, The Jakarta Post , Jakarta | Mon, 06/19/2006 1:25 PM | Opinion
Muhamad Ali, Manoa, Hawaii
The question of whether or not the specifically Islamic bylaws recently enacted in some provinces and regencies are legitimate within the context of pluralist Pancasila should receive more serious scrutiny and wider public debate among the government and people alike.
Unlike Malaysia, which has less heterogeneous views of what the state is and should be in terms of the relationship between religion and the state, Indonesia remains a state in remaking, especially after 1998 when some political parties and civil associations in local areas began promoting the implementation of sharia bylaws.
This phenomenon provides a paradox. Pancasila has since 1945 proved to be a unifying ideology and a middle-path between a rigidly secular state and a formally religion-based state. The New Order regime, however, attempted to homogenize its interpretation -- through its Guidelines for Interpretation and Implementation of Pancasila (P4), which gained religious justifications at the same time.
In contrast, Pancasila has been argued to be an open ideology in which different interpretations become possible. The crucial question is therefore whether the local movements of Islamic parties and associations toward more Islamization through bylaws still fall within a legitimate interpretation of Pancasila.
One may see how and why the sharia-law-minded activists, including the hard-liners, have had their own interpretations of Islam and Pancasila. For example, they often state that Pancasila allows any manifestations of religious observance and continue to claim that it is their right to interpret Pancasila in their own way.
Many also often claim that Pancasila was originally a gift from Muslims to the nation of Indonesia in such a way that they deserve to interpret its meaning and implementation as they wish and as they see in accordance with their goals and objectives of further Islamization.
These neo-Islamists argue that since Indonesia has now applied the three systems of law -- Dutch colonial, Islamic and customary laws -- what they are struggling for is actually to give more weight to the Islamic laws rather than to the colonial or customary laws. They always use the logic of ""right"" that Muslims are the majority and that it is their majority right to dominate the system of law.
Everywhere in the world, they claim, the dominant always influence the prevailing system of law. They claim that they have a legitimate right to pursue their goals of Islamization in their local regions when they fail at the national level.
In reality, the struggle within the provinces and regencies has involved politicking, particular the reading of public opinion, selected historical and sociological reading, pursuit of political power and the struggle for rare economic resources. The movement for Islamic bylaws is not purely religious and genuinely driven. Religion has more often been used and manipulated for political and economic purposes.
More importantly, the neo-Islamists often fail to see the real crucial problems within local society: Corruption, poor public services, poor health, poverty and economic disparity, low education, social disharmony, population density, traffic jams, disorder and other crucial problems. They are instead more concerned with the rituals and symbols of dress, scriptural literacy and other specifically religious obligations.
The moderates, liberals and minorities, on the other hand, have long argued for the integrated, unified system of law with pluralist Pancasila. They argue that the existing system of law has been adequate in guaranteeing law and order in which multicultural and pluralistic communities can live together harmoniously. Specifically Islamic bylaws can be regarded as an attempt at de-Pancasilaization.
In my view, Pancasila is above all the ideology of tolerance. It should not be an ideology of exclusive hegemonic meaning if it wants to last long and be effective. Some argue that Pancasila is a human invention whereas Islamic law is divine and paramount. But these people fail to understand that such a belief in divinity is specific to them, unshared by others who have equally lived in and struggled for Indonesia.
They often neglect the fact that the interpretation of Islam and Islamic law among believers is not monolithic and it cannot therefore be imposed over the pluralist and dissenting others by means of state machinery and law.
Since everyone in society is required to be committed to civil duties, including paying taxes, they thus deserve the same rights. If they have to perform their civil obligations then they also must receive just civil treatment.
Diversity is a fact, a condition, a reality of multicultural, ethnic and religious diversity. Pluralism is an ideal, impulse, acceptance and encouragement of diversity. Pluralism is a state of society in which members of diverse ethnic, racial, religious or social groups maintain an autonomous participation in and development of their traditional cultures or special interests, within the confines of a common civilization. The movement of exclusive bylaws is in contradiction to the pluralist spirit of Pancasila.
Pluralism is a belief in the distribution of political power through several institutions which can limit one another's actions, or through institutions none of which is sovereign. Pluralism is the advocacy of a particular kind of limited government.
It is the belief that the constitution of a state ought to make room for varieties of social customs, religious and moral beliefs, and habits of association, and that all political rights should be traced back to the constitution, and not to any social entity other than the state itself.
The furthering of exclusively religious bylaws, especially in ritualistic and symbolistic forms, is at odds with the pluralist spirit of Pancasila. Indonesia finds substantive movements more urgent and pressing than symbolistic and ritualistic ones.
Muhamad Ali is a PhD candidate in history at the University of Hawaii at Manoa, and a fellow at the East-West Center, Honolulu. He is an academic staff member at State Islamic University, Jakarta. He can be reached at muhali74@hotmail.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment