Indonesia memang bukan negara agama, tapi aspirasi keagamaan tidak mungkin diabaikan begitu saja.... more Indonesia memang bukan negara agama, tapi aspirasi keagamaan tidak mungkin diabaikan begitu saja. Sebagai negara yang mendasarkan dirinya pada prinsip “Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa”, Indonesia membuka ruang akomodasi aspirasi keagamaan menjadi kebijakan negara. Pertanyaannya, apakah semua aspirasi keagamaan bisa, bahkan harus diakomodasi melalui kebijakan? Kalau tidak, sampai batas mana akomodasi itu dilakukan? Pertanyaan-pertanyaan inilah yang ingin dijawab pidato ini. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) terkait persoalan keagamaan akan dijadikan optik utama untuk menjawab persoalan tersebut. Putusan-putusan MK pada dasarnya merupakan bagian dari politik hukum.
The citizenship of non-Muslims has long been a matter of debate in Islamic politics (fiqh al-siyā... more The citizenship of non-Muslims has long been a matter of debate in Islamic politics (fiqh al-siyāsah). The problem arose especially after the new world order in the early 20th century, in which citizenship was no longer based on religion. In the literature of fiqh al-siyāsah, the status of non-Muslims is divided into four categories: 1) kāfir żimmī (non-Muslims who receive protection); 2) kāfir ḥarbī (infidels who are permissible for an assault); 3) kāfir mu'āhad (infidels who are bound by a peace treaty with Muslims); and 4) kāfir musta'mān (infidels who are given asylum in an Islamic country). This paper discusses one of the dictums of Nahdlatul Ulama (NU)-the largest Islamic organization in Indonesia-which did not situate non-Muslims in the category of infidels as known in Islamic political doctrine. Rather, it considered non-Muslims as citizens. This is field study by qualitative approach. Primary data was collected by interviews with NU schoolars, direct observation in the process of discussion and relevant data tracing, including debate in the media. This paper argues that NU's decision regarding the status of non-Muslim citizens is a response to changes in the new world order based on tradition. This is the consequence of NU's acceptance toward the nation-state notion that sees the equality of all citizens.
The citizenship of non-Muslims has long been a matter of debate in Islamic politics (fiqh al-siyā... more The citizenship of non-Muslims has long been a matter of debate in Islamic politics (fiqh al-siyāsah). The problem arose especially after the new world order in the early 20th century, in which citizenship was no longer based on religion. In the literature of fiqh al-siyāsah, the status of non-Muslims is divided into four categories: 1) kāfir żimmī (non-Muslims who receive protection); 2) kāfir ḥarbī (infidels who are permissible for an assault); 3) kāfir mu'āhad (infidels who are bound by a peace treaty with Muslims); and 4) kāfir musta'mān (infidels who are given asylum in an Islamic country). This paper discusses one of the dictums of Nahdlatul Ulama (NU)-the largest Islamic organization in Indonesia-which did not situate non-Muslims in the category of infidels as known in Islamic political doctrine. Rather, it considered non-Muslims as citizens. This is field study by qualitative approach. Primary data was collected by interviews with NU schoolars, direct observation in the process of discussion and relevant data tracing, including debate in the media. This paper argues that NU's decision regarding the status of non-Muslim citizens is a response to changes in the new world order based on tradition. This is the consequence of NU's acceptance toward the nation-state notion that sees the equality of all citizens.
It is not uncommon for people to refer to Indonesia as the largest, most tolerant, and most moder... more It is not uncommon for people to refer to Indonesia as the largest, most tolerant, and most moderate Muslim country in the world. Indonesian officials and diplomats often use such expressions in their speeches. However, what is the origin of this tolerance and moderation, and how have they been retained all these decades? Clearly, their continuing presence has involved a complex social-historical struggle.
One of crucial issue in Muslim countries, such as Indonesia, is relation between religion and the... more One of crucial issue in Muslim countries, such as Indonesia, is relation between religion and the state. Even though Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution were claimed final, but it did not necessarily mean that position of religion, state and human rights is final and clear. The negotiation between religion, state and human rights not only on political forum like at The House of Representative, but also in Constitutional Court session. There are debates and opinion contestations. The problem is what is the politics of law accommodation towards religious aspirations, which the Constitutional Court has built through its decisions and arguments? Through analysis on two issues: 1) freedom of religion and belief; and 2) marriage law, this article argues that Constitutional Court's decision, especially relation between religion, state and human rights not only based on law consideration, but also on non-law consideration. Regarding private law, the Constitutional Court opened a fairly wide accommodation, so that more religious aspects would be accommodated by the state even with limited reforms. The limit of accommodation is an Islamic criminal law that cannot be made exclusively for Muslims. The accommodation of Islamic criminal law is only possible if the norms are incorporated into the national criminal law through a process of rational objectification. Based on this argument, continuous negotiation and contestation between religion, state and human rights will go on since Indonesia is not a religious state, which is based only on one religion, nor a secular state, which does not consider religion at all.
One of crucial issue in Muslim countries, such as Indonesia, is relation between religion and the... more One of crucial issue in Muslim countries, such as Indonesia, is relation between religion and the state. Even though Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution were claimed final, but it did not necessarily mean that position of religion, state and human rights is final and clear. The negotiation between religion, state and human rights not only on political forum like at The House of Representative, but also in Constitutional Court session. There are debates and opinion contestations. The problem is what is the politics of law accommodation towards religious aspirations, which the Constitutional Court has built through its decisions and arguments? Through analysis on two issues: 1) freedom of religion and belief; and 2) marriage law, this article argues that Constitutional Court's decision, especially relation between religion, state and human rights not only based on law consideration, but also on non-law consideration. Regarding private law, the Constitutional Court opened a fairly wide accommodation, so that more religious aspects would be accommodated by the state even with limited reforms. The limit of accommodation is an Islamic criminal law that cannot be made exclusively for Muslims. The accommodation of Islamic criminal law is only possible if the norms are incorporated into the national criminal law through a process of rational objectification. Based on this argument, continuous negotiation and contestation between religion, state and human rights will go on since Indonesia is not a religious state, which is based only on one religion, nor a secular state, which does not consider religion at all. Abstrak: Salah satu isu krusial di negara Muslim, tidak terkecuali Indonesia, adalah relasi agama dan negara. Meskipun Pancasila dan Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 dinyatakan final, namun bukan berarti kedudukan agama, negara, dan hak asasi manusia sudah final dan jelas. Perundingan antara agama, negara dan hak asasi manusia tidak hanya di forum politik seperti di Dewan Perwakilan Daerah (DPR), tapi juga di sidang Mahkamah Konstitusi. Ada perdebatan dan kontestasi pendapat. Persoalannya, bagaimana politik akomodasi hukum terhadap aspirasi agama yang dibangun Mahkamah Konstitusi melalui putusan dan dalilnya? Melalui analisis terhadap dua isu: 1) kebebasan beragama dan berkeyakinan; dan 2) hukum perkawinan, pasal ini berpendapat bahwa putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi khususnya hubungan antara agama, negara dan hak asasi manusia tidak hanya berdasarkan pertimbangan hukum, tetapi juga pertimbangan non hukum. Terkait hukum privat, Mahkamah Konstitusi membuka akomodasi yang cukup luas, sehingga lebih banyak aspek keagamaan yang diakomodasi oleh negara meski dengan reformasi yang terbatas. Batasan akomodasi adalah hukum pidana Islam yang tidak dapat dibuat secara eksklusif untuk Muslim. Akomodasi hukum pidana Islam hanya dimungkinkan jika norma-norma tersebut dimasukkan ke dalam hukum pidana nasional melalui proses objektifikasi yang rasional. Berdasarkan argumen ini, negosiasi dan kontestasi yang terus menerus antara agama, negara dan hak asasi manusia akan terus berlangsung karena Indonesia bukanlah negara agama yang hanya didasarkan pada satu agama, bukan pula negara sekuler, yang sama sekali tidak mempertimbangkan agama. Kata kunci: Mahkamah Konstitusi; HAM; penghayat kepercayaan; penodaan agama; hukum perkawinan.
International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, Vol. 24, Issue 04,, 2020
Religious-based violence and intolerance are of the issues that have made religious life dynamic ... more Religious-based violence and intolerance are of the issues that have made religious life dynamic and peculiar in post-reform Indonesia. Some small groups sects considered as a heterodox become victims of violence. Although religious communities in Indonesia are generally tolerant, they tend to be intolerant of heterodox sects accused of heresy. This paper aims to investigate the factors that have led Muslims to be intolerant to heterodox sect groups. By tracing the data of intolerance and violence against heterodox sects, investigating religious fat was and some court decisions against heterodox denominations in Indonesia and deploying political approach, this paper argues that Islamic intellectualism from the earlier was less amiable to the heterodox group that met with a new outgrowth of the theocratic constitutionalism in different parts of the world. This paper also argues that the attitude is a continuation of the pattern of sect relations in Islam that is more colored by hostility and mutual disregard and is not merely because of differences in interpreting Islamic orthodoxy, but also of political competition.
RENUNGAN Denny JA melalui tulisan berjudul "NKRI Bersyariah atau Ruang Publik yang Manusiawi" mer... more RENUNGAN Denny JA melalui tulisan berjudul "NKRI Bersyariah atau Ruang Publik yang Manusiawi" merupakan perdebatan lama yang oleh sebagian kalangan belum dianggap tuntas. Seruan Rizieq Shihab tentang NKRI bersyariah merupakan cermin dari sisa-sisa pertarungan ideologi masa lalu yang residunya masih menggumpal. Apa itu NKRI bersyariah? Tidak pernah jelas! Penggagagasnya juga tidak pernah dengan serius menawarkan konsepnya yang bisa diuji publik. Hal yang kita dengar hanya teriakan-teriakan dalam pidato atau dalam kerumunan demonstrasi. Jika Denny JA merasa perlu memberi tanggapan khusus tentang NKRI bersyariah, merupakan kemewahan luar biasa. Jika diringkas, Denny JA ingin menegaskan, tidak terlalu penting label NKRI bersyariah. Hal yang jauh lebih penting adalah pentingnya memperjuangkan dan merawat ruang publik yang manusiawi. Denny JA seolah ingin menegaskan, jika ruang publik yang manusiawi bisa terwujud, maka dengan sendirinya nilai-nilai syariat Islam tegak. Namun, teriak-teriak NKRI bersyariah tanpa visi penciptaan ruang public yang manusiawi justru bisa menjebak orang pada otoritarianisme beragama. Jebakan itu menyimpan bara lain, berupa pemutlakan atas kebenarannya sendiri yang akan dengan mudah menuduh orang lain yang berbeda pikiran sebagai anti Syariah. Dibalik jargon NKRI bersyariah yang tidak jelas konsepsinya, kita bisa memperkirakan bahwa para penggagasnya hendak menyampaikan bahwa NKRI yang ada sekarang belum bersyariah. Di sini kita belum bisa dipastikan, apakah belum syar'i-nya Indonesia terkait dengan dasar negara Pancasila dan konstitusi UUD 1945, ataukah hanya pada peraturan perundang-undangan di bawah konstitusi. Sisa Konflik Ideologi Terlepas dari ketidakjelasan konseptual, satu hal yang bisa saya pastikan, teriakan NKRI berasyariah merupakan sisa-sisa konflik ideologi masa lalu, terutama pada masa-masa awal kemerdekaan. NKRI bersyariah merupakan kelanjutan dari kekecewaan dihapusnya "Piagam Jakarta" dalam perdebatan dasar negara pada masa awal kemerdekaan. Mereka masih meratapi pencoretan tujuh kata Piagam Jakarta, "Ketuhanan dengan kewajiban menjalankan syariat Islam bagi pemeluk-pemeluknya" dianggap sebagai "kelicikan sejarah" yang masih gelap. Siapa sebenarnya orang-orang Indonesia Timur yang mempersoalkan dan mengancam tidak mau bergabung dengan negara Indonesia jika "Piagam Jakarta" dipertahankan. Mereka seolah ingin mengatakan, pengaborsian Piagam Jakarta adalah penipuan sejarah. Seruan NKRI bersyariah merupakan bentuk lain dari keinginan untuk menghidupkan kembali Piagam Jakarta. Pencoretan Piagam Jakarta menjadikan negara Indonesia kurang, atau bahkan tidak syar'i.
—One of the crucial issues in countries with a Muslim majority, not to mention Indonesia, is the ... more —One of the crucial issues in countries with a Muslim majority, not to mention Indonesia, is the relationship between the religion and the state. Although Pancasila and the Constitution (UUD 1945) are claimed final, it does not mean that the position of religion, state, and human rights is also final. Practically, the state, religion and human rights negotiate one another, and sometimes even create tension. Here, the negotiations between religion, state, and human rights are not only in political forums such as House of Representatives but also in the Constitutional Court sessions. Debate and argument contestation often occur in the forums. This article aims at identifying debate and argument contestation in the Constitutional Court. In theory, it focuses on two issues: 1) freedom of religion and belief; and 2) Marriage law. The result of the study argues that the Constitutional Court's decision, especially regarding the relationship among religion, state, and human rights, is based not only on legal considerations but also on non-legal considerations. According to this argument, negotiations and contestations among the three will always continue as Indonesia is neither one religion-based state nor a secular state that does not profess a religion at all.
Indonesia memang bukan negara agama, tapi aspirasi keagamaan tidak mungkin diabaikan begitu saja.... more Indonesia memang bukan negara agama, tapi aspirasi keagamaan tidak mungkin diabaikan begitu saja. Sebagai negara yang mendasarkan dirinya pada prinsip “Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa”, Indonesia membuka ruang akomodasi aspirasi keagamaan menjadi kebijakan negara. Pertanyaannya, apakah semua aspirasi keagamaan bisa, bahkan harus diakomodasi melalui kebijakan? Kalau tidak, sampai batas mana akomodasi itu dilakukan? Pertanyaan-pertanyaan inilah yang ingin dijawab pidato ini. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) terkait persoalan keagamaan akan dijadikan optik utama untuk menjawab persoalan tersebut. Putusan-putusan MK pada dasarnya merupakan bagian dari politik hukum.
The citizenship of non-Muslims has long been a matter of debate in Islamic politics (fiqh al-siyā... more The citizenship of non-Muslims has long been a matter of debate in Islamic politics (fiqh al-siyāsah). The problem arose especially after the new world order in the early 20th century, in which citizenship was no longer based on religion. In the literature of fiqh al-siyāsah, the status of non-Muslims is divided into four categories: 1) kāfir żimmī (non-Muslims who receive protection); 2) kāfir ḥarbī (infidels who are permissible for an assault); 3) kāfir mu'āhad (infidels who are bound by a peace treaty with Muslims); and 4) kāfir musta'mān (infidels who are given asylum in an Islamic country). This paper discusses one of the dictums of Nahdlatul Ulama (NU)-the largest Islamic organization in Indonesia-which did not situate non-Muslims in the category of infidels as known in Islamic political doctrine. Rather, it considered non-Muslims as citizens. This is field study by qualitative approach. Primary data was collected by interviews with NU schoolars, direct observation in the process of discussion and relevant data tracing, including debate in the media. This paper argues that NU's decision regarding the status of non-Muslim citizens is a response to changes in the new world order based on tradition. This is the consequence of NU's acceptance toward the nation-state notion that sees the equality of all citizens.
The citizenship of non-Muslims has long been a matter of debate in Islamic politics (fiqh al-siyā... more The citizenship of non-Muslims has long been a matter of debate in Islamic politics (fiqh al-siyāsah). The problem arose especially after the new world order in the early 20th century, in which citizenship was no longer based on religion. In the literature of fiqh al-siyāsah, the status of non-Muslims is divided into four categories: 1) kāfir żimmī (non-Muslims who receive protection); 2) kāfir ḥarbī (infidels who are permissible for an assault); 3) kāfir mu'āhad (infidels who are bound by a peace treaty with Muslims); and 4) kāfir musta'mān (infidels who are given asylum in an Islamic country). This paper discusses one of the dictums of Nahdlatul Ulama (NU)-the largest Islamic organization in Indonesia-which did not situate non-Muslims in the category of infidels as known in Islamic political doctrine. Rather, it considered non-Muslims as citizens. This is field study by qualitative approach. Primary data was collected by interviews with NU schoolars, direct observation in the process of discussion and relevant data tracing, including debate in the media. This paper argues that NU's decision regarding the status of non-Muslim citizens is a response to changes in the new world order based on tradition. This is the consequence of NU's acceptance toward the nation-state notion that sees the equality of all citizens.
It is not uncommon for people to refer to Indonesia as the largest, most tolerant, and most moder... more It is not uncommon for people to refer to Indonesia as the largest, most tolerant, and most moderate Muslim country in the world. Indonesian officials and diplomats often use such expressions in their speeches. However, what is the origin of this tolerance and moderation, and how have they been retained all these decades? Clearly, their continuing presence has involved a complex social-historical struggle.
One of crucial issue in Muslim countries, such as Indonesia, is relation between religion and the... more One of crucial issue in Muslim countries, such as Indonesia, is relation between religion and the state. Even though Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution were claimed final, but it did not necessarily mean that position of religion, state and human rights is final and clear. The negotiation between religion, state and human rights not only on political forum like at The House of Representative, but also in Constitutional Court session. There are debates and opinion contestations. The problem is what is the politics of law accommodation towards religious aspirations, which the Constitutional Court has built through its decisions and arguments? Through analysis on two issues: 1) freedom of religion and belief; and 2) marriage law, this article argues that Constitutional Court's decision, especially relation between religion, state and human rights not only based on law consideration, but also on non-law consideration. Regarding private law, the Constitutional Court opened a fairly wide accommodation, so that more religious aspects would be accommodated by the state even with limited reforms. The limit of accommodation is an Islamic criminal law that cannot be made exclusively for Muslims. The accommodation of Islamic criminal law is only possible if the norms are incorporated into the national criminal law through a process of rational objectification. Based on this argument, continuous negotiation and contestation between religion, state and human rights will go on since Indonesia is not a religious state, which is based only on one religion, nor a secular state, which does not consider religion at all.
One of crucial issue in Muslim countries, such as Indonesia, is relation between religion and the... more One of crucial issue in Muslim countries, such as Indonesia, is relation between religion and the state. Even though Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution were claimed final, but it did not necessarily mean that position of religion, state and human rights is final and clear. The negotiation between religion, state and human rights not only on political forum like at The House of Representative, but also in Constitutional Court session. There are debates and opinion contestations. The problem is what is the politics of law accommodation towards religious aspirations, which the Constitutional Court has built through its decisions and arguments? Through analysis on two issues: 1) freedom of religion and belief; and 2) marriage law, this article argues that Constitutional Court's decision, especially relation between religion, state and human rights not only based on law consideration, but also on non-law consideration. Regarding private law, the Constitutional Court opened a fairly wide accommodation, so that more religious aspects would be accommodated by the state even with limited reforms. The limit of accommodation is an Islamic criminal law that cannot be made exclusively for Muslims. The accommodation of Islamic criminal law is only possible if the norms are incorporated into the national criminal law through a process of rational objectification. Based on this argument, continuous negotiation and contestation between religion, state and human rights will go on since Indonesia is not a religious state, which is based only on one religion, nor a secular state, which does not consider religion at all. Abstrak: Salah satu isu krusial di negara Muslim, tidak terkecuali Indonesia, adalah relasi agama dan negara. Meskipun Pancasila dan Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 dinyatakan final, namun bukan berarti kedudukan agama, negara, dan hak asasi manusia sudah final dan jelas. Perundingan antara agama, negara dan hak asasi manusia tidak hanya di forum politik seperti di Dewan Perwakilan Daerah (DPR), tapi juga di sidang Mahkamah Konstitusi. Ada perdebatan dan kontestasi pendapat. Persoalannya, bagaimana politik akomodasi hukum terhadap aspirasi agama yang dibangun Mahkamah Konstitusi melalui putusan dan dalilnya? Melalui analisis terhadap dua isu: 1) kebebasan beragama dan berkeyakinan; dan 2) hukum perkawinan, pasal ini berpendapat bahwa putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi khususnya hubungan antara agama, negara dan hak asasi manusia tidak hanya berdasarkan pertimbangan hukum, tetapi juga pertimbangan non hukum. Terkait hukum privat, Mahkamah Konstitusi membuka akomodasi yang cukup luas, sehingga lebih banyak aspek keagamaan yang diakomodasi oleh negara meski dengan reformasi yang terbatas. Batasan akomodasi adalah hukum pidana Islam yang tidak dapat dibuat secara eksklusif untuk Muslim. Akomodasi hukum pidana Islam hanya dimungkinkan jika norma-norma tersebut dimasukkan ke dalam hukum pidana nasional melalui proses objektifikasi yang rasional. Berdasarkan argumen ini, negosiasi dan kontestasi yang terus menerus antara agama, negara dan hak asasi manusia akan terus berlangsung karena Indonesia bukanlah negara agama yang hanya didasarkan pada satu agama, bukan pula negara sekuler, yang sama sekali tidak mempertimbangkan agama. Kata kunci: Mahkamah Konstitusi; HAM; penghayat kepercayaan; penodaan agama; hukum perkawinan.
International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, Vol. 24, Issue 04,, 2020
Religious-based violence and intolerance are of the issues that have made religious life dynamic ... more Religious-based violence and intolerance are of the issues that have made religious life dynamic and peculiar in post-reform Indonesia. Some small groups sects considered as a heterodox become victims of violence. Although religious communities in Indonesia are generally tolerant, they tend to be intolerant of heterodox sects accused of heresy. This paper aims to investigate the factors that have led Muslims to be intolerant to heterodox sect groups. By tracing the data of intolerance and violence against heterodox sects, investigating religious fat was and some court decisions against heterodox denominations in Indonesia and deploying political approach, this paper argues that Islamic intellectualism from the earlier was less amiable to the heterodox group that met with a new outgrowth of the theocratic constitutionalism in different parts of the world. This paper also argues that the attitude is a continuation of the pattern of sect relations in Islam that is more colored by hostility and mutual disregard and is not merely because of differences in interpreting Islamic orthodoxy, but also of political competition.
RENUNGAN Denny JA melalui tulisan berjudul "NKRI Bersyariah atau Ruang Publik yang Manusiawi" mer... more RENUNGAN Denny JA melalui tulisan berjudul "NKRI Bersyariah atau Ruang Publik yang Manusiawi" merupakan perdebatan lama yang oleh sebagian kalangan belum dianggap tuntas. Seruan Rizieq Shihab tentang NKRI bersyariah merupakan cermin dari sisa-sisa pertarungan ideologi masa lalu yang residunya masih menggumpal. Apa itu NKRI bersyariah? Tidak pernah jelas! Penggagagasnya juga tidak pernah dengan serius menawarkan konsepnya yang bisa diuji publik. Hal yang kita dengar hanya teriakan-teriakan dalam pidato atau dalam kerumunan demonstrasi. Jika Denny JA merasa perlu memberi tanggapan khusus tentang NKRI bersyariah, merupakan kemewahan luar biasa. Jika diringkas, Denny JA ingin menegaskan, tidak terlalu penting label NKRI bersyariah. Hal yang jauh lebih penting adalah pentingnya memperjuangkan dan merawat ruang publik yang manusiawi. Denny JA seolah ingin menegaskan, jika ruang publik yang manusiawi bisa terwujud, maka dengan sendirinya nilai-nilai syariat Islam tegak. Namun, teriak-teriak NKRI bersyariah tanpa visi penciptaan ruang public yang manusiawi justru bisa menjebak orang pada otoritarianisme beragama. Jebakan itu menyimpan bara lain, berupa pemutlakan atas kebenarannya sendiri yang akan dengan mudah menuduh orang lain yang berbeda pikiran sebagai anti Syariah. Dibalik jargon NKRI bersyariah yang tidak jelas konsepsinya, kita bisa memperkirakan bahwa para penggagasnya hendak menyampaikan bahwa NKRI yang ada sekarang belum bersyariah. Di sini kita belum bisa dipastikan, apakah belum syar'i-nya Indonesia terkait dengan dasar negara Pancasila dan konstitusi UUD 1945, ataukah hanya pada peraturan perundang-undangan di bawah konstitusi. Sisa Konflik Ideologi Terlepas dari ketidakjelasan konseptual, satu hal yang bisa saya pastikan, teriakan NKRI berasyariah merupakan sisa-sisa konflik ideologi masa lalu, terutama pada masa-masa awal kemerdekaan. NKRI bersyariah merupakan kelanjutan dari kekecewaan dihapusnya "Piagam Jakarta" dalam perdebatan dasar negara pada masa awal kemerdekaan. Mereka masih meratapi pencoretan tujuh kata Piagam Jakarta, "Ketuhanan dengan kewajiban menjalankan syariat Islam bagi pemeluk-pemeluknya" dianggap sebagai "kelicikan sejarah" yang masih gelap. Siapa sebenarnya orang-orang Indonesia Timur yang mempersoalkan dan mengancam tidak mau bergabung dengan negara Indonesia jika "Piagam Jakarta" dipertahankan. Mereka seolah ingin mengatakan, pengaborsian Piagam Jakarta adalah penipuan sejarah. Seruan NKRI bersyariah merupakan bentuk lain dari keinginan untuk menghidupkan kembali Piagam Jakarta. Pencoretan Piagam Jakarta menjadikan negara Indonesia kurang, atau bahkan tidak syar'i.
—One of the crucial issues in countries with a Muslim majority, not to mention Indonesia, is the ... more —One of the crucial issues in countries with a Muslim majority, not to mention Indonesia, is the relationship between the religion and the state. Although Pancasila and the Constitution (UUD 1945) are claimed final, it does not mean that the position of religion, state, and human rights is also final. Practically, the state, religion and human rights negotiate one another, and sometimes even create tension. Here, the negotiations between religion, state, and human rights are not only in political forums such as House of Representatives but also in the Constitutional Court sessions. Debate and argument contestation often occur in the forums. This article aims at identifying debate and argument contestation in the Constitutional Court. In theory, it focuses on two issues: 1) freedom of religion and belief; and 2) Marriage law. The result of the study argues that the Constitutional Court's decision, especially regarding the relationship among religion, state, and human rights, is based not only on legal considerations but also on non-legal considerations. According to this argument, negotiations and contestations among the three will always continue as Indonesia is neither one religion-based state nor a secular state that does not profess a religion at all.
Uploads