PT.

AJINOMOTO INDONESIA

D
I
S
U
S
U
N
O
L
E
H

Diana Fransiska silalahi

Lifia Anjelica Naingolan
Reagen Chandra Rajaguguk
Stephanie Celine Hutapea
Vanessia Marchline Situmorang

Program studi Public Relation

Perguruan tinggi cendana
Tahun ajaran 2019-2020
 Ajinomoto Indonesia Haram or Halal?
On 5 January 2001 the Japanese Asahi Shinbun n e w spaper reported that the Indonesian
Department of Health had ordered P.T. Ajinomoto-Indonesia to withdraw its product,
Ajinomoto, an artificial seasoning of monosodium glutamate (MSG), from the market
because it contained pork. A few days later, the then Indonesian president Abdurrahman
Wahid, also an expert on f i q h, expressed to the Japanese Minister of Justice that he believed
the Ajinomoto seasoning could indeed be consumed by Muslims. This seemingly trivial
occurrence nonetheless became intertwined in the religious and political issues of Indonesia
under the Wahid government.
Ajinomoto, a multinational corporation based in Japan, has been operating in Indonesia for
more than thirty years and has succeeded in establishing itself in the Indonesian market by
selling its product in small bags at quite reasonable prices. In Japan itself, nowadays people
do not consume this artificial seasoning very often as it is widely known that natural ones are
healthier. In Southeast Asia, however, Ajinomoto is regularly consumed despite the
availability of various kinds of natural spices.

Halal certificate
In Indonesia, one can find the mark of 'halal' or 'halal 100%' on the wrappings of processed
food. This means the product has met the government requirements for h a l a l products. The
MUI (Majelis Ulama Indonesia; Indonesian Council of Ulama) is authorized to assess the
products. The LPPOM-MUI (Lembaga Pnegkajian Pangan, Obat-obat, Kosmetika-MUI;
Assessment Institute of Foods, Drugs and Cosmetics of the ICU) is in charge of scientific
assessment. The results of field and laboratory examinations are brought to an auditors'
meeting of the LPPOM-MUI, after which the Fatwa Committee assesses the data relating to
products from the point of view of religion, granting or withholding approval. A halal
certificat e issued by the MUI thus declares the legitimacy of foodstuffs in accordance with
the dictates of Islamic law. However, this certification system, which began in 1994, is not
obligatory. A producer can apply voluntarily for a halal certificate. To date, almost 1300
products have obtained halal certification , but that figure constitutes only some 10% of the
total of products concerned.
The certificate is valid for two years, but the LPPOM-MUI must be consulted promptly on
any change of ingredient, food additive or raw material in order to gain approval for its use.
Ajinomoto obtained its latest halal certificate in September 1998 and reapplied in July 2000.
The application showed that one of Ajinomoto's ingredients had been changed – from
Bactopeptone to Bactosoytone – without consulting the L P P O M - M U I . The main raw
material of Ajinomoto is sugarcane molasses, fermented by microbes and made into MSG,
which is further separated and purified. Bactosoytone, which is not produced by P.T.
Ajinomoto-Indonesia itself but is purchased from the Difco Corporation in the United States,
is used as the growth medium for the fermentation microbes. Bactosoytone is made from
soybeans out of which the protein is hydrolyzed. The LPPOM-MUI looked for information
on this unfamiliar ingredient and they received a letter from the United States informing them
that in the process of hydrolysis, an enzyme extracted from a pig pancreas is used as a
catalyst in the manufacturing of Bactosoytone. The use of such an enzyme in the production
process became an issue even though the final product of Ajinomoto does not contain any
pork e n z y m e . The LPPOM-MUI reported these findings to the Fatwa Committee, where
the matter was hotly debated. In October 2000 the LPPOM-MUI advised P.T. Ajinomoto-
Indonesia to stop using Bactosoytone. They heeded this and from 23 November began to
replace Bactosoytone with Mameno, which is free from pork enzymes. On 16 December the
Fatwa Committee concluded that the Ajinomoto that had been produced by using
Bactosoytone was h a r a m.

Legal-formalism or multidimensional approach

Let us consider briefly the itjihad process of the Fatwa Committee. Naturally the discussion
starts with the prohibition of the eating of pork, found in the Qur'an. Next is the hadith
containing the Prophet Mohammad's utterance concerning the disposal of oil in which a dead
mouse has been found. The committee quotes the cu l a m as' longstanding agreement that
every part of a pig is najis ca i n, inherently impure. Then, a k a i d a h (legal maxim) is
applied, to wit: 'in cases where h a l a l things are mixed with h a r a m things, then h a r a m
things are pronounced to be dominant'. Finally the results obtained by the LPPOM-MUI are
considered and a decision is taken.1 Clearly the MUI's deliberations concentrate on the
religious domain and scrutinize religious materials. We may look at how Abdurrahman
Wahid justified his opinion. He also began with the Qu'ran, but specified the limitations of
the prohibition against the eating of pork. He did not take issue with the use of pork, because
it has too wide an application. He received a report that no pork enzyme was extracted from
the final product of Ajinomoto. He applied a kaidah 'giving priority to the rejection of taking
a great risk rather than wishing to gain benefit'.2 Also he took into consideration the
withdrawal of investment and the possibility of mass unemployment.3 The first criticism of
the MUI's fatwa came from a scientist, Umar Anggoro Jenie, a chemistry professor at Gadjah
Mada University: 'Bactosoytone is not an active material. So Ajinomoto is not a haram
item . '4 According to some Muslim intellectuals, this case is included in the category of
khilaf iyah ( a n issue on which different opinions are legitimately possible), which is often
found in I s l a m . President Wahid was criticized by rival politicians for interfering in the
religious administration procedure. Demonstrators also came to the presidential palace to
protest. Wahid has earned a reputation as a substantialist Muslim, that is, one who wishes to
concentrate on the real substance of Islam. For a long time he has been criticizing stiff legal-
formalism, and has been encouraging cu l a m a to move out of the narrow framework of
religion and pay attention to social problems. He considers how Islam can respond to the
demands of modern society. He advocates a multi-dimensional approach to practical
problems. And so it is clear that he would still have delivered the same blunt opinion
concerning the MUI's fatwa whatever his position in Indonesian society. As a supporter of
pluralism, he did not forget to say: 'Both opinions are correct in doing ijtih ad' ,5 again
provoking the anger of the conservative ulama

Political conflict
President Wahid stated that he saw this problem as a political one, part of the series of
manoeuvres undertaken to damage his government. Many were inclined to agree. Indeed,
during those months there was a sequence of attacks on the President, ranging from bomb
explosions to the disclosure of a 'sex scandal', all intended to effect a speedy discrediting of
Wahid and his government. Indonesians seemed exhausted as a result of all the political
conflict – any and all problems were suspected of having a political background. The starting
point for all of this, however, remains the issue of P.T. Ajinomoto-Indonesia and its having
neglected the obligatory consultation on a change of ingredients. While it may be difficult to
establish any political motivation behind the issuing of the MUI's fatwa itself, there are
certain political issues that played a role in the evolution of events. The MUI and P.T.
Ajinomoto-Indonesia had initially agreed not to bring the issue into the open, but to settle it
secretly by withdrawing products produced before 23 November. However, the h a r a m d e
c i s i o n was leaked by another Islamic organization and the MUI was forced to announce
this publicly. It may well be that about this time political motivation began to play a part. The
first media report appeared on 29 December in the newspapers. On 3 January the Ajinomoto
case was first reported on television and the events were followed by the media for several
days but not to any great extent. Suddenly on 8 January the Ajinomoto case was presented as
the most important item and was widely reported. This scale of coverage was maintained for
a few days, the President's statement forming the c l i m a x . The internet newsgroup
'Indonesia-L' featured many postings on this issue, including those of critics of the MUI who
supported the New Order to legitimize development policy in accordance with the Islamic
point of view. Broader distrust of Din Syamsuddin, the general secretary of the MUI, was
expressed in that he often appeared in the media as a spokesman of the MUI. It is widely
known that Wahid bitterly denounced him for having the intention of politicizing Islam. It
can thus be said that the historical background also generated speculation concerning the
political motivation of this c a s e . However, the majority of the public remained calm,
although there were some small disturbances. Around the middle of January the news was
disappearing rapidly from the television as if the effort expended in making use of this case to
hasten political conflict had been in vain. Only in newspapers was related news found from
time to t i m e . P.T. Ajinomoto-Indonesia apologized and withdrew their product from the
market, at a cost of six hundred million yen excluding transportation and personnel expenses.
Ajinomoto obtained a new hal al certificate around the middle of February. However, it does
not seem so easy to restore Indonesian consumers' confidence in Ajinomoto. This case
demonstrates how in Islam differences of opinion may arise, and some Muslims can accept
that while others cannot. Also, in the midst of political conflict as in the present Indonesia,
anything can be made into a political issue. However, we should not forget that in such a
situation a sound and constructive opinion can still be heard. 'It is regrettable that society, cu l
a m a and political elites are so responsive to the issue of pork lard, but they seem to turn a
blind eye towards various corruption scandals which should be punished more severely in
that their destructive power is far more dangerous than is the consuming of Ajinomoto.
 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ::

1.Ari pranata : How much we lost because this case?

Answered by vanessia : approximately 30 bilions

2.Yenni limau : How you make sure there is no pork oil there ?

3.Jeffrey Prasetio : How can you guarantee the consumers that the product halal?

Both of the questions answered by Stephanie Celine :

actually the product will not earn the halal certificate from indonesia council of ulama (MUI)
if not for the product is halal itself.
Bactosoytone is not an active material. So Ajinomoto is not a haram item. And BPOM also
say this product is halal and have no pork.

4. Derick : When you make Product distrubeted again because this have been

happened, what is your action?

Answered by Diana Fra : keep asking permission, and we will wait for permission from the
government so we can distribute it again

5. Ricky Charles : Maintainance of the equipment ?

Answered by reagen C : every 6 months , to assure our product is safe.