O

ne young Facebook user and the chief justice of the Consitutional Court have unwittingly posed the unspeakable questions so far: Do the Pancasila state ideology and the Constitution still serve the state’s obligation to protect citizens’ religious freedom? Do we really welcome all faiths and belief systems? If so, do we need to change the ideology and the sacrosanct Preamble to the Constitution, which cites Pancasila?

Consider recent developments. On Tuesday, the Court’s chief justice Mahfud MD told visiting German Chancellor Angela Merkel that the Court “has guaranteed the freedom of atheists and communists in this country, as long as they do not interfere with the freedom of people of other religions,” Kompas.com reported late Tuesday.

On Thursday, a Shiite leader was sentenced to two years jail for blasphemy. On June 14, a West Sumatra court sentenced local resident Alexander Aan to 2.5 years in prison for his postings on his Facebook account and a fan page titled Ateis Minang (Minang Atheist).

Alexander was found guilty of violating the 2008 law on information and electronic transactions, by spreading “information that had caused hatred and enmity” against individuals and groups based on religious affiliations. Alexander’s declaration that he was an atheist, the judge said, could be taken to be unacceptable behaviour, given the Pancasila state ideology and the Constitution, which implies every citizen must have a religion.

Alexander is from the Internet generation, free of trauma of the 1965 bloodshed, which involved a witchhunt against suspected communists – and Mahfud is among the few who sound progressive compared to others brought up under the New Order. Scholars note how almost immediately following the Sept. 30, 1965, aborted coup, Pancasila became sakti, the magic, sacred icon used by the suddenly emerging Soeharto against the “evil” communists and atheists.

Not surprisingly, late president Abdurrahman Wahid failed to scrap a Provisional People’s Consultative Assembly ruling against communism.

So if all faiths and belief systems are now welcome, do we need to change the sanctified ideology and Preamble? But as activists now campaign for the use of Pancasila to combat intolerance, who would want to change it today?

Abdul Mu’ti, an executive of the second-largest Muslim organization in Indonesia, Muhammadiyah, said that while Pancasila does not recognize atheism, Indonesia is bound to protect everyone regardless of belief and ideology, as we are bound to international covenants on religious freedom and human rights.

Yet citizens who choose a faith outside the six state-sanctioned “religions” are similarly vulnerable – in 2010 the Consitutional Court upheld the 1965 law on blasphemy, which recognizes a limited list of official faiths. Justice Maria Farida dissented, citing the excesses – the difficulties of religious minorities in obtaining official documents such as identity cards and certificates for education, marriage and even death.

Worse, the government nods to bylaws against “deviant” faiths, which critics say lend justification to violence – including the murder of three Ahmadiyah members last year.

History shows that Pancasila’s belief in one God was a compromise to unify Islamists and Christians, so the new republic could be born.

But if the reform movement aimed for a better Indonesia for all, we may be forced to put behind us the legacy of trauma and propaganda, and face earlier unimaginable tasks; in line with the intention to “protect all the people of Indonesia”, as the Preamble states.