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