'Syariah' bid based on false assumption<\/p>\n
The People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) has decided to
\npostpone for a year deliberations on the possible inclusion of
\nsyariah (Islamic law) in the Constitution. The rector of the
\nSyarif Hidayatullah State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN),
\nAzyumardi Azra, discusses the possible political and sociological
\nimpacts of including syariah in the Constitution.<\/p>\n
Question: After 55 years of Indonesian independence, why is
\nthere a demand among some Muslim groups to reintroduce into the
\nConstitution a clause which will require Indonesian Muslims to
\nadhere to syariah, while the clause was dropped in 1945 for the
\nsake of national unity?<\/p>\n
Answer: Certain Muslim groups apparently see that political
\nliberalization after the fall of former president Soeharto has
\ngiven them an opportunity to reintroduce the seven words into the
\n1945 Constitution demanding Indonesian Muslims adhere to Islamic
\nsyariah.<\/p>\n
Are their motivations political or religious?<\/p>\n
Some have a genuine motivation to see the reinforcement of
\nIslamic law with political support from the state, but some
\nothers want to use the issue to look for public support for their
\nown political interests.<\/p>\n
Such a proposal can emerge if Muslim parties are politically
\nmarginalized and they think they have no power to overcome their
\nproblems. So such a proposal is a short-cut decision in solving
\nproblems. But the proposal is not supported by political and
\nsocial reality.<\/p>\n
Participants of the recent congress of the Mujahidin in
\nYogyakarta said the main objective of the inclusion of syariah in
\nthe Constitution was the establishment of a khilafah, or one
\nleadership for all Muslims in the world, like the leadership of
\nthe pope in the Vatican for Catholics. Is that realistic?<\/p>\n
They seem to have misunderstood the term khilafah. The pope's
\nleadership is limited to religious affairs only, while Khalifah,
\nthe one holding the position of leadership, has political
\nauthority. Perhaps the pope's leadership is, in some way, similar
\nto the imamah, or the leadership among the Shi'ite Muslims (as in
\nIran). Anyway, khilafah is not workable and viable for nation-
\nstates.<\/p>\n
How much support does the proposal have in Indonesia's Muslim
\nsociety?<\/p>\n
That's difficult to measure. As far as we know, the proposal
\nwas supported in the MPR's Annual Session by small factions, such
\nas the United Development Party (PPP) and the Crescent Star Party
\n(PBB), while the big factions, including Golkar Party and the
\nIndonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan), which
\nare supported by substantial numbers of Muslim constituents, were
\nagainst the proposal. Furthermore, mainstream Muslim
\norganizations like Nahdlatul Ulama and Muhammadiyah are also
\nopposing the proposal.<\/p>\n
What could happen if these factions continue to insist on
\namending the Constitution's preamble and Article 29 on religion
\nto include the proposed clause?<\/p>\n
That would cause social disintegration, not only between
\nMuslims and non-Muslims but also among Muslims themselves.<\/p>\n
Non-Muslims, particularly Christians and Catholics, will fear
\nbeing discriminated against by the state and will doubt whether
\ntheir rights will be respected. Unlike Muslims, some of whom
\nthink the state must play a role in the enforcement of Islamic
\nlaw, Christians and Catholics believe the government should not
\ninterfere in religious affairs.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, because Indonesian Muslims have different levels of
\nunderstanding of and attachment to Islam, the reintroduction of
\nthe proposed clause will cause friction among Muslims. The
\nabangan Muslims (those who do not adhere strictly to Islam) will
\nsurely resist it on the grounds that they are not mentally
\nprepared to implement Islamic teachings.<\/p>\n
Would the reintroduction of the clause in the Constitution
\nturn Indonesia into an Islamic state?<\/p>\n
Some Islamic groups want to establish an Islamic country by
\nimitating other countries, like Saudi Arabia and Iran. But based
\non Islamic norms, it is questionable whether such countries can
\nbe said to be Islamic. Saudi Arabia, for example, is said to use
\nthe Koran as its constitution but laws are not enforced fairly
\nthere because there is legal discrimination between citizens and
\nforeigners. Moreover, whether a kingdom has an administrative
\nsystem acceptable to Islam is still debatable.<\/p>\n
Thus we can say that their proposal is based on the false
\nassumption that it would, if implemented, solve problems. But, in
\nfact, there is no such guarantee. Legal problems are so complex.<\/p>\n
Now that the MPR has decided to continue deliberating the
\nproposal at next year's Annual Session, what measures should we
\ntake to reduce social friction?<\/p>\n
Muslim organizations, like the Indonesian Ulemas Council,
\nshould take the initiative to sponsor in-depth discussions about
\nthe consequences of the implementation of syariah based on
\nnormative, historical, sociological and political perspectives.<\/p>\n
Dialogs should also be held between Muslim and non-Muslim
\ngroups, so non-Muslim parties will not be haunted by exaggerated
\nfears about the implementation of syariah, which could encourage
\nthem to make threats to take up a separatist movement. (Rikza
\nAbdullah)<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/syariah-bid-based-on-false-assumption-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}