R

epresentatives of Muhammadiyah, one of the largest Muslim organizations in the country, testified on Wednesday at the Constitutional Court that Islam did not recognize interfaith marriage.

Muhammadiyah chairman Din Syamsuddin, in a statement read out by Muhammadiyah law division head Syaiful Bahri, said a Muslim who married someone of another faith would only have their marriage registered at the civil registry office, not at religious affairs offices under the Religious Affairs Ministry.

Din said an interfaith marriage would not produce a harmonious family and emphasized that Muslim men should not look elsewhere to get married because '€œthere won'€™t be any shortage of Muslim women.'€

'€œMuhammadiyah believes that a Muslim should marry another Muslim and we demand that the court reject this judicial review request [into the Marriage Law],'€ Syaiful said before the court justices.

A judicial review into the Marriage Law was filed by three graduates and one student from the University of Indonesia'€™s School of Law: Damian Agata Yuvens, Rangga Sujud Widigda, Luthfi Saputra and Anbar Jayadi.

They requested that the court justices review the law'€™s Article 2 that stipulates marriage ceremonies should be conducted according to religious teachings.

According to them, forcing people to choose a specific religion as a basis for their marriage prevents couples from enjoying the liberty of worshipping and practicing their religion of choice.

The law neither suggests nor prohibits marriages between people of different religions. However, it regulates that couples should be married in religious ceremonies and should register their marriages at the civil registry office. The lack of clarity in the law has led to debate and the insistence of some groups that interfaith marriage should not be allowed.

During Wednesday'€™s hearing, a group calling itself the Advocacy for Diversity Team, which acted as a related party in the judicial review request, said it agreed with the judicial review petitioners that the disputed article violated the 1945 Constitution.

'€œBased on Article 28B, paragraph one of the Constitution, everyone has the right to establish a family. Article 2 of the Marriage Law is not in line with this,'€ Uli Parulian Sihombing, the lawyer of the team, said before the court justices, chaired by Hamdan Zoelva.

Uli added that the absence of regulations about interfaith marriage had established a legal vacuum in the country for everyone who wanted to marry across religions and had caused different treatment by different registry offices.

'€œWe have found there are a number of civil registry offices that will not accommodate interfaith marriage registration, while others are willing to do so,'€ he said. (idb)