Hard-Liners Targeting Miss World in Bali Shows Need for Anti-Hate-Speech Law in Indonesia
"Those who fight on the path of Allah are promised heaven," said Abu Muhammad Jibril Abdurrahman, vice chairman of the Indonesian Mujahideen Council (MMI), a hard-line Islamic organization. Earlier on in his speech before thousands of people who attended the rally to condemn the upcoming Miss World Pageant in Bali, the cleric alleged that Balinese Hindus were mustering forces to protect the "lascivious Miss World pageant" in "a war against Islam."
The speech is indeed extreme in its religious fanaticism and bigotry but the most damning about it is that it promotes hatred and should therefore be categorized as hate speech. What Abu Jibril said about waging a holy war is by no means an isolated incident. Similar messages of hatred and intolerance are being preached in mosques throughout the country by fundamentalist clerics.
Back in President Suharto's days, Abu Jibril and his likes would simply have been dragged down from the podium and possibly not seen again after, and yet, ironically, in post-Reformasi Indonesia, his speech has so far gone unpunished.
Naturally, the harsh tactics of Suharto's New Order should find no place in a democratic Indonesia, but democracy is never about allowing hate speech to be made without due penalties. The International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights, a United Nations charter to which Indonesia acceded in 2006, clearly states that "any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law."
And yet, despite being a signatory to the charter, Indonesia has not promulgated comprehensive legislation against hate-speech crimes. The situation is very unsatisfactory as the only law that deals with inciting hatred turns out to be Article 156 of the Criminal Code, which is general in the extreme and does not elaborate on the specific types of hate speech that are outlawed.
A comprehensive anti-hate-speech law would have to define what constitutes hate speech and at the same time guarantee freedom of speech. The legislation should also seek to educate Indonesians that freedom of speech does not do away with responsibility, neither does it condone the denigration and victimization of minority groups within the country.
In formulating the legislation, Indonesia might find the South African model useful as a comparative study, considering the country's struggle with apartheid and the multicultural heritage it has. South Africa's anti-hate-speech act, passed in 2000, prohibits discriminatory speech under the categories of race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, ethnic or social origin, skin color, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth.
The new anti-hate-speech legislation needed in Indonesia should also incorporate an injunction that it be included in the national education curriculum. The participation of the country's education system in retrenching the values of tolerance is essential to the successful implementation of the new law.
In fact, it may be safely argued that intolerance in a divided country like Indonesia often begins at home and at school. While the government may not be able to do much about what parents teach their children about tolerance, it can certainly act as a counterbalance through education.
The correlation between hate crimes and the education system is well documented in Pakistan. In 2012 the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom published a study that revealed how a 1988 act by the Pakistani government to revise the education system promoted religious extremism throughout the country. The revision, stated the government, had the following mission: The highest priority would be given to the revision of the curricula with a view to reorganizing the entire content around Islamic thought and giving education an ideological orientation so that Islamic ideology permeates the thinking of the young generation.
Another crucial factor in ensuring sustainable application of the law is how conversant the National Police and other law enforcing agencies are in the legislation. The anti-hate-speech law would not be effective if those who are supposed to enforce it do not even embrace it.
There is absolutely no guarantee that an anti-hate-speech law will eradicate bigotry and hatred within our society but it will at least mark a national consensus that such behavior is uncivilized and illegal. The fight against intolerance is bound to be a slow process as it seeks to redress decades if not centuries of bigotry and entrenched preconceptions. Thus, the process must start now.
Johannes Nugroho is a writer and businessman from Surabaya. He can be contacted at johannes@nonacris.com.
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (1) |
Milis Wanita Muslimah
Membangun citra wanita muslimah dalam diri, keluarga, maupun masyarakat.
Twitter: http://twitter.com/wanita_muslimah
Situs Web: http://www.wanita-muslimah.com
ARSIP DISKUSI : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wanita-muslimah/messages
Kirim Posting mailto:wanita-muslimah@yahoogroups.com
Berhenti mailto:wanita-muslimah-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Milis Keluarga Sejahtera mailto:keluarga-sejahtera@yahoogroups.com
Milis Anak Muda Islam mailto:majelismuda@yahoogroups.com
Milis ini tidak menerima attachment.
0 comments:
Post a Comment