30 December, 2024

30 Desember 2024

Apparently, in 2024 minorities will still be considered a social problem in Indonesia. This happens because system relations are unequal. For example, the stronger the stronger the more powerful and the weak increasingly weakened. Ultimately creating a system of discrimination, subordination, and even violence at all levels.

We can see this phenomenon in the case of discrimination against the Ahmadiyah Congregation who wanted to hold a Jalsa Salana (annual meeting) in Kuningan. Opposition was not only carried out by the community and the Regional Government Communication Forum (Forkopimda), but also by the Kuningan government. This unilateral prohibition is based on maintaining security and conduciveness and West Java Governor Regulation number 12 of 2011 concerning the prohibition of the activities of the Indonesian Ahmadiyah Congregation in West Java.

I consider that the ban shows that the state is losing to pressure from intolerant groups, and at the same time it is the state that is the main source of this discriminatory behavior. Ahmadiyah is discriminated against structurally by the state through unequal regulations on the one hand, and the majority Muslim community on the other hand.

In simple terms, by continuing to consider Ahmadiyah as heretical, the government with its superiority has become the main key for crazy policy makers to be used as a means of legitimation and justification for carrying out violence by the anti-Ahmadiyah majority group. Meanwhile, this majority, with its theology of exclusivism, claims that it is the most truthful, therefore it is permissible to get confused and carry out attacks. On that basis, both of them confirmed each other in their disgraceful actions.

Simalakama fruit

Now, Ahmadiyah is like a simalakama fruit; whatever the choice, it is seen as wrong. In social and state life, for example, they are accused of being subversive or opportunistic. On a religious basis, they are stigmatized as a problematic group. The state and the majority of society united to carry out elimination simultaneously. 

In the book Minority Dilemma in Indonesia: Variety, Dynamics and Controversy (2020), it is stated that discriminatory practices against minorities such as Ahmadiyah or those who still maintain their ancestral religion take place in a structured, systematic and massive manner. This practice is rooted in the “politics of distinction” between so-called religions and beliefs as recorded in no. 1/PNPS/1965. 

The law explains that there are only three categories of religions that are approved in Indonesia: 1) six recognized religions; 2), groups that are allowed to exist, such as Baha'is, Sikhs, and Jews; and 3), group of believers. The law does not accommodate the rights of religious groups and two minority religious groups in society, which are currently being neglected, such as Shia and Ahmadiyah. 

The process of intolerance, discrimination and minorityization of two groups (the state and the majority) towards Ahmadiyah has been going on for a long time and is truly dark. On various occasions, Ahmadiyah religious activities were banned, intimidated, expelled and even persecuted. They are imagined to be left behind, underdeveloped, isolated and treated as if they have no history, arguments and social agency. What happened then was that they were deemed to have no control over their rights.  

Their civil rights as citizens, starting from obtaining marriage certificates, birth certificates, KTPs, family cards, access to education, employment, traditions and economic resources, places of worship and even burial of bodies are denied. As a result of this marginalization, the existing system in society is controlled by a handful of people. And the unfortunate impact of this marginalization is that from 1949 to 1992, there were 517 dead religious sects throughout Indonesia. What happened next was “cultural genocide”.

The marginalization of socio-economic and cultural-religious rights for minorities such as the Ahmadiyah further sharpens religious and ethnic boundaries and confirms a systematic pattern of state discrimination against religious minority groups in Indonesia. And this is in contrast to President Prabowo’s message which emphasized the importance of maintaining harmony within the nation and state.

Surprisingly, the majority group and the state know very well that discriminatory treatment of Ahmadiyah has eliminated religious tolerance and moderation. They know that this action has eliminated what they themselves were fighting for, namely unity and religious harmony as the key to national prosperity. Does Ahmadiyah deserve to be recognized as a religion, only if it is ready to be marketed for the sake of tourism, tolerance ratings, democracy in the academic and international markets?

As a nation, it seems we are still trapped in the values ​​of virality as an analogue of imagery. Ahmadiyah will not be helped if it does not impact the helper's rating. This is the current condition of the Ahmadiyah which seems to be alone. In Indonesia, Ahmadiyah is a mustadh'afin (oppressed group). He was oppressed right and left: the state and the majority.

Gus Dur membela Ahmadiyah

If there was Gus Dur, Ahmadiyah would definitely be defended, because he has rights as an Indonesian citizen. Gus Dur's stance is clear: "If you make propaganda that Ahmadiyah is heretical or guilty, yes, go ahead. "But, if you eliminate Ahmadiyah, that's not right, because it conflicts with the 1945 Constitution which guarantees freedom of opinion, freedom of thought," explained Gus Dur to journalists at the Nahdlatul Ulama (PBNU) Executive Board Office, Jalan Kramat Raya, Jakarta, Monday (9/6 ).  

 When Ahmadiyah was attacked by the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) and there were calls for Ahmadiyah to be disbanded, Gus Dur again defended: "As long as I am alive, I will defend the Ahmadiyah movement. Whether you understand or not, it's up to you!"   Gus Dur was willing and determined to defend Ahmadiyah life in Indonesia as long as he was still alive. According to him, the defense was based on the truth of defending the mustadh'afin and in order to uphold the 1945 Constitution.

For Gus Dur, Ahmadiyah's existence was protected by the laws in force in Indonesia. Therefore, he has the right to live and develop in the country.   If the government is afraid to uphold justice for Ahmadiyah in Kuningan, this is the same as the state not properly enforcing the 1945 Constitution. According to Gus Dur, if a government does not have the courage, society will continue to conflict. "It's the government's fault for not having the courage," he explained.  

If the government is afraid to uphold justice for Ahmadiyah in Kuningan, this is the same as the state not properly enforcing the 1945 Constitution. According to Gus Dur, if a government does not have the courage, society will continue to conflict. “It’s the government’s fault for not having the courage,” he explained. Even if the Ahmadiyah did not find a place to take refuge because the government could no longer protect them, Gus Dur offered his residence in Ciganjur.

Gus Dur emphasized that he was ready to become an expert witness for the Ahmadiyah if it was disbanded by the government. And many times Gus Dur also put up a body and advised Anshor to protect minority groups such as the Ahmadiyah.

With this defense, Gus Dur is reminding us of the limits regarding relations between the state, citizens and religion. I agree with Gus Dur, that recognition of tolerance, moderation, the constitution and nationalism promises mutual benefit in a social and global community. For this reason, we must maintain religion, the state and citizens based on humanism and justice towards differences, especially for oppressed groups such as the Ahmadiyah.

source https://islami.co/tahun-berganti-dan-kita-masih-dengar-hikayat-pilu-ahmadiyah-dipinggirkan-negara-dimuliakan-gus-dur/

Editor’s Note. Google translate being used…