Being happened to live in a country with diverse cultures and religions that is Indonesia, I can’t help but notice that in these days, what’s so-called tolerance has diminished in an alarming rate, culminating in violations of human rights, particularly to those who are minority. Cikeusik Ahmadiyah*) case, for instance, in which some extremists stoned Ahmadis to death (and the perpetrators get only six months or so in prison). And then HKBP Pondok Timur Indah in Bekasi and GKI Yasmin in Bogor that are prohibited to exercise their right to worship, despite the such right is protected by the very Constitution that Indonesia has (in Article 29). Whose fault is this?
Let me examine the government first. On one side, we have government who is apathetic. How? Seeing how religious extremists such as FPI going rampant and violent in the name of “justice” under the government’s nose, yet there was never been a serious attempt to disband them. In fact, police forces who are supposed to keep peace are afraid of them. Still lingers in my memory how in 2009, GKJ Manahan Solo cancelled their decade-old tradition in selling “nasi murah” (cheap meals) for poor people during Ramadan, per the order of polices that were afraid of extremists attack. Still lingers in my memory, several months ago, some religious thugs threatened elementary school kids conducting flag ceremony in Tawangmangu, and police were helpless and unable to disperse them. I do admit in Detachment 88’s success in dealing with terrorists like Noordin M. Top and Dr. Azahari, but when it come to big yet legal extremist organizations such as FPI, in which they have long records of aggression, government seems so helpless. Then again, it is nonsense in hoping peace and tolerance without punishment for those who disrupt it, for there is no human right to do violence.
On the other side, we have government who gives privilege to religious majority both in a subtle way and blatant way. In a subtle way, we have, for instance, SKB (Surat Keputusan Bersama or joint decree) no 8 and 9/2006 requiring those who want to build a place of worship to obtain at least 60 autographs as a prerequisite. This is very unreasonable. First, why exercising a constitutionally protected right should get permission from neighborhood? Right to worship (and right to peacefully assemble) is an individual right that is same for all people, based on justice principle and equality before the law. The right of people belonging in majority is not higher than the right of people belonging in minority, thus, the requirement of getting acquiescence is utterly pointless and unconstitutional. The interest of majority to keep their numerical advantage IS NOT protected by constitution.
Second, in a place where the hegemony of majority is strong, this is clearly not a level playing field for minority**), especially in the current situation when prejudice and suspicion is strong. This kind of giving de facto right for majority to dictate what place of worship that can be built, is very undemocratic and unfair. Majority can simply make up reasons to drive out minority. Fear of Christianization out of paranoia is one of the reasons I often heard - not that it is constitutionally wrong to proselytize, anyway. Proselytizing is okay as long as no coercion involved. Not to mention, the majority can also proselytize as well, so it’s a Pareto optimum justice. After all, all religions followers have the “holy mandate” to spread and preach about their religion to others. But the label of “being provocative”***) and “Christianization” simply just by a church being existed and singing and preaching and doing whatever constitutionally protected rights they have inside that very church is absurd at best. My friend ever told me about two churches in Depok that were closed even though they were nowhere near the residential area (therefore no basis for closure because of “being provocative” or “creating social unrest”). Isn’t this very ludicrous?
Third, this certainly will exacerbate tensions between different religious followers in this country, when majority “systematically prohibit” the minority and the minority retaliate or give the same treatment elsewhere where the minority happens to be the majority in that area, and vice versa. I see cases in Manado and Papua where Moslems who are minority, were made difficult in getting their permission to make mosque - what if we extrapolate these things in the future and on much larger scale, where the news of religious conflicts can spread fast and easily? This certainly will not lead to peace.
Even worse, is the government who blatantly and actively doing systematic discrimination to drive out minority. For instance, the SKB (joint decree) declaring Ahmadiyah as prohibited organization (why not FPI?), Governor of East Java that urged government to curb Ahmadiyah and Shia Moslems, or Governor of West Nusa Tenggara who actively endorsed Ahmadiyah to be relocated in a certain area similar to ghetto, or Major of Bogor who prohibited GKI Yasmin to conduct sermon on a preposterous basis of “making church in an Islamic-named road”. This is the government who is sick and ridiculous. After all, in such a democratic governance that Indonesia adheres to, government DOES NOT own religion nor have the right to define what a religion (and various interpretations of it is.
Using power to delineate, for instance, “what true Islam is” (in the case of Ahmadiyah) is such an abuse of power. It’s NOT OK to say that they can’t be Moslem. It’s NOT OK to attack them. It’s NOT OK to say that their lives and rights are somehow worth less than others’. It’s NOT OK to say that they can’t do dakwah (preaching) and gain follower, for they are peaceful and non-violent. It is the basic right of every religion, and furthermore, Islam is not the property of anyone, and certainly not government’s. The case of GKI Yasmin is even more barbaric. There is definitely no quarrel on their status as a legally recognized mainstream religion (Christian, alongside with Islam, Catholic, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Confucianism), yet this sick Major threatened their very right to worship, even after the Supreme Court’s decision to allow them to practice. I really, really hope that this Bogor Major be brought to justice for doing treason to this country.
Second part that I’d like to examine is the moderate majority. I say, they have not done enough for the betterment of condition of religious minority. This “silent” moderate majority actually have the power to restrain their violent counterpart, that, ipso facto, are on a significantly lesser number than these moderates. But in my opinion, I have yet to see significant effort from them.
There are millions of them, yet injustice for minority that could have been prevented still occurs. In Cikeusik trial case, in which the violent perpetrators got only six months in jail, for instance, I believe some of the judges are Moslems, but why did they reduce sentence just because of some “requests from prominent ulemas”, in spite of the duty to uphold justice is one of the most basic Islamic tenets? Why, for instance, Moslems who work as journalists and editors for news agencies never reported about the burning of some churches in Riau in the beginning of Ramadan few months ago****)? Why do Moslems in the police and Office of Attorney General never brought FPI to justice, despite there was a calling for banning or restricting FPI’s “vigilante” activities from President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono himself? Why do Moslems at Majelis Ulama Indonesia (Indonesian Ulemas Council) never issue fatwa (edict) that says FPI or any other religious violent movement (aside from terrorism where they had issued the fatwa) as haram? Why do Moslems at Department of Religious Affairs and Department of Internal Affairs keep on doing victimization and demanding the VICTIMS not to behave so as not provoke more violence? Why do they keep on making policy insisting VICTIMS to “negotiate” and “compromise” with their violent oppressors? Even worse, why do moderate Moslems who happen to be prosecutors were prosecuting Ahmadis for defending themselves from the angry mobs? Do these moderates really think that just because they are in a safe majority position then they don’t want to get their hand dirty to help their fellow human beings? Do they really think that just because we are different than we are not worthy of their caring? Do they really think that just because we are minority then we have no merit for justice?
But I do believe that the existence of religious liberals and human right activists can shed some light for the more peaceful future of Indonesia. Islamic organization like JIL or The Wahid Institute can disseminate tolerant understanding to their fellow Moslems. Governmental organization like Komnas HAM can further strengthening inter-religion peace talk by making more inter-religion discussions and seminars. Human right watchers like Imparsial can observe and report of some injustices that may occur in the future. I also hope and believe that in the end the moderate majority start to act something. At least, they do the easiest one like not voting for party that upholds radical religio-fascism ideology or has religio-fascist politicians inside of it. But more importantly, I do believe that the solution lies on the very basic step of human life: education. If school can propagate about tolerance and de-radicalize kids from the start, I believe that we will not see religious violence anymore in the future.
Part Two will follow.
*) Albeit there is Ahmadiyah school of thought, that is Lahore, that still believes Mohammad as the last prophet and that Mirzam Gulam Ahmad’s position is just as Imam Mahdi. Despite this, they are still pushed to not use the moniker Islam. While this is wrong to prohibit them in declaring themselves as Moslems (see reasons above), I don’t think that they will not be attacked anymore after changing their name anyway, seeing the attacks to Christians (who are legally recognized) and cases in Pakistan.
**) The dichotomy of majority and minority between Islam and Christian, if I may say, is not merely about numerical dominance, but such dominance in terms of the number of the places of worship is not proportional as well. Data shows that in Indonesia there is (in ratio) approximately 1 mosque for 364 Moslems while there is only 1 church for 1605 Christians. One religion is clearly having a privilege over the other.
***) Even displaying Christmas symbols DURING Christmas can be considered “provocative”, as per MUI comments on Christmas last year. I wonder, why having prayer in Islamic way during a formal public occasion in which a lot of non Moslems also attend isn’t considered provocative? Why can I see some anti-Semitic books sold freely at Gramedia and this is not considered provocative as well?
****) I got the news only from international media outlets such as Jakarta Post and Jakarta Globe. I hope that I was wrong. But even if Indonesian news agencies reported about this, I don’t know why it seems that there was no continuance from them. Apparently, Nazarudin case is far far more important.
