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 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”.
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 UN 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 who change their religion to marry their
partner can face stigmatization.
Furthermore, there is no provision for individuals without any
religious belief to enter into a civil marriage contract, and no legal
documentation. As a result, people keep 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 her 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, who have branded them as
members of heretical cults. The Asian Human Rights Commission and other
human rights organizations have highlighted violent attacks and
intimidation against the Ahmadiya and other religious groups, and their
places of religious worship. But so far there has been no concerted
effort to protect their rights.
On 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, 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.
The state, by only recognizing six religions and enforcing a
blasphemy law that alienates and criminalizes those believing in any
other religion or faith, 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.
