Restrictions on religious freedom still rampant in Indonesia
Restrictions on religious freedom still rampant in Indonesia
Several churches in Jakarta and West Java were closed down by
force recently, prompting practitioners to conduct their prayers
outside their church. This issue has also gained attention from
the United States, which mentioned the restrictions on religious
freedom in the State Department's 2005 International Religious
Freedom Report released on Wednesday. Chairman of the Indonesian
Communion of Churches (PGI) Rev. Andreas Yewangoe spoke to The
Jakarta Post's Ridwan Max Sijabat on Thursday.
Question (Q): What is your comment on the U.S. State
Department's report?
Answer (A): With or without the report, restrictions and abuse
of religious freedom are still rampant in certain areas in the
country.
Several churches of denominations grouped under the PGI were
closed by force by a certain extreme group, a series of attacks
were launched on Ahmadiyah-owned mosques and properties, and a
Catholic education center in Tangerang was closed because it was
used as a house of worship. A number of church ministers in the
country's eastern region have been arrested for unspecified
reasons.
A stranger thing is that the state fails to enforce the law
when facing these restrictions. In certain areas, security
personnel just stood by (doing nothing) when churches were closed
by force by certain unauthorized groups, and those who
perpetrated these wrongdoings have never been brought to justice.
Thus, the core problem is that religious freedom is still
restricted, despite the Constitution that guarantees all
citizens' right to worship in accordance with their own faith.
Has the PGI filed a complaint on the closure of churches to
the government?
Yes, we have. We brought the issue to our meeting with Vice
President Jusuf Kalla at the latter's Jl. Merdeka Selatan office
three weeks ago to be handled properly and immediately, but so
far, no measures have been taken.
Will you explain the core problems behind the church closures?
Numerous reasons have been aired by perpetrators to justify
their actions. Some said the churches had no official permit from
the relevant authorities and had caused disturbances to the
surrounding areas, while others said houses and school buildings
could not be used as houses of worship. Many have also aired
allegations that the establishment of churches in predominantly
Muslim districts was aimed at proselytizing non-Christian locals.
Will you comment on the specified reasons?
We have to be extra-alert on this sensitive issue.
First of all, all citizens have the right to adhere to the
religion they choose, and to build their houses of worship in
places permitted by the relevant authorities.
Second, many churches may have made noise and caused traffic
jams, but these problems could be solved amicably and religions
should not be seen as the culprits behind them. It is extremely
unfair to sow hatred of a certain religion only because church
services were noisy or because churchgoers caused a traffic jam.
Regarding the permit issue, if the churches have no official
permit as is required by regulations, then they should be closed
by the government, and not by militiamen. All sides, including
hard-line groups, should respect the rule of law and let law
enforcers handle all kinds of legal violations.
Do you think the regulation on the establishment of houses of
worship is restrictive?
Very restrictive. Because, despite the new revision, the joint
ministerial decree requires irrational administrative
requirements to obtain official permits from local
administrations for the establishment of a church in a certain
district.
The problem is that the government has always claimed to have
stayed out of religions' internal affairs, but, in reality, they
have made many rulings dealing with religions. Administratively,
the government should regulate the establishment of churches,
mosques and temples in accordance with regional spatial zoning
and it should not need approval from locals where houses of
worship are established.
Many Christian communities have performed their Sunday prayers
in houses and other properties because of difficulties in
obtaining official permits to establish their churches from
authorities. In the meantime, many mosques are built without any
official permits.
How do you prevent the government from interfering in the
internal affairs of religions?
Despite the Constitution and the Pancasila state ideology
that stipulates the belief in Almighty God, the state must be
principally separated from religions because both have their own
authority. The state (and the government) is tolerated to
regulate certain matters on religious affairs in general. In
Indonesia, state-religion relations are quite intricate and have
been frequently complicated because of the absence of a national
commitment to upholding the pluralism-based state pendulum.
What should the government do?
The government should comply with the Constitution that
guarantees religious freedom and stay out of the internal affairs
of religions. And it should give equal treatment to all citizens
to practice their beliefs.
All discriminative and restrictive regulations, rulings,
decrees and bylaws that go against the Constitution should be
annulled. These restrictive rulings or edicts have encouraged
certain sides to use violence on other religions' adherents and
certain sects deemed deviant.
Authorities must stand neutral and take action against those
abusing religious freedom in order to uphold the government's
sovereignty.