State must not interfere in interfaith marriages: Experts
The Jakarta Post, Jakarta
Demand for an end to the ban on interreligious marriages in the country remerged, with a woman activist calling the ban state intervention in its citizens personal affairs.
"Interfaith marriage is a decision made by people who know what they should do with their lives, so it's not something that should be decided by the state. The state cannot be allowed to impose its way of thinking on its citizens," said Ade Kusuma Ningtyas of the Rahima Center for Education and Information on Islamic and Women Rights Issues.
She stressed that choices have to be made available for those who want to marry someone of a different religion, by providing them a complete explanation on the impact it will bring.
"Marriage is a personal choice, as is religion. Religious authorities and the state should provide comprehensive information for those who want to have such a marriage, but not by banning it," said head of the research division at Rahima.
The issue was brought up during a discussion at the office of the country's largest Muslim organization Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) in Jakarta on Saturday titled "Interreligious Marriage: Learning from Various Countries' Experiences."
Law No. 1/1974 on marriage, stipulates that the state will only recognize marriages between people of the same religion. This means a man and woman from different religious backgrounds must choose to marry in accordance with one religion, so that their marriage will be acknowledged by the state.
A number of celebrities and expatriates have had their inter- religious marriage recognized by getting married in Singapore or Australia, countries where the practice is legitimate.
Ade said that a move to accept interfaith marriages was also crucial to help develop a more pluralist and tolerant society in the world's largest Muslim country.
Ade said that Sharia (Islamic Law) has been misinterpreted by Indonesian Muslims, by considering it the final word from God and forgetting that human beings have interpreted the verses of the Koran.
"There were human interventions in interpreting the verses of the Koran in terms of rules and laws in society, which then were enforced by the state," said Nining.
She explained that the laws, which were assumed by the state based on Islamic teachings, were formulated by people of certain beliefs and schools of thought, therefore its application had disregarded differences among Muslims.
Speaking at Saturday's discussion was Abdullahi Ahmed An- Na'im, an expert on sharia at Emory University school of law, in the U.S. who believes religions are dynamic and have to be developed according to the changes of time.
"Sharia ceases to be sharia by the very act of enacting it as state law, because then it becomes the political will of the state, not the religious law of Muslims. If it is the religious law of Muslims, it should remain a matter of free choice," he said in an interview in 2004.
"As a Muslim, I'm entitled to chose one opinion over another, but if you make it state law, you deny me that right." (006)