April 20, p. 1: The Constitutional Court on Monday ruled to uphold the controversial Blasphemy Law, a decision that plaintiffs said was mainly based on fears of a public backlash.
With only one dissenting judge, the court argued that the law was “still needed to maintain public order among religious groups”.
“If the Blasphemy Law was scrapped before a new law was enacted … it was feared that misuses and contempt of religion would occur and trigger conflicts in society,” Constitutional justice Akil Mochtar said.
“This law is very important ... to prevent both horizontal and vertical conflicts from occurring,” another judge commented.
The dissenting opinion came from justice Maria Farida Indrati, who said the 1965 law had many shortcomings relating to the fundamental amendments on human rights in the Constitution. “With the many problems that have often triggered arbitrary actions in the implementation of this law … I think that the petition should have been granted,” she said.
Your comments:
It is understandable the court arrived at this decision. It is necessary to note that even Europe doesn’t have a common position toward the issue of blasphemy while Europe now is facing a serious issue on freedom of religion, such as Islamophobia.
Mathiass
Sweden
Possibly several of those judges, if not most of them, believe in God. Of course they are free to believe what they want: They can believe in God, Santa Claus, eternal life, ghosts and rabbits that lay chocolate eggs on Easter day, but if they are believers, they can’t be impartial in this case.
Filippo Gian Carlo
Paris
It’s unbelievable how this beautiful country is becoming a wahhabi country, with history repeating
itself.
I can now imagine how the Jews felt when the Nazis were gaining more and more power by using violence and intimidating people, politicians, judges, the neighborhood and universities among others.
The government then did nothing against those extremists, just like this government today.
Minorities are more and more insecure and afraid of their lives. It is the same here.
Once in power they imposed their own set of laws. It already occurs in some regencies.
Edo E.
Jakarta
We shouldn’t be surprised that extremists have intimidated the court into this ruling, providing them the legal basis for their violent tactics to continue.
David K.
Jakarta
It is another victory for the fanatics. Indonesia is far down the road of religious oppression and fanaticism. How long can it hold together under this pressure.
This law only increases religious disharmony by justifying and protecting the fanatical groups who are causing it.
PJ
Jakarta
PJ and David, your comments and opinions are absurd and hateful. You label Muslims who want to uphold their religious law and dignity as fanatics/extremists.
You are intolerant and disrespectful of other belief systems, especially Muslims. You herald human
rights but you despise the rights of Muslims.
Yanuar W
Jakarta
Goodbye human rights. Religion wins again. Sharia law will not be
far behind.
Sheldon
Probolinggo, East Java
| 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|