Authors: Harsh Mahaseth and Aadira Menon*
Indonesia, a 30,000-island archipelago with 300 ethnic groups, is a mainly Muslim country with a long history of religious diversity. The earliest major world religions to arrive in Indonesia were Hinduism and Buddhism, followed by Islam and Christianity. The identity of the “others” is unknown; however, they may be followers of local religions. Indigenous religions, as mentioned later, are not considered “religion,” but rather “belief” or “culture,” and are governed by the Ministry of Education and Culture rather than the Ministry of Religious Affairs. What complicates matters further is that indigenous religious groups may have various religious affiliations: they may be regarded members of an indigenous religion while also professing to be Muslims, Christians, or members of other religious organisations, and thus be registered as such. This commentary will delve into the issue of religious intolerance and the current state of freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) in Indonesia.
The Aliran Kepercayaan who make up less than 0.6 per cent of the population in Indonesia and is a traditional faith practice followed by a few hailing from regions such as Java and Papua. The five major faiths followed in Indonesia include- Islam, Protestantism, Catholicism, Hinduism and Buddhism. The problem of the State’s relationship with religions and Aliran Kepercayaan in Indonesia is inextricably linked to the debate over Law No. 1/PNPS/1965. Anyone who presents a “deviant” interpretation of religious teachings or commits blasphemy against religion is subject to this infamous rule.
In the 1970s and 1980s, President Suharto backed a number of discriminatory policies such as rejection of the establishment of places of worship for the Kepercayaan community, rejection of such marriage registrations by the community and mainly denial of identity of the members of the Aliraan Kepercaayan, effectively emphasising that Aliran Kepercayaan was not a (new) religion and that Aliran Kepercayaan adherents had to accept a religion recognised by the State. Finally, in 2010, a group of non-governmental organisations petitioned the Constitutional Court for a judicial review of the statute. The repeal of the ordinance was intended to put an end to discrimination and persecution of believers of Aliran Kepercayaan and its minority identity by any of Indonesia’s six official faiths. The Constitutional Court issued its decision on October 18, 2017. The Constitutional Court ruled that the word “religion” in Article 61, paragraph (1), and “beliefs” in Article 64, paragraph (1) of the Population Administration Law are in violation of the 1945 Constitution because they do not include “beliefs” in their interpretation. The Constitutional Court claimed that excluding Aliran Kepercayaan from the “religion” section on the Resident Identity Card deprived Indonesian citizens of fair recognition, assurance, protection, and legal certainty, as well as equal treatment before the law. Even though this judgement was celebrated, has it really removed the discriminatory barrier that has haunted the Kepercayaan community for decades now?
The government respects and is following the verdict, according to Arief M. Edie, a ministry spokesman, but only by revising the national ID to include the Aliraan Kepercayaan as a religious status option in the section on religious status. The State’s seventh official religion will not be acknowledged.
– (The New York Times)
“It’s only recognised as a culture, not a religion,” Arief explained. Local administrations in Indonesia’s far-flung areas will continue to discriminate in the delivery of public services, according to Aliran Kepercayaan supporters. A number of Muslim organisations were taken aback by the court’s judgement and denounced it, believing that it went against the “national consensus.” Din Syamsudin, the former head of Muhammadiyah and a member of the Indonesian Council of Ulama’s Board of Advisors, has definitely asserted that Kepercayaan or indigenous faiths are not the same as (real) religion. Nonetheless, Legislation No. 1/PNPS/1965, which marks the start of the politics of law of intolerance towards Aliran Kepercayaan believers, is still in effect today. The religious-Aliran Kepercayaan dichotomy is still employed as a mental model when dealing with the identity of Aliran Kepercayaan members.
Furthermore, the Prosecutor’s Office continues to monitor the Aliran Kepercayaan organisation today. The social setting has little bearing on these two outstanding concerns. The lack of agreement on state-religion interactions has an impact on these issues and warrants additional investigation.
*Aadira Menon is a law student at Jindal Global Law School and a Research Assistant at the Nehginpao Kipgen Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Jindal School of International Affairs, O.P. Jindal Global University, India.
