T

he Islam Defenders Front (FPI) came under another round of scathing attacks this week in the wake of the latest violence involving its members. Media news and commentaries, as well as social media, are buzzing with condemnations of the group over what happened in the Central Java town of Kendal last Thursday.

There is now a growing chorus to disband the FPI, invoking the Mass Organization Law that gives the government such power. The law, passed by the House of Representatives this month, has yet to be signed into law by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.

Ironically, the same people who had opposed the passage of the law when it was deliberated in the House due to its draconian nature are also clamoring for the ban.

But is the FPI the real culprit?

We are treading a fine line between the need to protect freedom of association and freedom of expression on the one hand, and the need to protect citizens against violent acts perpetrated by groups like the FPI on the other. These rights are guaranteed by the constitution, which also states that the state is responsible for ensuring that those rights are upheld.

Criticisms against the FPI, long notorious for its violent acts, have been misplaced. We are barking up the wrong tree. The FPI is not the real problem. The state is.

Why is the FPI allowed to get away with these violent criminal acts in the first place, tormenting, harassing, injuring and at one time even killing its targets? Only a few of these incidents '€” we could count on one hand '€” ended up in court and jail.

Now, as we saw what happened in Kendal on July 18, we are heading to a dangerous situation where violence is starting to beget violence.

The local people, in a spontaneous move upon hearing that a woman was killed after an FPI car crashed into her during one of its sweeping operations against vice, went after the FPI members with equal violence. Fortunately, the heavily outnumbered FPI members found sanctuary in a mosque and were evacuated to safety only after police arrived to fetch them. The angry mob was waiting outside ready to inflict harm.

Many people, as is clear from their comments in social media, cheered when the FPI finally got a taste of its own medicine: fear.

They did not see the more serious implications of this. More people in the future will organize themselves into a mob to confront the FPI every time it goes out on a sweeping operation. Both sides will be armed for sure, and both would not back down. We can predict that there will be more clashes in the future.

Where is the state, the police, in particular, in all this?

This is the question that many people have repeatedly asked every time they hear of another report of FPI harassment or violent attacks against religious minorities, restaurant and bar owners, or just about anyone who has come under its wrath.

The state has never been more impotent when it comes to dealing with the likes of the FPI.

The FPI'€™s right to exist should be protected, no matter how violent its ideology is. The danger with banning the FPI is that we know it will not be the last one to go, and that soon, organizations critical of the government will be muzzled this way. In the past, we have seen how the Mass Organization Law can become a powerful, repressive tool.

Small organizations like the FPI thrive on media attention. The massive publicity makes them look a lot bigger than it is. The portrayal of the FPI as a violent or '€œanarchistic'€ group by the media plays into its agenda, for it helps to instill fear in the public. Even the police are scared, apparently.

As much as some people want to, we cannot ban any ideology. Like faith, people believe what they want to believe. But the state can do something each time these violent groups break the law. Not before.

We should all be venting our anger at the state, in this case, Yudhoyono, the man who, for some strange reason, was in May conferred an international statesman award for promoting religious tolerance in Indonesia by the New York-based Appeal to Conscience Foundation.

He has failed us.

On Monday, amid all the social media buzz calling for the FPI ban, Yudhoyono said he would not tolerate acts of violence and instructed the police to do something about it.

Mr. President, we have heard it before. Until we see real action on your part, we will not raise our hopes.

The FPI also did not take Yudhoyono'€™s remarks seriously. No sooner after he made it, FPI chairman Habib Rizieq came out with the most defiant statement, calling the president '€œa loser'€.

Therefore, it looks like the violence will continue, but next time around, it may be worse. After Kendal, expect ugly clashes from what our bureaucrats like to call '€œhorizontal conflicts'€.

Only Yudhoyono can put a stop to this. Unless he forgets, in the oath of office that he took in 2004 and in 2009, he pledged to uphold the constitution. That means protecting every citizen against acts of violence, by anyone, even those who claim to represent God.

Yudhoyono is good until October 2014. Indonesia is already a failing state. He should stop it from completely failing.