Autonomy revives hopes on sharia law

Autonomy revives hopes on sharia law

By Fajar Nursahid

JAKARTA (JP): The recent passage of a bill granting special
autonomy for Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam, which includes a provision
for the implementation of sharia (Islamic laws) for Muslims
there, has revived discussion on the subject.

Inspired by Aceh, some Muslim groups in South and Central
Sulawesi provinces have renewed their call for the adoption of
the Islamic law in their own regions. In strife-torn Maluku,
commander of the Muslim Laskar Jihad Dja'far Umar Thalib recently
led the stoning to death of a member who committed adultery. This
led to a charge of disobedience of the prevailing laws, dragging
the commander into a controversy over Indonesia's judiciary and
secular laws.

About 56 years ago, shortly after Indonesia became independent
and Pancasila was declared the state ideology, a similar call to
have Islamic law enforced as Indonesia's law was also voiced.

The idea to make Pancasila the state ideology then created a
stir among Muslim groups that wanted Islam to be the foundation
and inspiration for a state ideology.

Deliberations that followed resulted in the acceptance of
Islam as the Preamble of the Jakarta Chapter, which later became
the basis for the Preamble of the 1945 Constitution.

The Jakarta Preamble read as follows: "Believing in God and
obliging the followers of Islam to exercise Islamic laws in
accordance with a just and civilized humanity, the unity of
Indonesia, and democracy guided by the inner wisdom in the
unanimity arising out of deliberations among representatives, and
to produce social justice for all Indonesian people."

The formulation was approved by the Committee of Nine, which
was a group of national figures representing Muslim, nationalist
and Christian groups. On June 22, 1945, the committee decided to
respect the majority, the Muslims, and agreed to adopt the Islam-
based formulation of the state ideology.

The signing of the formulation showed the degree of tolerance
of the national leaders at the time.

Controversies soon emerged over the wording, "obliging its
followers to exercise Islamic laws." People feared that it would
spawn narrow-minded fanaticism. But Agus Salim, the then
prominent Muslim leader and Constituent Assembly member said,
" ... followers of other religions do not have to worry; their
security does not depend on the power of the state, but rather on
the population that is 90 percent Muslim."

Agus Salim pointed out that even though Islam was to be
formally acknowledged as the system of national values, non-
Muslims need not have worried because the Muslims, he asserted,
were tolerant and respectful of other groups.

Sukarno, the chairman of the Assembly meeting, said the
clause represented a compromise, painfully reached between Islam
and other groups in the country. In other words, the Jakarta
chapter was a gentleman's agreement between two parties.

The meeting was capped with the following conclusion: "Since
no party has an objection to the other subject matters, the main
points in the Preamble are considered accepted".

The clause in the Jakarta Chapter saying that Islamic laws
were to be used as the basic formulation for the state ideology
was later amended in the meeting of the Preparatory Committee for
Indonesia's independence on Aug. 18, 1945.

Surprisingly, the spirit of Islam failed to be codified either
in the state foundation or in the Preamble of the 1945
Constitution. The omission sent out ripples among Muslims in the
country. Prawoto Mangkusasmito, the leader of the now defunct
Masyumi party, commented that it was an event that raised a
historic question.

More than 10 years later, Muslim leader M. Isa Anshary said at
the 1957 Constituent meeting that the Muslim community was
totally baffled by the incident, fraught with political
maneuvering against Islam, but added that the Muslims showed
their tolerance by not rebelling against the decision.

The attitude exhibited and the stance taken by the Muslims
were based on prudent reasoning, given that at that time
Indonesia was experiencing unfavorable circumstances, making it
impossible for them to impose their Islamic aspirations on
others.

The Muslim group then set aside their stance on the state
philosophy, hoping that they would deliberate the matter when the
opportunity presented itself later. To them, the pivotal issue
was to defend independence.

In 1961, Sukarno himself said, "Later in life, when we all can
live in peace, we will surely get all members of the People's
Consultative Assembly together to draw a more comprehensive and
perfect Constitution."

In keeping with Sukarno's pledge adamantly reiterating the
need to amend the 1945 Constitution, leading politician Kasman
Singodimedjo remarked that the omission of the Islamic spirit
from the Preamble was a blow to Muslims, adding that they had
refrained from taking inappropriate steps to avoid unnecessary
chaos.

To many national figures, the reinstatement of the 1945
Constitution after the July 5, 1959 Presidential Decree
(abolishing it) was the revival of the Jakarta Chapter.

Chairman of the Supreme Advisory Council Dr Ruslan Abdul Gani
from the Indonesian National Party, spelled out in Sukarno's
Manifesto of Political Orientation (Manipol) and the five guiding
principles of Sukarno's Administration (Usdek) in 1961 that the
Jakarta Chapter was the spirit that invigorated and formed an
integral part of the 1945 Constitution.

The position of the Jakarta Chapter in the current context
becomes obvious. It is therefore proper to keep alive the
struggle to enforce Islamic laws as a system of values legally
adhered to by the majority in Indonesia.

Increasing numbers of areas joining the chorus of calls to
implement Islamic laws as the law in the country are
understandable on the following grounds:

First, the enactment of Islamic laws is a promise to the
Muslims that must be fulfilled, given that the country is now
politically stable.

Second, the enforcement of Islamic laws is considered
necessary, as the prevailing laws have failed to create social
security and justice for the public in general.

Third, the enforcement of Islamic laws is a divine mandate.
Every Muslim must have trust in a divine legal system and is
mandated to implement such laws. The belief in such laws means
disowning secular laws which are not in line with the spirit of
Islam.

From several points of view, the stoning of the Laskar Jihad
member a few months ago in Ambon resulted from a belief that
Islamic laws must be exercised in all parts and under whatever
conditions in Indonesia.

The three points underlining the significance of Islamic law
enforcement will surely entail differences of opinion. Some
people think that the Islamic laws as demanded by some regions,
must be totally implemented so there is a need to overhaul the
prevailing secular laws.

Others, using a more realistic approach, maintain that some
teachings in the Islamic laws such as laws on marriage,
inheritance, banking law and others can be codified into the
prevailing laws. More Islamic laws will hopefully be included
within Indonesian laws in the near future and applied nationwide.

During its course, advocates of the Jakarta Chapter also
reiterated the need to adopt Islamic laws in our life, stating
that a society deserved to behave in a more religious manner by
consistently exercising Islamic laws.

Historically and politically speaking, Muslims in Indonesia
have the right to demand that the spirit of the Jakarta Chapter
is included in the 1945 Constitution. This would help improve
their performing of religious obligations in this country.

The writer is a lecturer at the University of Indonesia's School
of Social and Political Sciences in Jakarta.