im so proud of those women! if im in jakarta, im sooooo there!

mo pamer susu juga...gue mo nonton...hehehe....
heran artis-2nya ko gak pake bikini..... kalah sama waria....

Stoofy I agree with you, and now I can't imagine...do I should be under arrest when I'm wearing my traditional clothes (Javanese) like "Kemben" or "Kebaya" cause I found this "Some of the Javanese also have arts and cultural shows where the costumes are not appropriate under Muslims guidelines", this one example from the other....and maybe there's a lot of "prisoners" in jail after they attended a traditional wedding party cause their clothes was an appropiate, its ridicolous!!!!

Bogor shuts three places of worship
Theresia Sufa, The Jakarta Post, Bogor

The Gunung Putri district administration in Bogor regency, has stopped the activities of three Christian churches in Griya Bukit Jaya housing complex.

The decision was made Tuesday in a meeting between local officials, representatives from the district office of the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI), Minister Ridwan Kurniawan and Minister Karel Silitonga from the All Churches Coordinating Board (BKSG) in Bogor.

Gunung Putri administration secretary Asep Santana said Wednesday that in the meeting it was agreed that the churches would comply with the newly issued ministerial regulation prohibiting the use of residences or shop-houses as places of worship.

"A shop-house is a commercial premise, not a place to hold religious activities ... Only the inhabitants of a house are allowed to perform a religious service there," he asserted.

Two of the Christian congregations were holding church services in houses, while the third was held in a shop-house.

Asep referred to the joint regulation issued by the religious affairs minister and home minister that serves as a guideline for local administrations to prevent conflict among people of different religions.

The regulation stipulates that in the case where a building is used as a place of worship the organizers have to obtain approval from the regent or mayor and have to meet several requirements, including maintaining public order and peace in the community.

Asep acknowledged that the Christian ministers had previously come to him asking for approval to build permanent church buildings.

"I told them to join the existing churches such as the Bunda Hati Kudus Church in Kota Wisata housing estate," he said.

The new ministerial regulation that replaced the previous decree on the establishment of places of worship has made it a must for congregations to seek the approval of people of different religions in the community.

Furthermore, as most of the Christian sects are not grouped under a big church association and only have a few members, they prefer to hold services in rented conference rooms, shop-houses or residences.

Minister Ridwan Kurniawan of Pentecostal Indonesian Bethel Church (GBI), which usually holds services at a house in Griya Bukit Jaya housing complex, said that he had already obtained approval from the Bogor regent to build a church.

"During the meeting yesterday, I asked the district administration to allow us to hold services at the house until we can build a church. But we first have to get approval from Muslims in the neighborhood," he said.

"I don't know where else we can go while waiting for their decision."

Soal pakaian ini menjadi penting karena salah satu tokoh MUI pendukung RUU Porno mengatakan, “Pakaian adat Indonesia yang mempertontonkan aurat sebaiknya disimpan saja di musium. Itu harus dianggap sebagai pornoaksi dan harus masuk dalam kategori porno yang diatur dalam RUU APP. Simpan saja di musium, jangan dilestarikan, karena tidak sesuai dengan martabat bangsa ini. Biar jadi sejarah.” (KCM, 13/3/06)


Ini pernyataan paling melecehkan yang pernah saya dengar sepanjang debat tentang RUU APP. Ini jelas sudah bukan masalah moral lagi, tapi sudah menjadi suatu pergerakan berbau rasisme. Apalagi menyebut bahwa ada adat-adat tertentu yang 'tidak sesuai dengan martabat bangsa ini'. Berarti ada (suku) adat yang lebih rendah dari suku lainnya. Kalimat yang sangat memuakkan. Karena yang berbicara adalah seorang tokoh, sekarang saya benar-benar meragukan apa maksud RUU APP yang sebenarnya? Apakah tujuan 'perjuangan moral' yang selalu digembar gemborkan hanyalah suatu topeng untuk mendirikan pemerintahan yang fascist?

Coba saudara pikir, kalau adat anda dianggap 'tidak sesuai dengan martabat bangsa', berarti anda juga tidak layak untuk menjadi bagian bangsa ini; kecuali anda rela menerima adat2 yang 'lebih tinggi', yang tentunya sesuai dengan 'martabat bangsa'. Ini apa namanya kalau bukan penjajahan? Dan kalau ini terjadi jangan heran kalau kita melihat banyak daerah yang ingin merdeka. Mereka telah direndahkan dan dijajah. Dan setiap orang yang dijajah tentunya berhak menginginkan merdeka.

Indonesia baru berumur 60+ tahun, tapi kita semua sudah lupa dengan jasa2 para pahlawan dan pelopor bangsa kita. Perjuangan mereka untuk menciptakan Indonesia yg merdeka dan bersatu dianggap sampah. Tiap hari kita lihat lambang negara kita dibawahnya ada tulisan 'Bhinneka Tunggal Ika', apa artinya? Mungkin semua juga sudah lupa. Kalau jaman kemerdekaan dulu setiap suku ingin jadi 'suku tertinggi' di negara ini, apa mungkin kita bisa bersatu? Sama juga halnya dengan agama dan ras.

Hari ini saya benar-benar marah. Kalimat diatas tidak sepatutnya keluar dari mulut orang Indonesia yang sejati, apalagi seorang tokoh masyarakat. Saya tidak begitu perduli dengan ada tidaknya RUU APP, tapi bagi saya persatuan bangsa adalah sesuatu yang tidak bisa ditawar. Kita sering menuduh 'Australia ingin memecah Papua', 'Ada negara asing yang ingin Indonesia bubar', dsb. Sekarang kok malah saudara sendiri yang ingin memecah-belah.

I wish they would just allow freedom of worship in Indonesia. There's no reason to beat around the bush on this. It's not respecting the nature of Christianity to demand they go to other established churches.

To Fir3blaze:

:applause::applause::applause:

A lot of people including tokoh masyarakat these days have entirely forgotten the foundations in which Indonesia was built. It is these elements that attack foreign embassies for allegedly conspiring to destroy/breakup Indonesia, but in fact they themselves are guilty of disseminating hatred and division in society.

To Zorobabel - I absolutely agree with your comment. As I said, if Sukarno was still alive, he'd be quite sad to see what has happened in this country. Our founding fathers envisaged a tolerant multicultural society where people have freedom to worship, no matter what their religion is.

Ini pernyataan paling melecehkan yang pernah saya dengar sepanjang debat tentang RUU APP. Ini jelas sudah bukan masalah moral lagi, tapi sudah menjadi suatu pergerakan berbau rasisme. Apalagi menyebut bahwa ada adat-adat tertentu yang 'tidak sesuai dengan martabat bangsa ini'. Berarti ada (suku) adat yang lebih rendah dari suku lainnya. Kalimat yang sangat memuakkan. Karena yang berbicara adalah seorang tokoh, sekarang saya benar-benar meragukan apa maksud RUU APP yang sebenarnya? Apakah tujuan 'perjuangan moral' yang selalu digembar gemborkan hanyalah suatu topeng untuk mendirikan pemerintahan yang fascist?

Coba saudara pikir, kalau adat anda dianggap 'tidak sesuai dengan martabat bangsa', berarti anda juga tidak layak untuk menjadi bagian bangsa ini; kecuali anda rela menerima adat2 yang 'lebih tinggi', yang tentunya sesuai dengan 'martabat bangsa'. Ini apa namanya kalau bukan penjajahan? Dan kalau ini terjadi jangan heran kalau kita melihat banyak daerah yang ingin merdeka. Mereka telah direndahkan dan dijajah. Dan setiap orang yang dijajah tentunya berhak menginginkan merdeka.

Indonesia baru berumur 60+ tahun, tapi kita semua sudah lupa dengan jasa2 para pahlawan dan pelopor bangsa kita. Perjuangan mereka untuk menciptakan Indonesia yg merdeka dan bersatu dianggap sampah. Tiap hari kita lihat lambang negara kita dibawahnya ada tulisan 'Bhinneka Tunggal Ika', apa artinya? Mungkin semua juga sudah lupa. Kalau jaman kemerdekaan dulu setiap suku ingin jadi 'suku tertinggi' di negara ini, apa mungkin kita bisa bersatu? Sama juga halnya dengan agama dan ras.

Hari ini saya benar-benar marah. Kalimat diatas tidak sepatutnya keluar dari mulut orang Indonesia yang sejati, apalagi seorang tokoh masyarakat. Saya tidak begitu perduli dengan ada tidaknya RUU APP, tapi bagi saya persatuan bangsa adalah sesuatu yang tidak bisa ditawar. Kita sering menuduh 'Australia ingin memecah Papua', 'Ada negara asing yang ingin Indonesia bubar', dsb. Sekarang kok malah saudara sendiri yang ingin memecah-belah.

Saya setuju dengan pendapat anda, bangsa Indonesia bukan bangsa homogen atau negara agama, dan seharusnya mereka juga "SADAR" bahwa kita terdiri dr berbagai macam suku dan agama. Jangan memaksakan kehendak sendiri, itu sangat egois namanya!

Ini pernyataan paling melecehkan yang pernah saya dengar sepanjang debat tentang RUU APP. Ini jelas sudah bukan masalah moral lagi, tapi sudah menjadi suatu pergerakan berbau rasisme. Apalagi menyebut bahwa ada adat-adat tertentu yang 'tidak sesuai dengan martabat bangsa ini'. Berarti ada (suku) adat yang lebih rendah dari suku lainnya. Kalimat yang sangat memuakkan. Karena yang berbicara adalah seorang tokoh, sekarang saya benar-benar meragukan apa maksud RUU APP yang sebenarnya? Apakah tujuan 'perjuangan moral' yang selalu digembar gemborkan hanyalah suatu topeng untuk mendirikan pemerintahan yang fascist?

Coba saudara pikir, kalau adat anda dianggap 'tidak sesuai dengan martabat bangsa', berarti anda juga tidak layak untuk menjadi bagian bangsa ini; kecuali anda rela menerima adat2 yang 'lebih tinggi', yang tentunya sesuai dengan 'martabat bangsa'. Ini apa namanya kalau bukan penjajahan? Dan kalau ini terjadi jangan heran kalau kita melihat banyak daerah yang ingin merdeka. Mereka telah direndahkan dan dijajah. Dan setiap orang yang dijajah tentunya berhak menginginkan merdeka.

Indonesia baru berumur 60+ tahun, tapi kita semua sudah lupa dengan jasa2 para pahlawan dan pelopor bangsa kita. Perjuangan mereka untuk menciptakan Indonesia yg merdeka dan bersatu dianggap sampah. Tiap hari kita lihat lambang negara kita dibawahnya ada tulisan 'Bhinneka Tunggal Ika', apa artinya? Mungkin semua juga sudah lupa. Kalau jaman kemerdekaan dulu setiap suku ingin jadi 'suku tertinggi' di negara ini, apa mungkin kita bisa bersatu? Sama juga halnya dengan agama dan ras.

Hari ini saya benar-benar marah. Kalimat diatas tidak sepatutnya keluar dari mulut orang Indonesia yang sejati, apalagi seorang tokoh masyarakat. Saya tidak begitu perduli dengan ada tidaknya RUU APP, tapi bagi saya persatuan bangsa adalah sesuatu yang tidak bisa ditawar. Kita sering menuduh 'Australia ingin memecah Papua', 'Ada negara asing yang ingin Indonesia bubar', dsb. Sekarang kok malah saudara sendiri yang ingin memecah-belah.



absolutely right. whoever it is that said that, should be the one thrown into the museum.

hahahah Yea Agree 100%^^. Maybe you can send your Tanggapan to SBY, Fir3Blaze. That'll be Great!!

Pro-Kontra RUU APP, NU Mau ke Mana?

Muhtadin AR

eputusan Pengurus Besar Nahdlatul Ulama (PBNU) yang "mendukung sepenuhnya" Rancangan Undang-undang Anti Pornografi dan Pornoaksi (RUU APP) untuk segera disahkan menjadi undang-undang (UU), ternyata tidak sepenuhnya diamini oleh warganya. Buktinya, beberapa anak muda yang tergabung dalam Forum Anak Muda NU, justru membuat pernyataan yang isinya menolak RUU APP tersebut. (NU Online, 3/4).

Sikap bertolak belakang ini meskipun mengesankan bahwa perbedaan adalah hal biasa, sesuatu yang positif, dan NU sangat familiar dengan situasi demikian, namun kenyataan tersebut sedikit menguak tabir, bahwa pola komunikasi yang tumbuh antara mereka yang ada di struktur (pengurus) dan di luar struktur ternyata tidak terjalin dengan baik.

Kenyataan demikian, bisa dilihat dari reaksi Ketua Umum PBNU (KH Hasyim Muzadi) yang menganggap bahwa gerakan Forum Anak Muda NU itu tak dikenal dalam struktur di PBNU, ekstrem dan tidak ada forumnya di PBNU. (NU Online, 3/4)

Sekjen Lesbumi (salah satu lembaga di NU), Diennaldo bahkan menuding bahwa pernyataan Forum Anak Muda NU itu hanya untuk mencari popularitas, dijadikan alat bagi kaum kapitalis, dan dimanfaatkan pers (NU Online, 3/4). Pun demikian dengan pernyataan Ketua IPNU (Banom NU), Mujtahidur Ridlo yang meminta agar semua warga NU patuh dengan keputusan PBNU yang mendukung RUU APP. (NU Online, 5/4).

Menghadapi situasi demikian, lalu muncul pertanyaan: di mana sebaiknya NU memposisikan diri? Mendukung RUU APP seperti yang dilakukan PBNU, atau menolak seperti yang dilakukan para anak mudanya? Pertanyaan semacam ini, terasa penting karena sebagai organisasi kemasyarakatan, NU memiliki tanggung jawab yang sangat besar untuk bisa mendialogkan keinginan pemerintah (negara) dengan keinginan masyarakat.

Jika benar bahwa keberadaan RUU APP ini dimaksudkan untuk mengatur agar masyarakat bisa berperilaku lebih "sopan" di depan umum, termasuk di media cetak dan elektronik (pasal 2 dan 3), mengapa negara tidak memaksimalkan instrumen hukum yang sudah ada, misalnya UU Pokok Pers, UU Penyiaran, UU Perlindungan Anak? Bukankah munculnya RUU ini lalu bisa ditafsirkan sebagai keinginan negara untuk mengintervensi seluruh aspek kehidupan masyarakat, termasuk tata cara mereka berbusana?

Di sinilah sebenarnya, kita layak mempertanyakan keputusan PBNU mendukung RUU APP tersebut. Mengapa organisasi yang dikenal sangat toleran ini justru secara formal begitu "kencang" mendukung agar RUU ini segera disahkan menjadi undang-undang? Ada apa di balik keputusan tersebut?

Jika argumennya adalah untuk melindungi akhlak generasi muda, moralitas bangsa, maka menjadi tugas siapa penjagaan akhlak itu? Negara, ormas seperti NU, atau individu? Pertanyaan ini penting dikedepankan karena dua hal. Pertama, munculnya suatu aturan atau perundang-undangan sesungguhnya adalah bentuk ketakutan negara terhadap masyarakatnya. Negara menganggap, masyarakat adalah kumpulan individu-individu yang di dalamnya banyak orang liar (homo criminalis). Maka satu-satu cara untuk menjinakkan mereka adalah dengan membuat aturan sebanyak-banyaknya agar mereka tidak bisa berbuat sesuka hatinya.

Kedua, peraturan yang sangat ketat selalu muncul karena ketidakpercayaan. Negara tidak percaya dengan kemampuan masyarakat mengelola perilakunya. Negara menganggap, jika tidak diatur sedemikian rupa, pasti masyarakat akan berperilaku norak, tidak peduli dengan tata krama, dan cenderung ingin bebas sebebas-bebasnya. Maka untuk membuat masyarakat beradab dan bermoral, mereka harus diatur dengan undang-undang.

Banyaknya aturan yang dibuat oleh negara untuk mengatur masyarakat, dalam pandangan Michel Foucault (The History of Sexuality: 2002) merupakan bentuk kegagalan negara membangun komunikasi dengan masyarakatnya. Negara tidak percaya dengan kemampuan masyarakat mengelola dirinya sendiri, sementara masyarakat menganggap negara terlalu banyak intervensi dengan privasinya.

Dalam posisi seperti ini, apakah NU harus mendukung RUU APP atau menolaknya, menurut hemat saya, problemnya bukan terletak pada mendukung atau menolak, tetapi lebih pada bagaimana NU membangun relasi dan mengambil posisi dengan negara, dan masyarakat.

Dengan negara, NU mesti harus bisa memposisikan dirinya bukan sebagai pendukung, selalu mengiyakan setiap kebijakan yang ada, apalagi menjadi pelindung bagi setiap kebijakan yang dikeluarkan pemerintah. Tetapi lebih sebagai pengingat dan pengontrol (informal) bagi kebijakan-kebijakan yang tidak memihak masyarakat.

Posisi seperti ini mutlak harus dilakukan karena NU bukanlah instrumen negara, sehingga dia tidak memiliki kewajiban untuk menjelaskan kepada masyarakat setiap kebijakan yang ada. NU adalah organisasi kemasyarakatan independen, yang kalaupun akhirnya NU di kemudian hari harus menjelaskan kebijakan negara kepada masyarakat luas, itu semata-mata karena tanggung jawabnya untuk mewujudkan kemaslahatan, bukan sebagai kepanjangan tangan atau atas pesanan dari pemerintah.

Sementara dengan masyarakat, NU harus mengambil posisi sebagai pengayom dan pelindung. Itu berarti, NU harus selalu peka dengan seluruh isu dan kebijakan yang merugikan masyarakat. Jika benar bahwa munculnya RUU APP ini karena ketakutan dan ketidakpercayaan negara terhadap masyarakatnya, dan pada akhirnya hanya meminggirkan kekayaan khazanah lokal, maka tidak ada jalan lain kecuali NU harus melindungi mereka.

Posisi demikian mutlak harus diambil NU bukan sekadar untuk menjaga identitasnya, sebagai organisasi yang peduli dengan khazanah lokal (lokalitas), tetapi juga agar keberadaan organisasi ini bisa dirasakan manfaatnya. Bayangkan seandainya NU mutlak mendukung RUU APP, kemudian setelah diterapkan banyak identitas lokal yang terpaksa harus tergerus, bukankah keberadaan NU justru menjadi masalah? Karena NU kemudian menjelma menjadi corong pemerintah dengan mengatakan bahwa RUU ini adalah demi keselamatan bangsa.

Sekarang, terserah NU mau memilih jalan yang mana dalam menyikapi RUU APP ini? Miring ke kanan dan condong ke arah negara seperti yang dipilih PBNU, atau berdiri di tengah-tengah untuk melakukan kerja-kerja sosial, melakukan pendidikan, pemberdayaan, dan kritis dengan setiap kebijakan pemerintah yang tidak memihak masyarakat.

Jika disinyalir bahwa akhlak dan moralitas bangsa ini akan hancur andai RUU ini tidak segera diundangkan, mengapa PBNU tidak berpikir tentang pentingnya meningkatkan kualitas pendidikan akhlak dalam lingkungan yang paling kecil, misalnya memulai dari diri sendiri (ibda' binafsik), rumah tangga dan lingkungan sekitar? Mengapa PBNU tidak berpikir bagaimana caranya agar penegak hukum di negeri ini bisa bertindak profesional dengan menjalankan seluruh ketentuan yang telah mengatur tentang pornografi dan pornoaksi, seperti yang termaktub dalam UU Pokok Pers, UU Penyiaran, dan lain-lain?

Mengapa para pengurus NU justru berketetapan, bahwa untuk menyelesaikan moralitas bangsa caranya adalah dengan menerbitkan undang-undang. Apakah dengan undang-undang semua masalah akan selesai? Inilah pekerjaan rumah yang harus segera dirumuskan NU agar dalam memberikan sumbangsihnya untuk masa depan bangsa, tidak salah cara. NU dalam posisi ini mestinya harus mengambil prakarsa agar dominasi negara atas masyarakatnya bisa ditekan (atau dikurangi), bukan malah sebaliknya, mendukung langkah-langkah dominasi yang sedang dilakukan negara. Wallahu a'lam.


Penulis adalah mahasiswa Program Pascasarjana UIN Jakarta

Jakartans...brace for Tangerang-style "morality" bylaws.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

MUI DKI Usulkan Perda Antikemaksiatan
Rabu, 26 April 2006 | 01:09 WIB

TEMPO Interaktif, Jakarta:Majelis Ulama Indonesia DKI Jakarta mengusulkan dibuatnya peraturan daerah mengenai antikemaksiatan. Peraturan itu mengikuti jejak Perda Tangerang tentang Pelacuran dan Miras.

"Aturan yang kami usulkan lebih komprehensif," kata Ketua MUI DKI Jakarta, Hamdan Rasyid, kemarin. Pernyataan itu dilontarkan usai pertemuan 10 ulama dengan Kepala Polda Metro Jaya, Inspektur Jenderal Firman Gani.

Menurut Hamdan, aturan yang komprehensif memuat hal seperti antiperjudian, antipelacuran, antipornografi dan antiminuman keras. "Segala bentuk kemaksiatan, tak hanya pelacuran dan miras," ujar Hamdan.

Menurut Ketua Umum MUI DKI Jakarta, Munzir Tamam, aturan yang diusulkan tak semata mengikuti aturan di Tangerang. "Konsepnya sejak lama sudah kami pikirkan," ujarnya. Pentingnya aturan itu, katanya, untuk mengurangi kemaksiatan yang telah mewabah di wilayah ibukota.

Dalam waktu dekat, katanya, akan segera dibuat tim khusus untuk menyusun draf Perda Antikemaksiatan. Rujukan pun akan diambil dari draf Perda No 8/2005. Setelah draf rampung, akan diserahkan ke dewan dan pemerintah daerah.

yuliawati



MUI DKI: Perda Tanggerang Diadopsi Spiritnya Saja
Kamis, 27 April 2006 | 16:48 WIB

TEMPO Interaktif, Jakarta:Sekretaris Komisi Fatwa Majelis Ulama Indonesia (MUI) DKI Jakarta, Kholil Nafits penyusunan kebijakan di DKI Jakarta tidak perlu mengadopsi perda kesusilaan Tanggerang mentah-mentah. "Konteks tiap daerah berbeda-beda," jelasnya ketika dihubungi Kamis (27/4).

Dia mengatakan pihaknya memang merekomendasikan agar Jakarta meniru Tanggerang dalam hal mengatur kesusilaan umum dengan menggunakan peraturan daerah. "Jakarta kan tolak ukur," katanya.

Akan tetapi, lanjut Kholil, Jakarta adalah daerah yang sangat heterogen. Semisal perda kesusilaan disetujui untuk diterapkan di Jakarta, penyusunannya harus melalui pengkajian peta sosial yang matang. "Agar tidak merusak pluralitas dan hukum harus benar-benar hidup di masyarakat," ujarnya.

Kholil mengatakan, yang perlu diadopsi dari Perda kesusilaan di Tanggerang cukup spiritnya saja yakni menciptakan tatanan yang baik untuk memperbaiki moral. Perda kesusilaan di Jakarta, dia menegaskan, tidak boleh melanggar undang-undang yang berlaku di Indonesia.

Terlkait rekomendasi agar Jakarta meniru Tanggerang itu, kata Kholil, pihaknya telah menjalin koordinasi dengan polda metro jaya dan pemerintah DKI Jakarta. Agenda komunikasi berikutnya ke DPRD DKI Jakarta. Kholil tidak bersedia menjelaskan tanggapan dari pihak polda. Sedangkan pemerintah darerah Jakarta, menurut dia baru menyetujui prinsipnya secara umum.

Target rekomendasi itu tercapai, kata Kholil, belum dapat ditentukan. "Inginnya secepatnya, tapi yang lebih penting bisa dipahami publik nantinya, karena itu perlu komunikasi dan diskusi publik yang panjang," katanya. Harun Mahbub

Rabu, 08 Maret 2006

*’RUU Porno’: Arab atau Indonesia?
*Goenawan Mohamad

Seorang teman saya, seorang Indonesia, ibu dari tiga anak dewasa, pernah berkunjung ke Arab Saudi. Ia tinggal di sebuah keluarga di Riyadh. Pada suatu hari ia ingin berjalan ke luar rumah. Sebagaimana adat di sana, ia bersama saudaranya yang tinggal di kota itu melangkah di jalan dengan purdah hitam lengkap. Hanya sepasang matanya yang tampak.

Tapi ia terkejut. Di perjalanan beberapa puluh meter itu, tiba-tiba dua mobil, penuh lelaki, mengikuti mereka, mengitari mereka. Mata para penumpangnya nyalang memandangi dua perempuan yang seluruh tubuhnya tertutup itu.

“Apa ini?” tanya perempuan Indonesia itu kesal.

Cerita ini nyata–dan bisa jadi bahan ketika DPR membahas RUU “Anti Pornografi dan Pornoaksi” (kita singkat saja: “RUU Porno”). Cerita ini menunjukkan bahwa dengan pakaian apa pun, perempuan dapat dianggap merangsang berahi lelaki. Tapi siapa yang salah?

“Yang dapat membangkitkan nafsu berahi adalah haram,” kata Fatwa MUI Nomor 287 Tahun 2001. Bagi MUI, yang dianggap sebagai sumber “nafsu berahi” adalah yang dilihat, bukan yang melihat. Yang dilihat bagi MUI adalah benda-benda (majalah, film, buku–dan perempuan!), sedang yang melihat adalah orang, subyek, yaitu laki-laki.

“RUU Porno” itu, seperti fatwa MUI, jelas membawa semangat laki-laki, dengan catatan khusus: semangat itu mengingatkan saya akan para pria yang berada di dua mobil dalam cerita di atas. Mereka melihat “rangsangan” di mana saja.

Di Tanah Arab (khususnya di Arab Saudi yang dikuasai kaum Wahabi yang keras), sikap mudah terangsang dan takut terangsang cukup merata, berjalinan, mungkin karena sejarah sosial, keadaan iklim, dan lain-lain. Saya tak hendak mengecam itu.

Soalnya lain jika semangat “takut terangsang” itu diimpor (dengan didandani di sana-sini) ke Indonesia, atas nama “Islam” atau “moralitas”.

Masalah yang ditimbulkan “RUU Porno” lebih serius ketimbang soal bagaimana merumuskan pengertian “merangsang” itu. RUU ini sebuah ujian bagi masa depan Indonesia: apakah Republik 17 ribu pulau ini–yang dihuni umat beragam agama dan adat ini–akan dikuasai oleh satu nilai seperti di Arab Saudi? Adilkah bila nilai-nilai satu golongan (apalagi yang belum tentu merupakan mayoritas) dipaksakan ke golongan lain?

Saya katakan nilai-nilai di balik “RUU Porno” datang dari satu golongan “yang belum tentu merupakan mayoritas”, sebab tak semua orang muslim sepakat menerima nilai-nilai yang diilhami paham Wababbi itu. Tak semua orang muslim Indonesia bersedia tanah airnya dijadikan sebuah varian Arab Saudi.

Ini pokok kebangsaan yang mendasar. “Kebangsaan” ini bukan nasionalisme sempit yang menolak nilai-nilai asing. Bangsa ini boleh menerima nilai-nilai Wahabi, sebagaimana juga kita menerima Konfusianisme, loncat indah, dan musik rock. Maksud saya dengan persoalan kebangsaan adalah kesediaan kita untuk menerima pluralisme, kebinekaan, dan juga menerima hak untuk berbeda dalam mencipta dan berekspresi.

Mari kita baca sepotong kalimat dalam “RUU Porno” itu:

Dalam penjelasan pasal 25 disebutkan bahwa larangan buat “pornoaksi” (sic!) dikecualikan bagi “cara berbusana dan/atau tingkah laku yang menjadi kebiasaan menurut adat istiadat dan/atau budaya kesukuan”. Tapi ditambahkan segera: “sepanjang berkaitan dengan pelaksanaan ritus keagamaan atau kepercayaan”.

Artinya, orang Indonesia hanya bebas berbusana jika pakaiannya terkait dengan “adat istiadat” dan “budaya kesukuan”. Bagaimana dengan rok dan celana pendek yang tak ada dalam “adat istiadat” dan “budaya kesukuan”?

Tak kalah merisaukan: orang Jawa, Bali, Papua, dan lain-lain, yang berjualan di pasar atau lari pagi di jalan, harus “berbusana” menurut selera dan nilai-nilai “RUU Porno”. Kalau tidak, mereka akan dihukum karena berjualan di pasar dan lari pagi tidak “berkaitan dengan pelaksanaan ritus keagamaan atau kepercayaan”.

Ada lagi ketentuan: “Setiap orang dilarang membuat tulisan, suara atau rekaman suara, film atau yang dapat disamakan dengan film, syair lagu, puisi, gambar, foto, dan/atau lukisan yang mengeksploitasi daya tarik bagian tubuh tertentu yang sensual dari orang dewasa”.

Jika ini diterima, saya pastikan kesenian Indonesia akan macet. Para pelukis akan waswas, sastra Indonesia akan kehilangan puisi macam Chairil, Rendra, dan Sutardji serta novel macam Belenggu atau Saman. Koreografi Gusmiati Suid atau Maruti akan terbungkam, dan film kita, yang pernah melahirkan karya Teguh Karya, Arifin C. Noer, Garin Nugroho, sampai dengan Riri Riza dan Rudi Sujarwo akan menciut ketakutan. Juga dunia periklanan, dunia busana, dan media.

Walhasil, silakan memilih:

1. Indonesia yang kita kenal, republik dengan keragaman tak terduga-duga,
atau
2. Sebuah negeri baru, hasil “RUU Porno”, yang mirip gurun pasir: kering dan monoton, kering dari kreativitas.

The Bill doesn’t tell us what is the main idea behind the Bill. It seems one-sided and a disadvantage to women

This Thread has 500+ Posts Already :cheers:

And where is our president SBY? I swear, this guy need to stand up for UUD 45 and Pancasila. I am very dissapointed at SBY's term so far. He has done jack in regards to keeping our national identity and actually helping the people. Very soon, we will fall behind Vietnam when it come to education. That is unacceptable. But hey, that's not very important. Instead, let us concentrate on Playboy, arresting innocent women who walks from work after 7 PM, and trying to legislate on how women should dress.

Benny Hinn... :puke:

---

In Indonesia, the Chinese go to church
Roderick Brazier International Herald Tribune

Benny Hinn, superstar Christian televangelist and faith healer, made a multi-city tour of Indonesia in late March. More than 100,000 arm-waving disciples paid more than $100 each to hear his electrifying sermons and to witness him raising cripples from wheelchairs.

Indonesia, home of the world's biggest Muslim population, seems an unlikely destination for Hinn. But Indonesia's big cities are now part of the international evangelical circuit, and charismatic Protestant churches are growing apace.

Indonesia's Muslims show no interest in Hinn and his fellow Christian preachers. But the rich, urban ethnic Chinese of Indonesia are flocking to Christianity. Since the 1950s, when only a small elite was Christian, several million Chinese have abandoned traditional Chinese religions in favor of Christianity, most commonly evangelical Protestant churches.

Of the estimated five million ethnic Chinese in Indonesia, well over 70 percent are now Christian. The ebullient and staggeringly rich charismatic churches are thriving by spreading a message of personal confidence and material success that seems to hold special appeal for young Chinese.

The mass conversion to Christianity occurred in two waves. In the 1950s and 60s, many Chinese converted as a response to Indonesia's official intolerance of traditional Chinese culture.

Convinced - sometimes justly - that the Chinese were halfhearted supporters of independence, the post-revolutionary government punished the Chinese by severely stifling their culture. Chinese schools were banned, pushing pupils into Christian schools. Chinese temples were stripped of "Chinese characteristics" and worship could only be conducted discreetly.

In contrast, Christians enjoyed far greater freedom of worship. For the ethnic Chinese, Christianity offered a life with less persecution and wider acceptance, especially by officialdom. Between 1957 and 1969 the number of Chinese Catholics surged by more than 400 percent.

The second phase of conversion began in the late 1970s, when the government de-recognized Confucianism. By law, Indonesians must profess a religion, so Confucians were forced to choose another of the five sanctioned faiths.

At about that same time, wealthy international churches began a stunningly successful campaign to proselytize the ethnic Chinese.

These charismatic Protestant groups deftly crafted a message that caters to the social and cultural preferences of the Chinese. For example, in contrast to Buddhism or Catholicism, the charismatic churches endorsed the accumulation of wealth - a message that is attractive to a group for whom money has been a major cushion in a boisterous and volatile society.

The charismatic churches also exhibit a modern outlook that is magnetic to upwardly mobile young Chinese. "Happy clappy" services are marked by the extensive use of English in sermons, songs and prayers. Fusty hymns have been replaced by Christian pop music played live by young bands.

Across urban Indonesia, where almost all Chinese live, signs of the shift abound. Jakarta's two cable television operators each carry two 24 hour Christian channels; neither carries comparable Islamic content. So called "mall churches," operating in rented space in shopping malls, have attracted a sizeable following.

The shift of religious affiliation among the ethnic Chinese of Indonesia follows a trend previously observed among ethnic Chinese in Singapore and Malaysia.

As in Malaysia, the shift to Christianity among the ethnic Chinese occurred around the same time that Muslims began to show greater piety. It seems reasonable to conclude that Christians, including the ethnic Chinese, are reacting to the quickening Islamization of Indonesia by showing greater outward piety themselves.

Unlike traditional Chinese religions, the charismatic churches offer an acceptable way for the Chinese to assert a distinct identity noisily and passionately. Moreover, the Christian churches have links to powerful international constituencies that eagerly defend the rights of Christian minorities worldwide.

What does this shift mean for Indonesia? As the ethnic Chinese are absorbed into the Christian community, the key fissures in Indonesian society become less along ethnic or racial lines, and more along religious ones.

That need not be a problem, so long as Christian proselytizing is confined to non-Muslims. If Christians start trying to convert Muslims, the response might well be different.

(Roderick Brazier is the Asia Foundation's assistant country representative in Indonesia.)

Ideologi
Pancasila Harus Dibentengi


Jakarta, Kompas - Mantan Presiden Megawati Soekarnoputri yang juga Ketua Umum Partai Demokrasi Indonesia Perjuangan mengimbau seluruh elemen bangsa, khususnya kadernya, untuk membentengi ideologi Pancasila.

Pernyataan itu disampaikan Megawati saat membuka Rapat Kerja Daerah II PDI-P Provinsi DKI Jakarta, Jumat (28/4). "Saya merasa sekarang ini, ada yang ingin, kalau bisa ideologi Pancasila itu dibuang," ucapnya.

Sebelumnya, mantan Ketua Umum PP Muhammadiyah Syafii Ma’arif mengemukakan bahwa nilai luhur Pancasila dikhianati. Nilai luhur Pancasila telah dijadikan retorika politik (Kompas, 28/4).

Megawati memimpikan elite politik di DPR bisa meniru Badan Penyelidik Usaha-usaha Persiapan Kemerdekaan Indonesia (BPUPKI) yang bisa melahirkan Pancasila pada 1 Juni 1945. Menurut Megawati, pemimpin politik di masa lalu, meskipun memiliki pendapat dan ideologi politik berbeda, bisa menyatukan pandangan demi Indonesia. Sedangkan sekarang, sebentar-sebentar mengutamakan voting hanya untuk kemenangan semata. "Mereka menyatukan pikiran, bukan memperbesar perbedaan," kata Megawati.

Dihubungi secara terpisah, Rektor Universitas Islam Negeri Jakarta Azyumardi Azra mengemukakan, Pancasila sebagai dasar negara dan falsafah bangsa Indonesia perlu revitalisasi dan aktualisasi. Itu dibutuhkan karena bagi bangsa Indonesia, Pancasilalah yang paling cocok dan tepat digunakan sebagai ide dasar umum bagi kehidupan berbangsa dan bernegara. "Saya tidak melihat ada tawaran ide dasar lain selain Pancasila yang tepat dan cocok untuk Indonesia," ujar Azyumardi.

Langkah yang perlu dilakukan adalah merevitalisasi dan mereintegrasi dalam konteks aktual Indonesia saat ini. Apalagi, selama delapan tahun terakhir sejak reformasi bergulir, Azyumardi mengemukakan, pejabat publik telah malu berbicara tentang Pancasila.

Ia juga mengemukakan perlunya pendekatan integratif agar jarak antara nilai luhur Pancasila dan praksis aktualisasinya sehari- hari tidak berbeda. "Ini semestinya telah dilakukan beberapa tahun lalu ketika gejala-gejala munculnya radikalisasi dalam kelompok masyarakat di Indonesia. Untuk masyarakat Indonesia yang multikultur ini, Pancasila adalah kekuatan integratif," kata Azyumardi.

Bahkan, untuk itu perlu manifesto politik dan penegasan kembali bahwa Pancasila penting bagi Indonesia. Hal senada diungkapkan pengajar Sekolah Tinggi Filsafat Driyarkara Francesco Budi Hardiman.

Budi mengemukakan perlu membuka pintu penafsiran baru bagi Pancasila yang dulu diinterpretasikan secara doktrinal hanya oleh penguasa. "Perlu penafsiran secara nasional dan kategorial. Dulu Pancasila hanya ditafsirkan secara substansial saja sehingga tidak memberi ruang kepada rakyat untuk terlibat di dalamnya," kata Budi.

Azyumardi dan Budi sepakat untuk memulihkan kembali nama Pancasila. Pancasila, menurut mereka, dalam dirinya tidak salah. "Masalahnya dulu, Pancasila diinterpretasikan sepihak oleh penguasa dan menjadi indoktrinatif," kata Budi. (sut/jos/ong)

Alvin, anda kata negara arab sangat membosankan. ya itulah mereka. dan itulah kamu. Semua punya prinsip dan pikiran masing2. Mereka juga berfikir aneh tentang kamu/kita.

jgn berusaha merubah kultur indonesia yang sebenarnya. Dunia ini emang berbeda-beda. Ada yang suka las vegas, ada yang suka arab saudi, ada yang suka china dan sebagainya. Take it or leave it. Rakyat indonesia banyak juga yang tidak suka Indonesia berubah. Harus hargai hal tersebut.

Kenapa tidak terima keadaan di Indonesia sebenarnya ? kenapa ingin merubah nya ? apa yang ingin dicari ? kebebasan individual atau kepentingan negara ? jujurlah berfikir dan berintropeksi diri sendiri. Apa yang dicari. kepentingan sendiri atau kepentingan negara ? anda diposisi mementingkan diri atau mementingkan negara ? Ingat lah dimana2 Agama itu sangat melarang umatnya melakukan dosa. Intropeksi diri juga, Anda ini dekat dengan agama anda apa tidak ?

Maap kalo ada yang merasa sakit hati.

^^ gapapa...dalam demokrasi banyak perbedaan pendapat dan saya menghargai pendapat anda. :)

^^ gapapa...dalam demokrasi banyak perbedaan pendapat dan saya menghargai pendapat anda. :)

iya.. dengan perbedaan itu kita cari kesamaan bukan menimbulkan perpecahan.
Perbedaan itu sudah terbiasa di kota medan / sumut yang sangat beragam ras dan suku nya. Dan di medan saling menghargai. Yaitu :
1. Berbagai Agama
2. ras : Indonesia, china, india, dll
3. Suku : Melayu,
Batak (berbagai marga),
Karo(berbagai marga),
mandailing(berbagai marga),
nias(berbagai Marga),
minang,
aceh,
jawa (berbagai daerah),
dan suku-suku lain yg ada di Indonesia.

Karena bila sampai di Medan, maka akan sering terdengar berbagai2 macam bahasa daerah, terutama bahasa daerah cina :) hehehehe

Indonesia's best known writer Pramoedya Ananta Toer dies at 81

JAKARTA (AFP) - Indonesia's most celebrated novelist Pramoedya Ananta Toer has died at the age of 81, his family said.

Relatives said Pramoedya died at his East Jakarta home at 8.55 am Sunday.

A relative who identified himself as Gunawan said Pramoedya had been hospitalized since Thursday for heart and other problems associated with advanced age but on Saturday evening had insisted on returning home.

The exact cause of death was not clear, though one of his grandchildren, Adit, said he believed Pramoedya died of a stroke.

Pramoedya is best known for his "Buru Quartet" series retracing the rise of Indonesian nationalism in the first decades of the 20th century, a version differed from that of the government at the time.

Hailed by many international critics as Indonesia's leading modern novelist, his work has been translated into 30 languages.

Under the staunchly anti-communist Suharto, almost all his work was banned in Indonesia, where he spent many years in jail under three successive rulers.

Suharto's fall in 1998 ended the political taboo surrounding his work and Pramoedya, his health fast detoriating and unable to write any longer, saw his books reappear in bookstores across the country.

The novelist, essayist and short story writer was nominated several times for the Nobel prize for literature, first in 1986, and was last year the only Indonesian to appear on a list of 100 leading intellectuals named by Britain's cultural Prospect magazine.

While Pramoedya never openly declared his political allegiances, he was accused of being a communist by Suharto, who in 1965 banned the then powerful Indonesian Communist Party (PKI) after a failed coup attempt and launched a campaign against sympathisers that left at least 500,000 dead and saw over one million arbitrarily arrested and jailed.

Pramoedya wrote eight of his novels, including the Buru tetralogy, during his 10-year stay at the infamous Buru island labor camp where he was sent after four years of detention at various other jails.

Thousands of alleged communist members and supporters were also incarcerated on the island without trial.

His first jail term, under the Dutch colonial administration, was in 1947-1949 for agitating for independence through the media.

The country's first president Sukarno imprisoned him once more between 1960 and 1961 for publishing a book that criticized his policies concerning ethnic Chinese, while Suharto jailed him without trial from 1965 until 1979.

His mastery of colloquial language added realism to his novels, and the alleged leftist tenor of his works angered Suharto.

After his release from Buru, he remained under close government surveillance until 1992, and was only able to leave the country after Suharto's fall.

In and out of jail, Pramoedya was a prolific writer, producing 37 novels, seven non-fiction books, a dozen translations, scores of short stories and three anthologies of poetry.

He received various awards including France's Chevalier of the Ordre des Arts et des Lettres and the Japanese Fukuoka Asian Culture Grand Prize, both in 2000.

He also received the 1995 Ramon Magsasay Award for Journalism, Literature and Creative Communication Arts and, in 1992, the PEN Freedom to Write Award.

Indonesia's best known writer Pramoedya Ananta Toer dies at 81


He also received the 1995 Ramon Magsasay Award for Journalism, Literature and Creative Communication Arts and, in 1992, the PEN Freedom to Write Award.

and he returned this award few years later. I don't remember anymore the reason but he was against to a decision made by the Magsasay's committee.

Funny how his last media intervew was for Playboy ..hahaha....really underlines his legacy as a controversial, non-mainstream persona . ;)

Chain-smoking thorn in the side of Indonesia's Suharto regime
OBITUARY PRAMOEDYA ANANTA TOER.
By SHAWN DONNAN

1 May 2006
Financial Times
Asia Ed1
Page 2
English
(c) 2006 The Financial Times Limited. All rights reserved
In recent years, the Indonesian writer Pramoedya Ananta Toer, who died yesterday at age 81, came to be known as a chain-smoking curmudgeon and consistent critic of the corrupt legacies of the Suharto regime and western-style consumerism.

But if anyone ever deserved the right to be the grumpy contrarian - a south-east Asian Gunter Grass, the German author known for his pointed social criticism - then Pramoedya was it.

His leftist politics led to his imprisonment in the weeks after the still-mysterious 1965 coup that ushered in Suharto and led to the slaughter of between 500,000 and 2m alleged communists, and the imprisonment of thousands of intellectuals. For the next 14 years, his home became a succession of prisons, the most famous of which was Buru Island, a notorious prison camp where he spent a decade.

His time on Buru Island yielded his most famous work, the Buru Quartet, four historical novels that highlight the inequities of Dutch colonial rule in Indonesia.

It also prompted part of what became his personal legend. Banned from writing during his imprisonment, the Buru Quartet's books first took form as stories that he narrated to fellow prisoners who eventually agreed to do his chores for him so that he could secretly write the tales down.

Released from Buru Island in 1979, Pramoedya remained under house arrest until the early 1990s and it was not until after the May 1998 fall of Suharto that he was allowed to leave Indonesia.

The combination of his life story and a remarkable body of work led to a flurry of attention and overseas accolades. In recent years he was mentioned regularly as south-east Asia's best candidate for a Nobel Prize.

"Just as (Aleksandr) Solzhenitsyn with Russia, Gunter Grass with Germany and Yukio Mishima with Japan, you get to know Indonesia through him. I put him alongside all of those writers," said John McGlynn, the US editor and translator of Pramoedya's 1999 autobiography, The Mute's Soliloquy.

The impact on his health of his prolonged imprisonment and decades of chain-smoking kreteks - Indonesia's pungent clove cigarettes - left him largely deaf and otherwise weakened, and by 2000 he stopped writing.

But he remained pugnacious to the end. His hospitalisation last Thursday as a result of complications from diabetes and other health problems saw him briefly slip into a coma. Awaking on Saturday afternoon, he requested a cigarette and to go home, where he died yesterday with friends and family in attendance.

"He pulled the tubes out of his body and said 'Now take me home'," Mr McGlynn said. "That says a lot about him. He dealt with life on his own terms. Heaven, or hell, be damned."

Despite not writing in the final years of his life, Pramoedya continued to oppose what he saw as the lingering influence in Indonesia of Suharto, who has never faced trial for his family's alleged embezzlement of up to Dollars 35bn (Euros 28bn, Pounds 19bn) during his rule.

The writer joined other former political prisoners in a failed effort last year to sue Suharto and other Indonesian presidents for compensation.

In an interview with the FT last year, Pramoedya also called his writing on Buru Island a challenge to Suharto's "New Order" and gloated that he had already outlasted the regime.

"Let us see whether it is the New Order or me who will be the loser before Indonesian history," he said, sitting before walls covered in memorabilia drawn mostly from his recent trips abroad. "I have won," he declared. "The New Order has fallen and my writings have been translated into 40 languages."

current edition of Gatra ...
http://www.gatra.com/images/gambar/182/72.jpg
http://www.gatra.com/artikel.php?id=94078

I'm reading one of that author's books right now. Interesting stuff.

New decree on houses of worship
The Bangkok Post

Religious harmony in Indonesia is guaranteed under its Pancasila state ideology. But a new, controversial decree governing the building of houses of worship could threaten this harmony
By NAZRI BAHRAWI

During her diplomatic stopover in Jakarta last month, US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice envisioned a heartening future which saw Indonesia assuming a leadership position among member nations of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean). Her speech to the Indonesian Council on World Affairs lay claim to this benign prophecy when she eloquently proclaimed: ''Freedom and democracy. Justice and tolerance. These principles are the source of success past, present and future for large, multi-ethnic nations like Indonesia and the United States.''

Yet some would argue that these very qualities are now found wanting, in the wake of last month's touchy new decree which would regulate the establishment of houses of worship in Indonesia.

Jointly issued by Religious Affairs Minister Maftuh Basyuni and Home Affairs Minister Muhammad Maruf, the decree, officially known as Ministerial Decree No.1/2006, declares that a permit which legitimises a house of worship can only be issued if it is sanctioned by at least 90 worshippers and 60 people from other faiths residing near its vicinity, in a signed statement.

Backed by the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI), it is little wonder that the decree has been hailed by officials as an improvement to a previous vague ruling, the Joint Ministerial Decree (SKB) No.1, 1969, in terms of defining specific prerequisites, after Christians complained that they could not get permits to build churches under the latter ruling.

Justifying his support for the revised decree, MUI spokesperson Amidhan believes that the ruling facilitates the management of social interaction. When interviewed by The Jakarta Post, he argued: ''If we don't limit the places of worship, they will be abundant. There would be competition from different religions or sects, and it would create public disorder.''

But the ideological underpinning that fuels Mr Amidhan's reasoning _ as public reaction suggests _ is one that undermines the Pancasila state ideology to uphold religious freedom as concretised under the Republic's amended 1945 Constitution.

As it is, the decree has drawn flak from Christians and the Ahmadiyah group. Taking it a step further, one group of protesters comprising lawyers from different faiths filed an official appeal with the Supreme Court, calling for its annulment. This legal outfit, known as the Defence Team for Religious and Faith Freedom (TPKB), was in fact set up last year to counter instances of forced church closures and attacks on the Ahmadiyah group, given that the latter has been branded as a heretical Islamic sect by mainstream Muslims.

Saor Siagian, leader of TPKB, decries the decree on grounds that it goes against the constitution, the human rights law and the principle of freedom to exercise one's religion and faith.

Judging from the potentially detrimental consequences of the decree, his protest is supported by credible reasons. Mr Saor argues that the decree will mean that rural sites like remote villages in Papua province, whose community is made up of less than 50 residents, will be denied a place of worship.

From a political standpoint, this can only spell bad news for President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, who is desperately trying to appease rising grievances that the Papuans harbour towards the central government, to avoid a fully-fledged rebellion similar to that in recently independent East Timor.

More possible troubles abound. It can be further argued that the decree will adversely affect the way religions are practised by citizens in conflict-torn areas like Maluku, Ambon and Poso, where relations between Christians and Muslims have been tense as a result of countless bloody clashes between these two groups in the past.

Under such edgy conditions, it is unlikely that either group can garner 60 signatures from the other to establish their respective houses of worship.

This could heighten bad blood between the two faith groups that could climax in further violent collisions.

Others, like Priest Weinata Sairin of the Indonesian Communion of Churches (PGI), question the need for existing places of worship which currently do not possess permits.

These include those found in shopping malls, hotels, shophouses and other public places. Given that most of these places are surau's or small praying areas for Muslims, which probably cater to less than 90 congregation members, this means that Muslims themselves might find difficulties getting permits.

Thus, the contentious decree will irk Muslims as much as non-Muslims in the world's most populous Muslim country.

Already, the decree has been criticised by Hasyim Muzadi, chairman of Nadhhatul Ulama (NU), Indonesia's largest Muslim organisation, who believes it to be more restrictive that the former 1969 rule.

Mr Hasyim disagreed, though, that it restricted religious freedom. Whether he will change his mind on this stand remains to be seen.

But not all is lost. Those rooting for the eradication of this decree can at least take some comfort in that the new ruling also mandates that the Joint Forum for Religious Tolerance (FKUB) _ a body comprising representatives from various faiths _ approve applications for permits.

It was also fronted that if locals reject the building of a place of worship but approval is granted by the FKUB, then alternative locations will be sought.

At least for now, strong protests have led to provinces like Riau exercising prudence in implementing the decree where local authorities require a congregation of only 80 people instead of 90 to grant a faith community a construction permit.

Minister Maftuh has also clarified that the required approval of 60 people of other faiths is not an absolute, with local authorities required to grant permits as long as worshippers meet the required minimum of 90 members.

In good faith, Indonesia must overcome the threat of parochialism that the decree seems to promote, lest its multicultural society is torn asunder. Only then can Ms Rice be possibly hailed as a believable prophet of sorts.

Nazry Bahrawi is Managing Editor of ''The Muslim Reader'' magazine and a free-lance writer on social issues.

First on the battlefield
GIG RYAN

6 May 2006
The Age
First
29
English
© 2006 Copyright John Fairfax Holdings Limited. www.theage.com.au Not available for re-distribution.
Indonesia's greatest writer died this week. Gig Ryan pays tribute.

PRAMOEDYA ANANTA TOER, WHO WAS OFTEN tipped for the Nobel Prize, had the dubious distinction of being jailed by three regimes, under the Dutch 1947-49, under Soekarno in 1960 for his sympathetic history of the Chinese minority, and between 1965 and 1979 under Soeharto's rule, mainly at remote Buru Island.

I was privileged to meet Pramoedya in Jakarta in March 1998. I was met at the airport by a family friend to be told, unbelievably, "Tomorrow we go to see Pram". There were mass demonstrations daily at this time. Pramoedya was fearless, pointing out with bitter amusement the government agents loitering close to his house, and assuring me his kretek cigarettes were good for his health.

He said even then that whenever he went out, he could never be sure that he would be coming back. He was partly deaf in one ear from a beating during his 1965 arrest. He showed me the thick manuscript, of The Mute's Soliloquy, mainly a record of his time on Buru Island. At the back of the book were listed all those who had died and the cause of death, often simply "shot dead".

Pramoedya's first novel, The Fugitive, was written during his first imprisonment and depicts the tumult of 1940s Indonesia. Set during the declaration of independence in 1945, it bristles with argument and drama, its main character based on Arjuna from The Mahabarata. This and his early short stories established his reputation and he became a leading figure in the cultural organisation that was linked to the PKI (Indonesia's huge communist party).

Pramoedya, whose name his father had constructed from a phrase meaning "first on the battlefield", travelled to the Netherlands, Russia and China in the Soekarno era and translated Tolstoy, Dostoevsky and Gorky into Indonesian; along with Zola and Steinbeck, these writers influenced his work.

He believed that writers were ". . . a resistance force, an unofficial opposition" whose record of history was more reliable than the conqueror's version.

During his time on Buru Island without writing materials, he composed his Buru Quartet in his head, reciting it to fellow prisoners. Minke, the central character, embodies the growing nationalism in the early 20th century, under a Dutch regime built upon "a pyramid of corpses". As Pramoedya has said, the Dutch practised democracy in the Netherlands but totalitarian rule in the colonies.

After Pramoedya's release, his ambitious quartet was published and fast became a bestseller. However, the similarities between Dutch colonialism and Soeharto's rule embarrassed the government and Pramoedya's works were again banned.

Pramoedya's belief in individual freedom and his harsh criticism of established writers often put him at odds with the Left. After the fall of Soeharto, he was consistently critical of subsequent leaders and doubted that democracy could happen quickly. "Evil has no witnesses," is a saying Pramoedya quotes in The Mute's Soliloquy, in which he coolly records the many atrocities of Buru Island. Finally, he prided himself on having outlasted Soeharto's New Order regime, with his work not silenced but acclaimed.

Gig Ryan is The Age poetry editor.

From Tempo

Syariat Islam di Jalur Lambat

Gagal masuk dalam amendemen UUD 1945, syariat Islam menyebar melalui peraturan daerah. Konsultan syariat pun bermunculan.


ALANGKAH terkejutnya Muhammad Muchsin. Sekretaris Daerah- Kabupaten Bulukumba, Sulawesi Selatan, ini baru mendengar kabar bahwa di Desa Padang, Gantarang, salah satu desa di wilayahnya-, memberlakukan hukuman cambuk. Per-aturan desa itu digagas- sendi-ri oleh kepala desa, disokong Ba-dan Pemasya-ra-katan De-sa, dan beberapa tokoh- masya-ra-kat. ”Saya sangat me-nyayang-kan masa-lah ini justru saya ketahui da-ri orang lain (bukan dari aparat Desa Pa-dang),” kata Muchsin.


Baru disahkan pada awal tahun ini, atur-an tersebut sudah mema-kan tiga kor-ban. Nasir- dicambuk karena me-mukul bo-cah. Hukuman serupa menimpa Ari-fin, karena ia menganiaya orang lain. Kor-ban lain, Suharman, dicambuk pada Ma-ret lalu gara-gara mengirim surat ke seorang wanita yang membuat suami-nya tersinggung.


Bupati Bulukumba, A. Sukri Sappe-wali, telah memanggil Kepala Desa Pa-dang, Rukman A. Jabbar, untuk men-je-las-kannya, Senin dua pekan lalu. Me-nurut Ke-pala Desa, peratur-an itu dibuat se-ba-gai pen-jabaran dari empat per-atur-an- daerah yang bersumber pada syariat Islam di Bulukumba. Me-mang, Bulukumba mem-punyai peraturan yang bernapaskan Islam sejak tiga tahun lalu. Ke-em-patnya mengatur zakat-, pakaian bagi musli-mah-, pandai membaca- Al-Quran bagi siswa dan ca-lon pengantin, ser-ta larangan penjual-an mi-numan beralkohol. Ta-pi tidak satu pun yang meng-atur hukum-an cam-buk. Ide kreatif hukum-an cambuk di Desa Padang membuat Bu-pati membentuk tim khu-sus untuk meneliti pelaksanaannya.


Aturan-aturan lokal yang mengacu pada syariat Islam memang sedang popu-ler di beberapa kabupaten di Sulawesi Selatan. Setidaknya sudah enam dari 24 kabupaten d Sulawesi Selatan yang mengadopsinya, yakni Enrekang, Gowa, Takalar, Maros, Sinjai, dan Bulukumba. Pilihan mereka cukup beralasan. Jajak pendapat yang dilakukan pemerintah daerah Sulawesi Selatan pada awal 2002 menunjukkan 91,11 persen responden setuju pemberlakuan syariat Islam.


Penerimaan masyarakat tak lepas da-ri peran Komite Persiapan Penegakan Sya-riat Islam di Sulawesi Selatan. Komite Sya-riat lahir dalam kongres umat Islam se-Sulawesi Selatan, enam tahun lalu. Kongres memilih Abdul Azis Kahar Muzakkar sebagai ketua komite. Dia adalah putra Kahar Muzakkar, pemim-pin gerakan DI/TII (Darul Islam/Tentara Islam Indonesia) Sulawesi Selatan pada 1950-an. Hanya dalam tempo setahun Komite Syariat berhasil membentuk perwakilan di semua kabupaten se-Sulawesi Selat-an. Mereka sudah tiga ka-li- melakukan kong-res. Hasilnya antara lain mendesak lembaga eksekutif dan legislatif memproses pemberlakuan sya-riat Islam di provinsi itu.


Dalam kongres ke-dua pada 2001, Ko-mite Sya-riat melihat kesempatan pene-rapan syariat Is-lam di tingkat kabupa-ten melalui peraturan dae-rah dengan adanya otonomi daerah. Di bawah ko-man-do Abdul Azis, lembaga ini juga meng-usulkan Rancangan Undang-Undang Otonomi Khusus Syariat Islam di Sulawesi Selatan. ”Syariat Islam itu sudah harga mati,” katanya.


Menurut Abdul Azis, sejumlah peratur-an daerah yang ada sekarang belum bisa disebut syariat Islam, tapi aturan me-ngenai amar makruf nahi mungkar. Jadi baru pada taraf mengatur kebaikan dan melarang keburukan. Sebab, sanksinya masih memakai pidana umum. ”Kalau syariat Islam, hukumannya juga harus- menurut Islam,” kata Azis, yang juga anggota Dewan Perwakilan Daerah di Jakarta.


Popularitas Komite Syariat sempat ja-tuh saat merebaknya aksi teror bom. Saat kongres kedua di Asrama Haji Sudiang, Makassar, pada Desember 2001, sebuah bom meledak melukai tiga orang. Setahun kemudian dua bom meledak di dua bangunan milik Jusuf Kalla (seka-rang Wakil Presiden RI) di Makassar, me-newaskan 3 orang dan melukai 14 orang lainnya.


Sejak itulah polisi mulai mengawasi- gerak-gerik anggota Komite Sya-riat. Hasilnya, delapan dari 10 tersangka bom Makassar mempunyai kaitan de-ngan Komite Syariat dan Laskar Jundullah. Las-kar ini merupakan organisasi sa-yap militer Komite Syariat yang dibentuk sebagai reaksi peristiwa pembantaian 200 warga muslim di Pesantren Walisongo, Poso, Sulawesi Tengah, pada 2000. Agus Dwikarna, panglima laskar itu, juga tokoh Komite Syariat.


Agus sendiri pada 13 Maret 2002 ditangkap bersama Jamal Balfas dan Tam-sil Linrung di bandara Manila de-ngan tuduhan membawa bahan peledak-. Tamsil, penasihat Komite Syariat dan anggota DPR dari Partai Keadilan Se-jahtera, dibebaskan sebulan kemudian bersama Jamal. Sedangkan Agus hingga kini masih mendekam di tahanan Filipina.


”Saat itu muncul citra, organisasi ka-mi dekat dengan kekerasan,” kata Sek-jen Komite Syariat Aswar Hasan. Citra negatif itu membuat luntur kepercayaan masyarakat kepada Komite Syariat. Aktivitas mereka mengalami kevakuman selama lebih dari dua tahun.


Pelan-pelan Komite Syariat kemudian berbenah. Laskar Jundullah diubah namanya menjadi Korps Pemuda Islam-. Pakaian anggotanya berganti dari hitamhitam menjadi seragam putih-putih. Mereka juga menata kembali programnya dengan membentuk tim kerja menjelang pemilihan langsung beberapa kepala daerah. Komite itu membentuk pula kelompok kerja penyusun-an rancangan peraturan daerah yang bernapaskan syariat Islam.


Kebangkitan juga ditunjukkan de-ngan memprakarsai Kongres Umat Islam III di Bulukumba, tahun la-lu. Kongres ini diha-diri wakil se-jumlah pemerintah daerah dan 36 organisasi- massa Islam. Bulukumba di-pilih untuk- di-pamer-kan kepada ratus-an peserta kongres sebagai proyek per-contohan penerapan sya-riat Islam. Setelah Syariat Islam dijalankan di Bulukumba, tingkat kriminalitas turun hingga 80 persen. Daerah ini juga berhasil mengumpulkan zakat empat hingga lima kali lebih besar dibandingkan pajak. Peserta kongres membawa oleh-oleh berupa contoh peraturan yang bernuansa syariat Islam untuk disosialisasikan di daerah mereka.


Menurut sumber Tempo, kelompok pendorong peraturan da-erah yang mengacu syariat Islam merupakan bagian dari jaringan Jamaah Islamiyah. Ke-lompok ini memilih jalur kons-titusi dan menilai tindak-an teror melalui pengeboman ter-hadap simbol-simbol Barat ha-nya membawa citra buruk dan merusak jaringan. ”Tapi ke-lompok ini lebih cair,” kata-nya. Mereka mendapat sokong-an dan berjuang bersama orga-nisasi Islam lainnya. Namun me-reka tetap bercita-cita menja-dikan Indonesia sebagai negara Islam, sehingga perjuangan melalui peraturan daerah itu hanya langkah awal.


Komite Syariat memang baru ada di Sulawesi Selatan. Tapi sejumlah daerah telah mengesahkan peraturan yang mengacu pada syariat Islam. Di Ja-wa Barat sejumlah kabupaten sudah me-ngesahkan peraturan daerah antimaksiat. Di antaranya Indramayu, Tasikmalaya, Garut, Cianjur, Kota Depok, dan Kota Cianjur. Bupati Indramayu Irianto M.S. Syafiuddin mengaku, lahirnya per-aturan daerah antipelacuran dila-tar-belakangi citra negatif Indram-ayu seba-gai pemasok pelacur ke luar nege-ri-. Peraturan ini ingin membidik gene-rasi muda Indramayu agar lebih memperdalam agama dengan menetapkan sya-rat kelulusan siswa harus mampu membaca kitab suci Al-Quran.


Bukan hanya Komite Syariat yang bergerak. Juru bicara Majelis Mujahidin Indo-nesia, Fauzan al-Anshari, juga mengakui saat ini organisasinya getol memasyarakatkan peraturan antimaksiat ke berbagai daerah. ”Saya kebagian menggarap wilayah Jawa Barat,” kata Fauzan. Cara yang dipakai tidak ha-nya melalui lembaga legislatif atau ekse-kutif, tapi juga pendekatan melalui individu.


Majelis Mujahidin menempuh jalur lam-bat setelah gagal memasukkan Piagam Jakarta yang mewajibkan umat Islam menjalankan syariatnya saat MPR meng-amendemen UUD 1945. Padahal sa-at itu rancangan perubahan undangundang dasar versi mereka sudah disiap-kan. Dalam kongres Majelis Mujahidin yang berlangsung di Solo, tiga tahun lalu, mereka juga mulai menyusun ji-nayat, semacam kitab undang-undang pi-dana (KUHP). Fauzan al-Anshari me-mimpin tim kecil penyusunan drafnya. Na-mun hingga kini masih belum se-lesai.


Menurut Ustad Wahyuddin, sekreta-ris- dewan penasihat Majelis Mujahidin, lem-baganya selalu siap membantu daerah-daerah yang akan membuat peraturan bernuansa syariat Islam. ”Itu juga kalau diminta,” kata Wahyuddin, yang juga Direktur Pondok Pesantren Al-Mukmin Ngruki, Jawa Tengah. Dua daerah yang pernah dia beri masukan adalah Cianjur dan Indra-mayu.


Berbeda dengan di Jawa Ba-rat dan Sulawesi Selatan, ge-rak-an membuat peraturan dae-rah yang mengacu sya-riat Islam kurang populer di Jawa Timur. Mungkin karena peng-aruh Nahdlatul Ulama cukup besar di sana. Menurut Ketua Pengurus Wilayah NU Jawa Timur, Ali Maschan Moesa, kiai NU melihat bentuk negara dan dasar negara Indonesia sudah final. Mereka tidak pernah berjuang bagi syariat Islam dalam konteks bernegara. ”NU hanya mendorong berlakunya syariat Islam dalam masyarakat,” katanya.


Di Jawa Timur, kelompok pengusung syariat Islam se-pert-i MMI dan FPI (Front Pem-bela Islam) jumlah anggo-tanya amat kecil. Menurut Ali Maschan, kelompok-kelom-pok ini menganggap Islam universal. ”Jika sudah mampu memasukkan syariat Islam dalam negara, mereka akan membentuk kekhalifah-an Islam. Sebuah pemerinta-han Islam dunia yang tidak me-ngenal wilayah negara atau daerah,” ujarnya.


Agung Rulianto, Purwanto, Irmawati (Bulukumba), Verianto Madjowa (Gorontalo), Febrianti (Padang), Ivansyah (Indramayu)

Going to make a new t-shirt:

di depan:
Mendungkunglah RUU APP

di belakang:
Atau kita akan gebukin lho.

Front Preman Indonesia

"RUU APP tsunami kemanusiaan dan rezim kesusilaan"
http://www.detiknews.com/indexfr.php?url=http://www.detiknews.com/index.php/detik.read/tahun/2006/bulan/05/tgl/13/time/172850/idnews/594386/idkanal/10

Playboy falls flat in Indonesia try
Despite air brushing, extremists lash out
Katie Hamann

Sunday, May 14, 2006

Jakarta, Indonesia -- If Hugh Hefner saw the sanitized photographs featured in the first edition of Playboy Indonesia, the octogenarian founder of the world's most famous skin magazine would probably need to reach for his Viagra to feel anything erotic.

In the centerfold, all evidence of Miss April's nipple and the pigmented skin surrounding it has been airbrushed out, her demure proportions and midriff concealed by a lacy powder blue slip and matching pair of sensible briefs.

But despite art directors' deft navigation of the strict obscenity and nudity clauses in Indonesia's pornography legislation, it is unlikely that a second edition of Playboy Indonesia will ever reach newsstands in the world's most populous Muslim nation.

A month ago, the magazine's offices were ransacked by a group of 300 extreme Islamists who call themselves the Islamic Defenders Front. Police looked on as windows were smashed, yet no arrests have been made.

Days later, Editor in Chief Erwin Arnada announced the indefinite suspension of future editions.

"The police say we have broken no laws," Arnada told reporters as he left a police station in Jakarta after questioning.

The storm is not likely to blow over quickly. In an interview, the front's chief said its attacks were just a warning to publishers and that other groups could do considerably more damage.

The front "made these protests not only to protect society but also to protect the media itself," said H. Muhammad Ridwan Voderi, the group's secretary general.

"There are many other groups who are against pornography and the media, and they can do more damage than what the (front) has done, such as bombing the offices," he said. "We were just trying to get through to the media before the other groups."

The alarming comments also reflect sensitivity over the Iraq war and the war on terror.

"Playboy represents the image of the West and with everything going on in the world lately, with the tension between the United States and the Islamic world, anything that represents the West is considered anti-Muslim," says Gadis Arivia, founder of the women's activist magazine Jurnal Perempuan.

For the front, the name Playboy also represents a perceived moral decay that pervades the West, which they claim to be preventing the spread of across their secular nation.

"We told the publishers before they started they should change the name because the image of Playboy internationally is very bad, its identity is pornographic images," Voderi said.

The ferment over Playboy Indonesia is just one chapter in a debate about pornography laws that is polarizing women's rights groups, Islamic fundamentalists and a government which is struggling to sustain the democratic momentum that began with the fall of former President Suharto's regime in 1998.

An anti-pornography bill is being vigorously debated in parliament and is expected to pass by the middle of the year.

Opponents argue that Indonesia already has three pieces of legislation regulating content on television and in the media, in addition to a criminal code which prohibits the distribution of pornographic material.

The new legislation, say women's rights groups, is just a smokescreen for a Sharia (Islamic) based law that is fundamentally anti-women.

"When you look at the bill, there is nothing really in it about pornography or the distribution of pornographic material," Arivia said.

"But is says a lot about what women can and cannot wear, what they can and cannot do, where they can go ... a lot of Sharia law that restricts women."

Arivia is one of many critics who fear that if the bill finds its way through the parliament in its current incarnation, men's magazines won't be the only thing forced to cover up.

"The new bill doesn't respect the diversity of culture, and is a threat to the freedom of speech of artists ... and our identity," said Husna Mulya, another women's rights activist.

"It will regulate what people can wear and which parts of the body can be exposed. It could also see writings, poems, songs, etc. banned because they contain references to eroticism or sexuality."

The defenders front has also made claims that pornography is provoking Muslim men to commit violent sexual crimes against women in Indonesia.

"There have already been a lot of cases of crime due to the effects of pornography in magazines, television, movies, etc. Nowadays we are hearing of fathers raping their daughters, sons raping their mothers and so on. Will the media take responsibility for this? Of course not. They don't want to know the effect their magazines has on people; they don't care," Voderi said.

Which is an indication that it will take much more than an airbrushed nipple to lower temperatures in the world's most populous Muslim nation.

Katie Hamann is a freelance writer based in Jakarta. Contact us at insight@sfchronicle.com.

Indonesia's Catholic church says no 'Da Vinci' boycott
TN
201 words
18 May 2006
14:04
Agence France Presse
English
Copyright Agence France-Presse, 2006 All reproduction and presentation rights reserved.
JAKARTA, May 18, 2006 (AFP) -

Indonesia's Catholic church said Thursday it would not boycott "The Da Vinci Code," saying the controversial film would not shake the faith of the country's Christians.

The movie would give an impetus for Christians to strengthen their faith, said Benny Susetyo from the country's highest Catholic authority, the Indonesian Bishops' Conference (KWI).

"The KWI will not ban people from watching the movie. It is a work of fiction and it will not shake the faith of Christians because they are mature enough," Susetyo told AFP.

"The movie is based on historical facts which have been twisted. The more people are discouraged from watching it, the more they are curious," he said.

Indonesia is the world's most populous Muslim country. Christians, mostly Protestants and Roman Catholics, make up about eight percent of the country's 220 million population.

"The Da Vinci Code," starring Tom Hanks, explores the idea that Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene and had children whose descendants are alive today.

The Ron Howard adaptation of the book had its worldwide premiere at the Cannes film festival on Wednesday.

tn/sb/mc

http://www.perspektifbaru.com/wawancara/532

Yeni Rosa Damayanti
Naskah Akademik RUU APP Tidak Memberikan Dasar Kuat
Edisi 532 | 22 Mei 2006 | Cetak Artikel Ini


Halo pembaca senang sekali saya, Wimar Witoelar, bertemu kembali dengan Anda. Topik Perspektif Baru minggu ini adalah Rancangan Undang-Undang (RUU) Anti Pornografi dan Pornoaksi (APP). Mungkin ada yang bertanya mengapa ini dibahas terus? Itu karena sangat penting. Kalau sampai lolos dari perhatian masyarakat maka kita akan dihadapkan pada situasi yang lebih gawat dibandingkan sekarang. Pekan lalu tamu kita Bambang Harymurti mengutip dari seseorang yang mengatakan, "Hanya satu yang diperlukan agar kekuatan jelek itu muncul yaitu orang baik itu diam". Kalau kita melihat dari segi argument, substansi RUU APP sangat berat sebelah. Tapi karena orang yang rasional tidak terlalu rajin, maka pengelindingan konsep undang-undang (UU) aneh ini masih terus berjalan. Kali ini Perspektif Baru mengundang Yeni Rosa Damayanti, nama yang sudah kita kenal sejak perjuangan di zaman Soeharto hingga reformasi, juga pada masa perjuangan pembebasan Timor Timur. Dia sekarang terpanggil oleh ancaman terbesar pada demokrasi. Ada satu hal khusus dalam wawancara kita sekarang ini, yaitu belum lama ini terungkap adanya naskah akademis yang menyertai RUU APP. Tapi itu tidak pernah dibahas. Sekarang sedang dan akan dibahas karena naskah akademis itu akan menunjukan sesungguhnya ada atau tiadanya dasar rasional untuk RUU ini.



Apa arti naskah akademis dalam kaitan suatu RUU?

Naskah akademik itu sebetulnya justifikasi atau landasan pemikiran dari dibangunnya atau disusunnya RUU. Jadi berdasarkan analisa atau paparan masalah yang ada di naskah akademik itu sebuah susunan UU dibangun.

Mengapa justifikasinya baru dibahas sekarang dan sejak kapan sebenarnya RUU APP mulai diajukan?

Sebetulnya ini barang basi karena sudah pernah diajukan sejak zaman Presiden Habibie, Gus Dur, Megawatu dan terus menerus ditolak. Tapi baru sekarang ini mendadak muncul kembali.

Itu tentunya diajukan di DPR. Betulkah?

Betul, seperti kita tahu pengajuan undang-undang bisa atas inisiatif Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat (DPR) atau pemerintah. RUU APP ini dari DPR tetapi pernah juga dari pemerintah. Kelihatannya Ketua DPR Agung Laksono agak merasa bersalah juga karena RUU ini lolos melalui DPR yang berarti lewat tandatangan dia. "Kalau menimbulkan pro kontra besar seperti sekarang dan mengancam stabilitas mungkin ini tidak perlu diteruskan," kira-kira seperti itulah dia bicara.

Apakah itu ada hubungannya dengan pergantian anggota DPR? Apakah komposisi anggota DPR sekarang lebih mendukung RUU APP?

Sebetulnya proses lolosnya RUU ini karena anggota DPR tidak terlalu rajin untuk mengawal proses legislasi atau RUU. Sebetulnya kalau ada pihak-pihak yang ingin memasukan sebuah rancangan undang-undang di DPR tidak terlalu sulit karena gampang sekali lolos, kecuali kalau mendadak mempunyai kepentingan terutama bisnis dan ekonomi.

Kalau memang Agung Laksono menyesal, apakah berarti dia sebenarnya tidak setuju?

Bisa jadi seperti itu karena memang seperti juga anggota DPR yang malas-malas, mereka tidak membaca dengan benar naskah undang-undang dan naskah akademiknya. Jadi begitu sudah ramai di luar, mereka baru kaget.

Naskah akademik itu sesungguhnya penting untuk yang mengusulkan RUU. Karena itu adalah jiwa dari RUU. Lalu mengapa mereka tidak memakainya sebagai senjata untuk mengawal RUU tersebut?

Setiap orang yang membaca naskah akademik itu pasti akan marah-marah karena sangat menghina, melecehkan. Kalau kita berbicara masalah pornografi sebenarnya konsep utamanya pasti pada peredaran DVD porno yang beredar di pinggir jalan seharga Rp 3000 – 4000, dan internet yang mudah diakses siapa saja. Itu sebenarnya perhatian kita. Tapi kalau kita membaca naskah akademiknya, isinya hampir semua mengenai tari Tayub di Banyuwangi, Joged di Bali, goyangan Inul, tarian-tarian di berbagai daerah dipersoalkan.

Jadi bukan hanya deviasi, penyimpangan pada kasus-kasus khusus tetapi malah bentuk-bentuk budaya tertentu ada yang ditolak.

Menurut saya, bentuk budaya tertentu dianalisa dan sangat dihinakan dalam naskah akademik RUU APP. Selain itu mereka memuat juga contoh-contoh dari berbagai daerah dari Sulawesi, Bali, dan lain-lain. Kadang-kadang untuk menjustifikasi pikiran mereka, misalnya, ada banyak diskotik di Medan, juga dikatakan di sebuah diskotik pernah diadakan tarian striptease pada tahun 1999.

Jadi dalam naskah akademik dibalik RUU APP, mereka ternyata bukan menyorot ekses dari pornografi tetapi bentuk budaya yang sudah lazim dan kejadian khusus seperti striptease di nightclub yang sebenarnya ada undang-undangnya.

Iya. Contoh yang diambil itu pun pada tahun 1999 dan hanya satu kali.

Satu kali striptease ditutup seluruh nightclub-nya. Kontroversi itu yang kita sesalkan. Siapa yang menulis naskah akademik itu, dari kelompok mana, universitas mana, siapa think tanknya?

Saya juga kurang begitu jelas, tapi ini diajukan oleh Majelis Ulama Indonesia (MUI).

Apakah mungkin ada segi yang sebetulnya positif tapi sampai sekarang belum keluar?

Ada, tapi ini positif menurut siapa? Ini yang perlu dipertanyakan. Sebenarnya yang dituju disini adalah untuk memunculkan sebuah culture yang seragam. Culture tersebut dianggap lebih tinggi dan lebih maju sehingga itu diharapkan dan diharuskan diterima oleh semua etnis. Culture yang dimaksud culture mana, ini belum jelas juga.

Padahal keragaman kita adalah satu-satunya aset kita.

Kalau di naskah akademik ini, keragaman kita mempunyai bahaya yaitu akan memicu konflik antar etnis karena norma antara kesusilaan dan pornografi berbeda-beda, sehingga harus disintesa menjadi sebuah norma tunggal yang lebih tinggi.

Siapa dan orang macam apa yang ingin melihat orang menjadi seragam tersebut?

Kalau boleh saya jujur, semenjak zaman Badan Penyelididk Upaya Persiapan Kemerdekaan Indonesia (BPUPKI) dulu sudah ada sekelompok masyarakat menginginkan Indonesia mengadopsi sebuah paham yang menyangkut kehidupan sehari-hari, hukum, budaya yang tunggal. Indonesia dalam bentuk Syariat Islam seperti tertuang dalam Piagam Jakarta. Pada saat itu jelas kita memilih Pancasila sebagai dasar negara dan bukan Syariat Islam. Kemudian pada zaman konstituante, perdebatan itu ada lagi dan tidak selesai selama empat tahun sehingga akhirnya konstituante dibubarkan Soekarno. Kemudian kita kembali pada naskah undang-undang dasar yang lama. Sesudah reformasi ini usaha-usaha tersebut dilakukan berkali-kali pada saat amandemen undang-undang dasar. Menurut kawan-kawan di DPR/MPR, dalam keempat amandemen UUD 1945 sempat voting mengenai hal tersebut. Menurut kawan DPR/MPR juga, lima ratus menolak dan lima puluh yang menerima.

DPR/MPR yang mana?

Periode amandenen yaitu 1999-2004. Menurut mereka, mungkin tidak apa-apa gagal untuk mengubah intinya yaitu UUD 45, tapi perubahan itu kini mereka mulai dari pinggir-pinggirnya.

Jadi menurut hipotesa Anda, ini bukan barang baru tapi konsisten dari dulu, hanya saja sekarang yang diincar perempuan dan pakaian.

Setelah melihat beberapa kali upaya mengubah di undang-undang dasar gagal, maka sekarang mereka tidak mengupayakan dulu mengubah UUD-nya. Mereka mulai perubahan dari pinggir, dari peraturan-peraturan daerah, undang-undang tentang perempuan dan berpakaian, tentang pornoaksi. Lama-lama tanpa kita sadari Indonesia sudah dikurung oleh puluhan peraturan daerah (Perda) dan perundang-undangan yang memang bernafaskan syariah.

Itu pola perkembangan di Pakistan dan Iran. Menurut pengamatan saya sebagian besar orang-orangnya lebih menganut Pancasila dari pada Piagam Jakarta dan dalam hal pluralisme mereka pasti mendukung keragaman. Tapi mengapa begitu kuat gerakan pro APP?

Kalau analisa saya itu ada dua penyebab. Pertama, masyarakat tidak terlalu sadar bahwa pendukung Piagam Jakarta sedang merayap masuk lagi secara terselubung. Di dalam agama Islam ada istilah, "Tuntutlah ilmu sampai ke negeri Cina", sedangkan komandan Mao mengatakan, mau makan bubur panas itu harus dari pinggir kemudian baru ke tengah. Jadi desanya dulu ditaklukan baru kotanya akan tunduk sendiri. Karena itu prosesnya perlahan-lahan dan kelihatannya anggota DPR di Indonesia juga tidak sadar sehingga di Indonesia kini sudah ada 26 Perda yang beradar. Sesudah debat mengenai RUU APP ini mulai beralih dari persoalan porno dan perempuan menjadi debat-debat Pancasila, mereka baru sadar.

Kedua, mereka terlalu sibuk mengamankan kursi untuk 2009. Selain itu juga terkait argumentasi kelompok pengusung syariat yang selalu berbicara minoritas dan mayoritas sehingga anggota DPR berpikiran mayoritas umat Islam mungkin some how menghendaki syariat sehingga mereka tidak berani mengambil posisi yang tegas terhadap itu.

Apakah harus seragam, atau tetap pluralis? Apakah DPR ingin menarik suara kaum Islam yang barangkali sebetulnya menginginkan syariat islam?

Kalau saya pikir itu sih Bluffing (gertakan) dari sekelompok tertentu karena jumlah kelompok yang sangat keras menyuarakan itu tidak begitu besar, hanya berisik, very noisy. Dari awal kita mendirikan negara Indonesia ini berdasarkan ikatan Bhinneka Tunggal Ika dan Pancasila, bukan syariah. Kalau debat mengenai mayoritas-minoritas, maka apa dasar mayoritasnya. Apakah dari segi jumlah penduduk, luas wilayah, pemasukan untuk income negara. Kawasan Indonesia Timur itu mayoritas. Penduduknya memang sedikit tapi sumber daya alamnya banyak dan sumbangan mereka terhadap pendapatan negara itu sangat besar dibandingkan Pulau Jawa. Kalau agumentasinya tetap mayoritas-minoritas dan kemudian mereka mengatakan, "Ya, sudah kalau kami dianggap minoritas sehingga identitas kami, pendapat kami, suara kami tidak dianggap, maka sudah pisah sajalah. Kalau mereka berpendapat seperti itu, Siapa yang kasih makan Jawa?

Ada satu lagi mayoritas yang lepas dari agama dan wilayah yaitu orang yang pluralis dan menjadi mayoritas dari segi kredibilitas di dunia. Kalau kita mengikuti jalan yang menginginkan keseragaman, kita jadi diisolir seperti di Iran dan Irak zaman dulu. Kami ingin mengundang pembicara dari masyarakat. coba jawab ini di www.perspektifbaru.com. Kalau betul ini penggrogotan pelan-pelan pada hetrogenitas kita, apakah pada suatu saat orang yang sebetulnya mayoritas - yaitu yang toleran - akan terbangun dan memgambil insiatif?

Sepertinya sudah mulai. Saya berterima kasih sekali dengan RUU APP karena kalau RUU APP ini tidak muncul maka orang-orang toleran termasuk saya mungkin tidak akan sadar dan berbuat. Teman-teman saya yang dulu tidak pernah bicara soal Pancasila sekarang bicaranya sudah Pancasila semua.

Saya kira betul karena pada waktu sesuatu itu terancam kita merasakan nilainya. Kita tidak terlalu merasakan bagusnya sesuatu kecuali kalau itu hilang. Kalau RUU APP ini disetujui DPR, apakah masyarakat akan menyesuaikan diri?

Saya pikir, yang terjadi adalah pemberontakan secara besar-besaran dan juga disintegrasi.

Kalau begitu, apakah Presiden harus disuruh turun tangan?

Presiden kelihatanya termasuk kelompok yang telat mikir tadi. Mudah-mudahan dia mulai sadar.

Presiden SBY pasti bukan penganut piagam Jakarta, betulkah?

Saya pikir tidak, tapi seberapa jauh dia menyadari bahaya ini. Kedua, seberapa jauh dia mempunyai kekhawatiran atau menempatkan prioritas posisi di Pemilu 2009 di atas dasar-dasar fundamental bangsa.

Anda kini aktif di aliansi Bhineka Tunggal Ika. Dikaitkan dengan statement tadi bahwa sekarang banyak orang toleran yang semula tidak serius terhadap masalah masyarakat menjadi terbangun. Apakah aktivis, orang bersemangat yang muncul sekarang lebih luas daripada dulu?

Sangat luas, sekarang ini ada designer, ibu rumah tangga, dan seniman tradisional. Jadi luas sekali. Pokoknya orang-orang yang tidak terbayangkan sebelumnya, yang dikira tidak mempunyai concern terhadap masalah sosial politik sekarang, aktif di dalam aliansi. Aliansi ini juga luas sekali, mulai dari aktivis tani, mahasiswanya, ibu rumah tangga, kelompok-kelompok kecil, designer, semua ada dalam satu keprihatinan yang sama. Jadi unik.

Syukur ada RUU APP. Jadi orang bangkit untuk menyadari bahwa ada sesutu yang kita hargai yaitu pluralitas. Apakah ini bisa menjadi gerakan yang positif?

Saya rasa bisa. Untuk kalangan pendukung Piagam Jakarta ini, RUU APP sebuah aborsi dari niat besar mereka yang terlalu cepat. Kalau sebelumnya mereka mulai dari provinsi-provinsi atau kabupaten-kabupaten yang jauh seperti di Sulawesi ujung sana maka sebagian besar orang tidah sadar. Pada saat mereka mendekati kota, terlalu percaya diri untuk buru-buru mendekati kota, ternyata saat Tangerang didekati dengan RUU APP langsung sang Singa bangun. Artinya, pusatnya langsung terbangun. Maksud saya, orang-orang menjadi sadar sebelum mereka siap, sebelum waktunya menurut kepentingan mereka. Orang sadar terhadap bahaya masuknya kembali Piagam Jakarta

Apakah perjuangan ini masih bisa didukung oleh sistem politik formal? Apakah partai-partai masih diharapkan untuk menyelamatkan Pancasila?

Kami dalam dua minggu terakhir ini rajin sekali mendatangi fraksi-fraksi di DPR, membawa isu-isu APP. Tapi pada saat bicara dengan mereka, kami sudah jelas-jelas mengatakan bahwa ini masalah penyeragaman budaya, ini masalah dasar negara.

Apakah yang pro APP rajin juga atau mereka lebih rajin di lapangan?

Mereka rajin di jalanan dan mereka rajin kirim surat juga. Jadi mengatas-namakan macam-macam organisasi. Karena itu saya juga ingin menghimbau pada pihak-pihak yang mempunyai keprihatinan sama dengan kita supaya membuat surat dengan kop surat organisasi masing-masing sebanyak-banyaknya dan itu dikirim atau di faksimili ke DPR. DPR juga menghitung jumlah pendukung dan penolak.

Apakah bisa kirim via e-mail dan akan dihitung DPR?

Mungkin belum sampai ke situ teknologinya.

Indonesian women's rights activists seek review of Shari'ah laws
611 words
23 May 2006
16:47
BBC Monitoring Asia Pacific
English
(c) 2006 The British Broadcasting Corporation. All Rights Reserved. No material may be reproduced except with the express permission of The British Broadcasting Corporation.
Text of unattributed article: "Activists Seek review of Shari'ah" in English by Indonesian newspaper The Jakarta Post website on 23 May

Reports that more regencies and cities around Indonesia are adopting Shari'ah-style bylaws have caused grave concern among women activists, who worry that the trend will threaten not only their rights but also the nation's integrity.

A group of women's rights activists in Jakarta is drumming up support for a plan to file a request for a Supreme Court review of 26 Shari'ah-inspired ordinances which have been adopted in various regencies and municipalities.

They argue the ordinances on sex and morality violate the 1945 Constitution, which guarantees equal rights for men and women. They say local administrations are taking advantage of the central government's lax supervision of local legislations in the name of autonomy.

Among those which have adopted the controversial ordinances are the predominantly Muslim municipality of Tangerang, and several regencies in South Sulawesi, South Sumatra, West Java, West Sumatra and West Nusa Tenggara. Aceh province was legally granted the right to adopt Shari'ah in 2002 with the hope that it would help end the secessionist rebellion there.

The head of the Jakarta chapter of the Legal Aid Foundation for Women (LBH-APIK), Ratna Batara Munti, is calling for a nationwide movement to stop bylaws that discriminate against women.

In Tangerang, women are subject to arrest as suspected prostitutes if they venture out without a male companion at night.

Recently, the Coalition to Oppose Discriminatory Local Ordinances filed a request for judicial review of the Tangerang prostitution bylaw at the Supreme Court. They believe the bylaw violates the Constitution and the Criminal Code as well as the International Declaration of Human Rights.

"In Palembang city (in South Sumatra), being a homosexual is punishable by jail terms and hefty fines," she said.

The ordinances appear to clearly violate international conventions that the Indonesian government has ratified, such as the 2005 law on civil and political rights and the 1984 law on women.

The International Convention on Civil and Political Rights obliges signatories to repeal policies that are incompatible with the principles of human rights.

"It is the right of every person to determine his or her sexual orientation," Ratna says.

Ratna points out that many of the Shari'ah bylaws discriminate against women, depriving them of their basic rights, such as the right to dress as they choose and act as they choose.

The General Secretary of the Indonesian Women's Coalition for Justice and Democracy, Masruchah, illustrates how such bylaws discriminate against women.

"In some regencies in South Sulawesi province, the bylaws require women to wear Muslim clothes but they do not prescribe the same thing for men," said Masruchah, who wears a headscarf.

"The bylaws curtail women's rights to move and act. In the West Java regency of Cianjur, women are seen as 'good women' only if they wear Muslim clothes," she said.

According to activists, local administrations have adopted the Shari'ah ordinances without properly consulting the people, let alone listening to objections from critics, particularly those of different religious faiths.

Masruchah says the end goal of the Shari'ah ordinances spearheaded by fundamentalist groups is to turn Indonesia into a theocratic state.

"This is wrong. Islam teaches tolerance for people of other faiths, so they are violating this principle," she said. "I believe that many people do not feel comfortable with the bylaws, and therefore, we have to form an organized movement," she said.

Source: The Jakarta Post website, Jakarta, in English 23 May 06

a4776473

Document BBCAPP0020060523e25n000b5

Article by Gus Dur, published yesterday in the Washington Post.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Extremism Isn't Islamic Law

By Kyai Haji Abdurrahman Wahid
Tuesday, May 23, 2006; Page A17

For a few days this year the world's media focused an intense spotlight on the drama of a modern-day inquisition. Abdul Rahman, a Muslim convert to Christianity, narrowly escaped the death penalty for apostasy when the Afghan government -- acting under enormous international pressure -- sidestepped the issue by ruling that he was insane and unfit to stand trial. This unsatisfactory ruling left unanswered a question of enormous significance: Does Islam truly require the death penalty for apostasy, and, if not, why is there so little freedom of religion in the so-called Muslim world?

The Koran and the sayings of the prophet Muhammad do not definitively address this issue. In fact, during the early history of Islam, the Agreement of Hudaibiyah between Muhammad and his rivals stipulated that any Muslim who converted out of Islam would be allowed to depart freely to join the non-Muslim community. Nevertheless, throughout much of Islamic history, Muslim governments have embraced an interpretation of Islamic law that imposes the death penalty for apostasy.

It is vital that we differentiate between the Koran, from which much of the raw material for producing Islamic law is derived, and the law itself. While its revelatory inspiration is divine, Islamic law is man-made and thus subject to human interpretation and revision. For example, in the course of Islamic history, non-Muslims have been allowed to enter Mecca and Medina. Since the time of the caliphs, however, Islamic law has been interpreted to forbid non-Muslims from entering these holy cities. The prohibition against non-Muslims entering Mecca and Medina is thus politically motivated and has no basis in the Koran or Islamic law.

In the case of Rahman, two key principles of Islamic jurisprudence come into play. First, al-umuru bi maqashidiha ("Every problem [should be addressed] in accordance with its purpose"). If a legal ordinance truly protects citizens, then it is valid and may become law. From this perspective, Rahman did not violate any law, Islamic or otherwise. Indeed, he should be protected under Islamic law, rather than threatened with death or imprisonment. The second key principle is al-hukm-u yadullu ma'a illatihi wujudan wa adaman ("The law is formulated in accordance with circumstances"). Not only can Islamic law be changed -- it must be changed due to the ever-shifting circumstances of human life. Rather than take at face value assertions by extremists that their interpretation of Islamic law is eternal and unchanging, Muslims and Westerners must reject these false claims and join in the struggle to support a pluralistic and tolerant understanding of Islam.

All of humanity, whether Muslim or non-Muslim, is threatened by the forces of Islamist extremism. It is these extremists, masquerading as traditional Muslims, who angrily call for the death of Abdul Rahman or the beheading of Danish cartoonists. Their objective is raw political power and the eventual radicalization of all 1.3 billion Muslims worldwide. Western involvement in this "struggle for the soul of Islam" is a matter of self-preservation for the West and is critical given the violent tactics and strength of radical elements in Muslim societies worldwide.

Muslim theologians must revise their understanding of Islamic law, and recognize that punishment for apostasy is merely the legacy of historical circumstances and political calculations stretching back to the early days of Islam. Such punishments run counter to the clear Koranic injunction "Let there be no compulsion in religion" (2:256).

People of goodwill of every faith and nation must unite to ensure the triumph of religious freedom and of the "right" understanding of Islam, to avert global catastrophe and spare millions of others the fate of Sudan's great religious and political leader, Mahmoud Muhammad Taha, who was executed on a false charge of apostasy. The millions of victims of "jihadist" violence in Sudan -- whose numbers continue to rise every day -- would have been spared if Taha's vision of Islam had triumphed instead of that of the extremists.

The greatest challenge facing the contemporary Muslim world is to bring our limited, human understanding of Islamic law into harmony with its divine spirit -- in order to reflect God's mercy and compassion, and to bring the blessings of peace, justice and tolerance to a suffering world.

The writer is a former president of Indonesia. From 1984 to 1999 he directed the Nadhlatul Ulama, the world's largest Muslim organization. He serves as senior adviser and board member to LibForAll Foundation, an Indonesian- and U.S.-based nonprofit that works to reduce religious extremism and terrorism.

And speaking of Gus Dur.......

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Rude reception for 'Gus Dur' in W. Java

A group of demonstrators disrupted a planned address Tuesday by former president Abdurrahman Wahid at an interethnic and religious discussion in Purwakarta, West Java. The demonstrators -- claiming to be from several right-wing militant groups -- rudely demanded he step down from the podium, Gus Dur's daughter Zannuba "Yenny" Arifah Chafsoh Rahman said. The situation nearly became violent when members of Abdurrahman's Nahdlatul Ulama youth wing confronted the demonstrators. Abdurrahman's official website (www.gusdur.com) cited Sona Maulida Roemardhie, organizer of the event, as claiming the demonstrators were led by Asep Hamdani, the head of the local chapter of the Islam Defenders Front.

-- JP

Gus Dur Hadapi Teror Gerombolan Islam Radikal


Purwakarta, gusdur.net
Segerombolan massa yang mengatasnamakan Islam membuat keributan saat berlangsung forum Dialog Lintas Etnis dan Agama di Purwakarta Jawa Barat, Selasa (23/5/2006) yang dihadiri KH Abdurrahman Wahid (Gus Dur).

“Ketika baru beberapa menit Gus Dur menyampaikan pandangannya sebagai keynote speaker, di luar forum mereka membuat kegaduhan,” jelas ketua Steering Committee acara tersebut Sona Maulida Roemardhie.

Kegaduhan itu, lanjutnya, terjadi lantaran sekitar 50 massa gabungan dari Front Pembela Islam, Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia, Forum Umat Islam dan Hisbut Tahrir Indonesia memaksa masuk Gedung PKK Kabupaten Purwakarta Jawa Barat, tempat acara digelar.

“Mereka dikomandoi Ketua FPI Cabang Purwakarta Asep Hamdani. Dan sekitar 15 orang masuk dalam ruangan diskusi untuk membubarkan forum,” imbuhnya.

Agar mereka tidak merusak, forum memberi kesempatan perwakilan massa untuk berbicara. “Sebagian mengeluarkan kata-kata kotor yang tak pantas diucapkan oleh orang yang mengaku beriman,” jelas Sona.

Gus Dur menanggapi hal itu dengan tenang. Dia menjawab panitialah yang berhak meminta dirinya meninggalkan forum. “Saya diundang panitia. Anda hanya diberi kesempatan bicara oleh panitia. Karena itu, andalah yang harusnya keluar dari sini,” kata Sona menirukan Gus Dur.

Melihat gelagat itu, massa Barisan Anshor Serbaguna dan Garda Bangsa yang berada di lokasi bangkit emosinya. Untungnya bentrokan tidak sampai terjadi. “ Para perusuh itu keburu diusir pihak kepolisian,” imbuh Sona.

Selain itu, Sona mengungkapkan tanda-tanda mereka ingin membubarkan forum itu telah tercium beberapa hari sebelumnya. “Sehari sebelumnya saya diundang MUI Purwakarta terkait forum ini. Di sana, saya divonis sekuler yang telah diharamkan MUI. Untuk itu, mereka meminta forum tidak jadi dilaksanakan,” ujarnya.

Sebagai tindak lanjut dari peristiwa ini, dikatakan Sona, pihaknya akan mengambil langkah tegas. Pertama, membuat pers rilis bahwa NU Purwakarta menuntut mereka untuk meminta maaf kepada Gus Dur melalui media massa. Kedua, mendesak polisi untuk memeriksa mereka karena telah mengganggu ketertiban acara.

Sona juga menghimbau supaya mereka meminta maaf kepada kaum nahdliyyin. “Karena perbuatan mereka telah menyakiti kaum nahdliyyin,” himbaunya.

“Banyak ulama menelpon saya, karena mereka mendengar berita Gus Dur disakiti. Kata mereka, kok ternyata ada warga Purwakarta yang berani menyakiti tokoh besar NU itu,” imbuhnya.

“Sekarang ini saya dan kawan-kawan di Purwakarta akan berkonsentrasi mencari bukti-bukti untuk menuntut mereka,” tegas Sona.

Pada acara bertema Merajut Cinta yang Terserak, Merangkai SilaturahimMenuju Purwakarta Wibawa Karta Raharja itu, Gus Dur diminta untuk memaparkan pandangannya tentang Pluralisme dalam Bingkai Masyarakat Mandiri. Selain Gus Dur, acara ini dihadiri oleh sesepuh Purwakarta KH. Habib Hasan Syueb, rohaniawan Benny Susetyo, perwakilan agama Islam, Katolik, Kristen, Hindu, dan Konghucu. Bupati Purwakarta urung hadir karena faktor kesehatan.

Are there any estimates on how many members FPI has? It seems there are at least 100,000.

Indonesia's anti-extremist


by Jeff Jacoby

"I have been called ‘Chrislam' because I am so close to Christians," Abdurrahman Wahid is saying. "When I was criticized by a certain Muslim preacher for not being harsh enough against the 'kaffir' [infidels] -- for being too close to Jews and Christians -- I told him to read the Koran again. Because when the Koran speaks of 'infidels,' it means idolaters," not monotheists.

Wahid, the former president of Indonesia, is speaking to me by phone from his office in Jakarta. With him is C. Holland Taylor, an American entrepreneur and libertarian who fell in love with Indonesian culture en route to making a fortune in the telecommunications industry. After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Taylor created the LibForAll Foundation, a nonprofit organization dedicated to fighting Islamist extremism by promoting a culture of liberty and tolerance in the Muslim world; Wahid is the foundation's patron and senior adviser.

With 200 million residents, Indonesia is the world's largest Muslim nation, and Wahid -- popularly known as Gus Dur -- was not only its first democratically elected president but the longtime chairman of its largest Muslim organization, the 35 million-member Nadhlatul Ulama. A revered religious scholar who studied in Cairo and Baghdad, Wahid is a longtime champion of a moderate, progressive, and nonpolitical Islam. As a result, he has frequently clashed with militant fundamentalists whose growing influence, fueled by Arab/Wahhabi oil money, is undermining Indonesia's traditional religious pluralism.

Last year, Wahid spearheaded the opposition to a series of 11 reactionary fatwas, or religious decrees, issued by a high-ranking council of Indonesian Muslim clerics. The fatwas condemned any Islamic teaching based on liberalism and secularism, banned interfaith prayers not led by a Muslim, and even prohibited the answering of "amen" to a non-Muslim prayer. Wahid and LibForAll promptly organized a group of religious leaders, both Muslim and non-Muslim, into an "Alliance Toward a Civil Society," which denounced the fatwas as unworthy of decent Muslims and improper under Indonesia's democratic constitution.

"Gus Dur went on TV and radio to insist that the fatwas had no legitimacy and called on Muslims to ignore them," Taylor says. "Because of his genuine scholarship, his criticism carried great weight. This is a model of how to defeat radical Islam worldwide."

Wahid and Taylor are convinced that the impact of Islamist fanaticism can best be blunted by promoting leading Muslims who endorse moderation, pluralism, and democracy. One member of the LibForAll board is rock star Ahmad Dhani, a rock star whose band, Dewa, has millions of fans in Indonesia, Singapore, and Malaysia. Some of Dhani's hits have been aimed at undercutting Islamic militants. For example, one album is called "Laskar Cinta" ("Warriors of Love") - a play on the name of a terrorist group, Laskar Jihad ("Warriors of Jihad"). By harnessing his music and popular following to the cause of peace and interfaith tolerance, Dhani aims to inoculate young Indonesian Muslims against the extremism and violence of the Islamists.

While all of LibForAll's work to date has been in Indonesia, Wahid and Taylor hope to begin operating in other Muslim nations soon. On the drawing board now is a project to translate "Laskar Cinta" into Arabic, then arrange for an Egyptian pop star to perform and record it at a concert in Cairo. Wahid intends to meet with Egyptian clerics and opinion leaders, to press his view that Islam requires openness toward other religions and that Islamist terrorists and their supporters must be resisted and discredited.

Taylor argues that because of Indonesia's long tradition of pluralism, and because of Wahid's great following, Indonesia is the ideal base from which to launch an intellectual and cultural assault against the jihadists' ideology. The "essence" of Islam, he and Wahid maintain, is summed up in the words of the Koran (Sura 109:6): "For you, your religion; for me, my religion." But whether such a message will resonate in the Arab world remains to be seen. After all, jihadists quote the Koran too, and the verses they cite are as intolerant and supremacist as Wahid's is pacific and humane.

But there is no doubting Wahid's commitment to interfaith harmony. He tells Indonesian Muslims that they can learn from Christianity and Christian life, and has dispatched armed members of Nadhlatul Ulama to protect Christian churches from Islamist violence. Not long ago, one of Wahid's Muslim adherents was killed when he discovered a bomb in a church and used his body to shield the Christian worshipers from its blast. That stunning act of selflessness is a powerful reminder that Muslims no less than non-Muslims have a great deal riding on the defeat of the Islamofascists -- and that we will not win the war against radical Islam without moderate Muslim allies like Wahid.

*Jeff Jacoby is an Op-Ed writer for the Boston Globe, a radio political commentator, and a contributing columnist for Townhall.com.

Ugh, I get tired of Libertarians. I'm sorry to say that, but they have one of the worst political ideologies in the world.

Ugh, I get tired of Libertarians. I'm sorry to say that, but they have one of the worst political ideologies in the world.
Hmm, what are libertarians, what do they belive in?

The police are starting to take action against FPI, arresting 20 members last Sunday after they wrecked havoc at 7 entertainment venues in Bekasi.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Massa FPI Kepung Polrestro Bekasi
Kamis, 25 Mei 2006 | 10:50 WIB

TEMPO Interaktif, Bekasi:Massa Front Pembela Islam (FPI) cabang Bekasi, dini hari tadi mengepung kantor Polres Metro Bekasi. Mereka mendesak supaya Ketua FPI Abdul Qodir dan 20 anggotanya yang ditahan sejak Minggu lalu segera dibebaskan.

Sejak kemarin malam sekitar pukul 23.00, sekitar 100 orang anggota FPI mengepung pintu gerbang Polres di Jalan Pramuka. Mereka mencoba merangsek masuk ke dalam, tapi sebanyak satu peleton aparat Pengendali Massa (dalmas) yang sejak masa penahanan ke-21 orang FPI telah disiagakan, langsung menahan gerakan massa.

Massa berteriak “Allahu Akbar” berkali-kali. Mereka meminta petugas polisi memberi jalan masuk untuk dapat menjenguk rekan-rekannya yang berada dalam tahanan. Salah satu motivasi kedatangan massa adalah setelah beredar desas-desus yang mengatakan salah satu anggota FPI mengalami penganiayaan selama menjalani pemeriksaan petugas.

Keadaan lebih gawat dapat dihindari setelah terjadi dialog. Disepakati, polisi mengizinkan perwakilan massa saja yang masuk menjenguk tersangka di tahanan. Massa akhirnya diwakili seorang pengurus Lembaga Bantuan Hukum FPI.

Tidak lama kemudian, perwakilan itu keluar lagi. Ia menjelaskan kepada massa bahwa kondisi ke-21 temannya di tahanan baik-baik saja. Isu penganiayaan itu juga tidak betul-betul terjadi.

Sebelumnya, Minggu (20/5) sore, anggota FPI menggerebek 11 lokasi yang dinilai sebagai tempat maksiat di Kampung Kresek, Jalan Masjid At-Taqwa Rt 2/6, Jati Sampurna, Pondok Gede. Aksi itu berakhir dengan perusakan tujuh tempat hiburan. Akibatnya, mereka ditahan.

siswanto

Pemerintah Dikritik Tak Tegas
Aksi Kekerasan dan Perusakan Terus Dibiarkan


Jakarta, Kompas - Sejumlah tokoh agama, aktivis lembaga swadaya masyarakat, dan artis mengecam tidak tegas dan tidak beraninya aparat keamanan menangani aksi kekerasan sekelompok warga yang memakai atribut serta mengatasnamakan agama.

Kecaman itu muncul dalam jumpa pers The Wahid Institute, Rabu (24/5). Sikap pemerintah dinilai membahayakan eksistensi Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia, yang dibangun berdasarkan asas kebinekaan. Mereka yang mengatasnamakan diri Aliansi Masyarakat Anti Kekerasan itu menuntut pemerintahan bertindak tegas.

Desakan juga diamanatkan kepada Kepolisian Negara RI serta aparat penegak hukum lainnya agar punya keberanian mencegah dan mengambil tindakan tegas menangani kelompok-kelompok masyarakat yang kerap melakukan kekerasan atas nama agama.

Selain itu, Majelis Ulama Indonesia juga diingatkan untuk hati- hati bersikap atau mengeluarkan fatwa yang bisa dipakai untuk melegitimasi aksi kekerasan.

"Kini kita mengalami masa di mana banyak kekerasan dilakukan mengatasnamakan Islam. Sayangnya, aparat keamanan membiarkan hal itu," ujar Direktur Eksekutif ICIP Syafi’i Anwar.

Ketua Pengurus Besar Nahdlatul Ulama Masdar F Mas’udi mengatakan, aksi kekerasan yang membawa nama agama tinggal menunggu waktu untuk menjadi lebih besar dan mencari korban lebih beragam dari sekadar perbedaan pemahaman.

Ketua Umum Pimpinan Pusat Muhammadiyah Din Syamsuddin meminta polisi mengusut kekerasan di Purwakarta. "Muhammadiyah menyesalkan kekerasan yang mengatasnamakan agama," kata Din yang juga Wakil Ketua Umum MUI.

Din mengimbau umat Islam waspada dan tak mudah terjebak hasutan dan provokasi untuk melakukan kekerasan. Namun, Din juga meminta berbagai pihak untuk tidak melakukan tindakan yang memancing emosi elemen lain. "Kata-kata nyelekit, nyeleneh, dan menyinggung juga bentuk kekerasan. Kekerasan kata- kata tidak kalah kejamnya dengan kekerasan fisik," kata Din.

Rabu malam lalu Sekretaris Jenderal Pengurus Pusat Gerakan Pemuda Ansor A Malik Haramain mengatakan, "Ansor menentang tindakan Front Pembela Islam (FPI) yang keterlaluan, apa pun alasannya. FPI harus minta maaf ke Gus Dur dan ulama NU atas tindakan mengusir Gus Dur saat dialog lintas agama di Purwakarta. Itu preseden buruk bagi kebebasan berpendapat."

"Ini bukti bahwa fasisme religius sedang membayangi kehidupan bernegara," lanjut aktivis Front Perjuangan Pemuda Indonesia Syafiq Alielha.

Dewan Koordinasi Nasional Gerakan Pemuda Kebangkitan Bangsa (DKN Garda Bangsa) juga meminta FPI agar meminta maaf atas perlakuan mereka yang dinilai menghina Gus Dur. Peringatan itu disampaikan Sekjen DKN Garda Bangsa M Nur Purnamasidi, Kamis kemarin.


MMI dan HTI minta maaf

Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia (MMI) Jawa Timur dan Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia (HTI) Surabaya meminta maaf kepada Garda Bangsa atas pengusiran Gus Dur. Pernyataan itu disampaikan Ketua HTI Surabaya Fikri A Sudian dan Ketua MMI Jawa Timur Djulqarnain kepada Pengurus Dewan Koordinator Wilayah Garda Bangsa Jawa Timur di Surabaya, kemarin.

Dalam pertemuan yang difasilitasi Pemuda Muhammadiyah Surabaya itu, Fikri menjelaskan, HTI tidak terlibat dalam pengusiran Gus Dur. Saat menjadi pembicara dalam dialog lintas agama dan etnis di Purwakarta, Selasa (23/5), Gus Dur menyatakan penolakan RUU Antipornografi dan Pornoaksi. Gus Dur juga menuding aksi sejuta umat pada 21 Mei dibiayai pihak ketiga. Atas pernyataan itu, Koordinator FPI Purwakarta Asep Hamdani meminta Gus Dur mengklarifikasi tudingan dan meminta maaf. Jika tidak, Hamdani mempersilakan Gus Dur meninggalkan Purwakarta. Peserta dialog dari HTI tak berbicara sedikit pun.

Djulqarnain menyatakan, MMI juga tak pernah mengusir Gus Dur. "MMI malah belum punya pengurus di Purwakarta. MMI selalu menjunjung tinggi kebersamaan, tak mungkin bertindak seperti itu. MMI siap menginvestigasi ke Purwakarta bersama Garda Bangsa," ujarnya.

Anggota Laskar FPI Irwan Arsidi (Sekretaris Pribadi Ketua Umum Majelis Tanfidzi DPP FPI Al-Habib Muhammad Rizieq Syihab) mengatakan, "Harusnya yang minta maaf kepada umat Islam adalah Gus Dur yang telah menghina Quran."

Irwan Arsidi malah menyatakan akan melaporkan ke polisi pernyataan Gus Dur soal aksi turun ke jalan sejuta umat menentang pornografi di Jakarta, Minggu (21/5). "Kami punya bukti Gus Dur mengatakan aksi itu dilakukan preman berjubah putih," ujarnya.

Ketua Forum Betawi Rempug (FBR) Fadholy El Muhir tak keberatan polisi menindak pelaku anarki. "Silakan, asal dilakukan sesuai prosedur hukum. Jangan bertindak atas desakan siapa pun. FBR sendiri tak pernah anarkis. Sejauh ini belum ada laporan kepada polisi atas tindakan anarkis FBR," katanya saat dihubungi.(msh/cok/APA/Ant/DWA/WIN)

A long, but enlightening, article...

------------------------------------------------------------------
Article 22



Review
THE GATE OF REASONING
Merle Ricklefs Merle Ricklefs is visiting, honorary and adjunct professor, respectively, at the National University of Singapore, Monash University and the Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies of the Australian National University. He is South-East Asia editor for the forthcoming third edition of the authoritative Encyclopaedia of Islam (16 volumes), published by Brill.
3271 words
26 May 2006
Australian Financial Review
First
1
English
© 2006 Copyright John Fairfax Holdings Limited. www.afr.com Not available for re-distribution.
Merle Ricklefs on what's at stake in the battle between Indonesia's liberals and puritans

It is common to say that there is a struggle going on for the "soul of Islam" within Indonesia and in the Islamic world generally. Even politicians have come around to saying so, the ultimate proof that the matter is thought to be significant. But the terms in which that struggle is usually understood - essentially, extremists and terrorists on one hand and liberals or moderates on the other - profoundly underestimates the depth, scale and significance of this struggle. We are witnessing a competition about the meaning of Islam that has roots deep in its history. This is a battle not of a few decades' duration, but of more than 1400 years.

But first we must talk about the bab al-ijtihad, the "gate of reasoning", for this is the central issue. The Arabic word ijtihad may be briefly thought of as "reasoning", although it is, in fact, a more technical term in Islamic law for a process by which analytical methods are used to deduce a legal ruling from scriptural sources. It comes from the root jahada, "to struggle", the same root that gives rise to the more familiar term jihad. But ijtihad is not about holy war. Ijtihad is instead about the expenditure of intellectual effort so as to understand and implement the divine will which Muslims believe to have been transmitted in the Koran and also narrated in the traditions (hadith) about the life of the Prophet - the ultimate exemplar for Muslims. Yet the intellectual effort of ijtihad and the more physical effort of jihad are not entirely unconnected. Both represent attempts to carry out divine directives in this life.

The Koran is not a connected, logically structured work of theology or law, just as the Bible, the Upanishads and Buddhist sutras are not. To produce comprehensive guidance for humans in this world, early Muslim interpreters applied ijtihad. That is, they used reason to deduce and argue about what the divine revelation meant for human beings facing the daily realities of life. By definition ijtihad was open to new concepts and arguments which scholars could reconcilewith the original Islamic message as they understood it. This took place in the various societies in which a rapidly expanding Islam now found itself. Thus, in principle, ijtihad was multicultural. As decades and centuries passed, these interpretations grew and often varied in details.

By the 10th and 11th centuries CE, Muslim thinkers concluded that the problems of interpretation had all been solved. They had reached consensus, which was represented by four schools of law, taken together to represent what was the Orthodox (Sunni) understanding of Islam. So there was no further room for ijtihad. Over time most scholars accepted the view that the bab al-ijtihad was closed. For several centuries the Orthodox view was that no new interpreters existed who had the necessary qualifications of learning and the exemplary piety needed to produce new interpretations.

By the late 18th century and into the 19th, however, thinkers in the Islamic world were beginning to see the closure of the gate of reasoning as a major cause of backwardness. They were by then facing an expanding Europe, powered by the fruits of scientific inquiry and industrialisation. Across a world that was progressively falling under the control of European colonial regimes, local thinkers - Muslim and non-Muslim alike - were inclined to an analysis that was generally similar in thrust. Since, in the eyes of Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Indonesian, Indian, Persian, Arab or other thinkers, the Europeans were manifestly barbarians - the heirs to a Judaeo-Christian civilisation that was inferior to their own - then the manifest Western superiority must arise from two sources. Firstly, the local people themselves must have somehow been untrue to their own culture, must have betrayed and undermined itssuperiority themselves. How else could it be possible for Europeans to sweep across the globe with such power? Secondly, Europeans had obviously acquired significant technological advantages, but these could be learned and copied once the original vitality of local culture had been revived and purified.

In the Islamic case, this led to the idea that closing the bab al-ijtihad had imposed a dead hand of obscurantism on Islamic civilisation and it was therefore essential that the gate of reasoning be reopened. Like the Protestants in European history - with whom some Islamic thinkers specifically compared themselves - Islamic reformers wished to discard the dominance of the four Orthodox schools (as the Protestants wished to overthrow the authority of the Catholic church) and to return to the original revelation, captured in the Koran and the traditions of the Prophet, thereby restoring Islam to its pristine condition. European learning and technology could then be successfully absorbed and European power confronted on equal terms.

Thus was born a movement generally known as Islamic Modernism. Its most famous Middle Eastern articulators were Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (1839-97), Muhammad Abduh (1849-1905) and Rashid Rida (1865-1935). By the first half of the 20th century, Islamic Modernism was a powerful force, opening intellectual doors to Western science and technology, but also to Western learning more widely. Western languages, humanities and social sciences were also pursued by the Modernists. They challenged and were often opposed by the dominant Orthodox scholars, the established universities, local elites and, not surprisingly, the European rulers who were frequently alliedwith these conservative forces. Nevertheless the Modernists pushed open the bab al-ijtihad and Islam was launched on its first major renaissance since the closing of that gate of reasoning.

But note that the two thrusts of Modernism that reinforced each other around the turn of the 20th century carried the seeds of conflict. Returning to the original sources of Islam meant going back to works recording the life of the 7th century CE. Embracing modern European learning meant facing a particular kind of modernity. So long as the target was obscurantist religious, intellectual and political structures of mediaeval origin, and/or European and Christian ruling powers, the enemies were the same for both of these thrusts. When, however, these intellectual and political targets were pushed aside, there remained a religious issue. Could the life of the Prophet and the pious forefathers of the 7th century CE be reconciled with the rationality and implicit secularity of modern learning?

Out of these originally reinforcing but implicitly competing thrusts of Islamic Modernism have come both the liberal Islamic thinkers on whom Western commentators now pin so much hope and the extremists whom these same commentators fear. The modernising, intellectually open thrust has produced some of the most creative thinking in Islam for at least a millennium. At the same time, returning to the original sources has meant puritanism with its attendant rigidities and certainties, including the extremist and violent fringes that capture so much media attention today. There is another obvious parallel with Christianity here. Today's Islamic fundamentalists and extremists are most likely to have roots in the reformist and Modernist Islam that has grown since the 18th century - and not in the traditionalist Orthodox schools. So also fundamentalist Christians, including the people who deploy guns or bombs at abortion clinics or call for the assassination of people with whom they disagree, are most likely to come out of the Protestant tradition. The US evangelist Pat Robertson - who recently said of Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez that American special forces should "take him out" - and the Ayatollah Khomeini - who famously called for the death of Salman Rushdie - are not from different planets.

In Indonesia, as in much of the Islamic world, Modernism produced social innovation, educational reform and political progress. The Muhammadiyah movement in Indonesia, founded in 1912, was and remains one of the largest and most impressive such movements in the world. It has schools, orphanages, clinics, hospitals, mosques, universities and some 30 million members. Its influence is found widely throughout the nation. It has done much to modernise everything from Islamic philanthropy to Islamic schools to public debate. But from the ranks of Islamic Modernism have also come - and by now this should not surprise you - some of the most fundamentalist, extremist figures of recent Indonesian religious history. The same is true in the Middle East where, for example, Egypt's Islamic Brotherhood has its roots in Modernism.

Tension within Muhammadiyah between the people who represent Modernism's two thrusts - let us call them the liberals and the puritans as a form of shorthand - came to a head in mid-2005. Then the quintennial Muhammadiyah general meeting expelled leading liberal figures from the central leadership and replaced them with puritans of a rather pronounced conservative, even reactionary, style. The latter group is led by the 47-year-old Din Syamsuddin, the new chairman of Muhammadiyah, who holds both a master's degree and a doctorate from UCLA. But behind this dramatic takeover of a vital organisation lies a deeper issue: an attempt to again close the bab al-ijtihad.

What is it that the puritans fear most? In this globalising age, with its attendant instantaneous (I still resist the neologism "real time") communications, what they fear is all of the hybridising, homogenising, liberalising forces of the modern world. They fear concepts such as pluralism and multiculturalism, along with liberalism and secularism. In July 2005, the Majelis Ulama Indonesia (MUI) - the state-sponsored Indonesian Council of Religious Scholars, also a bastion of conservatism - issued a legal opinion (fatwa) denouncing (among other things) pluralism, which they professed to equate (oddly enough) with the idea that all religions are equally true. We can safely assume that Pat Robertson wouldn't accept that idea either, of course.

So it is essentially the threat posed by new ideas that the puritans fear and resist. All the essential ideas were, they feel, transmitted to the Prophet Muhammad in the 7th century and since then it has been the task of humankind to understand and to implement those ideas. The only room for debate is how to carry out that understanding and implementation and in that context puritans once again think the essential questions have been resolved. So behind the different socio-political agendas and tactical approaches of liberals and puritans lies a prior contest of ideas.

When the MUI issued its mid-2005 fatwa declaring liberalism, pluralism and secularism to be forbidden in Islam, it said that it was determined to win the "war of ideas against liberal Islam".1 This reflected a debate going on in the Muhammadiyah publication Suara Muhammadiyah (The Voice of Muhammadiyah) which has continued since then.

Liberals argue for the need to continue renewing the organisation by embracing new ideas. For more than five years, Muhammadiyah has been talking about dakwah kultural (cultural mission) as a way of approaching Muslims whose faith is not yet of the standard the organisation seeks. By 2005 there was talk of dakwah multikultural (multicultural mission) as an approach to a world that is full of inter-ethnic, inter-religious and communal conflicts. Such conflicts arise, say liberal thinkers, because of communities adopting views that are monocultural. From this arise prejudice, misunderstanding and conflict.

Puritans reject this. They see multiculturalism as a plot by religious minorities in Indonesia to undermine the dominance of the majority religion and culture in the society. (Does any of that sound familiar here in Australia, by the way?) One puritan writer nicely captured the essence of the argument when he wrote, "Muhamadiyah, as an organisation for the renewal of Islam, contains (1) a movement for the purification of thoughts, comprehension and implementation of Islamic teachings, based on the Koran and hadith along with the concepts of the pious forefathers and (2) modernisation and renewal in the fields of management and social movements."2

The omission will be obvious: (1) is a call for puritanism, while (2) conspicuously omits any modernisation and renewal of ideas. Or any suggestion of multiculturalism. There is only one culture or religion acceptable to puritans.

By last October, the editors of Suara Muhammadiyah were writing that it was necessary to consolidate internally and protect the organisation from infiltrationby other ideologies. But - unlike the hardline puritans - they were not referring to liberalism or pluralism. They were referring to the hardline ideologies themselves. In other words, the liberal and the puritan intellectual thrusts of Muhammadiyah were in open conflict: "Younger folk of Muhammadiyah are being herded to other places; . . . even mosques on Muhammadiyah university campuses and schools are being taken over by other ideologies . . . All of this we have to clean up and return to the original charter of Muhammadiyah that is pure, moderate and filled with the spirit of renewal of the movement."3 The editor, Mustofa W Hasyim, said that many parts of the organisation were weak and needed reinvigoration. He revived the call of Muhammadiyah's founder, Kyai Haji Ahmad Dahlan, to be "people who are progessive".4

Even the traditionalist Nahdlatul Ulama (established in 1926) got into the debate and showed that it too was now divided between liberals and conservatives (the term "puritan" is hardly relevant to a group still committed to the four Othodox schools of law). While NU national leaders generally rejected the hardline stance of MUI and the new Muhammadiyah leadership, a group of NU religious scholars from East Java and Madura called for the Islamic Liberal Network (Jaringan Islam Liberal) - a group of younger-generation intellectuals - to be declared illegal.

One of the most prominent figures among the liberals in Muhammadiyah has been Dawam Rahardjo, a leading intellectual in Indonesia and one of the foremost figures in Muhammadiyah for many years. He has defended the Ahmadiyah, an offshoot of Islam that occupies a position with regard to mainstream Islam rather like that of the Mormons with regard to mainstream Christianity. The Ahmadiyah was declared deviant by MUI and threatened with actual physical violence by the extremist Islamic Defenders' Front. Dawam was among the Islamic leaders who defended the Ahmadis in the name of freedom of religion. It was MUI that was deviant, declared Dawam. He also defended a woman named Lia Aminuddin who heads a strange cult called the Pure Throne of the Kingdom of the Lord of Eden and who has recently been imprisoned on a charge of defaming Islam.

Earlier this year, it was announced that Dawam was no longer a member of Muhammadiyah. Some said that he had been expelled. No, said Muhammadiyah head Din Syamsuddin, he had resigned.

Whatever interpretation one wishes to place on Dawam Rahardjo's sudden absence from the ranks of Muhammadiyah, it reflects the increasing intolerance of diversity within that organisation under its new puritan leadership. There's not much point in talking to Muhammadiyah at national level these days about multiculturalism.

All of this is, of course, about the closing of the mind. Or, in Islamic terms, about closing the bab al-ijtihad. In reporting this debate, one news magazine used an apposite headline indicating it is about "the boundaries of free interpretation".5

And where does the government of Indonesia stand? That is still a work in progress. On the big issues of puritanical Islamic attacks on Christian places of worship and Ahmadiyah, the national government for months said nothing at all, while it calculated where its political interests lay. Local governments in some places meanwhile were seeking to exceed their constitutional powers by introducing elements of Islamic law. More recently, however, signs have begun to emerge that the government may take a stand on both sorts of issues.

This closing of the gate of reasoning is of long-term historic significance. It means that powerful voices in Indonesia - and they are mirrored elsewhere in the Islamic world - are saying once again that all the important questions have been resolved and there is no longer room to learn from others.

This is potentially deeply worrying for inter-religious, inter-group and international relations. It is a trend readily strengthened by the circumstances of the "war on terror", as the recent Danish cartoon controversy has demonstrated.

We would do well to realise, however, that it is not only certain groups among Muslims who fear an open gate of reasoning and the necessarily attendant multiculturalism. In Australia, after the Cronulla violence involving young white Australians and Lebanese Muslims, the resident right-wing commentariat was quick to finger multiculturalism as the problem (rather than, as others thought, a solution) in such conflicts. Peter Ryan called for an apology to Geoffrey Blainey who, 20 years ago, provided a "thoughtful warning that such horrors might happen . . . unless we reconsidered our program of almost indiscriminate immigration and the accompanying madness of multiculturalism".6 Never mind that most of the "Asians" whom Blainey was worried about had in the meantime settled peacefully and productively in Australia. Keith Windschuttle said the Cronulla violence did not represent "race riots" but rather "multicultural riots".7 There was one Mark Steyn writing in London's Daily Telegraph to point out that "whenever something goofy turns up on the news, chances are it involves a fellow called Mohammed".8 Deep thinking, indeed. Then there was the obviously ignorant Anglican pastor who declared that Buddhism was under the control of the devil. That is on a par with the historically ignorant editorial in The Australian that spoke of "the homogenous nature of British society in the 1950s"9 - a view sustainable only if you know nothing whatever of British society and its attendant class and regional disparities. The problem for monoculturality is that the pristine and simple picture of culture and identity that it appeals to is often mythical - whether it is an Islamic or a non-Islamic model.

Closing the gate of reasoning seems to be a defensive mechanism by certain kinds of people - mainly established elites who feel inspired and legitimised by some divine or universal message and who feel threatened by new ideas, new ways of doing things or new leaderships.

Our topic here, however, is Islam and Indonesia. In Australia, as Kenneth Nguyen delightfully put it, the "melting pot" is probably "safe from stirrers".10 Similar confidence would be premature with regard to Indonesia.

The challenge in policy terms for Indonesia and for friendly states such as Australia is how to pursue and crush terrorists without at the same time feeding the senses of threat, marginalisation and disrespect that build support for those puritans who wish to shut down the gate of reasoning and the multiculturalism that, in principle, goes with it. It is also a question of how to support the liberals who promise an approach that recognises the plurality and complexity of the real world without appearing to mark them as the tools of Western interests. Or, in Australia, without suggesting that they are the chardonnay-swilling dupes of Islamic extremists.

NOTES

1 Cited in The Jakarta Post, July 27, 2005.

2 Suara Muhammadiyah, April 28, 2005.

3 Ibid, October 15-31, 2005.

4 Ibid, October 20, 2005.

5 Gatra, August 1, 2005: 'Tapal batas tafsir bebas.'

6 The Australian, December 15, 2005.

7 Ibid, December 16, 2005.

8 Reprinted in The Australian, December 21, 2005.

9 The Australian, December 14, 2005.

10 The Age, January 1, 2006.

When will SBY take a stance?? This is the 6 million dollar question.

------------------------------------------------------------------

SBY urged to bring militants into line


The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

Religious leaders from the country's major Muslim organizations and activists have demanded President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono crack down on extremist groups that commit violent acts in the name of religion.

Activists grouped in the Alliance for an Antiviolent Society and leaders of Indonesia's largest Muslim organizations, Nahdlatul Ulama and Muhammadiyah, have warned the nation's integrity is under threat from the groups.

They urged the police to stop radical groups from taking the law into their own hands.

They were responding to a number of violent incidents recently.

On Tuesday, the Islam Defenders Front (FPI) demanded former president Abdurrahman "Gus Dur" Wahid leave the podium at an interethnic and religious discussion in Purwakarta, West Java. They said Gus Dur should not have been allowed to attend the discussion because he rejected the pornography bill, and that the discussion should be stopped because the organizer used the term pluralism.

In Bekasi, police arrested Bekasi Islam Defenders Front chairman Abdul Qodir, along with 20 other FPI members, last Monday because they had damaged property, including alleged houses of prostitution.

Armed with sticks, the group raided several cafes in Kampung Kresek in Pondok Gede, Bekasi, after participating in a mass protest Sunday in support of the pornography bill.

Former first lady Sinta Nuriyah Wahid reported the chairman of the Betawi Brotherhood Forum (FBR), Fadloli El Muhir, to Jakarta Police last Monday for allegedly slandering activists who took part in a rally against the pornography bill.

Fadloli said during last week's live broadcast on Metro TV that the women who participated in the rally were "evil, wretched women who did not have good morals".

The FBR also threatened singer Inul Daratista, telling her to leave the capital, and raided her karaoke lounge in North Jakarta after she appeared in a rally against the bill.

The executive director of the International Center for Islam and Pluralism, Syafi'i Anwar, said the phenomenon indicated that the state endorsed violence.

"The state must be responsible for protecting its citizens. But what we see now is that the state lets some groups use violence to force their beliefs (on others)," he said.

He said the police seemed afraid to act because the groups used Islam as a cover. "Sooner or later, the international world will see this as a threat".

Nahdlatul Ulama executive Masdar F Mas'udi said the groups' actions were contrary to Islam. "Islam teaches people not to use violence or to force their beliefs on others."

He said their actions should be seen as criminal.

"The state has the responsibility, because citizens can make mistakes. However, our President and Vice President have not taken any action, even though they have seen violence happening in this country," he said.

Entertainer Rieke Diah Pitaloka said the groups had been singling her out for harassment since she asked the government to issue a policy on the pornography bill. "The police did nothing to protect me".

Din Syamsuddin, the chairman of Muhammadiyah, has also expressed concern about the groups' lawlessness. He specifically referred to the harassment of Gus Dur.

He urged police not to hesitate to take action against the perpetrators, regardless of whether they claimed to be defenders of Islam.

"Muhammadiyah is gravely concerned about the violence a group of people committed in the name of religion," Antara quoted him as saying Thursday in the West Kalimantan capital of Pontianak.

"Violence and anarchy undermine the nation's integrity and the democracy that Indonesia is rigorously pursuing," he said.

A member of the House of Representatives, Badriyah Fayumi, called on all Indonesian people to respond in a measured way.

"Do not fight violence with violence. Let the police handle the problem," she said.(05)

Ma'ruf has no plans to drop references to religion on IDs


M. Taufiqurrahman, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The government will maintain references to religions on identity cards for the time being, the home minister says.

"There has never been a plan to drop religions from ID cards," M. Ma'ruf told The Jakarta Post on the sidelines of a House of Representatives hearing Thursday.

Earlier this month, ministry secretary-general Progo Nurdjaman said that the government was considering dropping the reference to religions on ID cards after protests from numerous minority faiths.

Progo said classing people by their religions was unnecessary and could be used by intolerant groups to incite sectarian violence.

Opposition, however, quickly mounted against the proposal.

In April, Muhammadiyah chairman Din Syamsuddin told Antara the idea was preposterous.

"In a secular country, a column for religions on ID cards is unnecessary, but we should not follow this standard. People here identify themselves by their religions," he said.

Secularism is enshrined in the nation's Constitution.

Din said injustice rather than religion caused most conflict in the country. The government should tackle poverty and injustice rather than remove religious references from state documents, he said.

Stating one's religion is compulsory on ID cards along with details of one's date of birth, marital status and occupation.

The problem is the state recognizes only six religions: Islam, Protestantism, Catholicism, Hinduism, Buddhism and Confucianism.

People of other faiths must choose one of the six if they want a valid ID card -- a move that human rights groups have long criticized as discriminatory.

Chinese Confucians and Taoists used to suffer the most from the requirement, with many writing Buddhist or Christian in the religion column.

Now, the Confucians are officially recognized -- in theory. One ID application form seen by The Jakarta Post included a six box marked "other" -- presumably where followers of Confucius could write their religion.

But would these "other" religions be recognized by local officials? Many Confucians think not and continue to tick one of the five main faiths when they get a new card.

However, according to Ma'ruf, a man in the East Java town of Malang applied successfully for an ID card as a Confucian.

"It was the right decision as it was in line with the Constitution," he said.

Swandy Sihotang of the non-governmental organization the Coalition for Civil Registrations said there was no good reason for the government to continue the identity card policy.

"There are millions of people whose faiths are not recognized and have to pretend they believe in one of five recognized religions. The government should start paying attention to them," Swandy told the Post.

The long article is interesting. I find it a bit strange that the word "puritan" now has a pejorative meaning. The French author Alexis de Tocqueville (Democracy in America - 1835) and perhaps the most pre-eminent sociologist in history, the Germany Max Weber, both observed that the effects of Puritanism on North America, Britain, and to a lesser extent the Netherlands created the freest thinking and most economically productive societies in the world.

The long article is interesting. I find it a bit strange that the word "puritan" now has a pejorative meaning. The French author Alexis de Tocqueville (Democracy in America - 1835) and perhaps the most pre-eminent sociologist in history, the Germany Max Weber, both observed that the effects of Puritanism on North America, Britain, and to a lesser extent the Netherlands created the freest thinking and most economically productive societies in the world.

what's the connection between puritanism in those countries and freedom of thought?

A few things:

The Puritans were some of the first people to experiment with socialism. Their North American colonies were a mixture of private and public land. Thus there were equal opportunities for every member of a colony. There was no social elite and everything was gained by economical merit. As a result, everyone had an equal voice or an equal opinion. A good read on this is "Puritan Economic Experiments."

Tocqueville was studying democracy in America because it was the first modern republic and all the others that came after it for many years (particularly the French Republic) failed. He concluded that one primary reason democracy worked in the United States was because of Puritan ethics. It's important to note that MANY Puritans were totally against the idea of mixing the church with the state. The Reformed Presbyterian Church (generally considered "Puritans"), for example, was against the institution of a state church in Scotland. So many Puritans have historically been against that. And of course Tocqueville noted that the strength of Christianity in the US was a result of the seperation of church and state (people don't naturally trust their governments). That continues today with the US having the highest church-going rate in the Western world whereas former European countries that merged state and church now have minimal to no church attendance.

When the Puritan theology of no free will is acted out in everyday life it generally results in a very segregated lifestyle. The Puritans were against many things such as alcoholism, sexual immorality, etc. and they made mistakes just as the Roman Catholic, Lutherans, and other protestants did in persecutions, but in the end they saw what a state church had led to in Britain and many other parts of Europe and decided to keep political authority outside the realm of the church. As a result, people were allowed to think freely without worrying about offending 'the Church.'

Of course in the US that barrier is beginning to fall as the Republican party infiltrates conservative Christianity and many people are repulsed by it. The reaction will be that church attendance will decline as people associate Christianity with the policies of corrupt Administration.

Interesting. I'm very much in the dark about world history and sociology :) The link you cited between separation of religion from politics v religious adherence of the population is very interesting, never thought about that ;)

Ketua Forum Betawi Rempug (FBR) Fadholy El Muhir tak keberatan polisi menindak pelaku anarki. "Silakan, asal dilakukan sesuai prosedur hukum. Jangan bertindak atas desakan siapa pun. FBR sendiri tak pernah anarkis. Sejauh ini belum ada laporan kepada polisi atas tindakan anarkis FBR," katanya saat dihubungi.(msh/cok/APA/Ant/DWA/WIN)
Funniest quote ever. Yeah, FBR is law abiding organization, I'm sure Jemaah islamiyah did not bomb Bali.

Legislators ready to start anew on porn bill


M. Taufiqurrahman, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The House special committee on the pornography bill will rework its draft to focus on curbing the prevalence of obscene materials, a development that brings the heated discussion about its contents back to square one.

The decision was made after committee members agreed that the current draft denied people's basic rights and also was rife with inconsistencies, lawmaker Eva Kusuma Sundari told The Jakarta Post on Friday.

"Proponents of the bill have repeatedly said that it was to protect women and children, but there was no mention in the bill about laws that protect women and children as its legal consideration," Eva said, adding the revamping of the draft would amount to drawing up a new bill.

She said that after taking into account the noisy demonstrations for and against the bill, committee members also agreed to focus on measures to curb the production and distribution of pornographic materials, instead of restricting individual behavior.

The member of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) faction, a staunch opponent of the current bill, said the bill was drafted in 1999 before there was a greater protection of basic rights enshrined in the amended Constitution.

She said passing the current bill into law would only heighten tensions between the opposing sides. "We don't want a law that will tax us with grave social costs in the future."

Various groups have united to protest the bill, arguing it will stifle the country's cultural diversity and suppress minority groups if it becomes law.

"Preparation of the new draft alone will take at least three months," Eva said.

Special committee chairman Balkan Kaplale of the Democratic Party insisted the deliberation of the bill would be completed by mid-June, with only a plenary session necessary for its endorsement.

Similar inconsistent statements and actions by Balkan have annoyed fellow committee members, who accuse him of incompetence. Some of the members, mostly from the PDI-P faction, earlier demanded Balkan be replaced.

Lawmaker Hilman Rasyad Syihab of the Prosperous Justice Party, the bill's strongest political supporter, described the changes as an amendment, not an overhaul.

However, Hilman agreed the amendment would focus on provisions designed to curb production and distribution of porn.

Balkan, contacted separately by the Post, did not consider the changed draft to be out of the ordinary.

"There has indeed been an amendment in the bill, but it was only one among many stages that a law has to go through before being approved," he said in a telephone interview from Samarinda, East Kalimantan.

Looks like NU have finally got annoyed at FPI. Bansar have called on the disintegration of FPI, MMI and other anarchist organizations like it. FPI are scared and called on the police to protect them. Where can I sign up to join Bansar?

The MUI released 19 fatwas today including supporting the proposed anti-pornography law BUT opposing proposed anti-race-discrimination laws. Why?! They also want to see Tangerang-style morality bylaws in the whole country.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

MUI Keluarkan 19 Fatwa
Sabtu, 27 Mei 2006 | 15:09 WIB

TEMPO Interaktif, Ponorogo:Ijtima’ ulama Komisi Fatwa Majelis Ulama Indonesia (MUI) kedua yang diselenggarakan di Pondok Modern Gontor Ponorogo sejak Rabu lalu berhasil menyepakati 19 fatwa terkait beberapa permasalahan yang saat ini sedang mengemuka di Indonesia.

“Dari 19 fatwa ini, kami bagi ke dalam tiga kelompok fatwa, yaitu fatwa mengenai masa’il asasiyah wathoniyah (masalah asasi keagamaan dan kenegaraan), fatwa masa’il waqi’iyah mu’ashirah (masalah tematik kontemporer) dan fatwa tentang masa’il qununiyyah (masalah hukum dan perundang-undangan),” ujar Ketua Komisi Fatwa MUI Pusat Ma’ruf Amin, dalam konferensi persnya hari ini.

Untuk masalah kenegaraan MUI mengeluarkan empat fatwa, yaitu fatwa peneguhan bentuk dan eksistensi NKRI sudah final, fatwa tentang perlu adanya harmonisasi kerangka berpikir keagamaan dalam konteks kebangsaan, fatwa tentang penyamaan pola pikir dalam masalah-masalah keagamaan, serta fatwa untuk mensinergiskan seluruh ormas Islam dalam masalah keagamaan.

Sedangkan masalah tematik kontemporer, MUI merumuskan delapan fatwa, di antaranya fatwa haram unjuk rasa dengan cara menyiksa diri, fatwa haram transfer embrio ke rahim titipan, fatwa diperbolehkannya pengobatan alternatif, fatwa diperbolehkannya nikah siri (dengan catatan diharuskan segera mencatatkan di KUA), serta fatwa haram SMS serta premium call. “Meski mengharamkan, untuk SMS dan premium call kami memutuskan untuk mentolerir sepanjang hadiah yang dikeluarkan murni dari pihak sponsor bukan dari kumpulan hasil SMS,” kata ma’ruf.

Selain itu, MUI juga mengeluarkan fatwa tentang diperbolehkannya mengelola sumber daya alam oleh siapapun termasuk pihak asing (asal tidak merusak), fatwa bolehnya membiayai pembangunan dengan utang luar negeri (dengan catatan keuangan negara benar-benar tidak mampu), serta fatwa haram mengenai segala bentuk makanan yang berasal dari barang haram.

Untuk masalah perundang-udangan, MUI mengeluarkan tujuh fatwa, di antaranya fatwa tentang perlu segeranya RUU APP diundangkan, fatwa penolakan terhadap RUU Antidiskriminasi Ras, fatwa dukungan RUU Perbankan Syariah, fatwa dukungan terhadap RUU Hukum Terapan Peradilan Agama Bidang Perkawinan, fatwa tentang perlunya revisi UU Pengelolaan Zakat, fatwa perlunya revisi UU tentang Kesehatan serta sebuah fatwa yang berisi desakan kepada semua daerah untuk segera memiliki perda antimaksiat, miras serta pelacuran. “Kami secara tegas menolak RUU Antidiskriminasi Ras karena di dalamnya mendefinisikan agama seperti etnis,” imbuh Ma’ruf.

Forum ijtima sendiri rencananya akan ditutup besok pagi oleh Presiden Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.

Today is the birthday of the Pancasila ideology, founded 1 June 1945.


From the Jakarta Post
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Put Pancasila back on pedestal

No one can build a nation overnight. As we have sorely learned it is not even something that can be done in 60 years. Efforts to make it happen have landed us in a quagmire of religious, ethnic and separatist conflicts.

It is consoling, therefore, to commemorate today the birth of Pancasila -- an overarching umbrella for a pluralistic nation. At least we have one day a year to sit back and reflect on the sublime values which imbue this state ideology. Never mind that the life around us bears scant semblance to the basic values of Pancasila. The reflection is still worth it, even if it is like tasting a drop of water in the desert.

The Sanskrit word embodies five principles: belief in one god, just and civilized humanity, national unity, consensual democracy and social justice. It was the genius of Sukarno, our founding president, who drafted Pancasila to pull together more than 200 ethnic groups scattered across 17,000 islands. He first introduced the ideology on June 1, 1945, two months before independence.

People today are reluctant to talk about Pancasila, partly because what is being practiced often departs from what is being preached. Some sections of society behave as if Pancasila never existed. They are obsessed with ethnic or religious divisions. Last week we watched a dispute between moderate and hard-line Muslims over the controversial pornography bill. The dispute almost resulted in a melee.

And there have been much worse scenes in the past. Muslims and Christians fought each other in Poso and Ambon, killing thousands. Religion is not the only excuse for conflicts. Clashes have broken out between villagers over trivial matters, between supporters of competing local politicians, between members of the police and the military, and between students and the police. The ongoing regional elections and decentralization process have been ridden with conflicts, often within similar communal groupings.

Another reason for the reluctance by many people to talk about Pancasila is that in the past, it has been hijacked by political leaders.

Sukarno trampled on the first principle, "belief in on god", in the latter part of his rule in the 1960s when he limited the number of officially recognized religions to six. Pancasila was reduced to dogma during the subsequent 32-year New Order era. Soeharto became the sole interpreter of Pancasila and he forced his interpretations onto young minds. Anyone who offered a different interpretation was branded a dissident. Soeharto was never hesitant to use violence to crush his enemies. In effect, he turned the umbrella into a weapon to strike his opponents. There is nothing wrong with Pancasila; it is the manipulation of the ideology that has given rise to the apathy.

Apart from using violence, Soeharto also changed the anniversary of Pancasila from June 1 to August 18 to belittle Sukarno's contributions to the country.

Confusing signals from the elite continued after Soeharto's fall in 1998 until now, with leaders often behaving in ways that undermine the state philosophy. Today, few people believe Pancasila can still serve as an umbrella to protect them. It has become a kind of laughingstock, thanks to a string of power-hungry politicians who have exploited it for their narrow political ends. They forget that without Pancasila, the nation could easily be pushed to the brink of extinction.

Many countries are wrestling with the plurality of their societies. Europe is dealing with this issue and the United States has a long experience with plurality, though that country deals mainly with race issues. Indonesia, which has been grappling with plurality since independence, could contribute its experiences to the world community, provided it is capable of answering the challenges.

We urge the government to put Pancasila back on the pedestal. It is vital that we break the dogmatic interpretation of the ideology left behind by Soeharto, still much alive in the minds of many.

Pancasila should remain an open ideology. The government should make sure that discussion of the topic flourishes. Let debate bloom to enrich our interpretation of Pancasila, to convince people of its depth of meaning and to allow fresh ideas in.

A common understanding of these elegant yet much abused fundamental values is needed. The people badly need fresh air to breathe.

The birth of Pancasila: An unfolding tragedy
J. Soedjati Djiwandono, Jakarta

Indonesians tend to be blindly fanatical about Pancasila, the national ideology. Pancasila is comprised of five principles: Belief in one God, Indonesian nationalism, humanity, democracy, and social justice. Indeed, the preamble to the 1945 Constitution that embodies the ideology is so sacrosanct that it is not to be the subject of reform. That stricture is the main source of a tragedy that has made the future of this nation uncertain.

As far as the current formulation of Pancasila is concerned, there is probably a national consensus on it. That, however, is only true today because the original draft of the 1945 Constitution, called the Jakarta Charter, was drastically changed on the eve of the proclamation of Indonesia's independence. Originally the phrase "Belief in one God" was followed by seven words that translated as "with the obligation to implement Islamic Sharia by its adherents." The omission meant an essentially secular constitution was inaugurated on Aug. 18, 1945.

Unfortunately, there was never a debate on the issue of whether Indonesia would be a secular or religious (Islamic) state, except in the Constituent Assembly that resulted form the first general elections in 1955, which was to decide on the consitution of the country. Nationalists won a vote on the re-institution of the "seven words" and they were left out of the constitution.

It was, however, the beginning of a continuous tragedy. In the first years of independence to the mid 1960s there was a series of Islamic rebellions -- in West Java, Aceh, South Sulawesi, South Kalimantan, West Sumatra -- all struggling for the establishment of an Islamic state. While these violent attempts were crushed, it did not mean Indonesia was a secular state.

Islamic aspirations have remained strong. At the onset of the reform era after the resignation of President in Soeharto in 1998, there were efforts to revive the "seven words" of the Jakarta Charter, but they failed. So too did efforts to reinsert Islamic principles into Article 9 of the 1945 Constitution, which provides religious freedom.

Then, also in the era of reform, they adopted a manner of decision making in the House of Representatives (DPR) known as "without voting", on the understanding that the majority (mostly Muslims) would have their way, with or without voting. This was first applied to the enactment of 2003 National System of Education Law, which made religious education compulsory at all levels of schooling, a move that was certainly against freedom of worship.

At the moment, in the offing are the bill on pornography and a draft amendment of criminal law, both of which are rooted in the Islamic law of sharia. That system of decision making would essentially amount to a tyranny by the majority. Should a bill be passed that is against human rights it would also be against the constitution.

Indeed, while it has never been openly admitted, there has never been a common understanding of Pancasila among Indonesians of different religions, particularly in regards to the first principle.

As an open ideology, by definition Pancasila cannot be directly implemented except through legislation. No law has ever been enacted that every citizen of the state must believe in God. Yet the Marriage Law requires one to marry according to one's religion. So implied in this law is not only that every citizen -- at least one that intends to get married - must believe in God, but also that belief in God must be realized through the profession and practice of a religion.

To enforce religion is against freedom of worship. Worse still, it cultivates a seed of hypocrisy: an atheist would have to claim to believe in a religion in order to get married.

To make matters worse, although the legal basis for this has never been made clear, everyone has to claim to embrace only one of the "recognized" religions. Ironically, Judaism, the oldest monotheistic faith, is not one of them. Recently however, though again with no clear legal basis, President Yudhoyono stated that Indonesia no longer made a difference between recognized and unrecognized religions.

While there is a consensus on the wording or formulation of Pancasila, however, most people would quickly realize there is no common understanding of how Pancasila should be interpreted. On the contrary, people remain ambivalent and take advantage of that ambivalence. When asked if Indonesia is a secular or religious (Islamic) state, the usual answer is "neither secular nor Islamic".

On the other hand, non-Muslims would claim that under Pancasila, they have freedom of worship. Many Muslims would like to see Islamic law be the source of national law. Hence the continuous clash of values that could make national unity simply a myth, for the nation is not bound by a set of common values. This is the source of the constant trend towards national disintegration.

People of different religions have been encouraged to engage in inter-faith dialogues. These dialogues have mainly aimed to promote mutual understanding, mutual tolerance and brotherhood. All of these sound like noble objectives.

However, those aims, however noble they may sound, are never enough. Mutual understanding, mutual tolerance and brotherhood could be interpreted to mean that we should understand and tolerate our neighbors even if their behavior violates human rights. We need to use inter-religious dialogs to develop common, universal human values.

It has taken mankind centuries to respect human rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was only adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1946. It will take a long process of learning to develop common universal human values.

The writer, a political analyst, holds a PhD from the London School of Economics and Political Science.

All religious services were held in the streets or under trees in Yogyakarta Sunday out of respect for the damaged or destroyed churches. Does anyone know if the FPI or government officials assaulted the worshippers as they did in West Java for not having proper permits?

Playboy publishes 2nd Indonesian edition, relocates offices to Bali
408 words
7 June 2006
17:58
Associated Press Newswires
English
(c) 2006. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
BALI, Indonesia (AP) - A second edition of Playboy hit the streets of Indonesia Wednesday as the local publisher moved its offices to Bali island, two months after Islamic hard-liners threw rocks at its Jakarta offices following the magazine's debut.

The magazine has been toned-down for publication in the world's most populous Muslim nation, but the first edition nonetheless drew violent protest from hard-liners who say the contents are immoral and violate criminal codes. Frightened advertisers responded by pulling their ads.

The magazine's new Bali offices opened Wednesday.

"The safety and convenience of our employees comes first," publisher Erwin Arnada said of the decision to relocate to the Hindu-majority island of Bali, a haven for foreign tourists. "People in Bali are more open to ideas, they are more adaptable."

Arnada, who is also the magazine's editor-in-chief, said 100,000 copies of the 160-page edition were being printed. Blank pages were dedicated to all the advertisers who were scared off: "We dedicate this empty page to our loyal clients who were threatened for putting their ad in this magazine."

Playboy, which hawkers discreetly displayed to motorists at crowded intersections in the capital, features an interview with Fabianus Tibo -- a Christian hard-liner on death row for an attack on a Muslim boarding school -- and follows the history of the local wine culture.

Consumers seeking pornographic thrills would likely be disappointed, Arnada said, noting that there were no nude photos and that the articles were "quite heavily about social, political and cultural issues."

The resort island of Bali has been targeted by al-Qaida-linked terrorists twice in the last four years. Twin nightclub blasts in 2002 killed 202 mostly foreign tourists and triple suicide attacks on crowded restaurants last year left 20 dead.

But Arnada said he still thought the climate was better than in Jakarta -- which has also been hit by deadly bombings.

"The ambiance here is more inspirational," he said by telephone from Bali. "People are more open to ideas."

The Islamic Defenders' Front -- which has a history of attacking bars and nightclubs and took part in the April stoning of the Playboy office -- said it did not know yet what action it would take against the magazine.

"We'll find some way to make them listen," said Tubagus Muhammad Sidik, a senior member of the group.

5

Ormas dan LSM Ilegal Akan Dibekukan
Kamis, 08 Juni 2006 | 16:07 WIB

TEMPO Interaktif, Jakarta:Pemerintah akan segera membekukan keberadaan dan kegiatan organisasi masyarakat (Ormas) dan lembaga swadaya masyarakat (LSM) ilegal yang dinilai telah mengganggu keamanan dan ketertiban umum. Pemerintah memandang perlu melakukan langkah penertiban setelah ditemukan aktivitas ormas dan LSM yang mengarah pada permusuhan dan SARA.

Menurut Kepala pusat penerangan Departemen Dalam Negeri, Andreas Tarwanto, mekanismenya pemerintah akan menertibkan ormas dan LSM yang tak terdaftar di Depdadgri. Kemudian pemerintah akan menindak Ormas dan LSM yang akivitasnya mengancam integrasi bangsa. “Jika sudah tak dapat ditolerir, pemerintah akan membubarkannya,” kata dia kepada wartawan di kantornya, kemarin.

Direktur Fasilitasi Organisasi Politik dan Ormas, Depdagri, Suhatmansyah, memaparkan adanya sejumlah bukti yang ditemukan pemerintah tentang aktivitas dan keberadaan ormas dan LSM yang akhir-akhir ini dapat mengancam integrasi bangsa. “Disadari atau tidak, aktivitas sejumlah ormas dan LSM sudah sangat mengkhawatirkan. Kalau dibiarkan dapat mengancam persatuan dan kesatuan bangsa,” ujar dia.

Langkah penertiban oleh pemerintah itu didasarkan pada UU No 8 tahun 1985 tentang Ormas dan PP No 18/1986 tentang Ormas. Dalam aturan tersebut Ormas dan LSM dilarang melakukan aktivitas yang dapat menyebarkan permusuhan dan SARA, memecah belah persatuan dan kesatuan bangsa, merongrong kewibawaan dan mendiskreditkan pemerintah, menghambat program pembangunan, dan kegiatan lain yang dapat mengganggu stabilitas politik dan keamanan.

“Berdasarkan Pasal 18 PP no 18/1986, pemerintah dapat membekukan ormas yang menerima bantuan asing tanpa persetujuan pemerintah dan memberi bantuan kepada pihan asing yang merugikan kepentingan bangsa dan negara,” paparnya. Bantuan dimaksud berupa keuangan, peralatan, tenaga dan fasilitas. Eko Ariwibowo

That is wrong. Ormas kan bagian dari demokrasi. Yg harus di tindak tuh justru tindakan kriminalnya. Bukan ormas nya yg malah di tutup.

It sounds like a partial return to New Order to me - not necessarily a bad thing.

the new porn bill is quite interesting, its stated there, you can sell porn magazine but you must have the book covered with special cover and only can be distributed by their own network agency....so its pretty much like what the government advised to playboy.....

they also scrapped the pornoaksi bills, which include kissing and anything...so they will only target the material instead..

but here it comes the funny thing, on pasal 28 or 29 there is a law that stated you cant have sex with dead body. lol..like anyone is dare doing it ?

cheers

but here it comes the funny thing, on pasal 28 or 29 there is a law that stated you cant have sex with dead body. lol..like anyone is dare doing it ?

cheers

no joke but this really happened. I read it in one of magazine in JKT

but here it comes the funny thing, on pasal 28 or 29 there is a law that stated you cant have sex with dead body. lol..like anyone is dare doing it ?

cheers
In the early Japanese Shinto texts they forbade people from having sex with chickens. If it's in the law, there's usually a reason.

In the early Japanese Shinto texts they forbade people from having sex with chickens. If it's in the law, there's usually a reason.

wtf?! sex with chickens??! :bash:

Pancasila back in favour in Indonesia
John McBeth, Senior Writer
1102 words
9 June 2006
Straits Times
English
(c) 2006 Singapore Press Holdings Limited
JAKARTA - IN WHAT may be one of the most important speeches of his 18-month-old presidency, Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has finally responded to mounting concern among civil society groups and called for a return to the principles of Pancasila - the state ideology which promotes secularism and sees all Indonesians as equal.

Coming on the 61st anniversary of the birth of a doctrine that has lost much of its earlier prominence in Indonesia's political lexicon, it was the first time the President had implicitly told Muslim hardliners that abandoning Pancasila for narrow religious or ethnic-based doctrines would only jeopardise Indonesia's unity.

Noting that Pancasila was a compromise reached by the founding fathers in recognition of the country's diversity, Dr Yudhoyono said: 'In this period of transition, many of us tend to create new realities and directions and abandon the old values, which should become part of our identity and be used as a tool for unity.'

'We should end the debate on alternatives to Pancasila as our ideology,' he continued. 'We should keep on with efforts to increase the people's welfare and to uphold justice based on the ideology that we have.'

Adopted as the nation's guiding philosophy at the time of its declaration of independence in 1945, Pancasila sees all Indonesians as equal, espousing the principle of Indonesia under one God, applicable to all religions, along with the concepts of democracy and social justice.

But because it was used during Suharto's rule to reinforce conformity and stifle dissent, it lost much of its credibility.

Secularists have grown increasingly vocal over the government's failure to rein in what has been seen as creeping syariahisation - a consequence of the new political freedoms Indonesians have enjoyed since Suharto's downfall. After three failed attempts in 2000, 2002 and 2004 to introduce a constitutional amendment that would make syariah compulsory, radical Islamists now appear to have changed their strategy.

Mostly, that has been about building a constituency for syariah from the grassroots, using like-minded or opportunistic politicians to pass unconstitutional town or district ordinances.

At the national level, however, the issue has come to a head over draft anti-pornography legislation, whose authors have cynically sought to turn into an instrument that would change the character of Indonesian society.

A special parliamentary committee is now reportedly redirecting the focus of the Bill exclusively towards tougher restrictions on the distribution of pornographic materials.

In its original form, it banned kissing in public, prescribed jail or fines on women for exposing 'sensitive' body parts, which could include their hair, shoulders and legs, and effectively outlawed nudity in art.

It took a lot of persuasion to get Dr Yudhoyono off the fence.

Muslim and Christian activists - working behind the scenes under the guise of inter-faith dialogue - had to do an end-run around State Secretary Yusril Mahendra, the doctrinaire founder of the Islamic-orientated Crescent Star Party, who they say was opposed to the President making the June 1 policy statement.

Dr Yudhoyono's advisers say his inaction was due to the fact that he doesn't want to interfere directly in the country's democratic processes until a point is reached where a referee is needed to resolve an issue.

But if the ever-cautious President is now blowing the whistle, it remains to be seen whether it will translate into anything effective.

Indeed, just days after the President's speech, members of the violent Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) raided several small East Jakarta hotels they claimed were fronts for prostitution - one of an increasing series of vigilante acts the FPI has staged across the country which the police appear to be unable or unwilling to prevent.

The FPI has already antagonised the moderate Muslim community by forcing former president Abdurrahman Wahid to leave a public discussion last month because of his opposition to the anti-porn Bill. An avowed pluralist, he is a one-time head of the Muslim organisation Nahdlatul Ulama, which is embroiled in an internal struggle between conservative leaders and younger, more liberal members.

Mr Abdurrahman's wheelchair-bound wife, Sinta, has also joined the fray, lodging a formal police complaint against hardline Betawi Brotherhood Forum chairman Fadloli El Muhir for allegedly slandering activists who took part in a recent rally condemning the Bill.

During a live TV interview, Mr Muhir described the demonstrators as 'evil, wretched women who do not have good morals'.

Female activists are also alarmed over a proliferation of syariah-style by-laws, which undermine the equal rights they share with men under the Constitution.

One group plans to file a request for a Supreme Court review of 27 such ordinances which have been adopted by Jakarta's satellite city of Tangerang, and district administrations in at least eight provinces - Gorontalo, South Sulawesi, South and West Sumatra, East and West Java, Banten and West Nusa Tenggara.

In Tangerang, women are subject to arrest as suspected prostitutes if they venture out without a male companion at night, while in the South Sumatra province capital of Palembang, homosexuals who come out of the closet can be punished with jail terms and hefty fines. Ordinances elsewhere prescribe everything from full Islamic dress for men and women to mandatory prayer and Quranic study sessions.

Human rights lawyer Tondung Mulya Lubis, who attended at least one of the sessions with Dr Yudhoyono, says secular activists are not letting up now in their efforts to roll back laws and regulations that compromise tolerance, democracy and the rule of law. They are also planning a road show to educate rural Indonesians on what is at stake. One of the main focuses: the country's thousands of Muslim boarding schools.

In the meantime, it is now dawning on people what Pancasila really means for a country as diverse as Indonesia, where the weakening of central government authority has led to a surge in what Dr Yudhoyono calls 'identity politics'.

That comes as no surprise to one senior US military officer who admits bemusement at being fed a heavy diet of Pancasila when he attended Indonesia's Army Command and Staff School in the early 1980s.

'They were worried about separatism then, but they were also concerned as much about the threat from the right (Islam) as the left,' he recalls. 'Now I think there is a new realisation that the Indonesian people have to have something to hang on to, otherwise there will be nothing but shared misery.'

feerjkt@pacific.net.id

In the early Japanese Shinto texts they forbade people from having sex with chickens. If it's in the law, there's usually a reason.

Poor chicken...

is it so likely that the porn bill will be passed, soon?

--------------
OOT: this thread has more than 500 posts, create a new one?

I think they will passed it but recently in the streets the hardliners started to protest about the revision of its porn law, they want the pre-revision law not the revision one.

tata, elo aja deh yg mulai atau sapa aja, buka thread baru, gue lock yang ini.

cheers