On Ahmadiyah
May 4, 2008 by verdinand
Filed under HAM dan Demokrasi, Politik
Ladies and gentlemen,
I’m sure all of us already knew the controversial case of Ahmadiyah. The Coordinating Board for Monitoring Religious Beliefs in Society (Bakor Pakem), the body that oversees (unorthodox) religious activity in Indonesia, has recommended that all activities of the sect Jemaah Ahmadiyah Indonesia (JAI) be stopped and the JAI dissolved. In other side, Adnan Buyung Nasution, member of President Advisory Board, disagree of this decision. He has spoken to the President that by prohibiting Ahmadiyah sect to pray will violate the basic rights of people to exercise their religious right. He added, Indonesia has suffered bad precedent when communist people (PKI) has been murdered mysteriously after new government (ORBA) declare to fight against communism in Indonesia.
I will not discuss whether Ahmadiyah is deviant or not. I know this is a sensitive issue since the issue comes around the belief of Islam. I just want to say two major thing in this writing. First, government should encourage conflicted groups to have intensive dialogue. Second, goverment must ensure the security of Ahmadiyah follower. Let me explain these arguments.
In my view, the role of government is to facilitate and assist. The decision maker is the people itself. Dwi Ardhanariswari Sundrijo in the latest Global Journal (Vol.9 Mei 2008) argue that Asian people fits better to accommodative-multiculturalism which emphasizes on communication and consensus. In the latest TEMPO Magazine, Amien Rais stated his disagreement on the decision BAKOR PAKEM which impose decision without any comprehensive-dialogue before. The decision should come from the society not by the government. This is what we called “bottom-down approach”: people create solution, and then government create the law. Thus, I propose an national dialogue between Ahmadiyah communities with the protester. This forum will determine whether Ahmadiyah should be banned or not. Then, the goverment should supervise the implementation of the agreement.
Second, EVEN IF the decision will ban activities of Ahmadiyah (please underline “even if”), goverment must protect their security of Ahmadiyah follower. Why? Ahmadiyah follower have been become the target of violence. The worst is the burning of Ahmadiyah mosque in Sukabumi. A mass of hundreds of unidentified people burned a mosque and ransacked a school in a Jemaah Ahmadiyah compound at Parakan Salak in Sukabumi district, West Java. I also found incitement video by Islam Defender Front urging its follower to urder Ahmadiyah member. (The video is here). We do agree that violence is not the solution. Violence will only bring bigger problem to the society. Therefore, even if goverment outlaw Ahmadiyah, goverment must ensure the security of Ahmadiyah communities.
I do believe we can solve the problem of Ahmadiyah peacefully. Not only by government but also by the society. The dialogue should be the first priority. No violence, no provocative speech. Government must ensure the protection of religious rights. In conclusion, comprehensive dialogue between the conflicted groups is the real solution of this problem. Peace for Indonesia!
Verdinand Siahaan, contributor of portalHI.
I totally agree with you Verdinand. The government here is needed to facilitate the dialog between conflicted people instead of making things worse off by irresponsibly banning the sect without prior dialog.
Anyway, I have seen the video mentioned by Indonesia Matters. It is a pity that some of religious leaders say that kind of things which will just raise people’s furor.
What do you know about Islam Ver?
betul sekali bung verdi
Hi Filia!
I think your question is quite unclear.
Would you mind telling me the reason why you ask that question.
Again, I’m not talking about the deviancy of Ahmadiyah in Islam values. I understand that this is a complex issue but what I want to say is goverment role in conflict management. My thesis is goverment should be a solid facilitator not the sole decision maker.
Thx Filia!
I agree with your argument that the government should be a solid facilitator rather than a sole decision maker. But then comes the new problem with the islamic community itself.
Those (moslems) who belief that Ahmadiyah is way too much different with Islam will demand the government to ban Ahmadiyah.
Unfortunately, when the government is about to facilitate Ahmadiyah and Islamic community for an open dialogue, this action will be seen as a weak stance of government in handling Ahmadiyah. Also a dilemmatic position for the government.
Now the question would be how to ease the tension of the people.
And btw, some say that this issue has been raised to divert peoples attention from government’s plan to raise fuel price… what about that? :p
What is not clear is “ban Ahmadiyah but protect the followers”. How? Dissolve the organisation but let the follower still conduct their worship? This is more difficult to control, if the aim is to “purify” Indonesian muslim from the teaching. The teaching will spread like thread of mushroom: unnoticed.
And, to comment on Andika’s opinion, isn’t the dilemma comes after hardliner groups pressing the government to ban? Since a very long time Ahmadiyyah lived side by side with other muslims in Indonesia: no massive conversion, by the way. We know each others position. Thus, what is actually the purpose to ban?
To me, the solution is: ban the hardliner groups.
Pilih Gusdur menjadi presiden 2009, agar kejadian-kejadian yang menimpa Ahmadiyah tidak terulang kembali. Hidup Gusdur. Comment dari seorang Gusdurian.
Saya yakin bahwa masalah Ahmadiyah bukanlah masalah hubungan Negara - Masyarakat atau diskursus Negara - Agama. Ini adalah masalah internal ummat Islam. Tugas pemerintah sebenarnya cukup jadi wasit. Jangan lupa, wasit bisa memberi kartu kuning, bahkan kartu merah.
Ilustrasinya gini. Ada seseorang yang mengaku jurnalis, punya kartu pers, dll. Tapi perilaku dia “bodrex”. Dan, secara umum perilaku ini dianggap bukan perilaku jurnalis. Apakah pemerintah bisa menghukum si jurnalis bodrex? Kalau ada undang-undang yang menyebut bahwa perilaku jurnalisme bodrex itu adalah melanggar, maka pemerintah bisa menghukum. Apalagi jika komunitas jurnalis menggugat hal itu.
Nah, dalam konteks Ahmadiyah, sekte ini ibarat jurnalis bodrex itu. Mereka mengaku Islam, tetapi meyakini sesuatu yang tidak mungkin diterima dalam Islam. Apa yang diyakini itu (yang kemudian jadi akar persoalan) adalah hal yang sangat prinsipil. Yaitu masalah kenabian Rasulullah, dan Kitab Suci Al Qur’an. Dalam Islam: “gak ada nabis setelah Muhammad SAW, gak ada kitab suci selain Al Qur’an”.
Jika perbedaan itu adalah pada persoalan implementasi atau tafsir, tidak ada masalah. Tetapi persoalan ini adalah substansi.
Para ulama sudah bilang berkali-kali, kalau Ahmadiyah mengaku mereka bukan Islam, maka persoalan selesai. Mereka boleh hidup tenang disini, boleh beraktivitas dengan damai. Sepanjang mereka masih memakai label ISLAM, masalah tidak akan pernah selesai.
Nah, sekarang pemerintah harus gimana dalam konteks ini?
Please correct me if I happen to be wrong, but this attitude perhaps, could be explained if we take a look at Javanese philosophy which defy “difference”.
In very basic sense, anything that against harmony and collective peace is treated as betrayer. Ego must be sacrificed and we must listen to the demand of Superego.
Perhaps this is also sign that Indonesia’s government, or perhaps people, that culturally dominated the government could not accept a full democracy because they are too much different from their very basic mindset.
Iain Johnston has coined term “Strategic Culture” to explain irrationality among decision makers. He explicitly stated that rather than affected by rationality (maximizing profit, minimizing losses), state leaders, government are more influenced by their belief system or what they think right.
Indonesia’s repressive behaviour is pretty much explained with this approach actually: being different is not good, and live without it.
Again, correct me if my judgement is happen to be wrong.
thanks Calvin, Jaka and Sherwin for the informative input.
Fifteen Rights, saya agak bingung dengan analogi Anda.
Kalau komunitas pers-nya nggak sepakat gimana?
Saya setuju bahwa kasus Ahmadiyah adalah kasus internal. Berarti penyelesaiannya juga harus secara internal. Melibatkan pihak luar seperti pemerintah hanya terjadi apabila komunitas internal tidak bisa menyelesaikannya.
Oleh karena itu, komunitas Islam harus sepakat dulu apa jalan keluar untuk kasus Ahmadiyah ini. Kesepakatan tidak akan ada kalau tidak ada dialog antara pengikut Ahmadiyah dengan masyarakat Islam lainnya.
@ gusdurian: aduh…gus dur itu bukanny salah satu persoalan bangsa. tu org pinter bgt tp suka kontroversial…selalu bikin heboh…..
“Tidak ada paksaan dalam agama..”
Mungkin dunia sudah melupakan hal ini.
this is the Fact! demokrasi belum berjalan baik di negara kita..
tp denger2 ni,,Ahmadiyah ada peran orang luar lo,,ada kaitan dengan CIA(serem ni bilangnya)..coba tanya2 de ma yang punya om di BIN..
serem deh,,,
yang penting,,JANGAN mau DIPECAH BELAH! MERDEKA!