Injustice in Belief: Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy Of

INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

INJUSTICE IN BELIEF Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

Composed by: Uli Parulian Sihombing Pultoni Siti Aminah Muhammad Khoirul Roziqin

Publisher The Indonesian Legal Resource Center (ILRC) Jl. Tebet Timur I no. 4, South Jakarta Phone: 021-93821173, Fax: 021-8356641 Email: [email protected], Website: www.mitrahukum.org

21 cm x 14,5 cm; viii + 102 pages, Jakarta ILRC 2012

ISBN : 978-602-98382-8-2

Designed, Layouted and printed by Delapan Cahaya Indonesia Printing - Canting Press Foreword

FOREWORD

The Indonesian Legal Resource Center (ILRC) compiled a report on the monitoring of the cases of blasphemy of religion and religious hate speech that led to violence, discrimination and hostility. This report was the result of monitoring from various sources such as the monitors in the region, the monitoring of news coverage in the media, and field visits. The purpose of this report is to discover the extent of human rights violations that occurred in these cases, particularly the infringement of freedom of religion and expression. In addition, we tried to identify the particular regulations that impeded everyone in their right to exercise their freedom of religion and expression. The unjust punishment of blasphemy, desecration and religious hate speech contemporary global problems. They occurs in almost all countries in the world. At the beginning of 2012, United Nations (UN) passed resolution No. 67/167 on thea war against intolerance, negative stereotypes, stigmatization, discrimination, incitement that causes violence and violence against people on the grounds of religion/belief. In that resolution, all countries denounced the practices of intolerance on grounds of religion including religious hate speech that leads to violence. The resolution calls for all countries to criminalize perpetrators of religious hate speech that leads to violence on the grounds of religion. Thus, at the international level, the focus has been shifted from blasphemy of religion to religious hate speech that leads to violence on the basis of religion. So it's a bit odd and irrelevant, when President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono proposed a resolution to the problem of blasphemy of religion at the UN General Assembly Session in last September. It looked like President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono had not keep track of the developments regarding religious intolerance.

iii INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

The message of the UN resolution is very clear all countries are required not only to denounce the practices of hate speech that lead to violence on the basis of religion, but also to criminalize the perpetrators of the religious hate speech. It was even urged that countries make effective policy/actions to counter all forms of religious intolerance, including religious hate speech. From the above, the rules concerning matters related to blasphemy of religion are not needed, and countries should focus on creating rules to fight acts of religious intolerance, including religious hate speech. Indonesia and countries that are incorporated in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) are the main sponsors of this resolution. Indonesia should follow contemporary international developments to combat religious intolerance through policies that are more rational, and do not violate the human rights of every person/group. This report would like to describe that the responses to the blasphemy of religion have so far resulted in violations of human rights, in particular the right to freedom of religion and freedom of speech and expression. Presently, responses to the blasphemy/ desecration of religion are far more severe than, responses to religious hate speech in terms of law enforcement. We are aware that the results of this monitoring are still far from perfect. For Because of that, we consider this monitoring report a living open document to be improved and updated by all the stakeholders, especially the communities of victims. We thank all the contributors who helped prepare this monitoring report, and also thank Freedom House, which has supported its publication. We hope, the results of thisis monitoring effort can contribute to the fulfillment of the freedom of religion/ belief and expression. We hope you find this report enlightening.

Jakarta, September 2012 The Indonesian Legal Resource Center

Uli Parulian Sihombing Executive Director iv Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD iii TABLE OF CONTENTS V I. INTRODUCTION 1 A. Background 2 B. Theoretical Frameworks of Blasphemy of Religion and Hate Speech on the Basis of Religion 3 C. Scope of Monitoring 8 II. CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA 9 A. Cases of Blasphemy of Religion 9 1. HB Jassin, Short Story of the Sky is Getting Cloudier / Langit Makin Mendung (1968) 18 2. Arswendo Atmowiloto, Questionnaire on Prominent Figures in the Weekly Tabloid Monitor (1990) 20 3. Muhammad Saleh, The Riots of Situbondo (1996) 22 4. Mas'ud Simanungkalit, Islam Hanif (2003) 24 5. Mangapin Sibuea, Pondok Nabi dan Rasul Dunia / The Cottage Prophets and Apostles of the World, (2004) 24 6. Charisal Matsen Agustinus Manu, Book Cover BPS of Alor City (2004) 25 7. Rus'an, Article on Islam is a Religion that Failed (2005) 27 8. Ardy Husain, Cancer and Drugs Foundation Cahaya Alam/YKNCA (2005) 28

v INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

9. Sumardin Tappayya, Whistling Prayer (2005) 30 10. Yusman Roy, Bilingual Prayer (2005) 33 11. Teguh Santosa, Cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in the Rakyat Merdeka Online (2006) 35 12. Imam Trikarsohadi and H. Abdul Wahab, the Loading of the Cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in the Tabloid PETA (2006) 35 13. The Editorial Board of TabloidGloria, the Publishingof the Cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in the Bi-Weekly GloriaTabloid (2006) 36 14. Lia Aminudin a.k.a. Lia Eden/Salamullah (2006) 36 15. Abdul Rachman (2006) 38 16. Ahmad Musadeq, Alqiyadah Al Islamiyah Sect (2007) 38 17. DjokoWidodo and Nur Imam Daniel, the prayer concert held by LPMI (Indonesian Student Service Institute) (2007) 39 18. Dedi Priadi and Gerry Luhtfi Yudistira/Al-Qiyadah Al-Islamiyah (2007) 40 19. Raji, Drug Prayers/ Sholat Koplo (2008) 41 20. Lia Eden/ Eden Community (2009) 41 21. Wahyu Andito Putro Wibisono, Salamullah (2009) 42 22. Nimrot Lasbaun, The Sion City of Allah Sect (2009) 42 23. FX Marjana, Lecturer of Widya DharmaUniversity / Unwidha (2009) 43 24. Wilhelmina Holle, Masohi-Maluku Riot (2009) 43 25. Pastor Moses Alegesen/ Translator of the paper Untouchability A History of Vaikonam Agitation Manu (2009) 44 26. Agus Imam Solihin, Satrio Piningit (2009) 45 27. Ahmad Naf’an, Santriloka Institute (2010) 45 28. Antonius Richmond Bawengan, The Temanggung Riot (2010) 47 29. Ahmad Tantowi, The Eden Heaven Sect (2010) 48 30. Ondon Juhana a.k.a. Raden Jaya Diningrat, Alternative Healing (2011) 50 31. Oben Sarbeni, Sect of Ahmad Sulaeman (2011) 51 32. Andreas Guntur Wisnu Sarsono, Amanat Keagungan Ilahi Sect (2012) 52 vi Contents

33. Hadassah J Werner, The Bethel Tabernakel Church (2012) 54 34. Sensen Komara, The Indonesian Islamic State/ NII (2012) 55 35. Alexander Aan, Account Facebook of Atheis Minang (2012) 56 36. Tajul Muluk, Shiah Sect (2012) 56 37. Sumarna, Tijaniyah Mutlet Cimahi Sect (2012) 57

B. Hate Speech Cases 58 1. Tabliq Akbar of Islamic Defender front FPI in Banjar and Ciamis against Ahmaddiya 58 2. Hate Speech to follower of Filadefia Church 59 3. Hate Speech to Shiah in Sampang 60 4. Condoning 62 III. MAIN FINDINGS OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS OF BLASPHEMYOF RELIGION ANDRELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION 65 A. Blasphemy of Religion 65 1. Problem the Concept of Article 156a of theIndonesia Criminal Code 65 2. Application of Article 156a in all Era’s of the Indonesia Governments 71 3. Application of Article 156a of the Indonesia Criminal Code by a Judge 74 4. The pattern of the Application of Article 156a of the Indonesia Criminal Code 78 B. Religious Hate Speech 82 1. Condemnation against Religious Hate speech on the Basis of Religion 82 2. Weak Enforcement of Laws against Religious Hate Speech 86 3. Criminalization of Victims of the Religious Hate Speech 87 IV. CONCLUDING PROVISION 89 A. Conclusions 89

vii INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

B. Recommendations 91

REFERENCES 97

LIST OF ADDRESSES 99 ABOUT ILRC 101

viii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

The seed of hatred surfaces when I Feel Disturbed by the presence ofothers. When my comfort and freedom is Questioned by others (Emmanuel Levinas) INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

A. BACKGROUND One of the characteristics of a constitutionally democratic country is the protection of minority groups, including the protection of minority religious groups. Therefore, the constitution is designed to protect minority groups from arbitrariness/tyranny of the majority. Although there is debate about the terms majority and minority, in the context of Human Rights, there is a clear recognition of the existence and the rights of minority groups in sources of law such as the Declaration of the United Nations (UN) on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination against Minority Religious Groups. The term minority means not only the number of members of a population based on religion/ race, but also by thinking/religious internal sect, sexual orienta- tion, gender and other classifications. We should realize that freedom of speech is the oxygen of democracy, and also that the freedom of religion/belief is the oldest right within Human Rights. Punishment of blasphemy of religion and religious hate speech which leads to violence, discrimination and hostility un- dermines democracy as it inhibits free expression. Laws condemn- ing blasphemy of religion and the tactics of religious hate speech are used to attack the existence of minority religious groups. Based on the above, the Indonesian Legal Resource Center (ILRC) feels the need to monitor cases of blasphemy of religion and religious hate speech in order to determine to what extent the cases of blasphemy/desecration of religion and religious hate speech were in violation of human rights and the response of law enforcement in such cases. We look forward to the future, as the results of this monitoring will result in recommendations for improvements to the rule of law and give information to the public regarding the cases of blasphemy of religion and religious hate speech.

2 INTRODUCTION

B. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK OF BLASPHEMY OF RELI- GION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN THE FORM OF INCITEMENT THAT LEADS TO VIOLENCE, DISCRIMINA- TION AND HOSTILITY Cases of blasphemy of religion are a global phenomenon, and many countries face this problem. A report of the UN Special Reporter on Freedom of Religion/Belief states that blasphemy/ desecration of religion is often used by extremist groups to silence debates/views that are critical of their religious doctrine. This has occurred in Jordan, Egypt and Pakistan, among many other countries. Blasphemy of religion laws are frequently used to punish minority groups for having views/thoughts that go astray from orthodox beliefs.1 Several European countries, such as Austria, also continue to have religious desecration/blasphemy articles in force. In the case of Otto Preminger-Institute v. Austria, a local court decided the filmDas Liebeskonzil (The Council of Heaven) was a criminal offence of blasphemy/defilement of religion (Article 188 of the Criminal Code of Austria), because the film belittles religious teachings. The local court’s decision was aimed at protecting the rights of others, especially respect for the religious feelings of a person.2 The bottom line, according to the local court’s ruling, is that the film is an abuse of religious symbols and thus is blasphemy of religion. In 1999, Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), introduced a resolution to the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Commission that would make blasphemy of Is- lam illegal under international law.3 This controversial proposal raised a heated debate but it was eventually rejected. However from 2000 until 2011, the OIC proposed resolutions on combat-

1 Paul M.Taylor, Freedom of Religion UN and European Human Rights Law and Practice, 2005, page 109 2 Id. at 86 3 Paul Marshall & Nina Shea, Silenced: How Blasphemy and Apostasy Codes are Choking Fredom Worldwide, 2011, page 211.

3 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia ing defamation of religion (not just Islam), which were adopted by the Human Rights Commission.4 This means that at the global level, actions of intolerance such as religious hate speech will get increased attention. Some countries have already eliminated rules about blasphemy of religion, such as the United Kingdom.5 These laws are usually abolished because of internal, as opposed to international, pressure and advocacy. Countries abolishing the anti-blasphemy laws view them as not only a violation of freedom of thought and of religion, but also a violation of freedom of speech and expression. A person or group of people has the right to interpret religious teachings and believe in/rely on his/her own interpretation. This is true regardless of whether he/she or the group of people concerned have the expertise some believe necessary to interpret of religion. Freedom of expressing opinions and thought is the heart of democracy. In addition, the interpretation of religious teachings is required to make people “more familiar with” religious teachings in accordance with their relevant context and facilitate the development of civilization. Thus, the interpretation of religious teachings is a fundamental right. In addition to the violation of human rights, the rule of blasphemy of religion is often misused and its interpretation is not clear. Its application can be either narrow or broad, depending on the interests that appear most dominant, and not for the sake of the rule of law in a fair manner. These laws are known as rubber articles. Article 156a of the Indonesian Criminal Code was applied against people who made religious books which strayed from the principles of religious doctrine, as in the case of Moh Ardhi Husin, who was convicted by the District Court of Probolinggo. From the substantive view point of the Probolinggo District Court it was de-

4 Resolution of the General Assembly of un To Fight Intolerance, Hatred Teachings that Lead to Violence, Violence against people on the Basis of Religion. 5 Uli Parulian Sihombing, dkk., Menyebarkan Kebencian atas Dasar Agama adalah Kejahatan (Spreading Hate on the Basis of Religion is a Crime), ILRC, Jakarta, 2012, page2

4 INTRODUCTION termined that they had clearly and accurately applied Article 156a of the criminal code. The article criminalized the making of a book which substantially strayed from mainstream religious teachings. In the case of Alexander Aan in Dalmas Raya, West Su- matra, the judge applied article 28 (2) of the Act on Information and Electronic Transactions (ITE) about hostility in the context of SARA (Ethnicity, Race, Internal Religious Sects and Inter-Religious Groups). The article could be categorized as punishing religious hate speech transmitted through the virtual world of the internet. In addition, there was a manipulation of the facts in the case. The judge convicted Alexander Aan under article 28 paragraph (2) of the Act on ITE because Alexander Aan had atheistic beliefs that were expressed through social media, despite the fact that Alex- ander Aan did not upload his beliefs through social media himself; somebody with access to his account posted the atheist statements. In fact, article 28 (2) ITE should have been applied to cases of religious hate speech through the medium of the internet, not about the blasphemy of religion. This means law enforcements (judges, prosecutors and police officers) had been wrong to apply the provisions of the article in this case. This gave rise to legal uncertainty which resulted in discrimination in law enforcement, while the principle of legal certainty and non-discrimination is recognized in the constitution. On the other hand there needs to be a clear and unequivo- cal rule of law to prohibit religious hate speech in the form of incitement that leads to violence, discrimination and hostility. But such rules must be applied in a clear and limited way, and should not be misused by law enforcement officers. The prohibition of religious hate speech is defined in Article 20 paragraph (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which has become national positive law through the Act No. 12/2005.In general, comment No. 22 on article 18 of the ICCPR explicitly mentions the obligation of the state to make a rule of law banning religious and all other forms of hate speech. Affirmation of the prohibition against religious hate speech

5 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia is not only contained in the ICCPR. The UN General Assembly has issued resolution No. 67/167 on combating intolerance, negative stereotyping, stigmatization, discrimination, and incitement that results in violence against persons on the basis of religion or belief. The resolution reaffirms opposition to religious hate speech on the basis of religion, through audio-visual, electronic media, printing and other ways, and urged UN member states to adopt rules that incriminate the perpetrators of religious hate speech. The resolution was sponsored by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). Article 19, a non- governmental organization focusing on free speech rights in Eng- land, along with other non-governmental organizations have for- mulated the Camden Principles which serve as a guide to the application of rules on religious hate speech. Accord- ing to Principle 12 of the Camden Principles, countries should adopt legislation prohibiting any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to hostility, discrimination or violence (hate speech).National legal systems should make it clear, either explicitly or through authoritative interpretation, that: 1. The terms ‘hatred’ and ’hostility’ refer to intense and irration- al emotions of opprobrium, enmity and detestation towards the target group. 2. The term ‘advocacy’ is to be understood as requiring an intention to promote hatred publicly towards the target group.

6 INTRODUCTION

3. The term ‘incitement’ refers to statements about national, racial or religious groups which create an imminent risk of discrimination, hostility or violence against persons belonging to those groups. 4. The promotion, by different communities, of a positive sense of group identity does not constitute hate speech.6 The Camden Principles may serve as a guide for the application and regulations governing the prohibition against religious hate speech to prevent violations of human rights, especially freedom of speech/expression. The United Nations itself has made a guide to the application of the rules prohibiting religious hate speech, which, among other things, contains the following: 1. There must be an evil intent in general (public intent) from the religious hate speech that leads to violence, discrimination and hostility; 2. Restrictions on freedom of expression should be clear, nar- rowly defined and regulated by law. The restriction must be necessary and proportionate to the purpose of the restriction; 3. That restriction must not endanger the exercise of the right itself, and shall be a last resort; 4. Only independent and impartial courts that are authorized to adjudicate the limitation of freedom of expression.7 The Camden Principles and guidelines of the United Na- tions could have been used to prevent the application of the provisions on the prohibition of religious hate speech. But these universal principles need to be adapted to the local context and conditions. One such condition which must be accounted for is a corrupt and biased judiciary. If this contingency is not accounted for, it is feared that the perpetrators of religious hate speech would

6 The Camden Principles are translated by the Independent Journalist Alliance, Camden Principles on Freedom of Expression and Equity Jakarta, 2009, page 11-12 7 Uli Parulian Sihombing, dkk., Menyebarkan Kebencian atas Dasar Agama adalah Kejahatan (Spreading Hate on the Basis of Religion is a Crime), ILRC, Jakarta, 2012, page2

7 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia enjoy impunity even when universal human rights standards are enacted into positive law. Law enforcement must address religious hate speech that has the potential of causing violence, discrimination and hostility immediately. Article 156 of the Criminal Code and article 28 (2) of the Act on ITE only focuses on religious hate speech resulting in hostility. The term hostility is very subjective. The term hostility receives a lot of criticism from experts because of this subjectivity. The UN guidelines and the Camden Principles focus more on violence and discrimination as a result of religious hate speech. From the above, it is necessary to improve the provisions of article 156 of the Criminal Code, and 28 (2) of the Act on ITE.

C. The Scope of Monitoring The monitoring of cases of blasphemy of religion in this report is restricted to the cases applying Article 156a of the Criminal Code, while cases of blasphemy of religion imposed by Articles 1 to 3 of the Act No. 1/Pnps/1965 that penalize organizations /religious ideology did not become an object of this report due to limitations of human resources, information sources and time available. The information on of blasphemy cases came from the court rulings, the news media and previous reports. As for the cases of religious hate speech, they were restricted to cases in which evidence such as recordings of lectures were available.

8 CHAPTER II CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA A. CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION

A criminal offence against religion8 is not derived from

8 Barda Nawawi Arief distinguishing 3 scopes of religion delik namely 1) a criminal act “according to religion”; 2) a criminal act “against religion” and 3) a criminal act “associated with religion” or “against religious life”. For the first category covers acts which according to the prevailing law are criminal acts and viewed from religion are also prohibited acts, the second category is Article 156aof the CRIMINAL CODE, and the third category which is spread in the CRIMINAL CODE are among others Articles 175-181 and 503 the 2nd. Barda Nawawi Arief, Religion Delict and Blasphemy in Indonesia and Comparison of Various States, BP Undip, 2007 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia the Wetboek van Strafrecht (WvS)/Civil Code of the Dutch, but is a supplement to Chapter V on Crimes against Public Order, namely Article 156a of the Criminal Code. The supplement Article 156a of the Civil Code is based on Article 4 of the Act No. 1/Pnps/1965 concerning Prevention from Abuse or Blasphemy of Religion, which reads as follows: To be liable to five years imprisonment and at the longest/at a maximum of five years for anyone who intentionally publicly expresses a feeling or commits an act: (a) that in any way is hostile in manner, abuse or blasphemy of religion that is practiced in Indonesia; (b) with a view to influencing people to not embrace any religion whatsoever, which is based on the Belief in the Al- mighty God. Based on the above formula, there are 4 (four) things that are liable to sentence when committed in public, namely: 1. Expressing feelings or committing an act having the character of enmity with a religion; 2. Expressing feelings or committing an act which abuses a religion adhered to in Indonesia; 3. Expressing feelings or committing an act of blasphemy of a religion adhered to in Indonesia; 4. An act done with the intention to prevent a person from adhering to any religion based on the belief of the almighty God. With respect to the existence of Article 156a of the Criminal Code above, Oemar Senoadji emphasized its placement in Chapter V on Crimes Against Public Order. Article 156a therefore belonged to a category of criminal offences against public order, and was intended to protect the peace of religious people. Religion itself is not the primary object of protection. However, if it is looked at literally, blasphemy of religion according to Article 156a of the Criminal Code is punishable without causing interference with the peace of religious people and without harming/endangering

10 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA public order, even if it were done in public in front of people who have no religion. Any statements that are hostile in nature, abusive, or blasphemous constitute a criminal offence. Thus there is a divergence between the “status and description of criminal acts” with “text and delict formula”.9 According to criminal law professor Barda Nawawi Arief, the formulation of such text is directed against “religion”, not on disruption of religious feelings or public order of society in general. The formulation of such an article requires formulating a particular interpretation of religious doctrine to determine whether or not there has been hostility, abuse and blasphemy of that religion. The acceptance of the state/government of one particular interpretation constitutes a discrimination against the other beliefs /interpretation that exist in Indonesia. As a result, Article 156a the Criminal Code is imposed for the benefit of an established religion to the detriment of new and smaller religions. The following are cases that are were based upon violations of Article 156a of the Criminal Code.

Table 1 Cases of Blasphemy (Article 156a of Criminal Code) District Informer/ Court Defendant/ Charges/ No Religion Sentence Juris- Case Indictment Tainted diction 1. Medan HB Jassin, High Articler 156a One year Short Story Prosecutor’s letter (a) of imprisonment on the Sky Office Criminal with a is getting of North Code probationary cloudier / Sumatera/ period of two Langit Islam years. Semakin Mendung (1968)

9 Id, page 5

11 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

District Informer/ Court Defendant/ Charges/ No Religion Sentence Juris- Case Indictment Tainted diction 2. Central Arswendo Mass/Islam Article156 and Five Years Jakarta Atmowiloto, 156a letter (a) Imprisonment Poll Figures of Criminal in the Tabloid Code Monitor (1990) 3. Situ- Muhammad KH Zaini Article 156a Five years bondo Saleh, the Ri- Abdul Aziz / letter (a) of imprisonment ots of Situbon- Islam Criminal Code do (1996) 4. Batam Mas’ud Si- Indonesian Article 156a Cannot be manungkalit, Ulemas letter (a) of traced in Islam Hanif Council of Criminal Code terms of its Sect (2003) Batam/Islam continuity of the handling. 5. Kalabahi Charisal Mat- Indonesian Article 156a 2years sen Agustinus Ulemas letter (a) of imprisonment Manu, Book Council of Criminal Code (Supreme Cover of Sta- Alor/Islam Court) tistic Alor City (2004) 6. Bale Mangapin Indonesian Article 156a Two years im- Endah Sibuea, The Christian letter (a) of prisonment Prophet Commu- Criminal Code Cottage and nication messenger of Forum the world sect (FKKI)/ /Pondok Nabi Protestan and Rasul Dunia, (2004) 7. Palu Rus’an, Article Communica- Article 156a Cannot be of Islam a tion Forum letter (a) of traced in Fails Religion of Muslims Criminal Code terms of the (2005) of Palu / continuity of Islam the handling.

12 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA

District Informer/ Court Defendant/ Charges/ No Religion Sentence Juris- Case Indictment Tainted diction 8. Probo- Ardi Husain, Indonesian Article 156a Four years linggo Cancer and Ulemas letter (a) of and 6 months Drug Founda- Council of Criminal Code imprisonment. tion of Cahaya Probolinggo/ Alam (2005) Islam 9. Polewali Sumardin Tap- Village Article 156a 6 months Mandar payya, whistle Head/Islam letter (a) of imprisonment Prayers (2005) Criminal Code and 1 year and Article 2 trial/probation paragraph 1 of Emergency Law No.12 / Drt/ 1951 of ownership weapon 10. Malang Yusman Roy/ Mass/Islam. Article 156a Not proven Bilingual letter (a) and guilty of Prayer(2005) 157 (1) of committing Criminal Code blasphemy of religion. Article 157 was proven and sentenced to2 years imprisonment 11. South Teguh San- Mass/Islam. Article 156a Acquit- Jakarta tosa, Publish letter (a) of ted from Cartoons of Criminal Code the charges the Prophet of because the Muhammad in application of Rakyat Mer- Article 156a deka Online was consid- (2006) ered inappro- priate.

13 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

District Informer/ Court Defendant/ Charges/ No Religion Sentence Juris- Case Indictment Tainted diction 12. Bekasi Imam Tri- -/Islam Article 156a Cannot be karsohadi letter (a) of traced in and H.Abdul Criminal Code terms of its Wahab, The continuity of Publication the handling. of Cartoons of Prophet of Muhammad in the PETA Tabloid(2006) 13. Sura- Management -/Islam Article 156a Cannot be baya of Gloria letter (a) of traced in Magazine, Criminal Code terms of its Surabaya continuity of (2006) the handling. 14. Central Lia Aminud- Amin Article 156a Two Years Jakarta din a.k.a. Lia Djamaludin letter (a), 157 Imprisonment Eden/ Salamul- /Islam and of Crimi- lah Religion nal Code. (2006) 15. Central Abdul Rach- Amin Article 156a Three Years Jakarta man, Follower Djamaludin letter (a) of Imprisonment of Salamullah /Islam Criminal Code (2006) 16. Central Ahmad -/Islam Article 156a Four years Jakarta Musadeq- the letter (a) of Imprison- leader of Criminal Code ment. Alqiyadah Al Islamiyah Sect (2007) 17. Malang Djoko Widodo -/Islam Article 156a 3 (three) years and Nur Imam, letter (a) of and 6 (six) Prayers Criminal Code months im- Concert of prisonment. Indonesian Student Serv- ices (2007)

14 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA

District Informer/ Court Defendant/ Charges/ No Religion Sentence Juris- Case Indictment Tainted diction 18. Sema- Raji/ Drunks -/ Islam Article 156a Cannot be rang Prayer Koplo letter (a) of traced in (2008) Criminal Code terms of its continuity of the handling. 19. Padang Dedi Priadi Mass of Or- Article 156a Each was and Gerry ganization/ letter (a) of sentenced to 3 Luhtfi Yudis- Islam Criminal Code years impris- tira, Follower onment. of Al-Qiyadah Al-Islamiyah Sect. (2007) 20. Central Lia Aminudin, Chairman Article 156a 2years and 6 Jakarta the leader of of Indonesia letter (a) of months im- Salamullah Muslims Criminal Code prisonment (2009) Movement Habib Ab- durrahman Assegaf/ Islam 21. Central Wahyu Andito Chairman Article 156a 2 years Jakarta Putro Wibiso- of Indonesia letter (a) of imprisonment no, follower of Muslims Criminal Code the / Salamul- Movement, lah (2009) Habib Ab- durrahman Assegaf / Islam 22. Kupang Nimrot Las- -/Christian Article 156a Six months baun cs, Zion letter (a) of imprisonment the City of Criminal Code God (2009) 23. Klaten FX Marjana Moslem Article 156a Cannot be (2009) Communica- letter (a) of traced in tion Forum Criminal Code terms of its of Klaten continuity of /Islam the handling.

15 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

District Informer/ Court Defendant/ Charges/ No Religion Sentence Juris- Case Indictment Tainted diction 24. Ambon Wilhelmina -/Islam Article 156a 1 year Holle, the Ri- letter (a) of imprisonment ots in Masohi- Criminal Code Maluku (2009) 25. Medan Pastor Moses PHDI/Hindu Article 156a Pure Acquittal Alegesen, letter (a) of Translation Criminal Code of Paper of Untouchabil- ity A History of Vaikonam Agitation Manu (2009) 26. South Agus Imam -/Islam Article 156a Two years im- Jakarta Solihin/Satrio letter (a) of prisonment Piningit Belief Criminal Code (2009) 27. Suraba- Ahmad -/Islam Article 156a On hold, can- ya Naf’an, Sant- letter (a) of not be traced riloka Belief Criminal Code in terms of its (2009) continuity of the handling. 28. Ciamis Ondon Juhana SriAsriyati Article 156a 4 years im- a.k.a. Raden dan Wawang letter (a) and prisonment Jaya Diningrat, (victim) / 378 (Decep- Alternative Islam tion) of Crimi- Medicine nal Code (2011) 29. Tasik- Oben Sar- MUI/In- Article 156a 4 years of im- malaya beni, Ahmad donesian letter (a) of prisonment Sulaeman Sect Ulemas Criminal Code (2011) Council/ Islam

16 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA

District Informer/ Court Defendant/ Charges/ No Religion Sentence Juris- Case Indictment Tainted diction 30. Temang- Antonius Rich- Residents Article 156a 5 years im- gung mond Bawen- and Admin- letter (a) of prisonment gan, the Riots istrators of Criminal Code of Temang- the Neighbor gung (2011) Community /Islam and Christian 31. Sumber, Ahmad Tan- Victim / Article 156a 10 years im- Cirebon towi /Eden Islam letter (a) and prisonment Belief (2011) 289 (sexual assault) of Crimi- nal Code 32. Klaten Andreas Gun- Communica- Article 156a 4 years im- tur Wisnu Sar- tion Forum letter (a) of prisonment sono, Amanat of Mosque Criminal Code Keagungan Activists/ Ilahi Belief/ Islam AKI (2012 33. Bandung Hadassah J Indrawati Article 156a Pure acquittal Werner/Bethel Tirtosoed- letter (a) of Tabernakel iro-Ex- Criminal Code Church (2012) Member of the Church/ Christian 34. Garut Sensen Koma- -/Islam Article 156a One year’s ra/ Indonesia letter (a) of treatment in Islamic State Criminal Code the Mental Movement/ and Attack Hospital NII (2012) against the Government

17 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

District Informer/ Court Defendant/ Charges/ No Religion Sentence Juris- Case Indictment Tainted diction 35. Padang Alexander Mass/Islam Article 156a Not proven Aan/Account letter (b) of guilty of com- Facebook of Criminal Code mitting article Atheis Minang and article 28 156 a letter (2012) (2) of the Act (b). Article on ITE 28 (2) of the Act on ITE was proven and sentenced to 2 years imprisonment 2 years and 6 months imprisonment 36. Sam- Tajul Muluk/ -/Islam Article 156a 2 years pang Syiah (2012) letter (a) of imprison- Criminal Code ment (District Court), 4 years imprisonment (High Court) 37. Suka- Sumarna/ -/Islam Article 156a Investigation bumi Tijaniyah letter (a) of Mutlet Cimahi Criminal (2012) Code, 340 Source: ILRC, 2012

The following is a description of cases of blasphemy of religion in Indonesia. 1. HB Jassin, Short Story of the Sky is Getting Cloudier/ Langit Makin Mendung (1968) The Literary Magazine of August 1968 published a short story entitled the sky is getting cloudier, Langit Makin Mendung (LMM) by Ki Pandji Kusmin. LMM tells the story of the Prophet Muham-

18 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA mad who went down to Earth. Muhammad was allowed to go down by God after arguing that it was an urgent need to find why a lot of his people went to hell. The release ceremony was held at an airfield. Prophet Adam who was considered to be the elder of the heaven gave speeches of release. By mounting buroq and accompanied by Gabriel, Muhammad glided down to Earth. In the blue in the sky, they crossed paths with Russia’s Sputnik satellite hat was on patrol. In a collision, Sputnik was smashed, whereas Muham- mad and Gabriel darted off into the clouds in the sky. To avoid the unexpected, Muhammad and Gabriel disguised themselves as eagles. In that disguise, Muhammad traveled and watched the va- garies of human doings by perching on top of the National Monu- ment (Monas) in Jakarta and also by looking over the localization of prostitution at Senen. Furthermore through a dialogue between Muhammad and Gabriel as well as through fragments that stood on its own, Ki Pandji Kusmin photographed the social conditions of the mother- land during the period, expressed in a sentence such as “the country although 90 percent Muslim, but rather all kinds of behavior of prostitution, crime, immorality and evil thriving”. Through this short story, Ki Pandji Kusmin also criticized the political elite, such as Sukarno as “the false prophet” who was almost dead, Subandrio as “Durno” and at the same time “Togog”. The short story ended with a statement that “The average people are forgiving and kind. Lies and mistakes of their leaders are always welcome gracefully. Their hearts are like the Sun, regardless of how the sky is getting cloudier, light would still like to touch the Earth”.10 That short story led to criticism from various parties, especially Muslims. As a result of the mass reaction, the High Prosecu- tor’s Office of North Sumatera banned its release because it was deemed to have insulted the sanctity of Islam. H.B. Jassin was not

10 To read this short story please open http://kangpanut.wordpress.com/2007/11/20/ langit-makin-mendung/

19 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia willing to disclose the identity of the Ki Pandji Kusmin,11 so that the magazine he was judged responsible for the publishing of the short story. The trial against Jassin created disagreement among authors and scholars in the community. H.B. Jassin in his defense, as well as his apologies, stated: “We have been interpreted differently and because of such different interpretations people thought we had insulted them, insulted their faith which is our beliefand confidence as well. We sincerely apologize to those who presumed that we have de- spised them, and we also apologize to Allah/God the Almighty, which you know is the Most Forgiving”. The Panel of Judges sentenced H.B. Jassin to imprisonment for one year with probation to two years. Later it was known that the original name of Ki Pandji Kusmin was Soedihartono who was educated at the National Shipping Academy, and served a contract with the government upon graduation for six years in Jakarta. In the Kami Daily published on October 22, 1968, he declared that he did not mean to insult Islam. The true purpose was solely to hold direct communication with God, the Prophet Muhammad, heaven, etc. in addition to laughing at the stupidity in the Sukarno regime. H.B. Jassin defended KiPandji Kusmin and the short stories Langit Makin Mendung based on the importance of freedom of expression.12

2. Arswendo Atmowiloto, Questionnaire on Prominent Fig- ures in the Weekly Tabloid Monitor (1990) Tabloid Monitor was a tabloid under Kompas Group and Gramedia (KKG). Aswendo Atmowiloto served as editor in chief.

11 At first by seeing the persistence of H.B. Jassin in defending and advocating LMM and Ki Pandji Kusmin at a court of law - Ki Pandji Kusmin is considered as pseudonimof H.B. Jas- sin himself. 12 Asep Sambodja, Why H.B. Jassin Defends Kipandjikusmin? http://asepsambodja. blogspot.com/2009/10/kenapa-hb-jassin-membela-kipandjikusmin.html

20 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA

It reached its highest print run of about 814,000 copies and was regarded as the pioneer of in the tabloid form in Indonesia. In each edition, Monitor hosted a giveaway questionnaire form for the readers. The questionnaire form was filled in by the reader by attaching coupons and sending it to the editor. The selected form would get monetary prize. One questionnaire asked, “Who are the people you admire and what is your reason for your vote?”The editor of the Monitor then compiled the results of questionnaire based on the number of the most to least preferred by the readers, then announced the results in October 15, 1990 edition. From 33,963 sheets of postcards that were turned in, the biggest number fell to Suharto (5,003 votes), the President of Indonesia at that time. Second was B.J. Ha- bibie (2,975 votes), followed by Sukarno (2.662 votes). Iwan Fals was the only artist in the top 10 rankings (2,431). Aswendo was ranked 10th (797 votes). Under Aswendo was the Prophet Muham- mad at number 11. The results of this questionnaire led to protests by Mus- lims. Arswendo was accused of having harassed Muslims. On Octo- ber 17, 1990, masses came sporadically, shouting “blasphemy” to Arswendo and burned his effigy made from Tabloid Monitor paper. On October 22, 1990, the masses surrounded the office of Tabloid Monitor pelted it with rocks, went through the editorial room, rummaged archives, hit the computers, as well as turned upside- down chairs and tables. The organs of the Islamic-based Young Force, Indonesia Ulemas Council (MUI), and among Islamic moder- ates cornered Arswendo and demanded his accountable.13 KKG and Arswendo himself publicly stated their apology which was broadcast by TVRI: “I’m sorry. Under no circumstances and by no means did I in-

13 The journey of the case of Monitor can be read in Agus Sopian, Wendo and Tujuh Samurai: Tabloid Monitor bagai meteor, melesat cepat dan lumat (Wendo and Seven Samurai: Tabloid Monitor as a meteor, flies away and pulverized) can be accessed at http://asopian.blogspot. com/2002/01/wendo-dan-tujuh-samurai.html

21 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

tend to make you all my sisters and brothers suffer. Without anyone saying anything, I should already have known. In fact I am dumb. Very dumb. Jahilun.“ In his testimony at the trial session of judicial review of the Act No. 1/Pnps/1965, Aswendo stated that he only knew after the case that comparing Prophet Muhammad with other human beings was considered as blasphemy. Before that there had never been any clarification on this subject. According to him, before Tabloid Monitor showed the results of the questionnaires, the Tempo News Magazine published questionnaires which were more or less the same results, but it did not get any reprimand, and did not get into trouble at all. Tempo published the results of research by a professor carried out by means of filling out a questionnaire from among his students with similar results. There were also books of translations from abroad that published an article comparing the Prophet Muhammad with the other figures there had so far not been any problem.14 Tabloid Monitor was banned from publication on October 23, 1990, the SIUPP number 195/1989 was revoked by the Minister of Information Harmoko, and PWI membership of Aswendo as a journalist was also revoked. Aswendo was convicted of violating Arti- cle 156a of the criminal code and was sentenced to 5 (five) years in prison. The Panel of Judges held that the questionnaire which likened the Prophet Muhammad with ordinary people obviously lowered the esteem of the Messenger. That act was regarded as an insult (which was hostile, abusive, or blasphemy) against Islam by using a press publication.

3. Muhammad Saleh, The Riots of Situbondo (1996) Muhammad Saleh was a young gate keeper and gardener in the Mosque Nurul Islam. Saleh frequently visited K.H. Achmad

14 Description before the Constitutional Court Session in a case no.140/PUU-VII/2009 concerning judicial review of the Act No.1/Pnps/1965, Jakarta, 10 February 2010

22 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA

Zaini, the head of Nurul Hikam boarding school , who was also his neighbor in the Kapongan sub-district Situbondo, for a discussion on religion. Saleh declared to K.H. Zaini, that God was similar to human beings and K.H. As’ad Syamsul Arifin, the founder of the famous Islamic boarding school Salafiyah Syafi’iyahin Situbondo did not die properly, because he died at the hospital. K.H. Zaini asked Saleh to write his opinions on paper and then distributed them and then asked NU Situbondo and the ulemas to bring Saleh to court. The Islamic leaders (kiais) suggested that Saleh need not be prosecuted in court, but that the dispute should simply be resolved amicably, as Saleh did not disturb public order, is still a young and had not yet raised a family. In addition, Saleh was also not an influential person. However, Kiai Zaini was determined to report Saleh to the police on charges of blasphemy of religion, and broadcast what was said by Saleh in a variety of forums of religious studies. Every court proceeding was full of protestors. Saleh denied the allegations that he tarnished Islam. He said, “I came only for the deliberation and I would like to know how Kiai Zaini responded, whether my opinion was correct or not.” The enraged masses which came from Besuki, Panarukan and Asembagus, reached 1,000 people. After the trial session the chants of “Kill Saleh” were heard, and the masses tried to swarm him. The masses managed to get into the prison cell by way of dismantling the roof tile sand beat him. This action could have been stopped, but the masses that were outside the prison demanded that Saleh be handed over to them for execution. The Public Prosecutor demanded punishment of five years in prison in accordance with the provisions of Article 156aof the Criminal Code about Blasphemy of Religion. Most protestors were not satisfied with the demand of the prosecutors, and wanted Saleh to be sentenced to death and pelted he courthouse with stones. The mob continued to run amok and rampage. Some in the crowd shouted that Saleh was rushed to Gereja Bukit Sion/Mount Zion Church and the judge who adjudicated his case was a Christian. The riots, which lasted a little over seven hours, caused 5 fatalities

23 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia and damaged34 churches within the 100 km surrounding Situbon- do.15 Saleh was sentenced to five years imprisonment, but it is not known whether KH Zain was penalized for his incitement.

4. Mas’ud Simanungkalit, Islam Hanif (2003) Mas’ud Simanungkalit, a convert to Islam, wrote a book called “Kutemukan Kebenaran Sejati dalam Al Qur’an” (“I Found the Real Truth in the Holy Qur’an”). MUI Batam determined that the book had a lot of mistakes, especially regarding interpretation of the language in the Qur’an, including the question of the syahadat/the creed, the translation of the Yassin Letter, declaring his teachings as Islam al-Hanif, commanding his followers to perform shalat in a congregation on Saturday and to use the term “God our father in Heaven” to refer to Allah/God, a term used by Christians. Mas’ud was found guilty and was sentenced to two years in prison. The Panel of Judges held that Mas’ud misinterpreted the Qur’an, because to interpret the scripture of Muslims could not be done by just anyone. Moreover, his interpretation was published and disseminated.16

5. Mangapin Sibuea/Pondok Nabi dan Rasul Dunia, (The Cottage Prophets and Apostles of the World), (2004) For 16 years Mangapin had been pastor of Pentecostal Churches in Indonesia, and became pastor of the Church of Phila- delphia in1999. After leaving that church he formed the sect of the Prophet Hut. Mangapin believed that on 10 November 2003 the world would end. He got this conviction after he heard divine instruc- tions immediately after fasting for seven days. According to him,

15 Zainuddin Daulay, Violent Conflict in Situbondo-East Java, in Imam Tholkhah Social Con- flict Having a Religious Nuance in Indonesia, Department of Religious Affairs, 2002, page 142 16 Rumadi, Delict of Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Life in the BILL of CRIMINAL CODE, Paper, tt

24 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA at the date mentioned above, there would be elevations of the con- gregations who had been purified of the Lord. Mangapin recorded his teachings in a DVD and then presented it to the congregation. In the tape the defendant said that Christian ministers were false prophets whose place was in hell and declared baptism was outside of the truth of the Holy Book. Believing his teachings, a number of his congregation chose not to work and sold their possessions, or left their college in the hope that they would be raised to the sky. The Indonesian Christian Communication Forum (FKKI) opposed the teachings of Mangapin and declared them to be misleading. FKKI reported them to the police and asked the government to forbid the religious rituals of the pondok nabi/prophet hut, citing concerns over the mass suicide occurring as a result. On 10 November 2003, 280 members of the sect gathered to perform religious rituals. Chants and cries of the congregation could be heard from inside the houses of worship. Security authorities evacuated the congregation to the Church Bethel Tabernacle (GBT) on Jalan Lengkong Besar, Bandung, under the direction of the West Java Church Council. The next day, hundreds of residents destroyed the house of worship ‘Prophet Hut’, shredding Mangapin’s documents and books containing his teachings that were left there. Citizens also destroyed the residential house of Mangapin and stuck it with car- ton paper bearing the censure. Mangapin was arrested on charges of blasphemy of religion, and was sentenced for 2 years in prison.

6. Charisal Matsen Agustinus Manu, Book Cover BPS of Alor City (2004) Charisal was a Civil Servant in the Regency of Alor. He made a book on its population based on data that had been collected by the Central Bureau of Statistics (BPS) of the Regency between Janu- ary 2003 and December 2003. The book was entitled “Penduduk Ka- bupaten Alor 2003” (“The Inhabitants of Alor Regency 2003”) (The Results of Registration) Catalog of BPS”. Regarding the book cover, Charisal

25 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia designed it himself and discussed it with the Head of the Section before it was printed. Charisal explained that he wanted the history of Alor to be recorded on the cover of the book. To obtain the pictures or photo he wanted, Charisal looked for pictures or photos on the website www.alorisland.com. He combined photos of a boy with traditional Alor clothing dancing the Cakalele dance, which was considered to represent the his- torical meaning of Alor Regency, and photos of an ancient book, later shown to be the Qur’an. The result of the combination these pictures was a man with traditional clothes dancing the Cakalele dance whose left foot was stepping on the ancient book. Once completed, the books were printed and distributed. Three subordinates of Charisal copied the files, zoomed in and found the picture of the ancient book containing Arabic script similar to the writing contained in the Qur’an, in particular, the verse (Surat) Taubah paragraph 5.Thethree of them reported this to the MUI, who then held a meeting with 30 Chairpersons of the Mass Organizations and Chairman of ORSOSPOL (Socio-politico Or- ganizations) throughout Alor Regency. An MUI investigation team was formed to examine the truth of the cover. The results of the investigation found that the pictures of the ancient books which were stepped on by the Cakalele dancers was the Qur’an and the verses which were stepped on were at Taubah paragraph 5. The results of the MUI investigation were reported to the police who arrested Charisal on charges of desecration of religion/ blasphemy. The District Court of Kalabahi held that Charisal was proven legally and convincingly guilty of committing the crime of defilement of religion/blasphemy and imposed imprisonment for two years. The High Court reversed and held that Charisal was not proven legally and convincingly guilty of committing the crime of defilement of religion/blasphemy and acquitted. However, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the ruling of the District Court of Kala- bahi.

26 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA

7. Rus’an, Article on Islam is a Religion that Failed (2005) Rus’an, a lecturer in the Faculty of Religion at the Universi- ty of Muhammadiyah (Unimus), Palu, wrote an article titled “Islam Agama yang Gagal” (“Islam is a Religion that Failed”). The article was published in the Radar Sulteng on Thursday, June 23, 2005. The writing of Rus’an contains his criticism against the function of religion in people’s lives. In his writing he sheds light on the condition of the Indonesian nation as the largest Muslim nation on Earth but also the most corrupt. He argues that the fragile moral foundation is the main reason why after such a long period of time since independence, the culture of corruption, misappro- priation and cronyism seems to have no end in sight. He compared the doctrine of Islam with the realities of everyday life. The observance of religion is limited symbolic gestures, which according to him will not give birth to a society that is full of compassion. In- stead, hatred, envy and slander, and other moral diseases will still be an ongoing problem. To reinforce his argument, he cited Karl Marx’s remark that ‘religion is opium for the people’, which led to oppression, class exploitation and emergence of non-productive imaginations. The statement of Marx in the body note was quoted from the writings of Vladimir Lenin in 1905. He then called upon all of the nation’s elite and religious leaders to consider an example and see how prominent figures who had great power eventually tumbled because of belittling the suffering of the people. Quoting Jalaluddin Rahmat he described the character of Pharaoh as a corrupt ruler, an oppressor who always felt he was right. Haman represented a technocrat group of scien- tists who supported tyranny with prostituting science. Qarun was a reflection of the capitalists, the owners of the sources of wealth who greedily sucked the entire wealth of the masses. Bal’am sym- bolized the ruhaniyun (the theologians), religious figures that used religion to legitimize corrupt powers and lulled the people. Even- tually these elites were destroyed because they were not sensitive to small peoples’ conscience, were unwilling to listen to the truth,

27 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia and did not want to enforce justice. And in the last paragraph he wrote rhetorically, “By looking at the reality that occurred as described above, we must decide whether religion still has meaning for human life in the present? If the answer is no, then that’s a failed religion”.17 In consequence of the said writing, Radar Sulteng received censure and criticism. The Muslim community and other groups in Palu City asked the daily belonging to Jawa Pos Group to cease its publication. Because of the rampant protests, Radar Sulteng finally decided not to appear for three days as an apology for publishing the article. The Muslim community of Palu City, in addition to de- manding the closure of Radar Sulteng, asked law enforcements to immediately arrest the persons insulting Muslims and prosecute him. The punishment requested was not just because of the blasphemy of religion but also the spread of atheism. Editorial staff of Radar Sulteng (Central Sulawesi) conveyed a written apology to Muslims and audiences over their wrongdo- ings, by publishing their apology twice. While Rus’an stated that the writings were merely criticisms against the elite behavior which was far from Islamic values. He did not have the slightest intention to defile the religion, but stated that if he hurt the feelings of the people, he apologized. Rus’an was named a suspect on charges of blasphemy. There was no information as to the verdict handed down to Rus’an.

8. Ardy Husain/Cancer and Drugs Foundation Cahaya Alam/ YKNCA (2005) Cancer and Drug Foundation Cahaya Alam (YKNCA) was established on June 1, 2002 by Ardi Husain. YNKCA published a book entitled “Menembus Gelap Menuju Terang 2 (MGMT 2)” (“Through the Darkness Towards the Light 2”) which is a compilation of descriptions of the Qur’an and Hadit has the results of a lecture by Ar-

17 Copy of article “Islam a Religion that Fails”, can be accessed at http://ciput.multiply. com/reviews/item/10?&show_interstitial=1&u=%2Freviews%2Fitem

28 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA dhi Husain. MGMT 2 was distributed to the public by Budiono, the Chairman of the Muhammadiyah of Probolinggo Regency, and the younger brother of Hermanto, one of the students of YKNCA. Bu- diono asked Hermanto and his wife to not worship at the YNKCA. Because they disobeyed his orders, Budiono became unhappy and influenced his family to disown Hermanto so that he would not be considered as a member of the family and his assets would be taken over.18 This family conflict further extended to the Muhamadiyah Muslim organization, because Hermanto was not present in the meeting of Muhammadiyah, due to choosing to follow a recrea- tional tour organized by YNKCA. Further, Budiono took, without permission, archives including photos stored on computers owned by Hermanto and distributed them to the media. The photos of YNKCA appeared in the media for more than a month with titles that discredited YNKCA. The teachings that were alleged to defile Islam were the legitimization of sexual relations between men and women in harems provided that they were in love with one another and the statement that the books Wedha, Tripitaka, Tao and Kong Fu Tse came from Abraham, and the removal of the word “qul” in the verse “qul huwa Allahu ahad”, because the word “qul” was reserved only for the Prophet not for the people after him. The MUI (Ule- mas Council) of Probolinggo Regency issued an edict finding that there were 60 misguided and misleading items in MGMT2. Accord- ing to authors Andri A and Salman Alfarisi, the fight between YKN- CA and MUI was a fight of two epistemological understandings of the teachings of Islam. The MUI treated Arabic as the ‘reason’ that should be the basis for everyone to understand the teachings of Islam, whereas YKNCA treated Arabic as the Arabic culture which from time to time could interpret the Qur’an and the Hadith a little

18 Andri A and Salman al-Farizi, Religious Conflict of Interest and the Failure of the State: A Case of Dismantling of YKNCA Centre, Besuk-Probolinggo-East Java, in Ahmad Suedy cs., Politization of Religion and Communal Conflict, Several Crucial Issues in Indonesia, The Wahid Indonesia, Jakarta, 2007, page 93-94

29 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia differently or could be developed to suit in the Indonesian context.19 The edict of the MUI on May 16, 2005 was accompanied by five demands:First , firmly crack down on Ardhi Husein and author of the book MGMT2; Second, firmly crack down on the editor of the book MGMT2; Third, prohibit the circulation of MGMT2 and all related books; Fourth, Husein Ardhie’s teachings were declared forbidden teachings; and Fifth, close and dissolve YKNCA. After the fatwa/edict on May 27, 2005, a huge recitation of the Qur’an to celebrate the birthday of the Prophet took place 200 meters from the YKNCA.A mob containing hundreds of individuals attending the huge recitation were commanded to invade YKNCA. Ardi Husain and the administrator of YKNCA were then charged with committing blasphemy of religion. The judge sentenced Ardi Husain to 4.5 years in prison with the view that he knew publishing a book would probably get the reaction of the public, and because the defendant did nothing to avoid adverse consequences. There was no information on the action against the perpetrators who damaged the properties.

9. Sumardin Tappayya, Whistling Prayer (2005) Sumardin Tappayya was a religious teacher from Polewali Mandar, West Sulawesi. Sumardin taught the doctrine of salvation, instructed others to calling Allah/God by the name Robbuka, and performed prayers while whistling in addition to mandatory prayers. He formed this conviction after a long spiritual journey. The journey began after Sumardin attended a lecture at the IAIN Pare-Pare, South Sulawesi in 1972.Sumardin often dreamed of meeting a white-robed old man whom he believed was the prophet Hidir. Those dreams were experienced at the time Sumardin performed his midnight prayers and optional fasting. After Sumardin

19 Id, page 106

30 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA returned to his village at the end of the 1970s, he again dreamed of the old man after Friday prayers behind the pulpit of the mosque of Laliko Village. At that time Sumardin saw and felt the white light that emanated from the old man enter into his body. Sumardin believed such a process was a revelation. In 1981,Sumardin,under the guidance ofthe old man, began to write the Book of Laduni. The book was written in two volumes. The first volume was completed in 2001 while the second volume was completed in 2005.20 The issue of blasphemy arose when the Village Chief of Tubbi sent a letter addressed to the Regent of Polewali Mandar and copied it to the to the Tutar Sub district Head, the Police Chief of Tutar, the Head of Pos of Ramil of Tutar, and the Head of Reli- gious Affairs of Tutar. The letter contained reports of Sumardin’s religious teachings that contradicted the doctrines of Islam. The Head of Service of the Unity of the Nation (KESBANG) of Polewali Mandar,a subdivision within the Intelligence Community (KOMIN- DA) of Polewali Mandar Regency then issued a letter to Sumardin ordering him to stop teaching. According to his lawyers from Le- gal Aid of Makassar, the cases were triggered by a land dispute between Sumardin and the local government. Sumardin was once asked by TNI (Indonesian Army), the Prosecutor’s Office and the local government to abandon his customary/traditional land. On the January 12, 2006 at 22.00, 40 policemen from Pole- wali Mandar along with several officers of the Department of Reli- gious Affairs of Polewali Mandar and the Sub district Head of Cam- palagian came to his house and arrested Sumardin and some of his students on charges of blasphemy/desecration of religion. Sumar- din tried to answer and explain his beliefs. However his responses were disregarded and the police were forced to carry Sumardin and three of his disciples to the Police Station of Polewali Mandar to conduct an investigation. Upon the results of the Police investigators of Polewali

20 Abdul Azis, Shalat Bersiul; Sebuah Keyakinan Yang Teradili (Whistling Prayer; A Belief that is Tried), LBH Makassar, 2007

31 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

Mandar, the board members of the MUI (Ulemas Council) of Pole- wali Mandar issued a letter stating that Sumardin’s teachings of salvation and Rabbuka were in disagreement with the doctrines of mainstream Islam. Because he did not recognize Muhammad as a prophet, instructed others to whistle while praying and believed he had a wife who existed only in another dimension, the MUI believed his teachings were misguided and misleading. To com- pensate for the weakness of religious sacrilege/blasphemy charge under Article 156a of Criminal Code, investigators focused on finding weaponry to serve as the basis of other charges. The investigators searched and seized Sumardin’s goods such as machetes and spears. According to the legal counsel of Sumardin, there was a difference in interpretation between Sumardin and the authorities. Sumardin and his holy book (the Laduni Book) ascribed to the approach of tassawuf, which in the Islamic epistemological tradition was known a sirfani tradition (direct experience) i.e. epistemolo- gy through intuition gained from a deep inner experience, and re- birth which was undetectable by logic and could not be expressed by language. The authorities put more emphasis on the approach of sharia or fiqih, which is based on rational and empirical rituals. Sumardin implemented additional prayers which were performed while whistling and were divided into Nur Prayer, Hayat Prayer, Fitrah Prayer and Sir Prayer accompanied by 4, 5, 7 and 8 prostra- tions, which was a ritual in addition to the obligatory prayer, conducted in order to be closer to God. Through the whistling prayer ritual, Sumardin felt the highest spiritual enlightenment because he felt closer to God.21 The Panel of Judges at the Polewali Mandar District Cour- theld that Sumardin was guilty of blasphemy and sentenced him to imprisonment for six months and one year probation. The charge of sharp weapons possession (Article 2 paragraph 1 of the Emer- gency Law No. 12of 1951) did not lead to conviction.

21 Ibid

32 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA

10. Yusman Roy/Bilingual Prayer (2005) The Muslim boarding school I’tikaf Ngaji Lelaku was established on October 9 2002, by Yusman Roy, a boxer who studied Islam for 17 years under the care of KH Abdullah Satar Majid at Peneleh in Surabaya. He contemplated the Qur’anic verses which that which states “Indeed praying prevents oneself from indecency and meanness.” Such verses made him wonder, because many people prayed and read the Qur’an, but their behavior continued to violate its commands. This spiritual quest moved Yus- manto establish an I’tikaf Islamic boarding school which could return people to the path of God.22 During the Hajj, he received an instruction from God to teach people to understand shalat/prayer and practice it devot- edly by means of translating the Arabic prayer readings into the Indonesian language. Yusman believed the translations would allow the shalat/prayer to serve as a deterrent of indecency and evil. To spread these beliefs, Yusman set up the Taqwallah Foun- dation. Yusman made fliers with the titles: “The Method of Doing a Perfect and High Quality Shalat Together” (25 February 2003), “Want- ing to Achieve a Perfect Shalat To gether? Choose the Shalat Priests Pray are Professional“ (May, 2003), and “We Have Become Independent: How to Believe in Prayer with Translation”. In addition to spreading them through flyers, Yusman spread his teachings through DVDs. The school of I’tikaf Ngaji Lelaku sent a letter to the Head of the Nation’s Unity of East Java Government asking for permission to distribute leaflets, but never got a clear response. Students did the spreading of the leaflets despite explicit permission. On January 21, 2004, MUI (Indonesian Ulemas Coun-

22 Paring Waluyo Utomo and Levi Riyansyah, State Supervision over Civil Life: Cases of Misleading and Criminalization of Yusman Roy, in Ahmad Suedy cs., Politization of Religion and Communal Conflict, Several crucial Issues in Indonesia, The Wahid Indonesia, Jakarta, 2007, page 93-94

33 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia cil) of Malang issued a fatwa/edict Number: Kep. 02/SKF/MUI/ KAB/I/2004 concerning the Broadcasting of Heresy by Yusman Roy. However Yusman Roy remained unaware of it for 10 months. Yusman Roy complained to the KOMNAS HAM (The National Committee of Human Rights) that the fatwa/edict constituted criminal defamation by the MUI.23 On 4th of May 2005, the ulemas who were united in the Chairmanship of Muhammadiyah, East Java, the PWNU of East Java and the East Java Ulemas Council commanded Yusman Roy to stop the spread of his teachings, and asked the authorities to arrest him. The conditions in Malang city deteriorated as Is- lamic organizations such as the FPI, HTI and Gondanglegi Banser came to Yusman Roy’s college. On Friday 6 May 2005, after Fri- day prayer, these groups united to demand that the police arrest Yusman Roy. Based on the pressure from the groups mentioned above, on May 6, 2005 the Regency Government of Malang issued a Decision Letter on the Discontinuation of the Activities of the I’tikaf Ngaji Lelaku Boarding School in the Lawang Subdistrict, Malang Regency.24 Based on the Malang Regent, the Police District of Malang City issued an arrest warrant. Yusman was charged with violation of Articles 156aand 157(1) of the Criminal Code. The tribunal held that Yusman Roy was not proven legally and convincingly guilty of defilement of religion/blasphemy, yet he was proven legally and convincingly guilty of transmitting letters or pictures of which spread hostility and contempt towards the population of Indonesia. Yusman Roy received a punishment of imprisonment for 2 years.

23 Report of Yusman Roy to the MUI (Indonesian Ulemas Council) was considered error in persona 24 Lawsuit of KH. Moch Yusman Roy against Decision of Malang Regent at the State Adminis- trative Court was declared defeated that until now the cottage/pondokitikaf ngaji lelaku has not been allowed to run its activities conducting bilingual prayer.

34 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA

11. Teguh Santosa/ Kartun Nabi Muhammad in the Rakyat Merdeka Online (2006) On February 2, 2006, Teguh Santosa, the Executive Editor of Rakyat Merdeka Online, displayed one of the twelve caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad that had been published in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten. The images had been modified from their original form to reduce the effects of vulgarityby the man- agers of Rakyat Merdeka Online. Uploading the pictures was intended to give the Indonesian public an overview of the insults launched by Jyllands-Posten. In a trial before the South Jakarta District Court, the judges issued an interlocutory decision exempt- ing the defendantfrom charges of blasphemy on the basis thatap- plication of Article 156a of the Criminal Code would be inappropri- ate.

12. Imam Trikarsohadi and H. Abdul Wahab, the Loading of the Cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in the Tabloid PETA (2006) Imam Trikarsohadi, the General Chief, and H. Abdul Wahab,the Chief Editor, published the caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) in the tabloid PETA of 6-12 Feb- ruary 2006.As a result, hundreds of citizens of Bekasi who belonged to the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) stormed the office of the tabloid PETA. However, the raid did not inflict damage to the office and there were no casualties as hundreds of policemen immediately arrived at the location. The mobs threatened to block access to their office when the management of the tabloid did not withdraw it from circulation but only apologized in writing to Muslims. The police detained and interrogated the tabloid management for two hours.T heir case currently remains a subject of police investigation and there is no further information about its status.

35 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

13. The Editorial Board of Tabloid Gloria, the Publishing of the Cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in the Bi-Weekly GloriaTabloid (2006) The bi-weekly tabloid Gloria, contained cartoons of Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) for in its288th edition released in February 2006. The publishingof these caricatures caused unrest among Muslims. The Indonesian Mujahideen Council (MMI) of Surabaya objectedand asked the management of the tabloid to withdraw all of the issues from the market, as well as to apologize publicly through the media. The management withdrew all tabloids available on the market comprising around 8,000 copies including those which would be sent to other cities such as Jakarta and Medan. The Chief Editor, David Da Silva, in his statement claimed to have erred, arguing that there was no element of deliberate action in the loading of the caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad. Further developments in this case are unknown.

14. Lia Aminudin a.k.a. Lia Eden/Salamullah (2006) In 1995, Lia Aminudin claimed to have received supernatu- ral revelation and guidance. She then formed a discussion a group named Salamullah, meaning “God’s salvation” based on her experience. Later she introduced herself as the incarnation of the angel Gabriel delivering messages from God. Salamullah is classified asa perennial religion. The perennial classification is used to describe religions which: (1) attempt to identify the similarities between religions(2) explain the existence of an eternal and generally applied value that attaches to certain religious views and which is acceptable or universal in nature, and (3) identifies the ideas and actions bridging the differences among religions or religious groups. Salamullah aimed to deliver prophetic messages with the following central points:

36 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA

- Summoning mankind, especially those having strayed too far away from God, to worship The Only God again and to avoid any idolatry and occultism. - Summoning mankind to join the brotherhood of truth and love God regardless of any walls of religion, ethnicity and race. Any- one who defends the truth and justice is considered a brother. Anyone oppressing and negating the truth shall not have any defense. - Salamullah’s mission is to make people submit, not to Salamul- lah, but to The Only God. In 1997, Indonesian Ulemas Council/MUI issued an edict stating the impossibility of the angel Gabriel’s return after the Prophet Muhammad’s (PBUH) arrival and therefore belief such as Salamullah was declared false and misleading. Despite numerous hindrances from many sides, Salamullah continued its activities of sending out messages from “the Angel Gabriel – The Holy Spirit” nationwide, including a message about the nation’s repentance. Lia Eden believed that the order from the Angel Gabriel that Salamullah had to be spread to the public. She based her faith on perennials – the philosophy that all religious teachings are equal before God.. One of Salamullah’s activities was to hold peace marches to spread God’s messages against wars, the threat posed by nuclear weapons, and the American invasion of Iraq. They moved from one place to another because of the rejection, expulsion and even the destruction of their houses of worship. Regardless of the prohibi- tions and threat sit received, in 2003 the Salamullah Congregation, by then known as the Eden Community, continued its tour of several months from town to town in the pursuit of delivering God’s messages concerning the misuse of cemeteries as places of worship, alignment with Devil, and the deification of Nyi Loro Kidul (a local mythical character). The Eden Community was also instructed by The Angel Gabriel tospread God’s warning from house to house and to 250 local shamans. It also visited a group of terrorists

37 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia who detonated a bomb in Bali in 2001 and radical groups to deliver the warning that God hated violence in His name and disliked the face of Islam which was ill-tempered and that did not spread the message of rahmatan lil ‘alamin (Islam is blessing for All). On December 28, 2005a mass of people gathered in front of the house serving as the Eden Community’s headquarters. Their numbers multiplied along with the shouting of “burn” and “destroy”. The local police executed a forced evacuation for 48 people, consisting of the elderly and children, reasoning that it was to save their lives from the mob Lia Aminudin was charged with blasphemy under Article 156a of the Indonesian Criminal Code, spreading the sentiment of enmity under Article 157 section (1) of the Indonesian Criminal Code, and unpleasant conduct under Article 335 of the Indonesian Criminal Code. The panel of judges declared Lia Eden guilty of blasphemy and sentenced her to two years in prison.

15. Abdul Rachman (2006) In the Eden Community, Abdul Rahman was believed to be the reincarnation of the Prophet Muhammad, and he served as Lia Eden’s confidant in delivering her revelations. He was charged with blasphemy but was not convicted by Central Jakarta District Court. However, the Supreme Court (MA) sentenced him to three years in prison.

16. Ahmad Musadeq, Alqiyadah Al Islamiyah Sect (2007) Al qiyadah Al Islamiyah was a movement led by H. Abdul Salam a.k.a. Ahmad Musaddeq that was centered in Gunung Sari, Gunung Bunder Village, Cibungbulan Sub-Regency, Bogor Regen- cy. Alqiyadah believed that the resurrection of the Islamic civilization was to happen soon and Indonesia was the center of this resurrection. The movement’s basic concepts were/manhaj haraki (proselytization of Islam), the return to the Qur’an and the prophet’s sunnah starting from the Mecca phase to Medina phase, so

38 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA that Allah’s Law would apply as comprehensively as it would for all human kind as it does in Allah’s land. He believed that the purpose of Al qiyadah Al Isalmiyah was to preach and to exercise jihad with Amwal (property) and Anfus (sacrifice) using six concepts: (1) sirrun/secretive (2) Jahrun/transparent (3) Hijrah/to migrate (4) Qi- tal/war, (5) Futuh/victory and (6) Khilafah/caliphate.25 Ahmad Mu- saddeq proclaimed himself a Prophet and the Al Masih Al Mau’ud (savior) before his followers. The MUI issued an edict that this sect was false mis leading and against Islamic teachings. It was deemed false for promoting a new Syahadat, a new prophet/Apostle after the Prophet Muham- mad PBUH, and for not commanding the fulfillment of the five daily prayers, fasting and the hajj ritual. The judge of Central Jakarta District Court sentenced Ah- mad Musadeq to four years imprisonment for religious blasphemy. His conduct was considered to have hurt the Muslims of Indonesia and the Board of Judges considered his repentance insincere.

17. DjokoWidodo and Nur Imam Daniel, the prayer concert held by LPMI (Indonesian Student Service Institute) (2007) Djoko Widodo and Nur Imam Daniel led the prayer concert held by LPMI (Indonesian Student Service Institute) of the JATI- LIRA (East Java, Bali, and Nusa Tenggara) district in Hotel Asida Kota Batu on December 19, 2006. The activity was recorded by one participant, who then uploaded it in an internet cafe. The DVD was then circulated from one person to another. In one of the events’ activities, Djoko wore a patterned long sleeve shirt, black trousers, white head cover and around his neck, a sarong. He held a Qur’an in his right hand, and said that in this book there were teachings that had misled millions of believ-

25 Investigation Report Abuse against Jamaah Alqiyadah Al Islamiyyah Siroj Jaziroh Padang, West Sumatera, LBH Jakarta and Kontras, Jakarta, 2008 page 12

39 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia ers, led them to hell, caused regrets for many, promoted radical- ism that drove rebellions, and taught hatred. Djoko then put the Qur’an on the floor. Nur Imam Daniel, who wore a long sleeve ba- tik shirt, black trousers and black cap, resumed the prayers. The prayers were for the people who believed in the Qur’an’s teachings so that they may become detached from them and have their hearts opened to see the light of Christ.26 The video circulated widely, especially because the clothing they used was similar to those of Muslims, yet they conducted Christian religious activities. The training participants were arrested and charged with religious blasphemy. They were put in different courts according to their domiciles and in charged in sepa- rate files. Malang District Court sentenced Djoko Widodo and Nur Imam Daniel to five years imprisonment each. The Board of Judges was of the opinion that the defendants’ conduct could anger the public, provoke conflicts based on ethnicity, race, and religion (SARA) and was against the teachings of Islam. On the appeal, both were sentenced to three and a half years imprisonment which was later upheld by the Supreme Court.

18. Dedi Priadi dan Gerry Luhtfi Yudistira/Al-Qiyadah Al- Islamiyah (2007) Al Qiyadah Al Islamiyah spread to some areas, including Pa- dang City. It was known as Alqiyadah Al Islamiyah Siroj V Jaziroh (the fifth province) in Padang, led by Dedi Priadi. Dedi and Gerri were alleged to be the primary teachers Al Qiyadah Al Islamiyah in Pa- dang City. MUI West Sumatra issued an edict that declared Al Qiya- dah Al Islamiyah a false and misleading teaching which drifted from those of Islam. Based on this edict, an alliance of Islamic public organizations came to Dedi’s residence which also constituted the secretariat of Al Qiyadah Al Islamiyah to block access to it and de-

26 Verdict

40 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA mand that the government ban it. The members of the Islamic public organizations also displayed posters cursing Dedi and shouted the words “Kill!!”, “Kill Dedi and Ery!” “Drag them out!” The police evacuated Dedi and his followers to the police station. It was ac- knowledged that their houses were robbed, causing a loss of up to 10 million rupiahs.27 The Islamic public organizations reported Dedi Priadi for religious blasphemy. The Board of Judges of Padang District Court declared them guilty of religious blasphemy and sentenced each of them to three years imprisonment.

19. Raji, Drug Prayers/Sholat Koplo (2008) Raji started his shalat/Islamic prayers by drinking dexton pills first, also known as koplo pills, a mind-altering drug. He took these pills in order to increase concentration on the prayers, as he and his followers were mostly drug addicts. The media publicized it as “shalat koplo/drug prayers.” Semarang police arrested Raji and the Department of the Religious Affairs conducted research on the prayers performed by Raji. It is unknown what happened in the aftermath of his arrest.

20. Lia Eden/Eden Community (2009) After finishing her sentence in prison for two years, Lia Eden resumed spreading her revelations from the Angel Gabriel, this time by writing to many parties on the abolition of all religions, including Islam, in Indonesia. From November to December 2008, Lia Eden sent four passages to several institutions including the President of the republic of Indonesia and the Chief of Police. The passage addressed to President SBY was sent on No- vember 23, 2008 at 9.30 and argued that the SBY administration had ignored all of God’s commands, stating:

27 LBH Jakarta and Kontras, Investigation Report Abuse against Jamaah Alqiyadah Al Islami- yyah Siroj Jaziroh Padang, West Sumatera, LBH Jakarta and Kontras, Jakarta, 2008

41 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

“This is My Letter of edict to eliminate your sovereignty as the leader of Indonesia. I shall not spare you any chance to be re- elected, and your administration shall have a chaotic end, and I shall make your country helpless, because I shall defeat you and I shall build My Kingdom by any means!” Meanwhile, in the revelation addressed to the Indonesian Police that was sent on November 14, 2008 at 9.50, Lia Eden said that God asked the Indonesian Police to protect The Eden Commu- nity following her edicts commanding the abolition of Islam and all religions. The Head of Indonesian Islamic People Movement, Habib Abdurrahman Assegaf reported Lia Eden for religious blasphemy. The 1000 pamphlets produced by The Eden Community and distributed to all government institutions were considered blasphemy against Islam. Lia Eden was sentenced to further two and a half years imprisonment for religious blasphemy. The judge deemed Lia Eden’s conduct threatening to the harmony of the religiously devout, having been previously sentenced for a similar case and being un- remorseful for her deeds.

21. Wahyu Andito Putro Wibisono/Salamullah (2009) Wahyu Andito Putro Wibisono, was a devout Salamullah member and was responsible for documenting the revelations from The Angel Gabriel. He delivered 1000 messages containing passages of the revelations. He was proven guilty for religious blasphemy and was sentenced to two years imprisonment.

22. Nimrot Lasbaun, The Sion City of Allah Sect (2009) The sect Sion City of Allah was led by Nimrod Lasbau. In 2008, according to Nimrod, he received guidance from God to stop attending church services until 2011, to take off his shoes when entering places of worship, to wear a robe and to marry for four

42 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA to seven times. Nimrod also claimed that the scar on his left finger would only heal in 2011 after marrying seven women. This sect only believed in the articles in Book of Jeremy on the Old Testa- ment. The police arrested seven Sion City of Allah followers for religious blasphemy. Nimrod was found guilty of religious blasphemy and sentenced to six months imprisonment.

23. FX Marjana, Lecturer of Widya Dharma University / Unwidha (2009) Dr. FX Marjana, lecturer at the Pedagogical Faculty (FKIP) Widya Dharma University (Unwidha) was reported by Islamic Fol- lowers Forum (FUI) Klaten based on an address from the Pedagogi- cal Faculty Unwindha students on a religious blasphemy allegation. The case started during a thesis panel on the Unwindha campus in Klaten in which Marjana represented the Rector in the opening speech. During the speech, Marjana was accused of dis- crediting Muslims. He remarked that Islam isa hateful religion, proven by its numerous branches, and that Muslims worshiped the Kaba. Marjana was terminated from his position as a lecturer in Unwindha, however the result of his trial is unknown.

24. Wilhelmina Holle/Masohi-Maluku Riot (2009) Wilhelmina Holle, an elementary teacher, allegedly insulted Islam and the Prophet Muhammad before her students when giving a private lesson on November 10, 2008. The rumor triggered an attack on Letwaru, a Christian village, reigniting the Maluku conflict of 1999. The riot was caused by pamphlet distribution, signature compilation, and invitation to join the demon- strations done by Asmara Washua. Asmara was a coordinator of Central Maluku Muslim Communication Forum, and a legislative candidate supported by the Welfare Justice Party / PKS for the electoral area of the Saparua-Harua District. Wilhelmina was sentenced to one year imprisonment for

43 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia breaching Article 156a of Indonesian Criminal Code while Washua one year for spreading the hatred through her pamphlets and signatures.

25. Pastor Moses Alegesen/ Translator of the paper Untouch- ability A History of Vaikonam Agitation Manu (2009) Pastor Moses Alegesan translated a paper written in Eng- lish by Periyar Erode Venkata Ramasamy that the latter delivered in a seminar in Kanyakumari District in 1958, titled Untouchability A History of Vaikonam Agitation Manuto “Manu, an Unfair Regulation for Non-Brahmin”. Parisada Hindu Dharma Indonesia reported pastor Moses for blasphemy because there was a discussion of the caste issue the in the paper. Moses said that he never distributed the translation. In- stead, it was done by the claimant, the PHDI, so that the translation created the debate among Tamil ethnic groups in Medan and other areas. He claimed that he was unaware of his mistakes that supported the accusation of blasphemy of Hinduism, as the translation discussed Indian cultural problems which questioned the caste issues, instead of Hindu religion itself. Being one of the Tamil ethnicity’s prominent figures in Medan, Pastor Moses Alegesan fought for his ethnic group’s existence as Indonesian Citizens having same rights (caste equality)as others. He suggested changing the name of Keling Village to Ma- dras Village, because according to him that name which originally referred to King Kalingga’s territory (in India) had become an insult since the mid-1970s. The opinion that the translation was an unlawful deed and the pressure from the PDHI that Pastor Moses be arrested and punished, led to his arrest and charge for religious blasphemy. The Board of Judges in Medan District Court decided that Pastor Moses was innocent of religious blasphemy and therefore was not convicted and his reputation was rehabilitated.

44 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA

26. Agus Imam Solihin/Satrio Piningit (2009) In 1999, Agus Imam Solihin received a vision from his an- cestor, the first President of The Republic of Indonesia, Ir. Soekar- no, instructing him to convey a teaching called ”Satrio Piningit Weteng Buwono”. At first his teachings were based on the Qur’an and the sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad according to Islamic rules, however they later strayed from these sources. Agus exclaimed “I am your God” and he commanded the abandonment of prayer, fasting, and paying for charity. His reasoning was: (1) shalat/prayer was basically reminding oneself of God, thus when someone had remembered God he had essentially conducted the prayer, (2) fasting was denying lust and anger, thus those who were already able to do so had already fasted; (3) charity was only obligated for the employed and not for the unemployed. Agus forbade his ill followers to go to the hospital. One of them was Ratna Ayu Kusumaningrum, who was suffering from lung and liver diseases. She was not allowed to go to the hospital, take any medication, or be exposed to sun light. She was only to sleep. All her meals were controlled by Agus who claimed to be the only person who could cure her. When Ayu died, Agus fled. Other dismaying cases involved ritual intercourse between husbands and wives in the presence of Agus and his followers, and other rituals performed nude. The police raided the place where the sect performed its rituals and seized Agus’ belongings. Initially the police charged Agus with obscenity, however later it applied Article 156a of the Indonesian Criminal Code. The Board of Judges of South Jakarta District Court found Agus Imam Solihin guilty of religious blasphemy sentenced him to two and a half years in prison.

27. Ahmad Naf’an, Santriloka Institute (2010) Ahmad Naf’an a.k.a. Gus Aan established the Santriloka In- stitute and spread his teachings through DVD and a book entitled Wind of Change. He stated that the Ramadan fasting, daily prayers

45 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

(shalat) and hajj rituals were not obligatory because they were only Arabic tricks, and that the original Qur’an was in Kawi, Sanskrit, and ancient Javanese languages instead of Arabic. The East Java MUI (Indonesian Ulemas Council), Jamiyyah Ahlit-Thariqah Al- Mu’tabarah An-Nahdliyyah or Mojokerto branch of the NU Order, and the East Java district head of Muhammadiyah analyzed the contents of Santriloka’s DVD and book and declared that the teachings were false and misleading. In October some people came to Gus Aan’s house after watching a debate between him and the MUI on a private TV chan- nel. Angered by his statements during the debate, they demanded Gus Aan’s family move away as his teachings were considered hu- miliating to Kranggan people. The police evacuated them to Polres Kota Mojokerto in order to avoid any violent reactions, removed all signs of the Santriloka Institute and declared that the house was no longer The House of Santriloka. The police conducted an investigation of Gus Aan regarding religious blasphemy. However the status of the investigation is unknown. Santriloka changed its name to Pandu Sanjaya and moved from Kranggan to Wates. On Thursday, February 9, 2012, a coordi- nation meeting was held and attended by Kesbanglinmas (The Na- tional Unity and Public Protection Body), youth and public figures, the heads of neighborhood associations, the members of district military command, and the village police of Wates to discuss how to address the Pandu Sanjaya sect. The results of the meeting were: a. The people would not be permitted to come to Ahmad Naf’an (Gus Aan)’s rental house. b. The Wates Village Head would summon Ahmad Naf’an (Gus Aan) and this would be witnessed by the public figures. c. The people of BanjarAnyar do not accept the existence of the Pandu Sanjaya sect in their neighborhood. d. Ahmad Naf’an (Gus Aan) must find a new rental house outside of Mojokerto city area within a period of two months.

46 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA

e. During the period of two months, Ahmad Naf’an (Gus Aan) was prohibited from receiving any personal guests and spreading Pandu Senjaya teachings. f. The residents of Banjar Anyar were not allowed to conduct any act of vigilantism toward Ahmad Naf’an (Gus Aan) g. Ahmad Naf’an (Gus Aan) was to obey the local rules and get along with the residents during his stay at Banjar Anyar, Wates District, Mojokerto. The current status of the case is unknown.

28. Antonius Richmond Bawengan, The Temanggung Riot (2010) On October 22, 2012, Antonius Richmond Bawengan visited his relative’s house in Temanggung and intended to stay overnight before resuming his trip to his parents-in-law’s home in Malang. While staying over, he distributed some books he brought from Jakarta:(1) “Oh my God, I have been tricked,” (2)”Do You Need a Sponsor?” and pamphlets entitled: (1)”Save Yourselves from Da- jjal and the Armageddon,” (2)”The Judge’s Free Conviction” and (3)”Three Sponsors – Three Agendas- Three Results.”The contents of the books and pamphlets essentially condemned Islam and Ca- tholicism. The next day he distributed the books and the pamphlets by throwing them onto the house doorsteps, benches, and shops of the Kranggan Temanggung area. While doing so, he was detected by residents and taken to the head of the neighborhood associa- tion’s house to be examined. The head of the neighborhood asso- ciation believed that the books contained religious blasphemy, and Antonius was then taken to the Police Department at Kranggan where he was charged with violating the Article 156a of Indone- sian Criminal Code. Antonius’ hearing processes were always packed by Islamic organization members and Islamic boarding school students de-

47 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia manding for a life sentence. The Board of Judges found Antonius guilty of religious blasphemy and sentenced him to five years imprisonment. This decision was deemed unacceptable to the community and a riot erupted. This led to the burning and destruction of three churches, one school, and the Temanggung district court building. The police arrested Syihabuddin of PondokPesantren Al- Hadist and 24 teenagers for participating in the Temanggung riot. Syihabudin was proven guilty and sentenced to a year imprisonment while the other24 actors received lighter sentences of four or five months each.

29. Ahmad Tantowi, The Eden Heaven Sect (2010) Ahmad Tantowi began to follow Eden Heaven teachings after joining a religious class in Jakarta from 1997-2004. He then began to deliver these teachings himself. He interpreted some Qur’an verses himself, such as: - Al’Imran Chapter, verse 78:“There are plenty of Mullahs, Cler- ics, Hajj, and Religious Teachers who only cheat on Allah”; - Al’Maidah Chapter, verse 57:“because Din was made a religion, many believers’ potentials (wealth and life) are not focused on Allah’s path”; - He also created terms or definitions of names in the Qur’an, such as: • Adam meant God chosen, • Noah meant preaching for Allah, • Ibrahim meant Allah’s companion, • Moses meant God’s spokesman, • Jesus/Isa meant the liberator, or the Savior • Jacob meant God’s prince, • Israel meant people who enjoyed wars,

48 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA

• Hebrews meant people who crossed the Efrat river, the first person crossing it was Abraham, • Zabur /Psalms meant compilation of writings; • Lot meant sticky. - He also interpreted the seven layers of sky: • Adam – Enoch/Idris– Noah (territory) – Hud (country)– Shaleh / Shelah (regency) – Abraham (district) and Moses (village); - Besides providing such interpretation of the Qur’an, Ahmad also taught the following ideas: • He proclaimed himself Allah the Creator of The Universe that must be worshipped. • The believers in Eden Heaven were not obliged to perform the daily prayers (shalat), fast during Ramadan, and recite the holy book. • Everyone, including biological parents, who were not Eden Heaven believers, was an infidel. • Any member who would get married was to submit his bride-to-be to purification in order to become an angel, meaning she had to be copulated. • Every member must submit 10% of their income to charity and members were allowed to rob other people’s belongings and the stolen goods be submitted to Ahmad for purification. The Eden Heaven believers reported the sexual abuse they experienced. The victims were in fear and helplessness because they were forced to obey their leader’s order. The sexual abuse happened in a room where the victims were locked inside. Ahmad Tantowi was assisted by three accomplices who were forced to hold the victims’ legs. Following the stipulation of Ahmad as a suspect, hundreds of people who were outraged by Eden Heaven’s teachings

49 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia threw stones and sealed his house and distributed posters with his pictures. The residents refused to have this sect present in their neighborhood. Ahmad was charged with obscenity (Article 289 of the Indo- nesian Criminal Code) and religious blasphemy (Article 156a of the Indonesian Criminal Code). The Board of Judges declared Ahmad convincingly guilty for criminal acts of “intentionally conducting obscenity” and “intentionally performing religious blasphemy.” The judge sentenced him 10 years imprisonment.

30. Ondon Juhana a.k.a. Raden Jaya Diningrat, Alternative Healing (2011) Ondon Juhana a.k.a. Raden Jaya Diningrat healed people through alternative medical practices. His success stories spread through word of mouth from his former patients. His ability was then widely known and many people started to visit his house to be medicated. To accommodate visitors, he built a hut in which he healed the sick by massaging the nerves in the head, stomach, back and knees before instructing them to consume hot instant noodles with and to drink black coffee. He gave some requirements to them to follow if they wanted to get well: - They must stop performing shalat/daily prayers because it was a Muslims exercise. - They must stop chanting prayers for Allah - They were to confirm that Ondon was the Prophet - Muham mad’s successor - They must admit that the mosque was only a place for gather- ing and chatting - They were forbidden to visit sacred places because Ondon’s house was the only sacred place they were permitted to visit From June to October 2005 the husband and wife of Sri As-

50 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA riyati Binti Emo Suganda and Wawang Bin Kartijam came to get medication from Ondon. He told them that they must build a hut near Ondon’s house for their recovery. As they believed in his words and promises that the sickness would be cured, they built a hut which cost them eight million rupiahs. However, they never recovered. Both of them then reported Ondon to the Police for the suspicion of religious blasphemy and fraud. The Board of Judges decided that Ondon was proven to have conducted religious blasphemy and he was sentenced to five years imprisonment.

31. Oben Sarbeni/Sect Ahmad Sulaeman (2011) Oben Sarbeni was a caretaker and a teacher at Anwarul Huda boarding school, Tasikmalaya, an Islamic boarding school. He believed that his teacher Ahmad Sulaeman a.k.a. Sukiman was the messiah and the custodian who would save the Muslim people and lead them to the heaven. Oben interpreted “ahli sunnah wal- jamaah” as the followers of Ahmad Sulaeman’s teachings, and he taught his followers praises for the prophet and the names of Al- lah, such as the word “Maniu”. He demonstrated his faith to Ahmad Sulaeman by making a special room in the Anwarul Huda’s building and decorat- ing the walls with pictures. He introduced Ahmad Sulaeman to his students and explained that the Prophet Muhammad’s spirit had entered into Ahmad Sulaeman’s body. On his own picture, he declared himself as the Prophet Muhammad’s best friend. Oben said that when reciting the shalat/prayers, Ahmad Sulaeman should be mentioned first, followed by the Prophet Mu- hammad. His other statement was that Nyi Roro Kidul was not a devil/ satan as she had been converted to Islam by Ahmad Sulae- man. The MUI questioned Oben in regards to his teaching. This inquiry was done in a “trial” atmosphere witnessed by hundreds of clerics and students. Oben was asked to say the two syahadat sen-

51 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia tences (that there is no other God but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger) as guided by the MUI Head, yet Oben refused to do so. This provoked the students’ rage and they tried to attack him, but the police protected him. Later MUI Kota Tasikmalaya issued an edict that the teachings of Oben Sarbeni were false and misleading (dhallunmudhillun) because they had drifted from the true Islamic teachings. The edict also demanded that the government prevent the spreading of Oben’s teaching and freeze his activities. Following the MUI edict and the demand from the Islamic organizations, the police arrested him on the allegation of religious blasphemy. During the hearing processes there were con- stant mass mobilizations by the FPI (the Islam Defenders’ Front) and Tasikmalaya branch of the LPI (the Islam Guards). The Tasik- malaya District Court decided that Oben was proven guilty of religious blasphemy and was sentenced to five years imprisonment. This decision was later confirmed by the Supreme Court on appeal.

32. Andreas Guntur Wisnu Sarsono/ Amanat Keagungan Ila- hi Sect (2012) Amanat Keagungan Ilahi (AKI) was a religious sect born out of M. Syamsoe’s synthesis of Islam and local beliefs during 1975. He was born in Cianjur on September 14, 1932,and died on June 7, 1995 in Jakarta and was buried in Leles, Garut, East Java. After resigning from the Indonesian Air Force, M. Syamsoe conducted Islamic rituals and became a staff member at Banten Grand Mosque. During his rituals, at midnight of 12 Maulid 1389 H or May 29, 1969, he received a revelation while in the Mosque. Since then he taught his ideas to his family, and beginning in1973, he started to spread them to the public in various ways such as: a) inviting people to know and feel the power of Allah; b) performing additional prayers; c) assisting people to recover from illness and to obtain good fortune. M. Syamsoe spread his philosophy in several regions: in Cilegon, Banten (1977-1981), Cibeureum, Bandung (1981-1984),

52 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA

Serengseng, Kebon Jeruk, West Jakarta (1991-1995). After he died in 1995, his followers’ discontinued spreading his teachings for a period of about ten years. Only in 2006, the senior followers of M. Syamsoe began to rebuild the AKI community, which had since split into three groups: AKI Yaskum focusing on social activities and traditional medicines, AKI Andreas focusing on social and politics and AKI Kurnia Wahyu focusing on religious and social matters. Andreas Guntur Wisnu Sarsono was an AKI follower and he conducted lessons in Klaten. On October 24, 2011, the MMI and Mosque Activist Communication Forum (FKAM) organizations with the district head, local military command members, and local police raided Andreas Guntur’s rental house. The raid happened as 23 AKI followers were conducting religious rituals. because the AKI had been condemned as false and had been prohibited by the West Java and Banten governments. The AKI used several posters to deliver their message: a. One poster had Arabic characters with Latin ones on the bottom that read “Ya Iblisa Saetonu Fidulumati Wa nur” translated from Bahasa Indonesia as “O Satan within the Darkness and the Light” and “Wamala Ikatihi Warosulihi Abdahu Sirotol Musta- qim” or “and the angels and the prophets and the servants of the right path”; b. A poster in Arabic with God’s mandate on the side. “Who is AKI – AKI is a blessing that you must deliver to your people in the world, Syamsoe is a light of Allah’s love in you, Allah is the life in you that you cannot cheat with”; these sentences were meant to demonstrate that in a man’s soul there is a feeling that always leads to honesty as Allah is the most honest. c. A poster containing slogans that some read “Man/Creature/ Light, Allah/Light, Satan/Devil/Light” that intended to equate Allah, man, Satan, the devil and light. According to Islamic teaching this idea of equalization of Allah, man, Satan and light is blatantly wrong.

53 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia d. A poster that read Kun Fayakun stated “Allah reveals, listen, I change your heart’s feeling for you to understand: Who am I? Who are you? I am the ruling one in this world, I created the whole universe and all of its creatures, so be grateful for me and spread my power and my gifts that you have received. On my power save all your people in this world whose hearts are still in the darkness”. Those sentences were neither of the Qur’an nor the Hadist Qudsi. e. A poster bearing Arabic characters that read Allahu Akbar lailla- haillauloh Allahhu Akbar and Latin characters that read Salamun Qoalam Mirobbi Rochim that appeared as if it were a Qur’anic verse when it was not. Andreas displayed five AKI posters obtained from Aki Syamsu before he died. Andreas was charged with religious blasphemy because he promoted AKI ideas, namely that he believed Allah’s revelation had descended through the Angel Gabriel to the AKI founder. The common interpretation of Islam holds that Al- lah’s guidance that descended through the Angel Gabriel stopped with the Prophet Muhammad, as he was the last prophet. There- fore, AKI teachings were contradictory to Islam and were deemed false and blasphemous. Andreas was proven guilty and sentenced to four years imprisonment. The Appellate Court and the Supreme Court upheld the decision by the Klaten District Court. This case set a bad precedent as it was the first timean AKI sect was convicted of blasphemy.

33. Hadassah J Werner, The Bethel Tabernakel Church (2012) Pendeta Hadassah J Werner, was the leader of The Bethel Tabernakel Church in Lengkong No 9, Bandung. He set up a community called The Kingdom Movement Community/KMC that provided education for over 140 young people. The teaching that was considered false was the statement of “a biological mother is only a way to birth, but a spiritual mother is in the stronger position”. This statement was perceived to threaten relationship between the young people and their families.

54 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA

On October 13, 2009, one congregation member reported Priest Hadassah for religious blasphemy for delivering speeches and hosting meetings called “flame meetings” and “star group meetings” during January and June 2010 and for setting up the KMC community whose teachings were not consistent with the Bi- ble. The Board of Judges granted Priest Hadassah’s interlocutory appeal during the preliminary order. However the general prosecutor appealed to the West Java High Court, which ordered the merits of case to be adjudicated. After the trial, the Board of Judges concluded that Priest Hadassah was innocent of religious blasphemy. The Board of Judges considered it was difficult to determine the correct time and location of the blasphemous acts, and the accusation that Priest Hadassah’s teachings had decreased Christians’ faith were not concrete. The allegation regarding Priest Hadassah’s statement about a biological mother having an inferior position was proven to be a false accusation of an angry mother who wished that her child would be less active in the KMC Church.

34. Sensen Komara, The Indonesian Islamic State/ NII (2012) Sensen Komara, self-proclaimed Grand Commander and President of the Indonesian Islamic State (NII), was convicted of treason for his attempts to establish an independent state within Indonesia as well as religious blasphemy. Sensen waved a NII flag on Sunday, August 7, 2011 on Sentra Bakti soccer field at Babakan Cipari Village, Desa Sukarasa, Pangatikan District, Garut. Sensen also conducted blasphemy by changing the kiblat direction to east. He was charged with the Article 106 of the Indonesian Criminal Code Jo. Article 53 section 1 of the Indonesian Criminal Code and Article 156a of the Indonesian Criminal Code. The Board of Judges found him guilty of treason and religious blasphemy. However Sensen was proven to suffer from a mental disease (paranoia) and it was decided to send him to the psychiatric ward of Hasan Sadikin Hospital (RSHS) Bandung.

55 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

35. Alexander Aan/ Account Facebook Atheis Minang (2012) Alexander Aan, was a civil servant in The Regional De- velopment Bureau of Dharmasraya, West Sumatra. He wrote a Facebook status which said “God does not exist”. He said that he saw many miseries in this world and there were plenty of gaps in life. His virtual statement caused some young people from Sungai Kambuik, Pulau Punjung and their community leaders to come to Dharmasraya Reagent’s office to meet him. Aan insisted that what stated was true and it was a personal opinion. The young people then began to physically assault him. Aan was then taken to Pulau Punjung, Dharmasraya police station and was charged with religious blasphemy. The evidence consisted of his personal Facebook account (under the name Alex An) postings containing writings and the defaming images of the Prophet Muhammad, and the presumption that Alexander Aan was the administrator of a Facebook group named “Atheis Minang.” Aan was charged with the Article 28 section 2 Jo, Article 45 section 2 of Law number 11, 2008 on Electronic Information and Transaction, and Article 156a of the Indonesian Criminal Code on discouraging other people to hold any religion. The Board of Judges declared Aan guilty of breaking the Article 28 section 2 of Electronic Information and Transaction Law regarding conflict in the SARA (ethnicity, race, and religion) context and was sentenced to 2 years and 6 month imprisonment.

36. Tajul Muluk/Syiah (2012) On December 29, 2011, the house of Ahl al-Bait (IJABI) Con- gregation Head , Ustad Tajul Muluk, two other houses belong to Shias and a small mosque were burned by a mob of 500 people claiming to belong to the ahl as-sunnah wa al-Jamaah. KH. Bukhori Maksum, a local religious leader Issued an edict that Ustadz Tajul Muluk’s teachings were false and misleading. Roisul Hukama, the brother of the defendant, reported Us- tad Tajul Muluk to the Sampang Police station on suspicion ofre-

56 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA ligious blasphemy for his statement that current versions of the Qur’an no longer contain the original text. He was sentenced to two years imprisonment. The Board of Judges in the District Court found his teachings of eight Islam cores and five faith cores blasphemous. Tajul appealed but the East Java District Court length- ened his sentence to four years imprisonment.

37. Sumarna/ Tijaniyah Mutlet Cimahi (2012) Sumarna, leader of the Tijaniyah Mutlet Cimahi sect, delivered a teaching after being instructedto do so by God. The teaching included four prayers a day (shalat) and no Friday prayer. Sumar- na conducted a planned murder on Endin, his former follower, because he was outraged at the teacher who strongly opposed his teaching and blocked the well construction project that would be used as the source for the holy water. Sumarna was charged with religious blasphemy (Article 156a of The Indonesian Criminal Code) anda planned murder (Article 340of The Indonesian Crimi- nal Code).The cases are still under investigation.

B. HATE SPEECH CASES There are hardly any cases on hate speech brought to court by law enforcement officers. Among these few, only a subset was sentenced under the Article 156 of the Indonesian Criminal Code. As mentioned in the previous chapter, the weakness of Article 156 of The Indonesian Criminal Code is that it is not used to capture the perpetrator of religious based hate crimes, including hate speech. It is only used to punish those accused of blasphemy. Hate speech resulting in discrimination and hostility remains untouched by Ar- ticle 156 of The Indonesian Criminal Code. Similarly, Article 28 section 2 of the Electronic Information and Transaction Law did not differentiate between hate statements made by state officials and those made by ordinary citizens. There are indications that inter-religious violence starts

57 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia from hate statements. However, due to limited verification process, hate statement cases that can be monitored are only the veri- fied ones. Below is a sample of religion-based hate statement cases resulting in violence, discrimination, and conflict.

1. Hate Campaign against Ahmadiyah Community (2008) A leader of a religious community organization made hateful statements toward the Ahmadiyah community in a mass religious rally in Banjar, Tasikmalaya, East Java in 2008. He delivered the following speech: “We summon the Muslims to fight against Ahmadiyah. KILL Ahmadiyah community members wherever they are, brothers! ALLAHU AKBAR! KILL, KILL, KILL, KILL!IT’S ALLOWED TO KILL. If you damage the Islamic faith, YOUR BLOOD IS HALAL (lawful to spill) ! AHMADIYAH’S BLOOD IS LAWFUL TO SPILL! We don’t care about the human rights! FIGHT AGAINST AHMADI- YAH, KILL AHMADIYAH, CAST AHMADIYAH OUT OF INDONE- SIA! ALLAHUAKBAR! No worries, we are the responsible ones ! If you kill Ahmadiyah community members, you can tell them that it’s under my direction...no problem. We will be responsible in this world and in the afterlife. KILL AHMADIYAH wherever they are!” “Nowadays there are many figures trying to be popular by defending Ahmadiyah. Look at the vice president Jusuf Kalla. He said, ’Let Ahmadiyah perform their religious duties their own way.. nauzubillah min dzalik..’Look, Gus Dur also joined to defend Ahmadiyah. For what? To gain the favor of the western countries for their money and support so he can be a presidential candidate supported by the evil America and the evil Brit- ain. We are reminding the president and the vice president to never even try to take any advantage of this situation. If you defend the false sect, we will declare to all Muslims, ‘you are forbidden from electing the candidates who defend the false sects in this country”.

58 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA

The hate campaign encouraged intolerant actions against the Ahmadiyah in Tasik and other areas.28 Several months after the mass rally, violence broke out against an Ahmadiyah community and the participants of Pancasila Day parade, June 1, 2008, in Lapangan Monas Jakarta Pusat. The speech directly resulted in violence toward the Ahmadiyah community members. The statement “Kill Ahmadiyah” was clearly a provocation to encourage violence. Even if the speech had not caused violence, the authorities must enforce the laws against such hate statements.

2. Hate Campaign Against HKBP Filadelfia Congregation Members On Sunday April 15,2012, in Jejalenjaya Village, Tambun, Bekasi, an ustadz leading the action to reject the HKBP Filadelfia church delivered hate statements before the local authority and the police force: “My concern is that they (HKBP Filadelfia) do not pay any respect to the government. What is the government for? Damn them for not respecting the government and for abusing the government. The government must take action. I will keep on rejecting these people.(You can) invite the people from the Vatican, from the USA, (and) bring your people in. You want to fight, let’s fight. No mercy. Respect your government. What kind of nation are you? DISMISS, YOU ARE DISMISSED.” A son of the ustadz also delivered hate speech before the crowd by stating: “Palti Panjaitan, be prepared if tomorrow you still hold a service, WE WILL PUT AN END ON IT. WE WILL ATTACK THE SERV- ICE. WE WILL END IT. Palti Panjaitan, your head, the number one person, I will put an end toy ou. You can be sure about it, I SLAUGHTER A LOT.”

28 Kertas Posisi, “Religion Based Hate Campaign“, (2012)

59 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

The hate campaign provoked more severe intolerant and violent actions duringthe following weeks.29 The statement “just end it” had a significant impact on the occurrence of violence towards the members of HKBP Filadelfia congregation. Even though the violence did not happen, law enforcements should have exer- cised their legal authority to punish these statements.

3. Hate Campaign Against the Shias/ Jema’ah Aliran Syi’ah 3.1. Hate Statement on 21 May 2012 An anonymous public figure in one video in YouTube dated May 21, 2012 said: “If Shias come to a place, please EXPEL THEMFROMTHE PLACE, TELLTHEMTO MOVE TO ANOTHER PLACE. Not only Tajul Mu- luk, not only Tajul Muluk that has to be expelled from that place. Habib converting to SHIAMUST BE EXPELLED FROM THAT PLACE AS HE HAD STAINED AND DRAGGED HIS ANCESTORS DOWN.” The statement was delivered before the participants of the commemoration of the Prophet Muhammad’s birthday in Jaluak Sepuluh Village,Kota Bangkalan Madura, May 21, 2012. There was a significant link between the speech and the violence and discrimination perpetrated against the Shiah community in Sampang Madura on August 26, 2012. This was based on the following points: a. The statement “expel them from the area, tell them to find another place” and “you are legitimate to expel him because he had stained and dragged his ancestors down” can qualify as hate speech. Article 1, paragraph 3 of the Human Rights Law number 39/1999explainsthatdiscrimination is any limitation, abuse or alienation that directly or indirectly is based on religion, tribe, race, ethnicity, group, social status, economic sta-

29 Id. Religion-Based Hate Campaign, (2012)

60 CASES OF BLASPHEMY OF RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH IN INDONESIA

tus, gender, language, political values. b. The word “expel” caused the limitation and alienation of Shi- ahs and frustrated the fulfillment of their human rights. c. The word “expel” has the tendency to inspire violence when directed towards a minority community. In the aftermath of the hate statement on August 26, 2012,assault and discrimination against the Shiahs in Karang Gayam Omben, Sampang District, Madura Island, took place. One Shiah died and the community had to be evacuated to Sampang Sport Center.

3.2. Hate Statement on June 7, 2012 A cleric delivered a speech commemorating the Prophet Muhammad’s Isra’ Mi’raj (ascension to heaven)on June 7, 2012 in Puger Jember, East Java.During this speech, which was uploaded on YouTube, he declared: “If this darul fasiqin school is not closed down, WE WILL CLOSE IT DOWN FORCEFULLY. Government officials, don’t blame us if we do it our way. We have left it all to you to close down, end, and dismiss darul fasiqin for good…” “…from eight people, only one person got arrested while the other seven are having a good time at the karaoke bar… if so, WE’D BETTER STAB THEM. (We will) wait forthe government appa- ratus, (but) if they do not take any action, we will. We will mo- bilize the people to multiply our numbers. Allahu Akbar. Shiah Laknatullah! Laknatullah!” “CLOSE DOWN THAT YAPISCHOOL, THE DARUL SHALIHIN SCHOOL, AND THE SHIAH SCHOOLS.”

The statements“…we will forcefully close it down…” and “…we’d better stab them…”were explicit incitements to violence towards the Shiahs. The threat is visible from the plain words of

61 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia the statement. The order to “close down that YAPI school ”was explicit hatred towards the Shiahs. Those statements do not require violence to actually occur in order to be punishable. The statements are sufficient in themselves as direct incitements to violence against the Shiahs.

3.3. Hate Statement in a Cleric’s Interview In one interview about Shiah, a cleric stated the following: “Say we have a cancer patient, the cancer in his arm has grown to his elbow. The doctor recommends amputating it, OTHER- WISE THE CANCER WILL GROW TO THE OTHER PARTS. Will you charge the doctor for human right abuse? Obviously not, because what he does is to save the other parts of the patient’s arm.” In the interview, the cleric had clearly intended to deni- grate and threaten the Shiah community in East Java by using the analogy that the Shiah were like a cancer that was harmful for the Sunni majority in East Java.

4. Condoning Hate promotion practices that lead to intolerant actions and religion-based violence, are often condoned by the government officials. Government officials are supposed to demonstrate respect to all religions and beliefs in society and protect all citizens engaging in religious acts. The example below shows a government official’s action that demonstrates condoning of religious hate speech. Before members of parliament, he said the following regarding the Ah- madiyah community’s existence: “The Ahmadiyah have to be stopped because they contradict Is- lamic principles. If they are stopped, they can no longer continue their activities…..the Ahmadiyah have provoked the people’s anger for continuing their activities, but this situation has been

62 suppressed by the police. Ahmadiyah teachings caused plenty of Muslims feel that the Islamic teachings have been insulted and abused.” He continued “besides, this sect has been banned in a number of countries…if a strict decision is not to be made immediately, the conflict potentials will be maintained and it will increase to actual social conflicts. Therefore I think Ahmadiyah must be dismissed.”30 The statement “the Ahmadiyah have to be stopped” has a tendency to promote violence and discrimination. People who listen to the government official’s speech will assume that when even the government officials have stated that the Ahmadiyah have to be stopped and the public must accept this idea. Then the statement “Ahmadiyah has to be stopped” also has a tendency to cause discrimination in form of “special” treatments of the Ahmadiyah because of their activities, even if this special treatment does not involve violence. This is another instance where law enforcement has failed to uphold religious freedom and stop hate speech. In this case, the government official’s speech triggered the violence and discrimination against theAhmadiyahs almost nationwide, including the case of assault on the Ahmadiyah at Cikeusik Village, Pan- deglang District, Banten Province in February, 2011.

30 quoted from www.voa-islam.com INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

64 MAIN FINDINGS OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS OF BLASPHEMYOF RELIGION ANDRELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION

CHAPTER III MAIN FINDINGS

A. RELIGIOUS BLASPHEMY 1. The Concept Problem of Article 156 of Indonesian Crimi- nal Code (KUHP) The Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP) does not specifically regulate the religious delicts. Nevertheless, there are several provisions in KUHP that can be classified as religious delicts. Barda Nawawi Arief differentiates 3 scopes of religious delicts, namely (1) crime “according to religion” (2) crime “towards religion”, and (3)

65 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia crime “related to religion” or “towards religious life”.31 Delict according to religion a reactions universally prohibited by religions such as murder, theft, fraud, insult, libel, moral delicts (adultery, rape, and such), and others. Article 156a can be classified as delict towards religion, while the delict related to religion can be seen insome provisions of KUHP related to religion such as the actions preventing religious a meeting/ceremony and funeral ceremony (Article 175); disturbing a religious meeting/ ceremony and funeral ceremony (Article 176); laughing at religious officers performing their authorized duties, et cetera. Article 156a is inseparable from the Presidential Decree (Penpres) Number 1 of 1965 on The Prevention for Religious Mis- use and/or Religious Blasphemy issued on January 27, 1965.32 After the fall of Soekarno, the Temporary People’s Consultative Assem- bly (MPRS) conducted a review of the state’s legislation that did not agree with the 1945 Constitution. Based on this review, Law number 5 of1969 on The Statements on Presidential Decrees and Presidential Regulations as the Law was issued. The Presidential Decree (Penpres) Number 1 Year 1965 issued on January 27 1965 on The Prevention for Religion Misuse and/or Religious Blasphemy then had its status promoted to binding law and it became Law Number 1/PNPS/1965 on The Prevention for Religion Misuse and / or Religious blasphemy.33 Article 156a was inserted to become part of the KUHP based on Article 4 of Law Number 1/PNPS/1965 on The Prevention for Religion Misuse and /or Blasphemy.

31 Barda Nawawi Arief, Religion Delict and (Religious blasphemy) di Indonesia and Some Coun- try Comparisons, BP Undip, 2007. 32 This Presidential Decree was issued when Indonesia’s social and political dynamics were filled with the competition among big ideas of nationalism, religions and communism. During that time, sects or spiritual organizations that were considered to be contrary with religious values emerged. 33 Siti Aminah and Uli Parulian Sihombing, Understanding Disenting Opinion, the Decision on Religious blasphemy Law’s Content Examination, ILRC, 2010, page. 1-2.

66 MAIN FINDINGS OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS OF BLASPHEMYOF RELIGION ANDRELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION

Article4 mentions: “In the Criminal Code, a new article is made and entered, the content of which is as follows” Article 156a: “By a maximum imprisonment of five years shall be punished any person who deliberately in public gives expression to feelings or commits an act: a) which principally has the character of being at enmity with, abusing or staining a religion, adhered to in Indonesia; or b) with the intention to prevent a person to adhere to any religion based on the belief of the almighty God”. Based on above prescription, there are four actions that can be classified as crime if done in public, namely: 1. Expressing feelings or committing an act having the character of enmity with a religion; 2. Expressing feelings or committing an act which abuses a religion adhered to in Indonesia; 3. Expressing feelings or committing an act of blasphemy of a religion adhered to in Indonesia; 4. An act done with the intention to prevent a person from adhering to any religion based on the belief of the almighty God. Related to the insertion of the Article 156a into KUHP there are some fundamental problems that significantly impact the application of the rule of law and human rights protection.

a. Formal Problem The Presidential Decree was one of the laws and regulations put into effect during the guided democracy period under Soekarno. The legal basis was the President of the Republic of In- donesia’s Letter no.2262/HK/59 on the Forms of State Regulations, dated August 20, 1959sent by President Soekarno to the Head of the House of Representative (DPR Head). In the Letter, the President firmly established three levels of law based on the 1945 Consti-

67 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia tution: legislative acts, temporary government regulations which replace legislative acts, and executive regulations. Yet, besides the three regulations created in this letter, the President created several others.34 “Apart from that, the Government deemed necessary to make a number of Other Government Regulations, namely; Presidential Decree to implement Presidential/ Warfare Commander Decree dated July 5 1959 on the return to the 1945 Constitution”. Based on this letter, during the period of 1959 – 1966, there had been at least 129 Presidential Decrees and Presidential Regula- tions. However, many of the Presidential Decrees Regulations issued by Soekarno were not appropriate. Therefore The Temporary People’s Consultative Assembly (MPRS) were ordered to conduct a review of the regulations based on MPRs Decree Number XIX/ MPRS/1966 on the Review of State’s Legislative Products Outside those of MPRS that did not Match the 1945 Constitution and MPRS Decree Number XXXIX/MPRS/1968 on the Implementation of MRPS Decree Number XIX/MPRS/1966. Based on the two decrees, Law number 5 of 1969 on The Statements on Presidential Decrees and Presidential Regulations as the Law was enacted. Article 1 reads, that “effective from the legalization of this Law, the Presidential Decrees and Presidential Regulations as mentioned inthe Appendix I of this Law are declared as Law.” Article 2 reads, that “effective from the legalization of this Law, the Presidential Decrees and Presidential Regulations as mentioned in the Appendix IIA and IIBof this Law are declared as Law provided that the contents of the Presidential Decrees and Presidential Regulations are listed or made as the material for the new Law compilations”. While Article 3 reads that “effective from the legalization of this Law, the Presidential Decrees and Presidential Regulations as men-

34 Disenting Opinion of the Judge Maria Farida Indrati in the Putusan perkara Pengujian UU No. 1/PNPS/1965 pn Prevention for the Religion Misuse and/or Basphemy. See Siti Aminah dan Uli Parulian, Ibid, hal. 32-33.

68 MAIN FINDINGS OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS OF BLASPHEMYOF RELIGION ANDRELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION tioned in the Appendix IIA and IIB of this Law, have their authority submitted to the Government to review them further and to recompile them for the purpose of implementing them as law and regulations or to make them a material for respective law and regulations.” It must be noted that the Presidential Stipulations and Presidential Regulations in Appendix IIA and IIB shall also be stated as Law, provided that there must be a correction/perfection in the meaning that such Presidential Stipulation and Presidential Regulations are accommodated and made as material for the arrangement of new law. With reference to the abovementioned provision, the Judge of Constitutional Court, Judge Maria Farida Indrati categorizes that Law Number 1/PNPS/1965 on the Prevention of Religious Mis- use/Blasphemy shall be conditional law. With reference to article 4, Judge Maria Farida also argues that the regulation which shall govern the addition of a certain article into the other laws is something uncommon in the technical arrangement of laws and regulations. Furthermore, the judges assesses that even though such laws have formal power, such regulations have some weaknesses because there are some fundamental amendments of the 1945 Con- stitution, in particular the articles regulating human rights.35 The placement of Articles 156 and 157 of Indonesian Crimi- nal Code may cause its own problem, since Articles156 and 157 of Indonesian Criminal Code have been be categorized as “haatzaai artikelen”, meaning the implementation of such articles might frequently be applied carelessly. Constitutional Justice Harjono also has different judgment related to defamation of religion. JusticeHarjono argues that the subtance of the formulation of Article 1 of Defamation of the Re- ligion Act contains weaknesses. ThereforeHarjono proposed a revision of the Act. According to Justice Harjono, the Act needs to remain in place in its current formlation for the time being while

35 Id pages 47-48

69 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia waiting for a complete revision to be completed.36

b. Material Problem. Substantively, the provisions of article 156a is unconsti- tutional because it conflicts wth the Article 28e and Article 29 of the 1945 Constitution. Both of these Articles gurantee freedom and independence of any person or citizen to embrace anyreligion of their choice. Article 28e paragraph (1) states ”Everyone is free to embrace and to worhip according to his/her religion,...... etc”, It is re- inforced by the Article 29 paragraph (2), which reads ”The State guarantess the freedom of each citizen to embrace his/her religion and to worship according to his/her relgion and belief”. In addition, Article 156a is not in accordance with various international instruments that have been ratified by the Indone- sian government. Article 18 of the ICCPR (ratified through Law No.13 of2005) states in paragraph 1: “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individu- ally or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.” The arrangement of this paragraph is reaffirmed by paragraph 2, which holds that no one can be coerced in a way which would impair their freedom of religion. Constitutional Judge Maria Farida Indarti said that the 1945 Constitution provides everyone freedom to embrace his/her religion and to worship according to his/her religion and belief, as well as the right to express thoughts and attitudes in accordance with his/her conscience. Furthermore, the guarantee of freedom of religion and belief in the legal regime of Indonesia is based on a

36 Different Reasons of Judge Harjono

70 MAIN FINDINGS OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS OF BLASPHEMYOF RELIGION ANDRELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION very strong foundation. Thus the Republic of Indonesia has a constitutional responsibility and obligation to ensure the fulfillment of every person’s right to freedom of religion and belief.37 The United Nations, through the Declaration on the Elimi- nation of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion orBelief encourages every nation to make legislation that ensures the freedom of religion. In item 4.1, this declaration requires a nation to eliminate all forms of discrimination: “All nations should seek to make laws or repeal laws to prohibit discrimination, and take appropriate measures to combat intolerance on the ground of religion or belief.” From the description above, it is obvious that everynation is responsible to ensure that discrimination based on religion does not happen. If discriminatory policies exist, the nation has an obligation to overturn such laws.

2. Application of Article 156a at All Era Governance The existence of Article 156a of the Criminal Code first appeared based on the Presidential Decree No. 1/PNPS/1965Regarding the Abuse and/or Defamation of Religion. Before it was upgraded to a law based on Law Number 5 of 1965 on the Statement of Vari- ous Presidential Decision and Regulation, Article 156a had been applied in the case of HB Jasin in 1968. HB Jassin was jailed for one year for writing the short story “Langit Makin Mendung” (The Sky Becomes Cloudier)” which is considered insulting to Islam. In addition to HB Jasin, another victim of article 156a in the Soeharto era was Arswendo Atmowiloto, who was jailed for five years because Monitor magazine ranked Prophet Muhammad 11 in a reader’s poll of influential people. The last case to occur at the end of Soeharto regime was Muhammad Saleh (1996). He was sentenced to prison for five years for insulting Islam.

37 Id page 38

71 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

Article 156 was usedmore aggresively after the reform era in 1998. In general, the change of regime affectedpolicy changes in the areas of law, including the politics of criminal law. Article 156a is an additional chapter in the Criminal Code which is based onA- rticle 4 of Law No. 1/Pnps/1965 on the Prevention of Blasphemy and or Demafationof Religion.The article has remained unchanged since its iniitial application. There is increasing usein the reform era, eventhoughthis era was supposed to deligitimate various provisions of laws and regulations which are inconsistent with the principles of universal human rights. In 2003, under the leadership of President Megawati, the Mas’us Simanungkalit case was the only case brough to trial which involved Article 156a. He was found guilty and sentenced to two years in prison for wrongly interpreting the Qur’an. In the following years, the quantity of blasphemy-related cases continued to rise. During the period of 2003-2012 there were 34 such cases.

NUMBER OF YEAR CASES Soekarno Era - Soeharto Era 3 cases 1998-2002 2003 1 case 2004 2 cases 2005 4 cases 2006 5 cases 2007 3 cases 2008 1 case 2009 7 cases 2010 3 cases 2011 2 cases 2012 6 cases

72 MAIN FINDINGS OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS OF BLASPHEMYOF RELIGION ANDRELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION

Several conclusions can be drawn from the data above: First, Article 156a was applied during most regimes of the post-colonial Indonesian government, whether in the Soekarno era that started the policy in the form of legislation, in the Soehar- to era, or during the reform era under the leadership of President Megawati Soekarno Putri, and Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. There were not any cases brought to the Court during the regimes of President BJ Habibie (1998- 1999) and Abdurrahman Wahid (1999- 2002). Second, in the reform era, protection of religious freedom was weakened. The number of blasphemy cases that occurred after 2003 showed the decreasing compliance with the protection of religious freedom. Constitutional changes since 1999-2003, and an effort to strengthen the protection of religious freedom guaranteed by the constitution were not followed by consistency of implementation, so that religious freedom violations remain rampant. The freedom of speech that has been increased since the reform era has led to the development of intolerant extremist groups that have used violence to attack minority groups. The pro- liferation of intolerant groups is not balanced with strong leadership that protects all citizens in embracing his/her religion and belief. Third, there is a strong correlation between the character- istic of the leadership of a President and the application of Article 156a in the settlement of blasphemy cases. The President holds strong authority in directing state policy, including the politics of criminalization associated with blasphemy cases. The President should be able to manage any kind of differences occurring in the community in a good, fair and dignified manner. The fact that no blasphemy case was found in the era of President Abdurrahman Wahid should be noted. President Abdurrahman Wahid is the only President with a strong vision in providing protection to minority groups including religious minority groups. This is further demon-

73 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia strated by his revocation of a ban on Jehovah’s Witnesses.

3. Application of Article 156a of Criminal Code by the Court As specified in the previous discussion, which based on article 156a there are four things punishable if they are performed in public, namely: 1. Giving an expression to feelings or commits an act having a character of being at enmity with a religion; 2. Giving an expression to feelings or commits an act abusing a religion adhered to in Indonesia; 3. Giving an expression to feelings or commits an act blasphemy a religion adhered to in Indonesia; 4. Such act is done with the intention to prevent a person from adhering to any religion based on the belief of the almighty God. In criminal law, there are two elements needed to find a defendant guilty: the objective element and the subjective element. The objective element includes actions that are prohibited or required, the result of a particular situation or problem, whereas the subjective element includes and the state of mind which makes the offender responsible. In relation to objective and subjective elements, prominent criminal law professor Lamintang38 mentions that subjective elements are elements attached to the actor himself/herself or that are associated with the actor himself/herself, and include everything contained in his/her heart, while the objective elements are elements associated with the circumstances where the actions should take place.

38 Lamintang, Dasar-Dasar Hukum Pidana Indonesia, (Bandung: Publisher PT. Citra Aditya Bakti, 1997) Ed: III, mm 193-194.

74 MAIN FINDINGS OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS OF BLASPHEMYOF RELIGION ANDRELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION

Furthermore, Lamintang specifies the subjective elements of the criminal action as follows: a. Deliberate (Dolus or culpa); b. Intentional (voornement) which can be found in the crimes of theft, fraud, extortion, forgery, and others; c. Premeditation or voorbedachteraad which can be found in the crime of murder in accordance with Article 340 of the Crimi- nal Code; d. Feeling of fear or emotional stress which can be found in crimes in accordance with Article 308 of the Criminal Code. The objective elements of a criminal act consist of: a. Illegitimacy; b. The quality of the actor; c. Causality, which is the cause of the relation of an action as a cause with the reality as a result. Lamintang’s views are more or less the same as those expressed by Dutch legal scholar Jonkers, who holds that errors of deliberation are always an element of the crime. Thus, the in- ability to be responsible and lack of errors are reasons for the release of the offender.39 The fulfillment of such elements becomes important for a person who allegedly committed a crime and determining whether sanction should be given or not given in accordance with his/her acts and competency. Judges have applied Article 156a in very different ways. Upon review of the cases summarized above, several problems can be identified: a. Article 156a is applied to actions that should be protected by the freedom of expression. The majority of existing cases related to freedom of ex-

39 JE. Jonkers, Hukum Pidana Hindia Belanda, (Jakarta: PT. Bina Aksara, 1987), p. 135.

75 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

pression include the freedom of individual to embrace a particular religion or not to embrace a particular religion, worship freely and interpret a particular doctrine. What was written by HB Jassin in the short story “Langit Makin Mendung” (“The Sky Becomes Cloudier”) is protected by the freedom of expression which is explicitly guaranteed by the 1945 Constitution. The same can be said of Rus’an’s article “A Failed Religion of Islam”. Rus’an actually did not reveal hatred against Islam, but expressed a critical opinion which is not a crime. Criticism must be protected by the freedom of expression. Other cases should not have resulted in punishment because the actions involved were fell under the freedom of expression, such as Teguh Santoso (Prophet Cartoons in Rakyat Merdeka), Iman Trikarsohadi and H Abdul Wahab (Prophet Car- toon in Tabloid PETA), The Leader of Gloria Tabloid (Prophet Cartoon), Pastor Mosen Alegesen (translation of Untouchabil- ity A History of Aaikonam Agitation Manu), Alexander Aan (Fa- cebook Atheist), and Tajul Muluk (Madura Shia). b. Article 156a is applied broadly and diversely. The actions in the cases charged under article 156ado not only consist of the four groups of action mentioned above. Judges presiding over cases which involve crimes such as fraud, obscenity or immorality, will often add charges of blasphemy indiscriminately. These applications raise the uncertainty of the law and the fairness of the law enforcement process. c. The lack of the element of intent As described earlier, the element of intent is a necessary factor when finding somebody guilty of a crime and punishing them for their actions. In many cases, there is no criminal in-

76 MAIN FINDINGS OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS OF BLASPHEMYOF RELIGION ANDRELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION

tent to commit religious contempt or defilement. There is only a lack of information or ignorance of the offender that his/her action is considered disfiguring to a particular religion. Arswendo Atmowiloto did not intend to defile a particular religion and did not know that his action was blasphemy. He did what he had done for other surveys, without any in- tentions to insult someone or a particular religion. A similar instance is the case of Ir. Charisal Matsen Agustinus Manu. He did not know that the picture used to design the cover of the book was a Qur’an. In both cases, there is not any element of intent. There- fore, it is unreasonable that these persons were punished for their actions. d. Application of article 156a does not require the existence of a threat to public order Article 156a is placed into Chapter V of the Criminal Code on Crimes against the Public Order. Following the terms of general provisions of the articles of the Chapter V, it follows that religious defamation must constitute a crime against public order. This is consistent with international conventions that allow a restriction if religious expression threatens public order. Any action that threatens public order should be firmly prosecuted. But the facts show that article 156a is applied even though there is no threat to public order. In various cases, it is impossible to see any potential threat to public order. For example, the cases of HB Yassin, Arswendo Atmowiloto, Lia Aminudin, and M Hussen lack any credible threat to the public order. A doctrine or an expression of belief can only be crimi- nally prosecuted if committed by a person or group of people in a way that has disturbed others to such a degree that public

77 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

order is jeopardized. However in these cases, the public order is only disturbed after a second group of people grouper act negatively to the expressed doctrine. Therefore, the cause of disturbance is not the adherents of the particular religion, but the people who do not agree with these doctrines. e. Professionalism problem of law enforcement officers Professionalism also becomes an issue in the application of Article 156a. Unprofessionalism of law enforcements occurred in the case of Sensen Komara, where the tribunal judges found the President of the Islamic State of Indonesia (NII) guilty on charges of treason and blasphemy. However, Sensen was proven to suffer from a mental illness (paranoia), and was sent to the mental unit of Rumah Sakit Hasan Sadikin (RSHS) Bandung. When he was proven mentally ill, he had to be freed from all responsibilities including undergoing trial. Another case is a copy paste for different case, namely in the case of Tajul Muluk that used a basic indictment of the other blasphemy cases. It shows unprofessionalism of law enforcements.

4. Patterns of Application of Article 156a The application of article 156a in general does not only involve law enforcement and an offender, but several other actors as well, following a common pattern of blasphemy cases. a. Pressure from Intolerant Groups/Community Organizations In reality, law enforcement does not necessarily arrest a person suspected of committing an act of blasphemy themselves. In many cases, action bylaw enforcements begin after protest or pressure by a particular group/community organization against the followers of a particular religion that they consider blasphemous. In some cases, the pressure from these groups receives more consideration by the court than the juridical elements of the crime.

78 MAIN FINDINGS OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS OF BLASPHEMYOF RELIGION ANDRELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION

The pressure is carried out in a systematic way, using a variety of media, and involving several parties from the public, as well as the state/government. In some cases, the pressure from intolerant groups/community organizations includes violent means and leads to social conflict. If this occurs, law enforcements or government officials often act in a discriminatory manner, blaming the minority groups for the public turmoil. Using an excuse of maintaining order, security and stability, law enforcement often evacuates or relocates a group which is entitled to protection from the state where they normally live, work and worship. Related to the pressured from the intolerant group, there are some problems that can be identified; First: neutrality of law enforcement and the government. In many cases, the neutrality of law enforcement is questionable in responding to the different views in the community related to belief and expression. Law enforcement officers always side with the majority group. Their impartiality can be seen through the lack of attention paid to the acts of violence committed by intolerant groups/community organizations. The state should act and behave neutrally, so that every citizen can enjoy safety and security. Second: the mobilization of people from other areas. There is significant horizontal conflict, which occurs between community groups and the followers of particular religion, often involving community groups from other areas where such followers/religious group are located. In fact, many followers/groups of particular religion coexist well with the surrounding communities that also differ in belief. The problem arises when there is an intervention and mobilization of people from outside of community, causing instability in society.

79 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia b. Intervention of Religious Institutions Religious institutions play an important role in the application process of Article 156a of the Criminal Code. After the pressure or demand from the intolerant groups/community organizations arise, the religious institutions usually make a study of the doctrine of such religious groups. After that, the views of these institutions are delivered in the form of a fatwa which states whether the doctrine is misguided or not. In some cases, the pressure and intervention of the intolerant institutions are performed simultaneously and support one another. In court proceedings against blasphemy, a fatwa or statement of such religious institutions is crucial in determining whether someone is convicted guilty of blasphemy or not. Law enforcement officers directly relied on such statements as primary evidence of the existence of malfeasance and desecration of a particular religion. In addition to the fatwa, witness testimony from the representatives of such religious institutions is frequently entered into evidence. Related to the involvement of religious institutions in the implementation of the Article 156a, there are some problems that can be identified; First: legitimation problem. Such religious institutions are categorized as non-state institutions (public institutions), but have a central role in determining whether the doctrine followed by a person or group of people is misguided or not. There is not any juridical legitimacy that gives religious institutions the sole authority to assess whether the doctrine of a person or group is “misguided” or not. Every religion contains variant doctrines or sects that sometimes differ with each other. Taking one interpretation by particular group as authoritative is unfair to the other group. Any one group assuming this authoritative role is wrong, but it becomes a serious problem if their doctrine is adopted and

80 MAIN FINDINGS OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS OF BLASPHEMYOF RELIGION ANDRELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION

used by law enforcement government as the sole justification for criminalizing someone’s beliefs. Second: the settlement of differences through dialogue. Fat- wa or criminalization is not the best way to resolve differences between religions. Many cases involving Article 156aconcern difference of interpretation over particular doctrine. If a doctrine is considered different from the mainstream doctrine, the best remedy is improving dialogue with an aim to reach agreement and mutual understanding. Dialogue must not preclude the possibility of changing someone’s viewpoint. c. Report to Police on Blasphemy Following a fatwa or religious group pressure, the acts of the group accused of blasphemy are usually reported to the police. Since Article 156a is not a general offense, the police immediately make someone a suspect. The police later gather evidence and witness to the existence of blasphemy. d. Criminal Justice Procedure First: the lack of understanding and perspective of law enforcement on the importance of religious freedom. Religious freedom has been guaranteed in various legislative instruments both at the national and international level. Many international conventions explicitly guaranty religious freedom, as well as the 1945 Constitution. Unfortunately, judges rarely consider such provisions. The judge will look at the criminal aspects of the case and the Criminal Code without thoroughly exploring the dimensions of religious freedom in the context of human rights protection. Second: the independence of the judge. In deciding a blasphemy case, the independence of the judges is questionable. The judge in deciding the case has to be independent and not influenced by various pressures from any party. In fact, in most blas-

81 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

phemy cases, the continuous pressures from people monitoring the proceeding have significantly influenced the attitude and the independence of the judges. Third: the impartiality of judges in deciding the case. Im- partiality of a judge in deciding the case is paramount if a fair decision is to be rendered. In several trials a lack of neutrality can be seen from the questions posed that tend to discredit the accused, and in some cases, do not provide an opportunity for the accused to mount an effective defense. The judge in the court should be able to free himself from various views, particularly his religious beliefs, to find the real truth. e. Execution The majority of cases related to blasphemy end with a guilty verdict. The punishment given is diverse. In addition to punishing the offender, the religious community the offender belonged to is forced to dissolve and discontinue their activities.

B. HATE SPEECH ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION 1. Criminalization of Hate speech on the basis of Religion Hate speech on the basis of religion is considered verbal violence, where that violence was born from a sense of insecurity, discomfort and vulnerability.40 The high level of intolerance based on religion in society is allegedly caused by the practice of hate speech conducted by an intolerant group. When performed sys- tematically and continuously, hate speech leads to acts of violence against a particular religious group which can lead to the loss of life.41 As described above, the UN, through the Declaration on the

40 Uli Parulian Sihombing, in the Introduction of the Book of Spreading Hatred on the Basis of the Religion is Crime, published by the ILRC, 2012. 41 ibid, page 2.

82 MAIN FINDINGS OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS OF BLASPHEMYOF RELIGION ANDRELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION

Elimination of All Form of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, encourages every state to create policy that guarantees religious freedom. In item 4.1, the declaration states that all countries should strive to make laws or repeal laws to prohibit discrimination, and take appropriate measures to combat intolerance on the grounds of religion and belief. Criminal provisions against hatespeech on the basis of religion in Indonesia arestill very weak.There are not any provisions that adequately criminalize these actions. Nevertheless, there are some rules that can be a foundation for law enforcement: The IC- CPR, which was ratified through Law Number 12 of2005, Law No. 11 of2008 on Electronic Information and Transaction, and the Law Number 40 of 2008 onthe Elimination of Racial and Ethnic Discrim- ination. Article 20 paragraph 2 of the ICCPR states that any actions promoting hatred on the grounds of nationality, race or religion that constitutes incitement to perform discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law. Prohibition of hate speech on the basis of religion is also regulated through Law Number 11 of

83 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

2008 on Electronic Information and Transaction. Article 28 paragraph (2) states: ”Any person who intentionally and without right disseminates information intended to cause hatred or hostility towardan individual and/or particular community group based on ethnicity, religion, race, and intergroups (SARA)”. The Laws also regulates the criminal provision. According to article 45 paragraph (2) states: ”Any person who meets the elements referred to in Article 28 paragraph (1) or paragraph (2) shall be punished with imprisonment of a maximum 6 (six) years and/or maximum fine of Rp. 1,000,000,000.00 (one million rupiah),” One of the considerations in the application of the Law Number 40 of 2008 on the Elimination of Racial and Ethnic Dis- crimination is that the existence of racial and ethnic discrimination in social life is an obstacle to family ties, brotherhood, friend- ship, peace, harmony, security and livelihood among citizens who must coexist. In addition, the general description of this law states: ”The condition of the Indonesian people, with various dimensions in various aspects of life, such as culture, religion, race and ethnicity, potentially raises conflict...” These laws do not directly regulate hate speech on the basis of religion. But the definition of ethnicity based on this Law includes religion. Article 1.3 states that ”Ethnicity is a classification of humans based on belief, value, habit, custom, norm, language, history, geography, and kinship,” Under the Article 4, there are some actions that can be categorized as dicrimi-

84 MAIN FINDINGS OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS OF BLASPHEMYOF RELIGION ANDRELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION nation against race and ethnicity. One of the actions in point b. is exhibiting hatred or a sense of hatred towards people due to racial and ethnic differences manifest through actions of: 1. Creating text or images to be placed, affixed, or disseminated in a public place or other places that can be seen or read by others; 2. Delivering speech in a public place or other places that can be heard by others; 3. Wearing something onhimself in the form of objects, words, or pictures in a public place or other places that can be read by other people; or 4. Performing deprivation, torture, rape, sexual immorality, theft with violence, or deprivation of liberty based on racial and ethnic discrimination. Related to a criminal threat, Article 16 of Law Number 40 of 2008 on the Elimination of Race and Ethnic Discrimination states: ”Any person who intentionally shows hatred or a sense of hatred toward others based on racial and ethnic discrimination as referred to in Article 4 letter b. number 1, number 2, or number 3, shall be punished with maximum imprisonment of 5 (five) years and/or maximum fine of Rp. 500,000,000.00 (five hundred million rupiah),” From the description above, it suggests that there are laws prohibiting acts of hate speech on the basis of religion, even though it is recognized that the provision is not strong enough. Al- hough adequate, that provision can be used by law enforcementto punish anyone who encourages hatred on the basis of religion. The Indonesian nation is composed of diverse of ethnic, cultural, and religious groups. This diversity can be a strength, but also a threat if it is not managed properly. One way to maintain integration is to encourage a dialogue between different elements of the community, and to maintain tolerance. On the other hand, firmness is required by the state against offenders who encourage

85 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia a sense of hatred, because it can threaten integration and destroy the relations between groups in the community.

2. The Weaknesses of Law Enforcement against Hate Speech on the Basis of Religion Blasphemy is a crime that is often used by law enforcement to prosecute those deemed to have defiled religion. On the other hand, hate speech on the basis of religion is also a criminal action which is rarely punished by the authorities. In practice, many acts of hate speech performed by an intolerant group/community organization against another religious group proceed with impunity due to a lack of involvement from the authorities. In various violent incidents associated with religious groups (such as those experienced by Ahmadiyah, Shiah and other groups) always begin with hate speech against that group. Unfor- tunately, very little action is taken by law enforcement to stop hate speech to prevent the occurrence of further violence. The results of this monitoring report demonstrate that

86 MAIN FINDINGS OF THE CRIMINAL ACTS OF BLASPHEMYOF RELIGION ANDRELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION only one case of hate speech has been brought to court by law enforcement (APH). The Masohi-Maluku riots of 2009 were triggered by the distribution of leaflets displaying hostility toward Christians. The leaflets contained the allegation, among others, that Wilhelmina Holle, an elementary school teacher, had insulted Islam and the Prophet Muhammad in front of her students. As- mara Washua distributed leaflets, collected signatures and invited people to a demonstration. Asmara is the coordinator of Central Maluku Islamic Communication Forum and a candidate supported by Partai Keadilan Sejahtera (PKS) for the electoral district of Saparua-Haruku. Asmara Washua was sentenced to one year imprisonment for spreading a sense of hatred by distributing leaflets and signatures. The reasons behind the lack of enforcement of on religious hate speech are: First: the lack of understanding of law enforcement of the article of hate speech on the basis of religion and the importance of that article for the protection of human rights. To prevent conflicts on the basis of religion, the state, especially police officers, need to punish those spreading hatred. Second: the offender of hate speech generally is a community leader or a religion with a large number of followers. Officers fear taking action against the offender, because of the possibility of backlash from these followers.

3. Victims of Criminal Action of Hate speech on the Basis of Religion The offenders delivering hate speech are not punished, but unfortunately, the victims from minority religious groups are punished by making them suspects in cases involving blasphemy or other criminal actions, such as causing unrest in the community. This can be seen in the case of Tajul Muluk. As the victim of Sampang riot, he is blamed for causing the riots. Making a victim a suspect in the investigation is part of a pattern of conflict reso-

87 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia lution which relies on a principle of ‘balance.’ This means that if there is someone from an attacker group that becomes a suspect, then there must also be someone from the victim group who can be a suspect. Making the victim a suspect, shows the weaknesses of protection for minority groups. Criminalization of a victim has lower social risk for the authorities compared to criminalizing the behavior of the offenders.

88 CHAPTER IV CLOSING

A. CONCLUSION From various descriptions in previous chapters, the following conclusions can be drawn: 1. Article 156a of the Criminal Code is an article imposed based on the Presidential Decree (Penpres) Number 1 of 1965 on the Prevention of Abuse and/or Blasphemy, which was later upgraded into Law Number 5 of 1965 on the Statement of Various Presidential Decree and Presidential Regulation as Laws. The Laws Number 1/PNPS/1965 on the Prevention of Abuse and/ or Blasphemy is “a conditional law”, which should be replaced or revised. 2. Conceptually, Article 156a contains many problems. Substan- tively, that article is contrary to the 1945 Constitution, international conventions that have been ratified by government,a nd other laws that guarantee religious freedom. Furthermore, regulating the addition of an article into another body of law (KUHP) is something uncommon in the mechanics of a legal regime. The placement of Article 156a between Article 156 and INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

Article 157 of the Criminal Code can cause problems of its own. Article 156and 157 of the Criminal Code are articles that can be categorized as “haatzaai artikelen”, so the implementation of such articles is often applied in an arbitrary manner. 3. Article 156a is applied more frequently in the new order following the 1998 reforms. This shows that the changes occurred in the reform era did little to change the policy related to blasphemy. 4. Application of Article 156a is not in accordance with the principles of the criminal justice system. Article 156a is applied to the actions that should be protected by the freedom of expression. In addition, Article 156a is frequently applied to actions which do not satisfy the requirement of intent to defile a particular religion. Basically, Article 156a is intended to prevent a disturbance of public order. However, almost all cases ending with a verdict of guilty did not concern any public order disturbance. 5. The independence and impartiality of the judge in blasphemy case trials are influenced by the perspective of law enforcement officers, religious belief and the pressure from intolerant groups. 6. Law enforcement officers act discriminatively because they firmly punish those accused of blasphemy. On the other hand, the authorities let the offenders of hate speech on the basis of religion walk free. Often, the victim of hate speech from the minority group is charged with blasphemy or other crimes.

90 CONCLUDING PROVISION

B. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. House of Representatives House of Representatives (DPR) is a representation of the people, including minority religious groups. In order to ensure the freedom of religious and belief of every citizen is protected, the House of Representatives must perform the following actions: 1.1 Related to Blasphemy - The House of Representatives must immediately eliminate the provisions relating to the criminalization of blasphemy, including Article 156a of the Criminal Code - The House of Representatives in forming legislation in an area related to religion must promote the values of Pan- casila as a basis of its philosophy and make the principles of human rights the main reference point. - The House of Representatives, as a government supervisor, performs evaluations of the performance of the government as a whole in handling blasphemy cases, using dialogue more than the implementation of the criminal law. 1.2 Related to Dissemination of Hatred on the Basis of Religion - The House of R e pr e s e nt a - tives must immediately r e c o g n i z e the Laws that guarantee the Freedom of Re- ligion, and ensure that dissemination of hatred on the basis of religion is a crime.

91 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

- The House of Representatives, as a government supervisor, needs to evaluative the government’s policies in relation to the guarantee of the freedom of religion. - The House of Representatives needs to encourage the re- newal of the Criminal Code (KUHP) to accommodate more democratic principles, including strengthening of the provision related to the dissemination of hatred on the basis of religion. - The members of the House Representatives must visit with their constituents who are members of minority religious groups.

2. Executive Branch The Executive plays an important role in maintaining the unity and harmony in the nation, state and society. Its policies effect the fulfillment of the rights of every citizen, including the freedom to embrace religion and belief. Therefore, the Executive must perform the following actions: 2.1 Related to Blasphemy - The Executive must immediately eliminate laws related to blasphemy, including Arti- cle 156a of the Criminal Code. - In formulating policies in areas related to religion, the Executive must promote the

92 CONCLUDING PROVISION

values of Pancasila as the basic philosophy and making the principles of human rights as the main reference point. - The Executive must act neutrally towards the differences of interpretation and belief that develop in a community and play a greater role in facilitating dialogue on the existing differences; - The Executive must encourage all government depart- ments and agencies to develop respect for the differences of interpretation and belief, as well as the freedom of expression. 2.2 Related to Dissemination of Hatred on the Basis of Religion - Government officials are public servants, and should action behalf of all citizens. Every policy issued should reflect respect for human rights and provide protection to minority groups. - Government, particularly the Ministry of Religious Affairs, becomes a force for the growth and development of harmony among religious communities. - Government should be aware of the dissemination of hatred on the basis of religion conducted by particular religious groups. Government must then facilitate dialogue and explain the importance of coexisting and respecting differences. - The Ministry of Education and Culture needs to be more active in promoting education which emphasizes tolerance, and encourages educational institutions to arrange internal policy that prohibit any actions which are categorized as dissemination of hatred on the basis of religion.

3. Law Enforcement Law enforcement plays an important role in the process of justice and law enforcement. Therefore, these necessary steps and actions are needed:

93 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

3.1 Related to Blasphemy - Law enforcement must not apply or place a moratorium on Article 156a of the Criminal Code, since it is contrary to the principles of human rights and law development, until there is a new law governing religious offense. - Law enforcement, whether police, prosecutor or judge, have to be more aware of the issues concerning religious freedom. Training needs to be provided so that they understand the importance of religious freedom, and are able to provide protection to minority groups with different religious interpretations/beliefs from the majority. 3.2 Related to Dissemination of Hatred on the Basis of Religion The dissemination of hatred on the basis of religion is a crime. Justice must be ensured for victims of religious hate speech. Therefore, the following steps and actions need to be taken: - Law enforcement, particularly the police, has to be firm in punishing the perpetrators of dissemination of hatred on the basis of religion. Firm actions are required to prevent the escalation of conflict that is more widespread on the basis of religion. The Criminal Code is used as a basis for the police to take action against the offender. Law enforcement, whether police, prosecutor or judge have to be more aware of the issues of religious freedom. Education or training is required in order for them to understand the importance of religious freedom, and to provide protection in order to stop the human rights abuses of hatred on the basis of religion. - The Police of the Republic Indonesia shall stop criminalizing the victims, and instead punish the offenders conducting violence against religious minority groups. As the en- tity which maintains order, the Police have to act fairly by ensuring the protection of any groups threatened because of their beliefs.

94 Profile

- Because of frequent violence on religious grounds, the police are required to make internal rules that have are sensitive to cases related to religious freedom, and strengthening the protection of victims.

4. Community Organizations Community organizations are aware of religious freedom issues should perform the following actions: 4.1 Related to Blasphemy - Develop respect for differences in religious interpretation and the freedom of expression; - Establish and develop dialogue among different communities to reach agreement and understanding between different groups. 4.2 Relating to Dissemination of Hatred on the Basis of Reli- gion - There should be a strengthening of a cross-stakeholder network that includes NGOs, academia, communities, and individuals concerned with the issues of religious freedom. With that network, it is expected that there is a synergy to perform activities in order to strengthen the protection of religious minority groups. - It is necessary to establish a network at the community level that can provide an update on various problems occurring in religious communities and that can monitor various violations, whether conducted by law enforcement, government, or other community groups. - It is necessary to establish a cross-stakeholder communication medium that can disseminate various information sources and track developments occurring in the community related to the issue of religious freedom, and to meet the stakeholder’s needs for materials related to religious

95 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

freedom. - Higher Education, in particular law faculties, should give special attention to the issue of religious freedom by em- phasizing them during the teaching progress. The support from law faculty is expected to strengthen protection for minority religious groups seeking to practice their religion freely.

5. Religious Organizations Religious organizations play an important role in maintaining the integrity of the state and nation. Therefore, religious organization needs to perform the following actions: a. Religious organizations play an important role in providing an understanding of the belief and perspective of its followers vis- à-vis other religious groups. Therefore, religious organization should foster empathy and tolerance among religious followers. b. Religious organizations need to foster dialogue, both within their own religion and with other religions to bridge the differences and find a common ground of respect. Religious organizations have to pioneer the rejection of violence in resolving religious disputes.

96 Profile

REFERENCES

Ahmad Suedy et al, Politisasi Agama dan Konflik Komunal, The Wahid of Indonesia, Jakarta, 2007. Barda Nawawi Arief, Delik Agama dan Penghinaan Tuhan (Blas- phemy) di Indonesia dan Perbandingan Berbagai Negara, BP Undip, 2007. Fulthoni, et al, Jaminan Hukum dan HAM Kebebasan Beragama, ILRC, Jakarta, 2009. JE. Jonkers, Hukum Pidana Hindia Belanda, Bina Aksara, Jakarta, 1987. Kontras, Panduan Pemolisian & Hak Berkeyakinan, Beragama, dan Beribadah, Kontras, Jakarta, 2012. Lamintang, Dasar-Dasar Hukum Pidana Indonesia, PT Citra Adi- tya Bakti, Bandung, 1997. LBH Jakarta and Kontras, Laporan Investigasi Kekerasan terhadap Jamaah Alqiyadah Al Islamiyah Siroj Jaziroh Padang, Sumatera Barat, LBH Jakarta and Kontras, Jakarta, 2008. M Zainuddin Daulay, Konflik Kekerasan di Situbondo-Jawa Timur, in the Imam Tholkhah of Social Conflict with Religious Nuance in Indonesia, Ministry of Religious Affair, Jakarta, 2002. Nurkholis Hidayat, et al, Peradilan Kasus-Kasus Kebebasan Be- ragama dan Berkeyakinan, LBH Jakarta, Jakarta, 2011. Paul M.Taylor, Freedom of Religion UN and European Human Rights Law and Practice, 2005. Rumadi, Delik Penodaan Agama dan Kehidupan Beragama dalam RUU KUHP, Wahid Institute, Jakarta, 2004.

97 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

Siti Aminah and Uli Parulian Sihombing, Memahami Pendapat Berbeda (Disenting Opinion) Putusan Uji Materiil UU Penodaan Agama, ILRC, Jakarta, 2010. The Camden Principles (translation of Alliance of Independ- ent Journalist), Prinsip-Prinsip Camden tentang kebebasan Berekspresi dan Kesetaraan, Jakarta, 2009 Uli Parulian Sihombing, et al, Menggugat Bakor Pakem: Kajian Hukum terhadap Pengawasan Agama dan Kepercayaan di Indonesia, ILRC, Jakarta, 2008. Uli Parulian Sihombing, et al, Menyebarkan Kebencian atas Dasar Agama adalah Kejahatan, ILRC, Jakarta, 2012. http://kangpanut.wordpress.com http://asepsambodja.blogspot.com http://asopian.blogspot.com http://ciput.multiply.com/

98 Profile

LIST OF ADRESSES

1. NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION/KOMISI NASIONAL HAK ASASI MANUSIA (KOMNAS HAM) JL. LATUHARHARY NO. 4B MENTENG JAKARTA PUSAT TELP/FAX : 021 - 3925 230021 - 3925 227 EMAIL : [email protected]

2. OMBUDSMAN OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA/OMBUDSMAN REPUBLIK INDONESIA (ORI) JL. IR. H. DJUANDA NO. 36 JAKARTA PUSAT TELP : +62 21 351 0071

3. LBH JAKARTA JL. DIPONEGORO NO. 74 JAKARTA TELP/FAX : 021-3145518/021-3912377

4. INDONESIAN CONFERENCE ON RELIGION AND PEACE (ICRP) JL. CEMPAKA PUTIH BARAT XXI NO. 34 JAKARTA10520 TELEPHONE : 021-42802349 / 42802350 FAX : 021-4227243 EMAIL : [email protected] WEBSITE : WWW.ICRP-ONLINE.ORG

99 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

5. NATIONAL ALLIANCE OF UNITY IN DIVERSITY/ ALIANSI NASIONAL BHINEKA TUNGGAL IKA (ANBTI) JL. TEBET BARAT DALAM VII NO.19, JAKARTA TELP/FAX : 021-8312771

6. BADAN KOORDINASI ORGANISASI KEPERCAYAAN (BKOK) JL. WASTUKANCANA NO. 33 BANDUNG TELP : 022-4265318

7. HIMPUNAN PENGHAYAT KEPERCAYAAN TERHADAP TUHAN YANG MAHA ESA (HPK) JL. IR. H. JUANDA NO. 4 A JAKARTA

8. THE INDONESIAN LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER (ILRC) JL.TEBET TIMUR I NO.4, TEBET JAKARTA SELATAN TELP : 021-93821173, FAX :021-8356641 EMAIL : [email protected] WEBSITE : WWW.MITRAHUKUM.ORG

9. HUMAN RIGHTS WORKING GROUP JIWASRAYA BUILDING LOBBY FLOOR JL. R.P SOEROSO NO 41, GONDANGDIA, MENTENG - JAKARTA 10350 EMAIL : [email protected] TELP : +62-21-3143015, +62-21-7073350562-21-3143058

100 Profile

THE INDONESIAN LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER (ILRC)

The Indonesian Legal Resource Center (ILRC) is a non-governmental organization concentratingon legal education reform. During the transition era to democracy, Indonesia faces the problems of corruption, lack of guarantee of human rights (HAM) at the legislative level and the weaknesses of law enforcement. The issue of law enforcement also requires a strong legal culture in society. In fact, awareness at the civil society level is still weak, as isthe capacity to access these rights. The instruments to access these rights at the community level are generallyunavailable. They are not protected by the state as customary law, and the state neglects to provide legal assistance. The role of higher education, particularly law faculties as part of civil society, becomes important in providing qualified law graduates to take part in various professions, such as bureaucracy, state institutions, judiciary, academia and civil society organizations. Future law graduates must play the lead role in reforming the law. We believe that legal education plays a crucial role in building legal culture and civil rights awareness.

The ILRC was established due to the growing concern that legal education that is not responsive to the issue of social justice. Legal education in universities tends to make the law graduates into profit ori- ented lawyerswhoignore social justice issues. Although universities have instruments/institutions to provide free legal assistance for the poor, they do so for different purposes.

101 INJUSTICE IN BELIEF; Monitoring the Results of Cases on Blasphemy of Religion and Religious Hate Speech in Indonesia

The problems that occur are: (1) the weakness of a paradigm of assistance to the poor, social justice and human rights, (2) commercializa- tion of higher education and a lack of fundingand human resources at the Institute for Consultancy and Legal Aid (LKBH) and the Center for Human Rights (HAM), (3) legal education is not able to respond to social problems when there is a law conflict due to norm differences between the law as applied in society and the law on the books. Due to those problems, the ILRC intends to take part in the reform of legal education.

VISION AND MISSION

ILRC’s vision is “Promoting Human Rights and social justice in legal education”. While the ILRC’s mission are: (1) Bridging the gap between Universities and social dynamics; (2) Reforming legal education to strengthen the perspective of social justice; (3) Encouraging universities and civil society organization to engage in legal reform and social justice.

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

Founder/Executive Board: Dadang Trisasongko (Chairman), Renata Arianingtyas (Secretary), Sony Setyana (Treasurer), Prof. Dr. Muhamad Zaidun, SH (Member), Prof. Soetandyo Wignjosoebroto (Member), Uli Parulian Sihombing (Member)

Executive Board: Uli Parulian Sihombing (Director), Pultoni (Program Manager), Siti Aminah (Programme Officer), Muhammad Khoirur Roziqin (Staff), Evi Yuliawati (Finance).

102