Blasphemy Law Challenge

Feb 9th, 2010, in News & Issues, by Patung

View the original article here.

24 Comments on “Blasphemy Law Challenge”

Burung Koel Says:
February 9th, 2010 at 12:20 pm
As an atheist, I always consider blasphemy to be a victimless crime.
Ross Says:
February 9th, 2010 at 9:44 pm
The NU leader is a disgrace.
So people want to start a new religon, and some others ‘ won’t stay quiet.’
Big Deal.
They can yammer all they want, but if they try thuggery to preserve their suppression of dissent, let the cops do something useful and arrest them. The footie stadium in Surabay could be used to hold all the crackers, FPI, HT, Muslim lawyers’ liberation front and anybody else who thinks they have the right to interfere with fellow-citizens; right to worship.

Then take them to court, require assurances of good behaviour, bind them over for a few years. First time they step out of line, pick ‘em up and send them down.
The leaderships of these Islamonazi outfits are gutless, and would not be happy to risk time in a ’sel non-mewah.’
Peace in our time. Just a suggestion.
Odinius Says:
February 10th, 2010 at 4:55 am
Won’t actually happen, but I appreciate the effort.

Indonesian democracy is certainly an improvement over what came before, but it’s still far too paternalist.
Patung Says:
February 10th, 2010 at 7:00 am
I’d always thought the blasphemy law was the one in the criminal code where it’s basically you can’t say bad things about a religion, I guess plenty of countries have a law like that even if it’s not enforced that much or at all but this is almost astonishing

It is forbidden for anyone deliberately and in public to do, encourage anyone to do, or attempt to gather support for doing, the [free or unorthodox] interpretation of any religion followed in Indonesia, or to carry out religious activities that [falsely] resemble any of those religions.

But yes it will go nowhere, one of the justices already echoed what NU and others say

Meanwhile, according to Constitutional Justice Achmad Sodiki, should the Article 1 be annulled, “If someone spoke in public about something which was contrary to religious dogmas then there was chaos. How would we settle this with the inexistence of the article?” asked Sodiki hypothetically.

http://www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php?page=website_eng.BeritaInternalLengkap&id=3479
Odinius Says:
February 10th, 2010 at 10:41 pm
Ireland just passed a new, more restrictive blasphemy law in 2009.

I will give Indonesia credit for general even-handed in the use of the law, but the critics are right: it directly impinges upon freedom of religion, which is constitutionally guaranteed in Indonesia. Since independence, this has been far more “theory, not practice.” The critics are trying to make it practical too. They won’t win, but I laud the efforts.
Patung Says:
February 11th, 2010 at 11:22 am
Ireland just passed a new, more restrictive blasphemy law in 2009.

Yeah I had that in the back of my head doing this post but this is more like a heresy law than a blasphemy one.

I will give Indonesia credit for general even-handed in the use of the law

I think it’s more a matter of the minorities just rarely making a complaint, whereas some of the loudmouth Muslim groups will jump to it quick smart. I mentioned it before but there’s an independent Catholic church in surabaya, I’m not exactly sure if they use the word ‘Catholic’ in their name but if they do then the official church would definitely have a case under this law if they went to the police but it seems they just decided to ignore the matter.
Burung Koel Says:
February 11th, 2010 at 11:52 am
The Irish blasphemy legislation defines it as:

“publishing or uttering matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters sacred by any religion, thereby intentionally causing outrage among a substantial number of adherents of that religion, with some defences permitted”.

I guess you could take anything to court on the basis of ‘grossly’, and ’some defences permitted’. Some atheists are already testing it out. Worth linking to the Bjork quote – “Fuck the Buddhists!” The European Court of Human rights might eventually have a say in it, too.

Patung’s right in that the Indonesian law is really about protecting organised religion. Stamping out heresies is part and parcel of how the major religions got where they are today, and consolidated their power and wealth.

The only upside for Indonesia is that Scientologists will still be banned.
ET Says:
February 11th, 2010 at 6:57 pm
I wonder what does it take for a set of superstitions to be elevated to the status of ‘Religion’. Is it a matter of numbers, power or money? Or all of it?
Odinius Says:
February 11th, 2010 at 10:54 pm
Patung said:

I think it’s more a matter of the minorities just rarely making a complaint, whereas some of the loudmouth Muslim groups will jump to it quick smart. I mentioned it before but there’s an independent Catholic church in surabaya, I’m not exactly sure if they use the word ‘Catholic’ in their name but if they do then the official church would definitely have a case under this law if they went to the police but it seems they just decided to ignore the matter.

That’s true, and for several reasons. First, minorities aren’t so bothered by stamping out heresy because they are more worried about making sure they can sustain their rights and privileges. Second, Catholicism is a centrally-controlled religion, where the center made the decision to liberalize in 1968, including on the issue of heresy. So, rather than it being up to the Catholics at the DA, it’s up to Rome, and Rome made an institutional decision to put anti-heretical campaigns behind it in 1968. Third, there is a concerted campaign in Indonesia by orthodox Muslims targeting non-orthodox Muslims, to try to ‘convert’ the non-orthodox to their version of orthodoxy. It’s akin to the Evangelical Protestant ‘mission’ to ‘convert the heathens,’ but is internally rather than externally focused.

I brought up Ireland, and the even-handedness of the blasphemy law in Indonesia with specific regards to blasphemy. Thinking about the Tempo Last Supper cover, etc.
Burung Koel Says:
February 12th, 2010 at 6:01 am
Rome made an institutional decision to put anti-heretical campaigns behind it in 1968.

Ahem.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25018662-952,00.html

That church in Surabaya probably needs to keep an eye out.
Odinius Says:
February 12th, 2010 at 7:34 am
Okay…made a GENERAL point to do so.

I forgot that my friend’s church (not in Indonesia) was excommunicated in the 90s for doing something or other…I think letting a woman lead prayers, but can’t remember.
boris Says:
February 12th, 2010 at 3:04 pm
friends. Here is an article lambasting the Blasphemy Laws.
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2010/02/11/blasphemy-law-a-shackle-indonesian-people.html

If any of you are on facebook, please join the facebook group: “Hapuskan PNPS 1965″
Odinius Says:
February 13th, 2010 at 12:17 am
From that editorial:

A recent example is the case of Welhelmina Holle in Masohi, Central Maluku, in December 2008. There were accusations and rumors that Holle, an elementary school teacher, had been offensive about a religion in one of his lectures in class.

As a result, a mob ran amok and destroyed 67 houses, a house of worship, and a community building. Hole was put on trial under the pretext of that law.

It is the existence of the blasphemy law that ignites conflict. It does not maintain harmony and peace.

Yes and no. It’s not the law that generates the conflict, but rather the understanding that the government should punish alleged blasphemers and not rioters. If the law went off the books, you wouldn’t see an end to this kind of misbehavior.

The only way that changes is if the government finally gets earnest about going after rioters, no matter who they are or what the circumstances of their amok massa are…
Ross Says:
February 13th, 2010 at 2:23 am
Yes, Odinius. I know I have railed about Lombok before, but the police there should be disbanded and reformed with respectable leadership. They have not rounded up the scum who mobbed Ahmadiyah despite having had video/ photographic evidence which clearly identifies many of thosewho took part.
Similarly, the arrest, eventually, of a handful of FPI/Laskar thugs does not exculpate the police on the Pancasila Day outrage at Monas, who watched as helpless women and children were terrorised by, let’s be honest, terrorists.
SBY would go down in history as the President who saved Indonesian democracy if he made a speech tomorrow and then acted to suppress islamist bigotry.
Ross Says:
February 13th, 2010 at 2:32 am
Re excommunication.
No problem with that. If a church or mosque refuses to let people take communion or attend Friday or other prayers etc., that’s their business, just as if a club has rules, they have the right to exclude members who don’t abide by them.
For example, if the Pope says his priests have to be men and a Catholic bishop says he wants to ordain priestesses, then the bish should be told to go off and start a new church with that doctrine.
That’s a far cry from burning the bishop’s house down and beating up the worshippers who fancy being led in worship by a lady in robes.
Odinius Says:
February 13th, 2010 at 2:59 am
My problem with Indonesia’s democratic government–and not just SBY, but all of the post-1998 presidents–is a lack of spine in upholding the basic laws stipulating that citizens cannot engage in wholesale violence or destruction of property as a means of expressing political views.

Like in many other places, the government and security forces think it’s best to just turn a blind eye and hope it all goes away. But that kind of leniency, particularly when there is also no attempt to build bridges among people on both sides, just demonstrates that rioting works.

The best solution is the old carrot-and-stick approach…bring communities together to address the sources of discontent and diviseness, while identifying and prosecuting the riot captains.
Burung Koel Says:
February 13th, 2010 at 5:02 am
(a)

Re excommunication.
No problem with that.

(b)

That’s a far cry from burning the bishop’s house down and beating up the worshippers who fancy being led in worship by a lady in robes.

Clearly this thread is about what’s needed to avoid (a) leading to (b).
Ross Says:
February 13th, 2010 at 6:58 am
If that’s the case, I’ve already offered the prescription. Effective police work to grab the (usually in this country Islamist) thugs, and courts who follow through with draconian punishments that will put the fear of God (!!) into the baddies..
ET Says:
February 13th, 2010 at 11:53 am
Odinius said

The best solution is the old carrot-and-stick approach…bring communities together to address the sources of discontent and diviseness, while identifying and prosecuting the riot captains.

Theoretically yes, but how many attempts have already been made – and I don’t mean just in Indonesia – at inter-faith dialogue and what are the results? Democratic deliberation may work for political and economic issues but when it comes to ideology or religion everybody retreats into their trenches to save the the ’soul of the child’, not to mention the position and privileges of those who believe it is their vocation to safeguard the morality of the nation.
I think only economic prosperity may remove the sharp edges of religious dispute, like it has been the case in the West and East Asia, provided the competing ideologies limit themselves to spiritual matters and refrain from pursuing a political agenda.
Odinius Says:
February 14th, 2010 at 12:15 am
Inter-faith dialog often works, as does inter-ethnic dialog. You just don’t read about the salacious results because they are, well, not salacious. They work when things are normal and boring. And, of course, the results are reversible, given the right structural conditions and the right set of a**holes leading the mobs. But then again, faith-hate and race-hate are also reversible, given the right set of structural conditions and the right set of good people calming down the mobs.

The presence or lack of the stick is one of those essential structural conditions. Peacemaking only works when there is also a clear line drawn in the sand, and enough people simply won’t tolerate it. Modern states are supposed to have a monopoly on legitimate violence; when they let others take some of it, mob rule emerges.

It’s like in the American South when the states would not go after lynch mobs, or like when India has failed to respond to its numerous riots (much more numerous and deadly than Indonesia’s). Regardless of place or time, the inaction of the state begets more extra-state violence by telling extra-state actors that violence works.
lewis Says:
February 15th, 2010 at 10:35 am
Di dalam NEGARA MODERN yang dipentingkan adalah kesejahteraan masyarakat , pertumbuhan ekonomi dan keamanan negara. Kalau hukum di Indonesia hanya memihak ke-agama-an atau pernefaan pendapat tentang ke-agama-an itu tidak akan memberikan KEDAMAIAN masyarakat di luar atau masyarakat tamu yang tinggal di dalam negara. Dan akan menjadi pertanyaan besar, bagaimana reputasi Indonesia di luar negri?
Saya berharap agar indonesia menjadi negara yang damai dan tidak mementingkan hukum yang memihak ke-agama-an.
hendrian Says:
February 26th, 2010 at 3:50 pm
It’s ridiculous to put religious party to hold an influencial power in politic. It’s also a fact that religious parties lack of seeing the current social fact and condition, they are held by their unchangeable doctrines. Refer to what Jusuf Kala said quran and bible were the only thing in the world that couldn’t be changed.
Such an unnessecary policy to allow religious doctrine to control the new modern open society. It’s just make people born again blind and back to the stone age. What difference they have with the social control system of the communist, which ironically they annhiliated during mid 60’s.
Astrajingga Says:
March 11th, 2010 at 6:05 am
So protestant should be banned in Indonesia, although it is one of Indonesian official religion? Isn’t Protestant, well, as far as I know, Martin Luther, taught peoples to personally or to freely interpret Jesus teaching and the Bible?
ronald Says:
March 13th, 2010 at 6:49 pm
free interpretation mustn’t be banned!!!!!