[Nasional-m] Indonesian Muslims and the commitment to sharia

[Ambon]

The Jakarta Post
15 August 2002

Indonesian Muslims and the commitment to sharia
Abdul Mu'ti, Chairman, National Board Muhammadiyah Youth Movement, Jakarta

The People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) finally reached an agreement on the
second alternative among three alternative amendments to Article 29 of the
1945 Constitution on religion. Previously, Islamic parties proposed the
adoption of sharia, or Islamic law, as formulated in the Jakarta Charter
(Piagam Jakarta).
The second alternative, the one agreed on by the Assembly, was proposed by
the nationalist parties and recommended that the MPR maintain the original
phrasing of Article 29: "The state is based on the One God".
This decision was crucial, especially if we note that the majority of the
MPR members are Muslims; and that Islamic parties themselves did not put up
a serious struggle for the amendment. Does the decision mean that the
adoption of sharia is no longer important?
Although Muslims believe in the significance of sharia, there is
disagreement among the ulema. There are the "scripturalists", who see sharia
as detailed and complete guidance from God for all aspects of life. Sharia
deals with religious or spiritual fields, as well as social and political
arenas. According to this view, it is obligatory for every Muslim to set up
an Islamic state based on sharia. Rejecting this doctrine is regarded as
kafir (unbeliever).
The scripturalists' argument goes that Indonesia is not yet a Muslim country
since sharia has not been fully implemented. The criminal laws of Indonesian
are inconsistent with the law dictated in the Koran and the Sunnah, the
written tradition of the Prophet Muhammad. For example, there is no death
penalty for murderers and no whipping for adulterers. This inconsistency is
said to be the main source of social injustice in Indonesia.
The modernists take a different view. Sharia is believed to be the global
guidance from God, as revealed in the Koran and the Sunnah. Sharia consists
of two main fields -- spiritual (ibadah) and social or political (muamalah).
According to the argument of the modernists, Ibadah is strictly regulated;
no additions, reductions or modifications are permitted. While in muamalah
there are no strict regulations from the sharia; just general rules not the
details, stressing the essence and the values rather than format.
Political affairs, including the system of state, fall under the muamalah;
there is no certain format for an Islamic state, either in the Koran, the
Sunnah or in Islamic history. From this perspective, a non-Muslim or secular
country might be called Islamic if the political system and its
implementation correspond to the sharia.
In this modernist perspective, which is currently more dominant in the
country than the scripturalist view, sharia in Indonesian politics is no
longer important, and inserting sharia into the Constitution is seen as a
possible trigger for conflicts among Muslims and national disintegration.
Despite the fact that attempts to insert the Jakarta Charter in the
Constitution have been unsuccessful, this does not necessarily mean that
sharia does not or will not work in Indonesia. The second verse of Article
29 of the Constitution clearly states that the government guarantees the
freedom of religion and supports the practice of religion.
True, Indonesia is a secular country. There is no Islamic Criminal Code. But
there are three national laws specifically for Muslims: the Islamic family
law, the alms-giving law and the law on the haj. These laws reflect the
government's concern for the needs of Muslims; however Muslims have shown
little commitment to these three laws.
Available data shows that most Muslims tend to resolve family problems in
state courts rather than courts for religious affairs. And most Muslims
prefer secular or conventional banks to Islamic banks.
So if Muslims are really concerned with implementing sharia, the more
important issue at hand is developing their commitment to Islam in daily
life. This is far more strategic and beneficial than spending all that
energy debating sharia. Legal problems in Indonesia are not caused by the
absence of sharia or an Islamic Criminal Code, but rather by the failure of
the government to enforce the law.
Any possibility of adopting sharia in the future depends on Muslims'
commitment to their religious teachings, and how they practice these
teachings in a country based on the Pancasila ideology.