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.