Friday, February 09, 2018 | 16:30 WIB

 Video   

Amidhan Shaberah and Musni Umar, experts presented by related parties, provided expertise in the trial of the judicial review of the Blasphemy Law, Thursday (9/2) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court Building. Photo by Public Relations/Ifa.

Sociologist from Ibnu Chaldun University, Musni Umar, emphasized the need for Ahmadiyah to free itself from the factor of community exclusivism. This was conveyed by Umar, who was presented as an Expert from the Indonesian Islamic Da’wah Council in the follow-up trial of the judicial review of Law Number 1 of 1965 concerning the Prevention, Abuse, and/or Blasphemy of Religion (Blasphemy Law) held by the Constitutional Court (MK) on Thursday (9/2).

Umar assessed that exclusivism is one of the five factors that make the Ahmadiyah problem not find a bright spot for resolution. The Related Party Expert explained that this exclusive nature is considered because the Ahmadiyah community lives only with its community and not with the whole community so that this in social relations of the community is very easy to cause suspicion.

In the fourteenth trial of case No. 56/PUU-XV/2017, Umar mentioned several factors influencing the lack of resolution of the Ahmadiyah problem. He mentioned theological factors, holy books, community mosques, and the absence of a comprehensive resolution of the problem as things that caused the differences between the Ahmadiyah and Indonesian society dominated by Islam to not be resolved. In relation to the absence of a comprehensive resolution of the Ahmadiyah differences, Umar explained that since 2009 to 2018 various groups have raised the problems faced by the Ahmadiyah.

“The root of this problem is the existence of Law Number 1 of 1965 concerning the Prevention, Abuse, and/or Blasphemy of Religion (Blasphemy Law) which was born during the Guided Democracy era, but this law is still very much needed to prevent blasphemy before the birth of the new law,” said Umar.

Regarding theological factors, Umar continued, stating that in social life, society considers Ahmadiyah to be heretical so that they expect Ahmadiyah followers to return to Islamic teachings or enter non-Islamic groups or ask the government to disband the community. Regarding the holy book, Umar mentioned that in the Ahmadiyah community there is the Book of Tadzirah, while Islam has the Qur’an. Therefore, according to Umar, this is a problem that drives conflict.

“The ruling from the World Islamic League and the MUI Fatwa stating that Ahmadiyah is heretical is not the cause of Muslims committing violence against Ahmadiyah, but rather the passion of Muslims who are awakening because their Islamic religious beliefs are being shaken up,” explained Umar.

Next, the factor of the existence of a community mosque built only for the Ahmadiyah community, Umar actually admitted that the mosque is a place of worship for anyone and a place to carry out social activities. However, this is not the case with what happens in the field for these religious activities.

Polemic in Society

On the same occasion, Former Head of the Halal Product Division of the MUI, Amidhan Shaberah, in his statement conveyed the occurrence of acts of violence against the Ahmadiyah. Amidhan said that there had been previous efforts made by Islamic figures to find common ground regarding the Ahmadiyah problem.

“Islam agrees that Ahmadiyah deviates from the teachings of Islam. Therefore, the government must be present at every sign of violence that befalls them so that every individual is free to practice their worship and beliefs, but it must be emphasized that the state also has the authority to regulate it so as not to violate the freedom of others,” explained Amidhan.

At the end of his statement, Amidhan expressed his hope that Ahmadiyah would remain in their group and not try to spread their teachings to other parties and that the state would always be present at every sign of violence that befell Ahmadiyah. “Thus, there is no need to change the existing law because it could cause new chaos. So, I remain firm in my position that there be no change to the a quo law,” Amidhan explained.

The Applicant is an Ahmadiyah follower who claims that his constitutional rights have been violated due to the enactment of Articles 1, 2, and 3 of the Blasphemy Law. In his petition, the Applicant considers the Joint Decree of the Minister of Religious Affairs, the Attorney General, and the Minister of Home Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia concerning Warnings and Orders to Followers, Members, and/or Members of the Board of the Indonesian Ahmadiyah Congregation (JAI) and Community Members (SKB 3 Ministers) which was prepared based on the three articles is detrimental to the Applicants. The SKB 3 Ministers stipulates that Ahmadiyah is a deviant sect. As a result, the Applicants are directly impacted, shackled, and constrained, and even their rights to have a religion and to practice worship are suppressed.

The domino effect felt by Ahmadiyah adherents includes the Applicants not being able to worship in the mosque they built due to burning and sealing, marriage registration at the KUA, and the eviction of the Applicants from their place of residence. For this reason, the Applicants request that the a quo article be in conflict with Article 28C paragraph (2), Article 28D paragraph (1), Article 28E paragraph (1) and (2), Article 28I paragraph (2), Article 28G paragraph (1), Article 29 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution and does not have binding legal force as long as it is interpreted, suspected against citizens in the Ahmadiyah community who only worship in their place of worship internally and not in public. (Sri Pujianti/LA) 

source https://www.mkri.id/index.php?page=web.Berita&id=14287