs Suryadharma Ali has opposed the review of the law, arguing that putting no limits to the establishment of religions would result in people “openly declaring new prophets and angels.”

Ignatius Mulyono, chairman of the House Legislation Body, said legislators should prepare for the court’s outcome.

“If there are some articles annulled, the commission should make the changes required, and along with the government we will discuss it, irrespective of legislators’ own personal beliefs,” he said.

Mahfud on Sunday guaranteed that the court’s decision would be independent, and that the verdict would be based not on religious biases but the study of articles in the Constitution.

“I threw out all the letters from clerics and community groups that weren’t directly addressed to me during a court hearing,” he said.

“The court can only decide based on legal facts in a hearing. Beyond that, nothing else will be taken into consideration.”

Legislator Eva Kusuma Sundari, from the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), told the Globe that although she was not of the same opinion as her colleagues on Commission VIII, she was pessimistic the court would approve the review.

“The issue is not about justice, but power,” Eva said. “Consequently, once we ratified the law on human rights, we should work on related laws, including the blasphemy law.”

She said it was very unfair that the nation only recognized six religions, when one’s religious belief was a personal matter and people should be allowed to choose their own faith. She said the right to freedom of worship was a basic one that the state should respect.

* The statement is erroneous. Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian did not make any such claim of being last prophet. Please visit Alislam.org/messiah for further info.

Copyright 2010 The Jakarta Globe
URL : www.thejakartaglobe.com/news/house-roots-for-upho...stands/370204

Religion Minister Defends Indonesia’s Blasphemy Law

---Jakarta Globe, Indonesia    

March 24, 2010
Anita Rachman & Ulma Haryanto

Religion Minister Defends Indonesia’s Blasphemy Law

Makassar, South Sulawesi. Minister of Religious Affairs Suryadharma Ali on Wednesday sought the support of the country’s largest Islamic organization, the Nahdlatul Ulama, in maintaining the country’s 1965 Blasphemy Law, which is under review at the Constitutional Court.

“The consequences [if the law is annulled] are that people, figures, could establish new religions, declare new prophets, new angels,” Suryadharma told thousands of NU followers during the group’s 32nd national congress.

“It could be one that could trigger a harmony breakdown. I expect that NU could also [work] together to solve this problem,” he said.

Suryadharma shared a stage with Minister of National Education Mohammad Nuh in Wednesday’s congress to discuss religion and education issues in the country and in NU. He took the opportunity to enlist its support over the law.

The 1965 law recognizes only six religions: Islam, Protestantism, Catholicism, Buddhism, Hinduism and Confucianism. Others are officially banned. It also prohibits alternative interpretations of recognized religions, including Islam.

In 2008, the government used the law to formally ban Ahmadiyah, a minority Islamic sect, because members held that its founder, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, was the last prophet of Islam, a claim that contradicts mainstream Muslim beliefs. [*]

The Constitutional Court is currently reviewing the law following a demand for a review filed by human rights groups and the late former President Aburrahman “Gus Dur” Wahid, who was also a longtime former NU chairman.

The law “should be secured,” he told the plenary to the cheers of NU members attending the session. “Freedom doesn’t have to be absolute. There must still be rules.”

Suryadharma depicted a gloomy picture of conditions if the law was annulled. He said Islam and the Koran could be interpreted at will.

“Maintaining religious harmony is essential, and maintaining harmony within the same religion is already difficult nowadays. Maintaining NU is difficult. There are some that are [moving to the] left and some to the right,” he said, provoking laughter from audience members. “And it will be even more so if there are new religions.”

Meanwhile, at the Constitutional Court, W. Cole Durham Jr., a professor of law and director of the International Center for Law and Religion Studies at Brigham Young University in the United States, testified via video conference. He noted that Indonesia had agreed to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

“Indonesia thereby also accepted the obligation to protect freedom of expression, freedom of association, and equal protection under law, as well as to extend these protections to religious minorities,” Durham said.

He agreed that the challenged provisions in the law were not only inconsistent with international human rights standards, but also open to multiple interpretations.

Also testifying in favor of the plaintiffs were a host of legal and religious scholars and experts and former officials. A verdict will be delivered in mid-April.

The statement is erroneous. Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian did not make any such claim of being last prophet. Please visit Alislam.org/messiah for further info.

Copyright 2010 The Jakarta Globe

URL: www.thejakartaglobe.com/home/religion-mi...onesias-blasphemy-law/365540

Blasphemy law violates women’s rights: Commission

---The Jakarta Post, Indonesia

Headlines - Sat, 03/13/2010 11:06 AM

Blasphemy law violates women’s rights: Commission

Arghea Desafti Hapsari, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The law on blasphemy tramples on the rights of women, the National Commission on Violence Against Women (Komnas Perempuan) testified Friday in the judicial review of the 1965 law.

Commission chairwoman Yunianti Chuzzifah told the Constitutional Court her organization had received several reports from women who had been discriminated against because they were followers of religious sects and traditional beliefs not officially recognized by the government.

“The implementation of the 1965 Blasphemy Law … violates women’s constitutional right not to be discriminated against,” Yunianti said.

“Female members of some faiths and beliefs that aren’t recognized by the state can’t obtain an ID card unless they list one of the official religions [on the ID], which is done against their will.”

The commission testified in the review as a related party.

The Constitutional Court has so far held seven hearing in the review, filed by petitioners from NGOs and self-proclaimed supporters of pluralism in October last year.

Yunianti said many women from these unrecognized faiths had also been deprived of the right to a registered marriage.

“Children borne from the union are denied birth certificates because the mother isn’t considered an individual before the law,” she said.

“As the result, the children are denied the right to an education, or worse, suffer the stigma of being labeled illegitimate children.”

Such a situation, she added, clearly violated children’s right to grow and be free from violence and discrimination.

Yunianti cited cases of women from the Ahmadiyah sect bringing their case to her commission to tell of the hardship they endured with every attack on the group.

“They reported of being threatened with rape, and of being sexually harassed during attacks and when they took refuge,” she said.

“They also told of being fired from their jobs as teachers, and of their children getting second-class treatment from teachers.”

Her testimony was met with loud jeers from the gallery, mostly members of hard-line Islamic groups. The Ahmadiyah are deemed heretics by mainstream Muslims for recognizing sect founder Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a prophet.

Islamic teaching holds up Muhammad as the final prophet.

For years, Ahmadis have suffered attacks from various hard-line Muslim groups, including the fire-bombing of their mosques and homes.

Also testifying Wednesday was Jakarta Interfaith Communication Forum chairman Ahmad Syafi’i Mufid, who said that even in democracies, human rights and freedom of religion had their boundaries.

“One’s freedom to embrace a religion or belief is limited by the law, which prevails to maintain security, order, health and public morality, and to protect other people’s basic rights and freedom,” he said.

He called on the court to dismiss the review of the law, adding that if it were revised, the government must immediately issue a regulation-in-lieu-of-law of greater clarity and detail “so as to avoid misinterpretation which could lead to chaos and vigilantism”.

Culture analyst Emha Ainun Nadjib, testifying as an expert witness, said rescinding or retaining the law could both prove dangerous.

“If the law is repealed, it will create new conflicts and generate hatred,” he said. “But if it’s retained, there will always be anxiety.”

He added he would not recommend either choice unless “all of us pledge not to threaten one another”.

URL: www.thejakartapost.com/news/2010/03/13/blasphemy-...hts-commission.html

Raucous Crowd Churns Court at Hearing on Blasphemy Law

---Jakarta Globe, Indonesia    

Ulma Haryanto  - March 11, 2010

Raucous Crowd Churns Court at Hearing on Blasphemy Law
 

Heated debate and cries from a rowdy crowd marked Wednesday’s hearing in the judicial review of the 1965 Blasphemy Law, as leaders of the hardline Islamic Defenders Front and the conservative Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia took to the podium at the Constitutional Court to deliver their arguments in support of the law.

Packed with people wearing the uniforms of the Islamic Defenders Front, also known as the FPI, and Arabic-style outfits, the courtroom was filled with shouts of joy each time an Islamic leader took to the stand in support of the law, and jeers for plaintiffs who supported the review of the law.

Outside the courtroom at least 100 people from a number of conservative Islamic groups, calling themselves part of the Islamic People’s Forum (FUI), declared that they were against the judicial review, saying it was an effort by the court to “harass Islam.”

“I disagree with the view that the state should not interfere with religious matters. If it were left only to the people, it would be dangerous,” FPI leader Habib Rizieq Shihab told the court.

Habib said that prior violence toward followers of Ahmadiyah, a minority Islamic sect, was simply a result of “tardiness” on the part of the state, which had failed to act against the group in time.

“Look at Lia Eden. The government detained her immediately. But with the Ahmadiyah, the government did not do anything. So do not be surprised that the public took matters into their own hands with street justice,” he said. He was referring to jailed Kingdom of Eden sect leader Lia Aminuddin, who claimed to be the bride of the biblical figure Archangel Gabriel, who she said ordered that Islam and other religions be disbanded.

Indonesian law recognizes only six religions: Islam, Protestantism, Catholicism, Buddhism, Hinduism and Confucianism. All others are officially banned.

In 2008, the government used the Blasphemy Law to formally ban Ahmadiyah because the sect held that its founder, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, was the last prophet of Islam, a claim that contradicts mainstream Muslim beliefs. [*]

Habib also claimed that the judicial review was being used by more liberal Islamic followers to publish their own “critical interpretation” of the Koran.

“This is a big project for them. They are going to use Islamic hermeneutics to interpret the Koran, when hermeneutics is a method that is used to interpret the Bible,” he said.

Thahir Azhary, from the Islamic organization Al Irsyad Al Islamiyyah, also questioned the purpose of the judicial review.

“Are there foreign political interests at work here? Zionists? We cannot just import freedom from the Western world. Those non-Muslim Westerners only want to mislead us,” Thahir said.

At the hearing, the sixth in the review process, the Constitutional Court invited their own witnesses for the first time. They included Azyumardi Azra, dean of the graduate program at Jakarta’s Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University, and sociologist Thamrin Amal Tomagola, from the University of Indonesia.

According to Thamrin, sociology holds that religion is based on the fascination of everything mighty.

“Then it is institutionalized in three forms — religious teachings, ideologies and social groups. As a revelation, a religion is final, but as an ideological understanding, there can be multiple interpretations. It can never be final. Those forms are within the public realm and not under the state,” Thamrin said.

Thamrin said he doubted Habib’s opinion that eliminating the law would trigger rioting.

“This will not happen if the police are assertive in keeping public order, security and public convenience. The destruction of mosques, churches and other places of worship is about the security of people. It doesn’t have to be about religion,” he said.

Thamrin also stressed the importance of freedom in following their religion and faith.

“If there is someone who prays using Bahasa Indonesia, then let them. Everybody is entitled to perform their beliefs, as stated by the law. What is not allowed is if you ask other people, and they refuse, and then you use force,” he said.

The statement is erroneous. Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian did not make any such claim of being last prophet. Please visit Alislam.org/messiah for further info.

Copyright 2010 The Jakarta Globe
URL: www.thejakartaglobe.com/news/raucous-...blasphemy-law/363172

Indonesia’s Religious Ministry Names Hard-Line FPI Among ‘Misguided’ Islamic Sects

---Jakarta Globe, Indonesia    

March 03, 2010

Indonesia’s Religious Ministry Names Hard-Line FPI Among ‘Misguided’ Islamic Sects

The FPI is 'sometimes against correct Islamic teachings,' said a ministry official. (JG Photo/Yudhi Sukma Wijaya)In the wake of another case of allegedly “misguided” Islamic teachings that contravene the nation’s blasphemy law, the Ministry of Religious Affairs on Tuesday said there were about 70 potentially illegal sects in Indonesia, including the hard-line Islamic Defenders Front.

“We can also say that the Islamic Defenders Front [FPI] is one of the sects as sometimes they are against correct Islamic teachings,” said Rohadi Abdul Fatah, the ministry’s director of Islam and Shariah law.

Speaking to the Jakarta Globe, Rohadi also identified the sects of Islam Katolojo, Darmo Bandul, Islam Kejawen, Muhammad Nabirasulillah and the Ahmadiyah as being problematic.

Tangerang Police on Tuesday said they had questioned the leader of Perguruan Cakrabuana and two of its followers for allegedly violating the 1965 Law on the Prevention of Blasphemy and Abuse of Religion for its interpretation and teaching of the Koran.

The blasphemy law is outmoded, according to some liberal Islamic scholars, and is currently being challenged in the Constitutional Court for curtailing religious freedom.

The FPI infamously ambushed a peaceful rally organized by the National Alliance for the Freedom of Faith and Religion in support of the Ahmadiyah at the National Monument in Central Jakarta in late 2008.

FPI chairman Habib Rizieq was later sentenced to 18 months in prison for his role in the attack, although the government later issued a joint ministerial decree ordering the Ahmadiyah, a peaceful Islamic group founded in the late 19th Century, to restrict its religious activities.

FPI deputy secretary Soleh Mahdmud said anyone who labeled the FPI as antagonistic to Islam did not understand the organization.

“For us, they are people who have no brains,” Soleh said. “I believe the person must be someone who has liberal views saying that all religions are good and all people will go to heaven.”

Soleh said FPI members loved Islam and Shariah law and spread their message in a kind and gentle way.

“But of course it’s different in a struggle,” he added.

He also said that those who wanted polygamy outlawed were against Islam, whereas the FPI’s support of plural marriage was consistent with the faith.

Rohadi, speaking generally, conceded there was little the ministry could do to control sects because many of them were in existence long before independence and any attempts to disband them could lead to chaos.

He urged all religious groups to not take the law into their own hands lest that lead to violence. “If society is annoyed by such sects, they should report them to the police,” Rohadi said.

Rohadi said the ministry believed the blasphemy law remained valid. “The law will prevent people from establishing new religions in the country,” he said. “The country will be destroyed if it’s easy for people to establish a new religion.”

He said that the country only recognized Ahlisunnah Waljamaah as the right path to Islam.

“Ahlisunnah Waljammah means that we only follow the Koran and the Sunnah [sayings from the Prophet Muhammad],” he said, adding that the ministry would work with the Indonesian Council of Ulema (MUI) to ensure people followed the “right path.”

Slamet Effendy Yusuf, head of interreligious harmony at the MUI, said current economic pressures could encourage people to join sects.

“Many people do not understand their religion perfectly in the middle of economic and social problems,” Slamet said. “They easily follow a sect as they are seeking spiritual support, something to calm their hearts because they are dissatisfied.”

He said this created new problems as the sects upset other groups, though he warned that it was better to adopt a persuasive approach rather than resort to violence.

“Islam is a religion that upholds peace. We should be able to talk to them, have regular meetings and educate them.” Nurfika Osman

Copyright 2010 The Jakarta Globe
URL: www.thejakartaglobe.com/news/blasph...buses-activists/361433

Blasphemy Law Leads to Human Rights Abuses: Activists

---Jakarta Globe, Indonesia

March 01, 2010 - Nivell Rayda

Blasphemy Law Leads to Human Rights Abuses: Activists

Liberal religious and human rights activists on Monday called on the government to overturn the 1965 law on blasphemy and replace it with one that better protected freedom of religion.

Dawam Raharjo, president director of the Religious and Philosophical Study Institute (LSAF), said the law, which is being reviewed by the Constitutional Court, paved the way for serious human rights abuses and allowed minority religious groups to be persecuted.

“There is no alternative but to annul the law. The government should replace the law with one that actually protects religious freedom,” he said. “The law only provides the opportunity and legal basis for mainstream religious groups to intimidate minorities.”

Dawam said police were reluctant to protect religious minorities because of the law.

“The majority of intimidation cases end up with the arrests of the minority followers while the attackers are protected,” he said. “There is little protection for citizens to practice their beliefs.”

Hendardi, chairman of the Setara Institute for Democracy and Peace, a human rights group, said his organization had uncovered hundreds of cases of abuse of religious minorities.

“These range from burning and destroying places of worship and banning minorities from practicing their beliefs to acts of violence and threats [against individuals],” he said.

“The 1945 Constitution guarantees freedom of religion and belief, yet these rights are neglected and unenforced. Meanwhile, there are people who are forced to practice their religion in secrecy out of fear of intimidation.”

Last Friday, New York-based Human Rights Watch wrote to US President Barrack Obama, urging him to make human rights issues, including the blasphemy law, key discussion points during his visit to Indonesia from March 20-22.

The group questioned the Indonesian government’s commitment to religious freedom because it continued to defend the antiquated blasphemy law.

The minister of religious affairs, Suryadharma Ali, and the minister of justice and human rights, Patrialis Akbar, both from conservative Muslim parties, the United Development Party (PPP) and National Mandate Party (PAN), respectively, have condemned the court’s review.

They have insisted that the law “ensured freedom of religion,” and argued that changing it would “create horizontal conflicts.”

“It is the government’s prerogative to say that,” Hendardi said. “But our data suggests otherwise — that the law inhibits freedom of religion.”

The law recognizes only six religions: Islam, Protestantism, Catholicism, Buddhism, Hinduism and Confucianism. Other religions are officially banned.

The law also prohibits alternative interpretations of recognized religions, particularly Islam.

In 2008, the government used the law to formally ban Ahmadiyah, a minority Islamic sect, because it held that its founder, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, was the last prophet of Islam, a claim that contradicts mainstream Muslim beliefs.

Copyright 2010 The Jakarta Globe
URL: www.thejakartaglobe.com/news/blasp...-rights-abuses-activists/361433

INDONESIA: Freedom of religion not protected

---Asian Human Rights Commission, Hong Kong

Asian Human Rights Commission — Statement
 
INDONESIA: Freedom of religion not protected

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AHRC-STM-032-2010
February 23, 2010
A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission

INDONESIA: Freedom of religion not protected

U.S. President Barack Obama is scheduled to visit Indonesia, the place of his childhood, in March. It is important that the President does not waste this opportunity and uses his good relations with Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono to raise the issue of religious tolerance in Indonesia.

Late last year Obama External Link - Opens new browser window stated that “Indonesia is important… as one of the world’s largest democracies, as one of the world’s largest Islamic nations… it has enormous influence and really is… a potential model for the kind of development strategies, democracy strategies, as well as interfaith strategies that are going to be so important moving forward.”

(Photo source: Carolincik, 2008, Yogyakarta, flickr)While his statement is no doubt true in some respects, the essence of Obama’s remark is at odds with the current situation in Indonesia.

In recent years the United Nations has expressed disquiet at religious discrimination and intolerance in the country. There is continuing concern at the distinctions made in legal documents between the six recognized religions of Islam, Protestantism, Catholicism, Hinduism, Buddhism and Confucianism, and the adverse impact on the freedom of thought, conscience and religion of people belonging to minorities, ethnic groups and indigenous peoples in Indonesia.

In 2007 the U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination noted with concern that mixed-faith couples – in which the man and woman hold different recognized beliefs – faced difficulties in officially registering their marriages and that their children were not provided with birth certificates, as they were not the products of “lawful” marriage. Paradoxically, people that change their religion in order to marry their partner can face stigmatization.

Furthermore, there is no provision for individuals with no religious belief to enter into a civil marriage contract, and no legal documentation for those without such a belief. This results in people keeping their atheist beliefs secret and when the time comes to marry, they make the choice of either marrying in a religious ceremony that is devoid of meaning for them, or not marrying at all, which can leave their family and offspring without legal protection.

Moreover, under Indonesian Law No. 23 of 2006 on Civic Administration, individuals are required to record their faith on legal documents such as identity cards and birth certificates. Atheists who ascribe to no religion or those who wish to leave the column blank or to register under one of the “non-recognized” religions face discrimination and harassment - including refusal of employment.

Forcing an Indonesian to adopt a religion as part of her identity grossly undermines his right to freedom of thought and religion under article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Concern has been expressed in Indonesia and internationally about religious minorities such as the Ahmadiya – followers of a disputed branch of Islam – being targeted by fundamentalists that have branded them members of heretical cults. The Asian Human Rights Commission External Link - Opens new browser window and other human rights organizations have highlighted violent attacks and intimidation against the Ahmadiya people and other religious groups, and their places of religious worship. But so far there has been no concerted effort to protect the rights of these groups.

To the contrary, religious intolerance and discrimination is effectively condoned under Law No.1/1965 on the Prevention of Religious Abuse and Blasphemy, which amends the Indonesian Penal Code (Article 156 (a)) to allow the state to prosecute people deemed to commit blasphemous acts which “principally have the character of being at enmity with, abusing or staining a religion adhered to in Indonesia”. The maximum penalty is five years imprisonment.

To combat this law and the issues of state-authorized religious intolerance within it, human rights groups have gone to the Constitutional Court to seek a judicial review of the law, in the hope that it will be struck down as incompatible with human rights and freedom of religion.

However, state officials have reacted against the review. They claim that if the court were to uphold freedom of religion and expression, as guaranteed in international and domestic law, as well as in the principles of Pancasila External Link - Opens new browser window, the official philosophical foundation of the Indonesian state, it would create “unlimited religious freedom.” They fear this could lead to social upheaval, with people worshiping in ways not authorized by the state. Such intolerance is clearly a breach of the Indonesian Constitution under Articles 28 and 29 External Link - Opens new browser window.

The state, by only recognising six religions and enforcing a blasphemy law which alienates and criminalises those that hold beliefs outside of those six, is in effect, giving Indonesians a choice between one of six religions. The right to choose between one religion or another is a false choice and only creates the illusion of freedom.

Both President Obama and President Yudhoyono should understand very well that tolerance and acceptance of varying beliefs, including atheist belief, are vital for a peaceful, democratic society. Practices and laws requiring people to adopt a faith that they do not actually hold is not in accordance with the principles of tolerance, equal rights and non-discrimination, which are the cornerstones of democracy and human rights.

Any blasphemy law should be struck down as unconstitutional. The religions that Indonesia’s blasphemy law seeks to protect can withstand criticism and do not need the full force of the criminal law to ensure adherence. No state should interfere in the practice of religion or belief other than to protect the rights of individuals to freedom of expression, assembly and thought including the right to be free from religious thought.

In a diverse democratic society that prides itself on being multicultural, multi-religious and multi-racial, the Indonesian government should welcome this judicial review and enforce laws to prohibit discrimination based on faith.

In a democratic Indonesia which seeks to adhere to the rule of law and the supreme law of its Constitution, the state should seek to protect the rights of religious minorities from the tyranny of those that wish to foster intolerance and discrimination.

# # #

About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.

URL: www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2009statements/2430/

Court Chief Refuses Blasphemy Law Petition From Muslim Schools, Leaders

--- Jakarta Globe, Indonesia

February 23, 2010
Camelia Pasandaran

Court Chief Refuses Blasphemy Law Petition From Muslim Schools, Leaders

Constitutional Court chief Mahfud MD on Tuesday refused to accept a petition against annulling a blasphemy law because the petition’s organizers — several Islamic boarding schools and a forum of Muslim leaders from Madura — had not followed proper procedures.

“They arrived as a delegation,” Mahfud said. “I received them and spoke with them. However, such aspirations must be conveyed during court proceedings, inside a courtroom, and not directly to a judge,” he said.

The 1965 Law on the Prevention of Blasphemy and Abuse of Religion is currently the subject of a judicial review after it was challenged by the late President Abdurrahman Wahid last year on the grounds it was being misused to intimidate minority religions.

Mahfud told representatives of the schools and the Muslim leaders that their aspirations must be conveyed via organizations legally involved in the review.

“Please hand over your thoughts and aspirations to organizations involved in the case. If you are in favor of the law, hand it over to the government or official groups that are in favor of the law,” Mahfud said.

He also said the court would never invite expert witnesses to give testimony in regard to the review.

“We do not invite. It is requested by applicants and we oblige. If expert witnesses from Mecca are presented, we will accept them. Even if expert witnesses from hell are presented, we cannot refuse,” he said.

The review applicants have requested that the court hear testimony from W Cole Durham Jr, a human rights and religious freedom advocate from Brigham Young University in the United States, Mahfud said.

He said the petition organizers had argued the law should not be annulled because matters of religious blasphemy would fail to be legally regulated.

“The public would then resort to using their own version of the law [street justice], which would be chaotic. Actually, this opinion has been presented in previous hearings,” Mahfud said.

The judicial review was filed by several people and organizations, including Wahid.

According to Choirul Anam, a lawyer representing the applicants, the law is unconstitutional because it only recognizes six religions: Islam, Protestantism, Catholicism, Hinduism, Buddhism and Confucianism.

The law bans people from publicly espousing other religious views or following non-mainstream interpretations of one of the state-sanctioned religions, he said.

The Indonesian Conference on Religion and Peace recently expressed concern over the use of the law to justify violent acts against minority groups that interpret religious tenets differently, such as the Ahmadiyya Muslim minority sect.

Mahfud said the petition organizers had also asked him to hold a theological meeting to discuss the law.

“We are not theologians. The conclusions taken in court are about law and will be based on legal conclusions, not theological ones,” he said. “We hold on to the truth, based on the law.”

Copyright 2010 The Jakarta Globe
URL: www.thejakartaglobe.com/news/court-chie...lim-schools-leaders/360410

FPI Hard-Liners Heckle Scholar Over Religion Law

--- Jakarta Globe, Indonesia

February 17, 2010
Ulma Haryanto

FPI Hard-Liners Heckle Scholar Over Religion Law

An Islamic scholar and lecturer from Jakarta’s Paramadina University was jeered by members of a hard-line Islamic group at the Constitutional Court on Wednesday when he dared to draw a comparison between the Prophet Muhammad and the leader of a sect who claimed to be the bride of the Archangel Gabriel.

Luthfi Assyaukanie, who is also cofounder of the Jakarta-based Liberal Islam Network, told the court, which is reviewing the controversial blasphemy law, that the Prophet had initially been persecuted when he first started preaching his faith.

He then compared this to the treatment of Lia Aminuddin, the leader of the Kingdom of Eden sect who was jailed last year for blasphemy. “Some people think she is crazy and even persecute her, just like the Prophet Muhammad in the beginning,” Luthfi said.

His statement immediately provoked vocal protest and abuse from members of the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI), who had filled up more than half of the courtroom.

The court hearing comes during the fifth phase of the judicial review into the 1965 Law on the Prevention of Blasphemy and Abuse of Religion. Dating back to the last years of President Sukarno, the law was challenged by the late President Abdurrahman “Gus Dur” Wahid last year for being misused to intimidate minority religions.

Undeterred by the jeers, Luthfi said the state should never side with a particular religion or criminalize worshipers who held different beliefs.

“What if the majority of the country’s population followed Ahmadiyah?” he asked, once again inviting shouts of anger from the crowd. He was referring to the controversial minority Islamic sect that for years has suffered from discrimination and had their mosques burned down by hard-line Islamic groups.

“I’m sure that both Sunni and Shia followers each believe that they are the most correct and true,” Luthfi added, referring to the two main branches of Islam.

“The problem with our Constitution is that it allows the religious majority power to do anything in the name of defending their religious rights. We have seen, during violent attacks, it’s usually started by the majority who think they have the right to do it.”

Toward the end of Luthfi’s testimony, presiding judge Mahfud MD had to reprimand the court spectators for their continuous shouting.

Ifdhal Kasim, chairman of the National Commission for Human Rights (Komnas HAM), who also appeared as a witness at the hearing, said the state needed to limit itself from interfering in religious matters.

“The right to be religious and to practice one’s religion is a Constitutional right,” he said, adding that the government should draw the line only when it came to four issues: public safety, public order, morality and if human rights are threatened.

The government, Ifdhal said, was obligated to protect the rights of its citizens through the legal system.

“We argue that Article 1 of the 1965 Law crosses the line on the right to religious belief because it prohibits people from having their own interpretations of religion,” he said.

Lutfi Hakim, legal counsel for the Indonesian Council of Ulema (MUI), said Ifdhal’s testimony was unconvincing.

“And furthermore, the four things that you mentioned, were more or less the same with what is written in the judicial review request,” he added.

Copyright 2010 The Jakarta Globe
URL: www.thejakartaglobe.com/news/fpi-h...er-religion-law/359299