W. Java the ‘least tolerant province’

NATIONALTue, 12/20/2011 11:25 PM

W. Java the ‘least tolerant province’

The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

A survey by human rights watchdog Setara Institute has found that West Java was the least tolerant province in 2011, registering the largest number of religious violence cases.

Throughout 2011, West Java saw 57 incidents involving government-endorsed discriminatory policies, instances in which government officials condoned acts of violence against minority groups, the closure of places of worship and religiously motivated killings.

In the survey, South Sulawesi ranked second place with 45 incidents, followed by East Java and North Sumatra in the third and fourth position with 31 and 24 incidents, respectively.

Banten, which saw the Cikeusik Ahmadiyah lynching in April, and West Nusa Tenggara were both in fifth position with 12 cases each. Bali and West Kalimantan were found to be the most tolerant provinces.

“This high number of violence and discrimination indicates that the government has done little to mitigate religious acrimony. The numbers remain high compared to last year’s,” Setara Institute chairman Hendardi said Monday.

Hendardi attributed the violence to President Susilo Bambang Yu-dhoyono’s lack of leadership.

“The President is even powerless in the face of opposition from Bogor Mayor Diani Budiarto, who refuses to obey the Supreme Court’s ruling to reopen GKI Yasmin Church and let its members practice their faith freely,” he said.

The survey also found correlation between religious conflicts and the level of urban spread.

“We found that the more urban an area, the more likely religious conflicts will occur,” Setara Institute deputy chairman Bonar Tigor Naipospos said.

The Setara Institute recorded 244 incidents in which religion was cited as the cause.

The survey also found that government officials owned the biggest share of the blame in allowing religious conflict to happen. A total of 105 incidents were initiated by government officials.

Members of the National Police were responsible for 40 cases, the Indonesian Military (TNI) personnel for 22 cases, regents and mayors 18 violations, governors 10 violations and the Religious Affairs Ministry nine violations.

Setara also cited the Islam Defenders Front (FPI) and the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) as non-governmental organizations that registered the highest number of discrimination cases.

Setara researcher Ismail Hasani said religious conflicts peaked between February and March, when locals in Cikeusik attacked members of the Ahmadiyah sect.

“Following the incident, two churches were burned down in the same month, which heightened tension between the majority Muslim and minorities groups for the rest of the year,” he said.

Ismail added that the increasing religious conflict could indicate hypocrisy on the part of the government.

“We recorded that the President made at least 19 public statements encouraging religious harmony. However, change could hardly happen in the coming years because those around the President include people from several political parties who oppose religious freedom,” Ismail told The Jakarta Post.

According to the Setara Institute, the Ahmadiyah suffered the worst type of discrimination in 2011.

It recorded 22 policies, including 15 ordinances, issued by local governments that promoted animosity toward the sect. The policies include the Religious Affairs Ministry’s decision to prohibit Ahmadiyah members from performing the haj pilgrimage to Mecca. (msa)

Copyright © 2008 The Jakarta Post - PT Bina Media Tenggara. All Rights Reserved
URL: www.thejakartapost.com/news/...province.html

Bleak prospects for Ahmadis

ARCHIPELAGOMon, 12/19/2011 11:50 PM

Bleak prospects for Ahmadis

Panca Nugraha, The Jakarta Post, Mataram

Hopeful eyes: Children pose at an Ahmadiyah shelter in Mataram, Lombok. Members of the religious community have been largely shunned by society, and their future as part of Indonesia’s workforce and as citizens is looking bleak. The 33 families of the community have lived in the shelters since they were evicted from their homes six years ago. JP/Panca Nugraha

The Ahamdiyah community comprises about 140 people and 33 families who have been forced to take shelter in Wisma Transito in Mataram after they were evicted from their homes six years ago.

The outreach program provided by the NTB provincial administration, involving the NTB Agency for Political Affairs and National Unity and a number of clerics, has not been effective, the Ahmadis say, while the West Lombok regency administration has backtracked from its promise to compensate assets they were forced to leave behind in their village.

An early estimation revealed that their assets, comprising 21 houses and land, were valued at Rp 1.4 billion (US$155,000).

“The outreach program, they said, would last for six months from June until December was in fact carried out for only two months. It began early on in the month of Ramadhan and ended just after Idul Fitri,” Nasiruddin, one of the Ahmadis, said recently when interviewed at Wisma Transito.

He is a respected member of the Ahmadiyah community, often playing the role of advisor.

Nasiruddin accused the government of not being serious about resolving their problem.

The condition of the Ahmadiyah refugees in Wisma Transito, which is located around 2 kilometers from the NTB gubernatorial office, has not improved. The community still lives in makeshift quarters made of cloth and used banners.

Two infants were in the community in November, bringing the total number of babies born in the community since they were evicted to 18.

“I gave birth at Mataram General Hospital for free, thanks to the Delivery Assurance program, but we faced difficulties in applying for the Jamkesmas and Jamkesmasda health insurance because we don’t have identity cards,” said Maemunah, 25.

She was carrying her baby, Noval Syaif Irfan, who was born on Nov. 15, while eight pre-school-aged children were cheerfully playing around her.

Ahmadiyah is considered by mainstream Muslims as heretical. Ahmadiyah communities across the country have been persecuted by their fellow Muslims, and in some severe instances have had members seriously injured or killed.

In a number of provinces, local administrations have banned the sect citing security concerns.

Ahmadiyah members in West Lombok say they continue to be persecuted.

Amaq Marsudin, 52, who suffers from kidney failure and requires regular dialysis, was rejected by the NTB General Hospital because he did not have an identity card.

“He was admitted to the hospital for two weeks but did not receive dialysis because he is not covered by Jamkesmasda as he doesn’t have an identity card. Finally, we brought him back to Wisma Transito and he has resigned his fate to God,” Nasiruddin said.

According to Nasiruddin, during the e-ID card campaign program in Mataram in October, the Ahmadiyah refugees tried to apply for ID cards at the Mataram Population Agency.

However, they were turned down on the grounds that they were only temporary residents.

“The West Lombok regency administration also refused to issue us ID cards. Actually, we only requested residence identity permits. It doesn’t matter if we don’t live in West Lombok, but owning an ID card is important for access to healthcare and education programs, especially as an ID card proves citizenship status,” he said.

The Ahmadiyah refugees endure living at the shelter despite that most of the families are in dire financial straits. In general, the men seek a living as construction workers, ojek (motorcycle taxi) drivers, barbers and hawkers.

Sarim Ahmad, 45, for instance, owns a chicken noodle cart now. He had worked for a fritter seller earlier.

“I saved up my salary to make a cart to sell noodles, and the proceeds are not bad,” he said.

The NTB provincial administration had initially promised that the outreach program provide startup capital for the refugees.

However, for Sarin, it was all just talk and no action.

“They promised to provide startup capital, but have failed to do so as of now. Furthermore, we prefer to be independent because the assistance is a loan in nature and we have to pay installments,” he said.

West Lombok spokesman Ispan Junaedi said the administration would never compensate the assets of Ahmadiyah members in Ketapang because funds set aside for that purpose in 2010 and 2011 had not been realized “because the refugees raised the amount”.

Copyright © 2008 The Jakarta Post - PT Bina Media Tenggara. All Rights Reserved
URL: www.thejakartapost.com/news/2011/12/19/bleak-prospects-ahmadis.html

Blasphemy charges: Out of fear, Ahmadi family on the run

Pakistan Punjab

Blasphemy charges: Out of fear, Ahmadi family on the run

By Rana Tanveer
Published: December 15, 2011

Teenager accused of making derogatory remarks against Holy Prophet (PBUH).

LAHORE: Blasphemy allegations continue to haunt minorities in Pakistan.

Aalmi Majlis Tahafuz Khatm-e-Nabuwat (AMTKN) activists alleged that 16-year-old Sajeel committed blasphemy by making derogatory remarks against the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and his father, Rana Hakim Jameel, had done the same by portraying Sajeel as a Muslim in his school admission form.

Denying that he ever put down Islam as Sajeel’s religion and all other allegations levelled against his son, Jameel’s was a different tale.

According to him, the allegations stemmed from a school fight.

The school principal overheard some students abusing Sajeel and beat them up. The students later accused Sajeel of telling on them and beat him up. When Sajeel actually went to the principal to complain, he learnt that the students had “made up a story, telling the principal they had attacked him because he had made blasphemous remarks”.

Later, Haji Aslam, the school principal, expelled Sajeel.

Fearing their safety, the two have been on the run ever since the charges emerged.

While the police have yet to register an FIR against the accused, they have already started conducting raids for their arrests.

A member of the accused family, Rana Asfandyar, 18, was arrested by the police, who allegedly pressurised the young student to reveal his brother’s whereabouts, Asfandyar’s older brother, Rana Mujahid told The Express Tribune.

At local mosques, various religious scholars were fuelling a hate campaign against Ahmadis, Mujahid alleged, adding that evoking such hatred among the public could prove dire for his family.

However, Khushab police station SHO Raja Arshad told The Express Tribune that since the family refused to tell them about Sajeel’s whereabouts, the police had brought Asfandyar in to record his statement at the DPO’s office. Arshad denied that they had detained the boy.

Mujahid alleged that religious scholars Qari Saeed and Waqas Ahmed were producing “false witnesses” before the police.

SHO Arshad said that they were still in the process of recording the statements of witnesses, and hence, were unable to conclude their investigations.

Meanwhile, Jameel alleged that a property dispute could also be a reason behind the accusations.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 15th, 2011.

Copyrighted © 2011 The Express Tribune News Network
URL: http://tribune.com.pk/?p=306901

Ahmadiyah bans: Legal justification for intolerance?

OPINIONSat, 12/10/2011 9:27 AM

Ahmadiyah bans: Legal justification for intolerance?

Ati Nurbaiti, Canberra

As of September this year, at least 26 regencies and municipalities have passed bylaws restricting or banning the Ahmadiyah sect, 11 of them in West Java alone, according to a list from the National Commission on Violence Against Women.

Some were issued after the murderous assault on the sect in Pandeglang regency, Banten, in February 2011; including the Banten bylaw itself. The Commission has said women and children of the sect were the most vulnerable in the attacks, which according to the Setara Institute have included 342 cases of assault from 2007 to 2011. This also includes the resettlement of an entire Ahmadiyah community to an island off Lombok.

The local regulations justify other citizens and authorities into closing down Ahmadi mosques, forcing them out of their homes, or ordering them to denounce Islam if they insist on their beliefs. Unlike mainstream Muslims, the Ahmadiyah do not believe that Muhammad is the last prophet, saying they differentiate between prophets and messengers.

However, Muslims have said this is their excuse to hide their real beliefs; that the Ahmadiyah have frequently violated the joint ministerial decree on their sect by proselytizing; and that the attacks on them would stop — if only they would drop their teachings, or declare that they are no longer Muslims.

The bylaws and the joint ministerial decree, revived in 2008, refer to the 2005 non-binding fatwa of the Indonesian Council of Ulema (MUI) which states the Ahmadiyah is deviant; and also the 1965 Law on Blasphemy, which was upheld in 2005 by the Constitutional Court in its ruling against a group of human rights advocates who wanted it annulled. The plaintiffs had said the blasphemy law was no longer relevant for a democracy since it was issued under martial law in 1965.

The movement to annul the 1965 law and those advocating an end to prosecuting minorities, pursue entirely different reasoning from groups who are sealing the Ahmadiyah mosques, often accompanied by local police.

The first argues that the state of a democratic country should not decide which Islam is “right”. The second wonders out loud why the state is leaving Muslims to take matters into their own hands, because, they say, it is evident that Ahmadiyah should be banned, based on the 1965 law, the joint ministerial decree and the MUI fatwa.

A glimpse at news reports in the wake of the Feb. 6 attacks shows that a number of these reports asserted or implied that the real victims were not the Ahmadiyah, whose three members were mobbed and killed, with helpless police officers looking on — all on display to the world thanks to YouTube.

According to the sources in the reports, such as in CyberSabili and hidayatullah.com, the real victims were the Muslims, because the Ahmadis, who insulted Islam, and blatantly defied all civilized requests to stop proselytizing, gained all the sympathy. The “victimization” of Muslims is traced to the marginalization and suppression of Islamic expression by Soeharto, apart from reports of intelligence operations against Muslim activists.

That the Ahmadiyah were not the real victims in the February assault would not necessarily be the majority view; a poll involving 3,000 respondents found most rejecting violence in the name of religion. The July poll by the Setara Institute was conducted in 47 regencies and municipalities in 10 provinces.

But if most Indonesians agreed with these respondents, it doesn’t explain all those bylaws restricting the Ahmadiyah, emerging right under the nose of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. The passing of the bylaws had no difficulty, it seemed, even though the regional autonomy law states that religion should be regulated by the state. But similarly, Religious Affairs Minister Suryadharma Ali and Home Minister Gamawan Fauzi have voiced their opinions that the state should ban or dissolve the Ahmadiyah instead of only restricting their activities.

So are Indonesia’s Muslims becoming increasingly intolerant? Many say tolerance is not the issue, for the Ahmadiyah has insulted Islam.

Leading lawyer Adnan Buyung Nasution told a recent discussion in Canberra that he had a hard time convincing President Yudhoyono that the Ahmadiyah had constitutional rights as a minority — and thus the President may have been persuaded against an outright ban. The ministers overseeing the joint ministerial decree restricting the Ahmadiyah also have a constitutional reference; that religious freedom is limited in respect of followers of other faiths.

The International Crisis Group had recommended an independent body to work out a strategy for religious tolerance; such a body would have to deal with this legal confusion stemming from demands to “protect” the Muslim majority against “deviants”, through rulings such as a state ban on the Ahmadiyah.

Malaysia may seem tragic to many of us as its activists say ordinary citizens, including Muslims themselves, cannot speak out against increased state regulation of Islam, lest they would be considered un-Islamic.

But the incidences of Malaysians’ violence against minorities do not come anywhere close to our long list. Should we be proud of outdoing Malaysia?

The author is a staff writer at The Jakarta Post.

Copyright © 2008 The Jakarta Post - PT Bina Media Tenggara. All Rights Reserved
URL: www.thejakartapost.com/news/2011/12/10/ahmadiyah...intolerance.html

2011 Yet Another Bad Year for Human Rights: Setara

HOME

2011 Yet Another Bad Year for Human Rights: Setara

Ulma Haryanto | December 06, 2011

Only a handful of those involved in the attack on a small Ahmadiyah community in Cikeusik, Banten, were charged, and they only received prison sentences of just a few months. An Ahmadi survivor who almost had his hand hacked off, though, was charged with provoking the attack and sentenced to six months in prison, half a month longer than his attacker. (JG Photo)

The year 2011 has been yet another period of abject failure by the government to protect human rights, according to the results of a survey released on Monday.

Bonar Tigor Naipospos, deputy chairman of the Setara Institute for Peace and Democracy, said the survey of leading rights activists, community and religious leaders and bureaucrats showed no improvement in the state’s efforts to protect rights.

“There has been no significant change or effort from the government to uphold human rights compared to the previous year,” he said.

“The survey used a similar approach as last year. The Setara Institute grouped the variables in eight categories and measured how these items were perceived by our 71 respondents.”

Bonar said the category respondents rated the lowest was the resolution of past human rights violations, which received a score of 1.4 on a scale from 0 to 7. Last year’s worst-performing category, the perception of religious freedom, improved from a score of 1.0 to 2.3, while elimination of discrimination dropped from 4.0 to 2.8.

“Even though the score for religious freedom improved, one item in that group that still received a low score was the handling of cases of violence against minority groups,” said Ismail Hasani, a researcher at the Setara Institute.

He said that this year the worst of those incidents was the attack by a mob of 1,500 on a small Ahmadiyah community in Cikeusik, Banten province. That attack, in February, led to the deaths of three members of the beleaguered sect.

Only a handful of the perpetrators were charged, and wound up receiving prison sentences of just a few months. An Ahmadi survivor who almost had his hand hacked off, though, was charged with provoking the attack and sentenced to six months in prison, half a month longer than his attacker.

Hendardi, the Setara Institute chairman, called on President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono to “construct policies that uphold human rights through the resolution of past human rights abuses, end impunity and provide legislation enabling the enforcement of human rights.”

“Compared to previous presidents, Yudhoyono has the strongest political backing because he was directly elected by the people,” he added.

“So there’s no excuse for him for not to uphold human rights.”

Researchers said that on the positive side, survey respondents were more satisfied with the performance of state bodies such as the National Commission on Violence Against Women (Komnas Perempuan), the Indonesian Commission for Child Protection (KPAI), and the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas Ham).

“Komnas Perempuan received the highest score, with a 3.7, while the KPAI got 3.6 and Komnas HAM got 3.4,” Ismail said.

“Another government initiative that received a higher score was terrorism eradication.”

The survey questioned 71 respondents across 13 provinces in the country. It was carried out in September and October and focused on items in international covenants on human rights.

Copyright 2010 The Jakarta Globe
URL: www.thejakartaglobe.com/home/2011-yet-another.../482919

ANALYSIS: Persecution of Ahmedis in the Islamic Republic

Monday, December 05, 2011

ANALYSIS: Persecution of Ahmedis in the Islamic Republic — Yasser Latif Hamdani

The basic premise on which we won ourselves Pakistan was that a permanent majority cannot and should not dominate a permanent minority on account of numeric strength. Yet contrary to that founding logic, Pakistan is today legally a totalitarian fundamentalist theocracy

A fresh round of hate has been unleashed against the hapless Ahmediyya community once again. A young woman has been expelled from her university for daring to stand up to hate speech against her community on campus in Lahore. In Rawalpindi, ignorant and boorish mobs have been agitating to close down an Ahmedi ‘place of worship’ for being ‘unconstitutional’. In other words, practising their own faith in their own space is deemed unconstitutional by a mob that has probably never opened the constitution. All the while this community goes on praying and fasting for Pakistan, where a majority continues to persecute them for believing differently.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, the great American Judge, wrote in his dissenting opinion in Abrams vs United States 250 US 616 (1919): “When men have realised that time has upset many fighting faiths, they may come to believe even more than they believe the very foundations of their own conduct that the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas — that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market.” If the Ahmedi beliefs are so patently false and ridiculous as our ulema (Islamic scholars) say they are, then why be so insecure as to shut them down completely? Why not allow them to be ridiculed in the marketplace of ideas?

Every citizen of Pakistan has the unfettered right to practice and propagate his or her religion and every religious denomination and sect thereof has the right to establish its places of worship and educational institutions according to Article 20 of the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. These rights are paramount. Unlike other articles, this Article — the cornerstone of religious liberty in our country — is not restricted by reasonable restrictions but is subject to law, order and morality alone. This means that religious freedom and freedom of conscience cannot be restricted. Ahmedis might be non-Muslims for the purposes of law and constitution under Article 260 but that does not mean that they are not Pakistanis. Unfortunately, time and again the judiciary in Pakistan — whose basic function is to safeguard marginalised sections of our society — has upheld retrogressive laws that target the Ahmedis.

To begin with, let us put a popular notion to rest that if an Ahmedi calls himself a Muslim, he is violating the constitution. The most one can stretch Article 260, which is a definition clause, is to say that the state of Pakistan does not agree with an Ahmedi if he calls himself a Muslim and that laws and provisions specific to the Muslims will not apply to the Ahmedis. When Article 260 is read with Article 19 (freedom of speech and expression) and Article 20 (freedom of religion), it becomes clear that there is no constitutional bar against an Ahmedi citizen calling himself a Muslim, even if the Pakistani constitution and law does not agree with him. In these circumstances Ordinance XX of 1984 is a clear violation of the fundamental rights of an entire community to any sane and reasonable mind. However, two judges on a three member bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan in Zaheeruddin vs the State 1993 SCMR 1718 did not think so. They felt — incredibly enough — that Ahmedis purporting to or even thinking themselves to be Muslims is a violation akin to violation of intellectual property rights. One of these judges went so far as to declare that it was reasonable for a Muslim to be outraged and therefore attack the Ahmedis on this ground. This is our Supreme Court for God’s sake. Check your religious biases on the door, Lordships. You cannot be partisan judges serving communitarian interests of the majority. You are justices of the superior judiciary of Pakistan, tasked with safeguarding fundamental rights of every citizen of Pakistan, whatever his faith maybe. The clearest duty on part of the Pakistani Supreme Court is to stand up for every citizen of Pakistan, be it an Ahmedi, Shia, Christian or Hindu. If you cannot be unbiased or if you cannot stand up or are too afraid to stand up for every citizen of Pakistan, then I implore you to resign and let men made of sterner stuff replace you.

Last but not the least, the history of Ahmedi persecution is as sordid as it is surreal. The anti-Pakistan Majlis-e-Ahrar-ul-Islam, which had opposed the Muslim League in the 1940s, enflamed passions on the Ahmedi issue to hit back at the Muslim League, which had many prominent Ahmedis in it. One particular Ahmedi target for this party was Chaudhry Zafarullah Khan who was Pakistan’s first foreign minister and in the words of Quaid-e-Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the most able Muslim in his team. Jinnah himself would have been horrified at the persecution of the Ahmedis. He had dismissed appeals by the mullahs in his lifetime. saying that anyone who professes to be a Muslim is a Muslim. It was this statement that won him the eternal animosity of the Majlis-e-Ahrar-ul-Islam and other religious outfits. These religious organisations are today claimants of the protectors of Nazaria-e-Pakistan (Ideology of Pakistan).

The basic premise on which we won ourselves Pakistan was that a permanent majority cannot and should not dominate a permanent minority on account of numeric strength. Yet contrary to that founding logic, Pakistan is today legally a totalitarian fundamentalist theocracy. It will lead us to a dead end from which there will be no way out. It is time the Muslims of Pakistan halted and thought about where they intend to take this much abused, much maligned and much misunderstood Islamic Republic.

The writer is a lawyer based in Lahore. He is also a regular contributor to the Indian law website http://mylaw.net and blogs on http//globallegalforum.blogspot.com and http://pakteahouse.net. He can be reached at yasser.hamdani@gmail.com

URL: www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2011\12\05\story_5-12-2011_pg3_6