The politics of religious pluralism

The politics of religious pluralism

Muhamad Ali, Lecturer, Syarif Hidayatullah State
Islamic University (UIN), Jakarta, muhamad@hawaii.edu

Religion has become part of not only private but also public
life in Indonesia as elsewhere. The question about how the state
should deal with religious pluralism remains unresolved and
therefore needs to be rethought.

The Indonesian Constitution clearly states that every person
has the right to worship according to his or her own religion and
beliefs. The government has so far given official recognition in
the form of representation at the Ministry of Religion to five
major religions and indigenous beliefs (aliran kepercayaan). In
January 2000, the ban on the practice of Confucism that had
existed since 1967 was lifted. While only five religions are
officially recognized, the law also states that other religions
are not forbidden.

However, there are still some restrictions on certain types of
religious activity and civil administration that are felt by
Confucians and the adherents of other minority religions.

For example, many Confucians still have difficulties with
civil registration. The National Identity Card (KTP) should state
the religion of the holder. Confucians have not been legally
allowed to state their religion on their identity card.
Accordingly, Confucians are precluded from renting venues to hold
services.

Because they cannot register they are forced to find
alternative means to practice their faith, to be hypocritical by
stating an official religion other than their own -- for example,
by identifying themselves as Buddhists -- or run the risk of not
being issued with an identity card. The failure to state a
religion would mean being refused an ID card, something that is
required for employment and other purposes.

Some groups have urged the government to abolish the need to
state one's religion on one's ID card. However, little if any
progress has been made. Activists have noted bureaucratic
resistance to change and say that the Muslim majority see no need
to remove the requirement. They say that stating a person's
religion on his ID card is necessary so that if he dies and his
body is not claimed by relatives, the authorities will be able to
ensure appropriate treatment for the remains.

Such resistance shows a lack of understanding about the
principle of equal citizenship.

Certain policies, laws and official actions restrict religious
freedom, and the police and military occasionally tolerate
discrimination against and abuse of religious groups by private
organizations. Although the Constitution does not discriminate,
there is de facto discrimination that limits the access of
minorities to government jobs and places in public universities.

Although the adherents of minority religions are able to
obtain police permits to hold meetings in hotels and other public
places, there are still some difficulties registering marriages,
enrolling children in schools and concerning other civil matters
in some areas. They are unable to register their marriages at the
Civil Registration Office because they do not belong to one of
the five recognized religions. Also it is difficult to obtain
official recognition for interfaith marriages between Muslims and
non-Muslims. These difficulties result in some persons
converting, often superficially, in order to get married and some
others going abroad to get married.

Some leaders of religious minorities have also expressed
concerns that the onset of decentralization and enhanced regional
autonomy in the country, which is designed to empower provincial
and district governments, might result in the issuance of
regulations by local officials that could erode the rights of
minorities to practice their religions. This worry has become
more pronounced in some areas where Islamic Law is being or is to
be applied. The implementation of Islamic Law is rejected by
minorities as it will undermine religious tolerance and
pluralism.

The state should serve as an agent of religious pluralism in
that it should pursue the politics of recognition. All men and
women should have equal religious and civil rights -- private
rights and public rights. No religion should be excluded from
state recognition. Everyone should be recognized because everyone
is authentic, unique, and equal.

The government should be aware that they have mistakenly left
minorities unrecognized or misrecognized. A person or a group
could suffer real damage and real distortion as a result.
Nonrecognition or misrecognition can inflict harm, can be a form
of oppression, imprisoning someone in a false, distorted and
reduced mode of being.

Misrecognition shows not just a lack of due respect. It can
inflict a grievous wound, saddling its victims with a crippling
self-hatred. Due recognition is not just a courtesy we owe
people. It is a vital human need. As the philosopher Rousseau put
it "le sentiment de l'existence" should be respected.

Every one shares the dignity inherent in human beings, or the
dignity of the citizen. Universalism emphasizes the equal dignity
of all citizens, and the state should be concerned about the
equalization of rights and entitlements. The state should avoid
the existence of "first-class" and "second-class" citizens.

For some, equalization affects concerns religious rights; for
others, it concerns civil rights and voting rights, and even the
socio-economic sphere. But despite all the differences of
interpretation, the principle of equal citizenship has come to be
universally accepted and any violation of this principle
constitutes a violation against human dignity.

The politics of equal dignity should be tied to the politics
of recognition. With the politics of recognition, everyone should
be recognized for his or her unique identity. With the politics
of equal dignity, what is established is meant to be universally
the same, an identical basket of rights and entitlements. Both
politics are manifestations of the principle of equal
citizenship.

The government should ensure that all laws and regulations are
in accordance with the principle of religious freedom, increase
religious harmony and interfaith dialogue, encourage comparative
religious education and increase the role and function of
religious institutions in overcoming the difficulties of social
change, and strengthen interreligious and interethnic harmony.

The writer is Ph.D student in History, University of Hawaii at
Manoa, and a fellow of the East-West Center, Hawaii.