Releasing the Myth in the Religious Conflict
 |
| Ogoh-ogoh untuk perayaaan Nyepi di salah satu desa di Kediri |
The some parties of the conflict have different interest in the conflict
arena that has certain motivations. This interest always brings the
imaginary in their values. It can be mapped based on the statements of parties
that debate to call it is religious conflict or not. The Indonesia government
especially Ministry of Religious Affairs determine conflict that is happen in
sampan is not religious conflict. They said it is the family conflict. In the
other hand, the mass media force to use the term of religious conflict to
describe the attacking toward Shi’ah community by a group of people. So, what
are the interests of each party, the actors in conflict, the out side parties
of conflict and the Medias. Potentially, they bring the Sampang conflict in
escalation problem that is puss to add the numbers of actors and victims.
Before discussing about sampan conflict, it is better to know the
background of situation in Indonesia, especially about religion and its policy.
Based on public discussion, on title “Religion, violence, blemishing
politic, evaluation on Shi’ah-Sunni conflict in Sampang”, Thursday,
September 27th 2012, at University Club UGM, there are some
sources from different scholars field analyze that conflict. One of them
is Zaenal Abidin Bagir who emphasizes the regulation in
Indonesia that has the effect of religious conflict potential causes, focus
on Undang-Undang No. 1 Tahun 1965 tentang Undang-Undang Penodaan Agama.
Religion in Indonesia is drawn by the government in the hierarchy form. There
are six religions (worldly-which has an international standards that is
required must have had the scriptures, prophets, laws) are Islamic, Christian,
Catholic, Hindu, Buddhist, Confucian. They get financial support from the
government. Underneath, there is a belief system which is only ‘recognized’ but
they is not protected by governments (the class and the government's treatment
of this belief system is different from the official religion). Then, the hierarchy pursed
being "not recognized" for the form of "kepercayaan"
(likes local custom). The thing that not should be in Indonesia is who did not
embrace religion or be atheist.
That policy is constructed and controlled by the law, which is since 1965
until 2012 there were 47 cases that use the law of religion blasphemy (UU
Penodaan Agama). From 1965 to 2000 only 10 cases, but from 2000 to 2012 the
number of cases increased by three times or as many as 37 cases. That is
occurred in one third of during 47 years, there 32 cases after 2005, for
example MUI’s fatwa misguided for pluralism, liberalism and anti-apostasy
movement).
However, the trend to use issue of blasphemy increasingly is more worrying.
They who were considered by heretical would be wider; this trend is also
achieved at the level of regional policy (religious policy in the certain
resident). That led to a particular religion to be more narrowed in sense, for
example, what we call as Islam is more narrowed in the particular definition of
certain group of Islam, and the others considered as heretical. If the
condition can not be controlled and allowed, it will threaten for the existence
of minority groups that lived peacefully in Indonesia before. The intimidation
can be done by recklessly determining action blasphemy. The utilizing of
legislation/law to criminalize the 'difference' become 'desecration',
and the worst is differences between both of them are not clear. However,
Indonesia's Supreme Court (Mahkamah Agung) determined that the law (Penodaan
Agama) is still valid, according to the constitution, it is useful for
maintaining social order. The problem gets worse when the law can not
distinguish between the presences of the Shi’ah and the people action
"deviated from religion main point" that is legitimated as criminal
in blasphemy law.
The other debate that has not completed is related between the
"concept of harmony" (the consequences of freedom can be restricted,
in order to maintain harmony-it is popular New Order era) and the "concept
of liberty" (requires a high tolerance should be more carefully in the
face of tensions due to the difference). Both concepts have their each
consequence in shaping the attitudes of religious maturity in Indonesia.
Back to the interest of parties, the government should maintain the imaging
of Indonesia ad peaceful country and the other hand, this attitude is no
helpful to solve the real condition of conflict relating to right to belief.
The interesting critics in the Annual Report 2011 by CRCS, is the
majority just need to attack the unwanted minority and the government responded
by relocating. This statement is to response government policy to relocate
Syi’ah community from Sampang as a part of problem solving. In other studies,
as well as interviews Rusdi Mathari in reporting cases of Sampang, the conflict
experienced enrichment supported by the local social and cultural conditions to
ignite a major problem and penetrated into violence. The family conflict
(between Tajul Muluk and Rois) is caused by disappointment based on the
economic and social jealousy. Then, one of the actors uses to manipulate
religious issues by determining the 'difference' of Shi’ah toward Sunni as the
'heresy'. Thus, the social understanding will be easy to burn the emotions
people or even legitimize violence against the victim.
The imaginary of value that is the Sunni Islam as minority to be the
perfect value than the others, is one of cosmic belief that more chauvinist toward
certain interpretation of Islam. The ideology that constructs to define what
Islam and receive as Islam is arranged. The reality is there many interpretations,
understandings, sects, and as a part of Islam. The willing to Islamize the law
is always refer to the most understanding of Islam in Indonesia, it means
Sunni. But Islam is not only Sunni. The worst thing that I worried, is about
radical understanding that is so narrowed to force people belief in the same
manners they belief. Unfortunately, most of this attitude is supported by the
head of regional governments.
The contentious of conflict is caused the
escalation of spiral conflict. The escalation is the result of a vicious
circle of action and reaction. Contentious tactics committed by a party to
encourage the same contentious response from the other party. These responses
contribute to further contentious actions of the parties concerned. It makes a
complete circle of conflict and then began forming a circle that increasingly
acute (Pruitt 2004 p. 90-92). The Indonesian governments is failed to
make more parties are safe from conflict escalation when a balance of
power exist (p. 86). The failed is there is not adequately
communicated to counteract the threat and there is no perceptive and rational
decision makers, and there is no effort to avoid
escalation.
Another question unanswered, as Rizal Panggabean explanation is how to explain
the actions conflict with not only the completion of placing Sampang Shiah
community as a victim, but also do not just treat the Sunni community Sampang
as the attacker. In fact, the violence actions make a logical consequence,
while the victim (Tajul Muluk) became the accused and in prison, and there has
been no information regarding violent actors. The problems solving through the
continuous re-conceptualization will be hard to do with the condition of
religious understanding and truth becomes more narrowed and difficult to accept
the “differences”.
0 komentar: