Hanry Tapotubun
As a country with a high level of religious and belief diversity, Indonesia plays a role in the signing of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). However, in the context of religious freedom (kebebasan beragama), it faces another discourse of “Kerukunan” (harmony) as a competing narrative. In practice, the policy of kerukunan frequently undermines the rights to religious freedom and belief, especially for minority groups. Ideally, on which side should Indonesia position itself? Should it return to the path of “kebebasan” (freedom)? Or is “kerukunan” (harmony) the most pragmatic way to manage religious diversity in Indonesia?
Those questions ultimately became a foundation of the book “Ketegangan Kebebasan dan Kerukunan Beragama di Indonesia: Telaah Sejarah, Politik, dan Hukum”(The Tension between Religious Freedom and Harmony in Indonesia: A Study of History, Politics, and Law), which was launched on October 24, 2024, during a special panel in the 6th International Conference and Consolidation on Indigenous Religion (ICIR) held in Ambon (October 22-24, 2024). The book is a collaborative effort from Trisno S. Sutanto, Asfinawati, Ihsan Ali-Fauzi, Maufur, Suhadi Cholil, and Zainal Abidin Bagir, published by PUSAD Paramadina with support from the Communion of Churches in Indonesia (PGI), the Indonesian Consortium for Religious Studies (ICRS) at Gadjah Mada University, and the Indonesian Coalition for Religious Freedom Advocacy (Koalisi Advokasi KBB Indonesia). During the discussion, Ihsan Ali-Fauzi from PUSAD Paramadina, Maufur from ICRS UGM, and Asfinawati from STHI Jentera shared their views and perspectives, moderated by Jimmy Sormin from PGI.
The discussion began by highlighting the dynamics of religious diversity in Indonesia as a multi-religious country, where the government responds by promoting the concept of "religious moderation" as a national agenda through the Ministry of Religious Affairs. However, in practice, the debate between kebebasan beragama and kerukunan beragama has become increasingly prominent in academic, legal, and public policy discussions; on one hand, kebebasan is considered a fundamental right guaranteed by the constitution and international treaties, but on the other hand, kerukunan is prioritized to maintain social and political stability. This conflict often leads to negative effects, particularly for minority groups whose rights are frequently overlooked in the name of achieving interreligious harmony.
From Religious Freedom to Religious Harmony
First, Ihsan Ali-Fauzi started by examining the dynamics of the use of terms and policy implementations related to religious freedom and harmony in Indonesia. Historically, Indonesia at the beginning of its independence prioritized the concept of kebebasan, or what was then referred to as kemerdekaan beragama or religious independence. According to Ihsan, this aligns with the spirit of freedom and sovereignty that was newly achieved post-colonialism. However, during the New Order into the Reformation era, the focus on managing religious diversity shifted toward the concept of kerukunan. This culminated in the establishment of the Forum Kerukunan Umat Beragama (FKUB) or Forum of Interreligious Harmony in 2006, which affirmed kerukunan as a national policy and matter for discourse.
Further, Ihsan emphasized that while both kebebasan and kerukunan aim to manage religious diversity, the application of the kerukunan tends to be majoritarianism. It appeared in many efforts to resolve inter-religious tensions that mostly accommodate the interests of the majority group, while minority groups are frequently neglected or even persecuted. In his point of view, the kerukunan paradigm has an increased risk of undermining the principles of pluralism and diversity that are foundational in Indonesian ideology.
The Dynamics of Managing Religious Diversity from Colonialism to Early Independence
Continuing the discussion, Maufur explained that historically, managing religious diversity in Indonesia has changed from the colonial era to the early independence period. During the Dutch colonial era, individual religious freedom was highly respected and protected. However, collective religious freedom faced numerous restrictions due to stringent social control policies imposed by the colonial government. The colonial government categorized religious freedom into two levels: at the ritual level, religious freedom was fully guaranteed, while at the political practice level, religious freedom was severely limited to prevent threats to colonial authority and maintain social stability.
During the Japanese occupation, the model of managing religious diversity changed, focusing more on social harmony. The Japanese introduced and reinforced the concept of kerukunan through the establishment of community institutions such as neighborhood units or rukun tetangga (RT) and community units or rukun warga (RW). This model of harmony aimed to maintain stability and control over society as it allowed religion to be used by the Japanese occupation as a tool for anti-Western propaganda to strengthen Japanese imperialism in the Asia-Pacific. Thus, in the early independence period, the management of religious diversity shifted back towards religious freedom. The spirit of independence emphasizing individual and collective freedom allowed society to express their beliefs more freely, particularly in social and political contexts.
Kebebasan and Kerukunan Beragama in The Indonesia’s Legal Perspective
In the context of law and legislation in Indonesia, Asfinawati highlighted the dynamics between kebebasan (freedom) and kerukunan (harmony) that can be traced through various legal products in Indonesia, ranging from the 1945 Constitution to regional government’s regulations. In the legislative context, the concept of harmony is more prominent than freedom. The term “kerukunan umat beragama” appears consistently in various laws and policies, while “kebebasan beragama” is only mentioned at the level of Indonesia’s law (UU). According to Asfinawati, this indicates that the government tends to prioritize harmony in public policy over strengthening religious freedom as a fundamental human right. This focus on harmony often leads to the marginalization of minority rights and creates imbalances in religious practice.
Then, Asfinawati noted that religious aspects are often used as a basis in various regulations, which can lead to controversies. For instance, the Marriage Law requires “religious marriage” as a condition for legal marriage, thereby limiting the space for those who do not adhere to a particular religion. Even in tourism Law and Regulation, tourism development must align with religious norms, which implicitly – according to Asfinawati – tends to prioritize the standards of the majority religious group. She also remarked that such policies not only restrict individual freedom but can also result in discrimination against groups that do not conform to those majority standards.
Thus, Asfinawati emphasized that the term “kerukunan” in legal regulations often accompanies the concept of “order,” which leans more towards social control. In this view, kerukunan is not merely a guideline for creating inter-religious harmony but rather an instrument for the state to maintain public order. She warned that an excessive emphasis on harmony as a control tool risks sacrificing religious freedom and causing a homogenization of values, ultimately contradicting the principles of pluralism and democracy.
Global Debate on Religious Freedom and Harmony
At the end of the discussion about the book, Ihsan Ali-Fauzi raised the debate on harmony versus religious freedom in a broader global context, including the debate between liberalism and communitarianism in Europe, as well as the tension between harmony and religious freedom in China. particularly, he emphasized that this tension is not only relevant in Indonesia but also reflects the challenges faced by other countries in managing religious diversity. Additionally, they discussed the differences in managing religious diversity in Southeast Asia, focusing on comparisons between Singapore and Malaysia where religious diversity overlapped with ethnicities and racial discourse.
Book Overview: The Tension Between Religious Freedom and Harmony
This book is a compilation of writings by several authors that deeply examine the issues of kebebasan vs kerukunan in Indonesia. It consists of six chapters organized around different themes, beginning with Chapter I, written by Trisno S. Sutanto, which discusses the politics of pluralism in Indonesia. Maufur then describes the struggle between kebebasan and kerukunan beragama during the Japanese occupation and the debates at BPUPKI in Chapter II. Suhadi Cholil continues in Chapter III, highlighting human rights and religious freedom during the 1956-1959 Constitutional Assembly sessions. Trisno S. Sutanto returns to write Chapter IV, which examines the politics of kerukunan during the New Order regime, followed by Chapter V, which focuses on the legacy of “Mambang Agama” after the constitutional amendments. Chapter VI, authored by Asfinawati, explores the tension between kebebasan and kerukunan beragama after the Reformation. The book concludes with a comparison of Asian values in freedom and harmony, written by Zainal Abidin Bagir and Ihsan Ali-Fauzi, providing a broad perspective on the dynamics occurring in Southeast Asian countries.
This comprehensive book provides a deep understanding of the struggle for and advocacy of religious freedom in Indonesia. It offers rich perspectives on the contemporary debate between kebebasan and kerukunan beragama, prompting readers to reflect on Indonesia's position regarding these values. Additionally, it explains the legal dynamics surrounding religious harmony and freedom, enhancing readers' understanding of the legal context influencing diversity management policies. Ultimately, the book serves as an important resource for anyone interested in issues of pluralism and human rights in the context of religious freedom in Indonesia.