5th article

IELL 2 ,,

· Title article : Has Indonesia Failed to Protect Its Citizens?

· Author : Svetlana Anggita Prasasthi, Jakarta

· Source :

Retrieved from : http://www.thejakartapost.com/paper

On November 9th 2010

Has Indonesia Failed to Protect Its Citizens?

Svetlana Anggita Prasasthi, Jakarta | Sun, 09/19/2010 10:54 AM | Opinion

As a Muslim, the assaults of two Batak Christian Protestant Church (HKBP) leaders on Sept. 12, for me and for many Indonesians, regardless their religion, is shocking.

This occurred in Indonesia, where people take pride in their nation’s internationally recognized reputation as a peaceful, tolerant and democratic nation. Religion is the anchor in the everyday life of most Indonesians, either as a part of their character, or as a part of the nation’s identity.

Indonesians are proud to have the 1945 Constitution as the foundation of our nation, and are equally proud of the state ideology Pancasila and its first principle, Belief in One God.

The constitution guarantees the protection of freedom of religion, including every person’s freedom to worship according to his or her religion and beliefs.

After Indonesia transformed into a full democracy in 1998, the nation also ratified international human rights conventions that guarantee freedom of religion and belief without discrimination.

However, in reality, as reported by the local and international media and many human rights reports, many Indonesians continue to face religious hardship.

The situation is worse for persons who do not have a religion or faith, or if their beliefs are not recognized by the state. Every Indonesian must have an official religion, a policy which is contrary to international human rights laws that acknowledge agnostic and even atheist views.

Another sad example is demonstrated by the present poor condition of the Ahmadis in Indonesia. They are not only facing religious discrimination and violence that has led to economic hardship, the Indonesian government even issued a Joint Decree (SKB) which ruled that Ahmadiyah followers have only two options: They can continue their present religious activities but they will not be acknowledged by the state as Muslims, or change their teachings and practices in accordance with mainstream Islam.

This decision very unfair for the Ahmadis, because aside from the obvious human rights implications, expecting them to acknowledge they are not equal Muslims is asking them to commit an apostasy against themselves as Ahmadis.

The freedom of religion or faith should never be compromised under any circumstance, even under a public state of emergency.

Following the violent attacks on the two HKBP church leaders, authorities in Bekasi said on Monday that they had warned the congregation not to hold services in Ciketing, where the crime took place.

The incident could have been seen as a direct result of a lack of protection by the State, its failure to uphold religious freedom, and especially to secure the rights for followers to assemble for worship — and this was not the first attack on the church.

Still, the government regards the problem as no more than an “administrative issue” or a “purely criminal act”.

Jakarta Police chief Insp. Gen. Timur Pradopo said the police’s preliminary investigation concluded the assaults were “purely criminal”, adding that police had found no link to recent interfaith conflicts (The Jakarta Post, Sept. 13).

The state has a constitutional obligation to ensure that all citizens have full freedom of religion and the guaranteed right to practice their faith. Violating one’s right to worship according to one’s religion is a serious violation of human rights.

The writer is a law faculty graduate from Gadjah Mada University.

By : Fransiska Indah Kristiani

(2010110012)

Math Departement

Summary of the article :

Attack incidents against the leader of the Protestant Christian Batak Church (HKBP) 12 September, enough to surprise many people in Indonesia, regardless of their religion.

This happened in Indonesia, where people take pride in their country is internationally renowned as a peaceful nation, tolerant and democratic. But in fact, freedom of religion and belief still not sure. Indonesia in 1945 Constitution, which guarantees the protection of religious freedom, including freedom of everyone to worship in accordance with their religion or belief. Although in 1998. where countries have also ratified the international conventions on human rights, which guarantee freedom of religion or belief, without discrimination.

Another example of the Ahmadis in Indonesia. They are not only dealing with religious discrimination and violence that have caused economic hardship, the Indonesian government even issued a joint decree (SKB), which ruled that Ahmadiyah followers have only two choices: They can continue their religious activities but they will not be recognized by the state as a Muslim, or change their teachings and practices in accordance with mainstream Islam.

This decision is grossly unfair to the Ahmadiyya, because it violates human rights as the Ahmadis. Freedom of religion or belief should not be compromised under any circumstances, even under a state of public emergency.

This incident could have been seen as a direct consequence of the lack of protection by the State, the lack of respect for freedom of religion, and especially to ensure the rights of fans - and this is not the first attack against the Church.

However, the Government considers the problem as nothing more than a "management problems" or "purely criminal act".

State has the constitutional obligation to ensure that all citizens have full freedom of religion and guarantees the right to practice their faith.

Violate the right of a person of worship according to one's religion is a serious violation of human rights.

Comment :

I think this article is less systematic and not focus on one discussion. In another sense, this article discusses the specifics, but there is overlap with the discussion.

Issues discussed in this article by sukup sensitive writer, but writers with good positions itself as a neutral party.

The authors also discuss the problem, climax, and solutions. As a religious question, with the climax of the discussion more specific to the problem of violence and human rights HKBP and Ahmadis, and solutions that states have a constitutional obligation to ensure that all citizens have full freedom of religion and guarantees the right to practice their faith.

By : Fransiska Indah Kristiani

(2010110012)

Math Departement

4th article

IELL 2 ,,

· Title article : Indonesia and The Great Challenge of Natural Disasters

· Author : Yansen, Bengkulu

· Source :

Retrieved from : http://www.thejakartapost.com/paper

On November 2nd 2010

Indonesia and The Great Challenge

of Natural Disasters

Yansen, Bengkulu | Tue, 11/02/2010 10:10 AM | Opinion

Indonesia has become a land of tragedy. Just after the flood tragedy in Wasior, West Papua, an earthquake-triggered tsunami hit Mentawai Islands, West Sumatra.

While we were still shocked by those disasters, Mount Merapi erupted. Hundreds of people have been killed in the recent calamities. Natural disasters have become a great challenge for Indonesians.

There are two impacts of disasters: Economically and psychologically. In terms of Indonesia’s economy, natural catastrophes damage property and stop economic activity, which consequently result in significant financial loss for the people.

Furthermore, the series of natural disasters create more burden on the national budget to finance post-disaster rehabilitation.

On a macro scale, the increase of natural disasters in this country directly multiplies the number of people living in poverty.

It is not only financially frightening; natural disasters are also psychologically horrifying. The shock due to natural calamities can create a very real terror.

Earthquakes, for example, are terrifying because they are unpredictable, involving a large scale of area and associating with possibly another adversity: the tsunami. An earthquake is a tragedy, which implants uncertainty in the people’s minds. A study predicting the unfinished movement of the tectonic plate along the Ring of Fire adds to the horror.

There are two kinds of reactions that we frequently observe from the authority when disasters occur. If the cause of the disaster is a mixture between human factors and natural phenomena, the authority will blame the natural factor and deny its incompetency to minimize the human factor.

With regards to the flood in Wasior, the government rejected the idea that deforestation had caused the flood, but rather blamed high rain-level intensity.

It is understandable since if deforestation was the cause, the government would be criticized for its incompetency in preventing the cause of deforestation, such as illegal logging.

The recent flood saga in Jakarta is another example. Jakarta Governor Fauzi Bowo is never willing to admit that his administration’s failures to provide and improve the drainage system contribute to the constant floods in Jakarta.

Rain is always to be condemned. Denying responsibility has become a main exit strategy for the authority to escape from criticisms.

When natural disasters, such as earthquakes, tsunamis and volcano eruptions, occur, the government frequently shows a kind of desperate reaction: That there is nothing that can be done to stop the disasters. This may not be totally wrong; however, there may be a lack of preparation in dealing with those natural crises.

What happened in Mentawai has shown us a real example of a lack of disaster management. The tsunami warning was canceled because there was no report of a potential tsunami in Mentawai Islands.

In fact, the problem was that tsunami early detection warning systems were not established in Mentawai, one of the most vulnerable islands to tsunami.

Consequently, hundreds of people were killed by the high waves that swept villages. We need to question the government’s commitment to provide disaster evacuation procedures and infrastructure.

The long observation of Mount Merapi volcanic activity also has not resulted in a minimum number of casualties. There has to be a comprehensive evaluation on disaster management in this country.

As a nation, we have to raise more societal awareness of the fact we are living in a disaster-prone country. We are not only blessed by a natural resource rich land, but also a geologically unstable area and a number of volcanoes.

Consequently, natural disasters such as earthquakes, tsunamis and volcanic eruptions may occur at any time. This condition is worsening since we are unable to protect our environment that may initiate human-induced disasters.

Therefore, the only choice we have is to prepare ourselves for the worst scenario and raise community awareness about the disasters. The state has to provide a reliable and appropriate disaster evacuation system and infrastructure.

The government also needs to start listening to experts that have advised on potential disasters we face. It is sad to see the published studies that say the Mentawai plate may still move have not been followed by appropriate actions to build an early warning system in the island.

We have to seriously prepare this nation for the great threats of natural disasters. We are hoping that the government does not easily deny its responsibilities when disasters occur.

Taking responsibility is absolutely not an easy thing; hence, denial is much easier to do. Denial is a self-defense mechanism, said Sigmund Freud. When unwanted things happen, denial is sometimes comfortable to commit, even though that will not solve the problem.

I believe that improving societal awareness on disaster management is not an easy task. Therefore, every component of this nation has to take shared but different responsibilities. The state has to be more serious in order to serve its citizens, which must be reflected by the government manners and actions.

We citizens also have to contribute positively. Sadly some people commit cowardly acts such as destroying and stealing the tsunami early detection machine.

If we do not take fundamental actions and responsibility, dealing with natural disasters will be more complicated in the future and we will be unable to prevent a huge loss of life.

The writer is an ecologist at the University of Bengkulu and an Australian Leadership Awards fellow.

By : Fransiska Indah Kristiani

(2010110012)

Math Departement

Summary of the article :

This year a major challenge for Indonesia, because of natural disasters seem to come over and over again, like a flood tragedy in Wasior (West Papua), the quake triggered a tsunami in Mentawai (West Sumatra), and the eruption of Mount Merapi.

There were two disasters: the impact of the economic terms and in terms of psychological. In the economic impacts such as damage to property resulting in financial loss for society and government. While the psychological impact, is often discussed is about the trauma, which struck the victim with a natural situation for a disaster.

There are two kinds of reactions that often we observe from the government when a disaster occurs. Often the government will blame a natural phenomenon that the factors causing the disaster. For example, floods in Jakarta, the Governor was never willing to admit that the failure of governments to provide and improve the drainage system that contributed to the constant flooding in Jakarta. Although indeed sometimes disasters all happened and nobody could guess.

In this article the author does not entirely blame the government would be a natural disaster, impacts, and responses that emerged. The author also speaks of solidarity and concern among fellow citizens.

The author discusses cooperation should be made between the government and its citizens. As in the case of increasing public awareness about disasters, preparing this nation to the threat of natural disasters, increase public awareness about disaster management, to contribute positively, and take collective responsibility but different. Countries must be more serious in order to serve its citizens, which should be reflected in the attitudes and actions of governments.

Comment :

This year is really a big challenge for Indonesia, both for governments and citizens of Indonesia. Natural disasters are coming barrage was shocked and rocked the Indonesian economic and psychological, particularly as victims of disaster. In economic terms manyebabkan, victims of natural disasters should lose theirs. So it is with what should be done by the government towards the rehabilitation of public facilities and the victim, which resulted in financial losses. From the psychological aspect, sometimes the things discussed were obtained from the state victim traumatic experience when a disaster occurs.

There are two kinds of reactions that often we observe from the government when a disaster occurs. If the cause of the disaster is a combination of human factors and natural phenomena, the authority will be blaming natural factors and refuse incompetency to minimize the human factor.

Of the several examples that expressed by the author, was impressed that the government only to escape responsibility for what happened, although there are factors that affect natural phenomena. The government is always blaming natural factors and refuse incompetency to minimize the human factor.

I think the article is good enough, because not only discuss the negative things, but also discuss things that are positive. Such cooperation should be made between the government and its citizens. As in the case of increasing public awareness about disasters, preparing this nation to the threat of natural disasters, increase public awareness about disaster management, to contribute positively, and take collective responsibility but different.

By : Fransiska Indah Kristiani

(2010110012)

Math Departement

3rd article ,,

IELL 2 ,,

· Title article : The right to build mosques and churches

· Author : Al Makin, Yogyakarta

· Source :

Retrieved from : http://www.thejakartapost.com/paper

On October 25th 2010

The Right to Build Mosques and Churches

Al Makin, Yogyakarta | Fri, 10/15/2010 9:31 AM | Opinion

Mosques and churches, in which believers pray to God for a happy life in this world and salvation in the world to come, can also cause tension and conflict. In this archipelagic country — with a boast-worthy diversity of ethnicities, faiths, ideologies, political parties and social organizations — mosques and churches of minority groups are under attack.

Ahmadiyah’s mosques and the churches of the Batak Protestant Church (HKBP) in Bekasi are cases in point. Ironically, those who attacked those places of worship, such as the FPI (Islam Defenders Front), also pompously voiced their disagreement in public statements. They question the rights of minorities to build places of worship that they perceive as a threat to their mosques.

Worse still, the government, e.g., the religious affairs minister, makes that disagreement its main concern and shields the mosques of the majority — which are in fact “safe and sound” as nobody dares to disturb them.

The mosques and churches belonging to minority groups are then further discredited, while some of the perpetrators are roaming free and looking for vulnerable people who can be turned into radicals. Through the public media, schools and mosques, the younger generation can become the prey of radicals.

True, some, such as Abu Bakar Ba’asyir and those who stabbed the HKBP leaders, were jailed for their roles in spreading hate, causing disorder and breaking the law. However, their ideologies are far from diminishing in this country.

Nevertheless, you may wonder why the “majority” is so scared of the “minority”. Common sense and logic are turned upside down. Who is intimidating whom? Who are the perpetrators and who are the victims? The minority or the majority? Which one is increasing? Mosques or churches? Ahmadiyah’s mosques or the Muslim majority’s mosques?

Throughout history, the diversity of this country has been palpable. Evidence can be seen in the remaining sanctuaries in Indonesia, Hindu and Buddhist temples scattered throughout many cities. Most of these places of worship — such as many of the old churches in Europe that attract tourists with their photo-ready exotic sculptures — no longer function.

Certainly, Hindu and Buddhist temples were built much earlier than mosques and churches, where believers are still coming to listen to preachers’ words.

What is also obvious is that the number of majority Sunni Muslim mosques is noticeably increasing. In 1997 the Religious Affairs Ministry recorded 392,044 mosques. In 2004 the number was 643,834. Now the number has likely doubled or tripled.

“Nevertheless, you may wonder why the ‘majority’ is so scared of the ‘minority’. ”

The increase in the number of mosques can be felt whenever you visit an Indonesian city — provincial, district, or subdistrict — you will find a new mosque with a shiny dome.

Mosques dominate many cities’ landscapes. In front of the Prambanan temples in Yogyakarta a mosque stands mightily. In the heart of Pekalongan, Central Java, a large mosque was built in front of an old church. Mosques are also found in malls, schools and other public places. Remember that before the 1990s, mosques were not as numerous as they are now.

Yet there is no evidence to suggest there is significant growth in the number of mosques belonging to minority groups, e.g. Shiite, Ahmadiyah, Tarekat and other Muslim minorities.

Nor is there a significant rise in the number of churches in Indonesia, such as those of Roman Catholics, Protestants, Eastern Orthodox, and others.

Why are many so anxious about the construction of places of worship other than their own? Clearly the idea that there is an increase in faiths other than Sunni and rising missionary activities is mythical.

Many scholarly studies have shown this. However, the anxiety and the spread of the myth are not fairytales. They are real.

Keep in mind that the Sunni majority can build a mosque anywhere they choose, any time they want, in any form they desire and without special permission from any authority or the government, even though minority groups are required to obtain permission before building their places of worship. The number of mosques and churches demonstrates this.

The writer is the author of Representing the Enemy, Musaylima in Muslim Literature.

By : Fransiska Indah Kristiani

(2010110012)

Math Departement

Summary of the article :

This article is about the unfairness of the cultural and religious diversity, which is an archipelagic country, especially in Indonesia. In this article, the author calls them, that the use of mosques as "majority", and most of those who use the Church, temple or shrine as "minority ".

As a "majority" they question the rights of "minorities" to build places of worship which they regard as a threat to their mosque. Worse still, the government, e.g., the religious affairs minister, makes that disagreement its main concern and shields the mosques of the majority — which are in fact “safe and sound” as nobody dares to disturb them.

Throughout history, the diversity of this country has been palpable. Evidence can be seen in the remaining sanctuaries in Indonesia, Hindu and Buddhist temples scattered throughout many cities. Most of these places of worship — such as many of the old churches in Europe that attract tourists with their photo-ready exotic sculptures — no longer function. Certainly, Hindu and Buddhist temples were built much earlier than mosques and churches.

Now the number has likely doubled or tripled. Nevertheless, you may wonder why the “majority” is so scared of the “minority”.

In front of the Prambanan temples in Yogyakarta a mosque stands mightily. In the heart of Pekalongan, Central Java, a large mosque was built in front of an old church. Mosques are also found in malls, schools and other public places. Remember that before the 1990s, mosques were not as numerous as they are now.

“Majority” can build a mosque anywhere they choose, any time they want, in any form they desire and without special permission from any authority or the government, even though “minority” groups are REQUIRED to obtain permission before building their places of worship.

Comment :

I think the article is discussing something very sensitive. This article also discusses, in accordance with what is happening in Indonesia. With Islam as the State religion of the majority and a minority. Most actually sometimes feel that threats to the rights of minorities, to build the temples.

And sometimes we wonder why most are so afraid of minorities. Common sense and logic upside down. Who is intimidating whom? Who are the perpetrators and victims? Minority or majority? Which is increased? Mosques or churches?

But in fact the current amount of the mosque may have doubled or tripled from the year 2004 with the number 643 834.

The majority feel threatened will be a growing minority, but there is no evidence to suggest there is significant growth in the number of mosques belong to minority groups, such as Shiites, Ahmadiyya, Sufi and other Muslim minorities. There is also no significant increase in the number of churches in Indonesia, as a Roman Catholic, Protestant, Eastern Orthodox, and others.

For them, the majority, to build a mosque anywhere they choose, any time they want, in whatever form they want and without special permission from local authorities or government, although minority groups are required to obtain permission before they build places of worship . This is what sometimes becomes injustice.

And in fact, all of them can live side by side in full of peace, with mutual respect and appreciate in all such differences.

By : Fransiska Indah Kristiani

(2010110012)

Math Departement