Formalization of sharia: A true answer to problems in Aceh?<\/p>\n
Lily Zakiyah Munir
\nDirector
\nCenter for Pesantren and
\nDemocracy Studies (CePDeS)
\nJombang
\nlilyzm@hotmail.com<\/p>\n
Presidential Decision No. 11\/2003 inaugurating the Sharia
\nCourt (Mahkamah Syariat) in Aceh was issued on March 3. The
\nSharia Courts in Aceh will be the first of their type in
\nIndonesia and will have the authority to examine, decide and
\nsettle civil law cases, material cases and crimes such as murder
\nand torture punishable by qishas (punishment equitable to the
\ncrime). The stoning to death punishment (rajam) is not yet
\nincorporated into the system.<\/p>\n
In the history of Islam, including in Indonesia, formalization
\nof the sharia has always raised controversy. Its proponents argue
\nthat as Muslims are the majority in the country, it is just
\nlogical that sharia be formally enforced as a legal basis in
\nIndonesia. They appeal that Muslims return to the Koran and
\nProphet's sayings (Hadith) so that all social, political and
\neconomic problems can be resolved.<\/p>\n
The opponents do not oppose sharia, but refuse the first
\ngroup's interpretation and understanding of it. Sharia is often
\nunderstood by the first group as no more than fiqh, Islamic laws
\ncodified by Islamic scholars centuries ago.<\/p>\n
The problem arises when a particular madzhab (fiqh school) has
\nto be chosen and adopted as the formal legal reference. There are
\nvarious schools equally recognized and accepted by Muslims. The
\nlargest Islamic organization, Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), for example,
\nrecognizes four major schools and all of them are regarded as
\nvalid.<\/p>\n
How can we now choose only one of them and refuse the others?
\nIsn't forcing a version of sharia and nullifying the others
\nagainst the spirit of Islam itself? This group, moreover, argues
\nthat for centuries Muslims have been living under the guidance of
\nsharia. Regardless of the fact whether sharia is formalized or
\nnot, they have practiced it, anyway.<\/p>\n
Let us learn from history. Let us look at Iran back in the
\n1980s. Two years after the victory of the Islamic revolution,
\nKhomeini put restriction on women's space in the public sphere.
\nHe obligated women to wear jilbab (headscarfs) and imposed it on
\nwomen in markets, offices, schools and other public places. Under
\nthe banner of sharia, the Imam brought women back to the domestic
\nsphere as if it were advocated by sharia. While women were
\nKhomeini's strong supporters in the revolution, they turned out
\nto be marginalized and rigidly controlled after all the
\nvictories.<\/p>\n
Let's see Afghanistan. In the name of sharia, Taliban laid off
\nall of their women employees regardless of their status and
\npositions. They did not care whether the job was the sole source
\nof income for the women and their families. Women were banned
\nfrom education. Women teachers and women doctors were not allowed
\nto work. Those who secretly continued the work in their homes
\nwere whipped when discovered.<\/p>\n
A book titled My Hidden Face written by an Afghan teenage girl
\nvividly illustrates her testimony about all the atrocities. And
\nall of these were committed in the name of the sharia.<\/p>\n
One may argue that sharia in Aceh will have its own form,
\nwhich does not resemble Iran or Afghanistan. "We are obviously
\ndifferent from those in Afghanistan or Iran. We are Indonesian,
\nwith our own cultures," said a government official in Aceh in an
\ninterview. But who can guarantee it? Who can ensure that sharia
\nin Aceh will do justice to women, when many prominent ulema
\nunderstand the Koran textually to refer to men's superiority over
\nwomen?<\/p>\n
A study was conducted in January this year in Aceh to document
\npeople's understanding, opinions and feelings about sharia.
\nOrdinary people, teachers, housewives, activists and
\nintellectuals were interviewed in depth. Interestingly most
\nrespondents felt misled by the formalization of sharia. They
\nunderstand sharia as all embracing to include justice, peace and
\nwelfare for all.<\/p>\n
When sharia was first enacted, they were hopeful that it would
\ndo justice to them, imposing qishas (equal punishment) to
\nperpetrators of violence or chopping the hands of corruptors who
\nhave stolen people's money. But they were disappointed when, two
\nyears later, sharia was concerned more with jilbab, controlling
\nwomen and formal rituals.<\/p>\n
The sign of formal sharia can also be seen in the use of
\nArabic letters on name boards, street signs or billboards. None
\nhas been done about people's welfare, justice or combating
\ncorruption, as if they were not within the scope of sharia.<\/p>\n
According to some respondents, there has been no change after
\nsharia was formalized two years ago. "Social ills such as KKN
\n(corruption, collusion and nepotism), prostitution or violence
\nagainst women remains unchanged," said one of the informants.<\/p>\n
What is actually the raison d'etre of sharia? The ultimate
\ngoal of sharia (maqasid al syari'ah), as widely understood and
\naccepted is the welfare of all people.<\/p>\n
The basic teachings of Islam, that should be reflected in the
\nimplementation of sharia, can be summarized in a few words. The
\nProphet Muhammad, when asked about this, referred to a verse in
\nthe Koran: "Allah commands justice (adl), the doing of good
\n(ihsan), and giving (of your wealth) to kith and kin " (an-Nahl:
\n90).<\/p>\n
These three teachings, when summarized into one, means
\njustice. The ultimate goal of sharia, welfare of all human beings
\nshould be achieved within the framework of justice, the basic
\nessence of Islam. Have we done justice in the formalization of
\nsharia?<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/formalization-of-sharia-a-true-answer-to-problems-in-aceh-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}