R

eligious Affairs Minister Lukman Hakim Saifuddin has expressed his support for the recent Constitutional Court ruling that upholds a provision in the 1974 Marriage Law that was deemed by some to be ambiguous and fuel opposition to interfaith marriages.

The Constitutional Court (MK) rejected last week a judicial review of the law'€™s Article 2 that regulates interfaith marriage, maintaining its current provision that stipulates that a marriage can only be considered legitimate if it is conducted in line with the rituals of a religion to which both the bride and groom adhere.

The ruling resonated with the majority opinion of the Indonesian people that a marriage was not merely about legal procedure, but was also a sacred religious event, said Lukman.

On Monday, Lukman, who has been praised for his progressive stance on many issues, especially religious minority rights, said he appreciated the ruling.

'€œWe are grateful. It'€™s a ruling we should be grateful for because it reflects our Indonesia; our society is a religious society,'€ he said as quoted by the Antara news agency, adding that a religious society considered marriage as a part of religious teachings.

'€œTherefore, it cannot be separated from the religion itself, so there is no possibility for interfaith marriage to occur,'€ he added.

However, Lukman called on everyone to respect people who were already in an interfaith marriage.

In the ruling, the bench concluded that a citizen should abide by a limit set by the Constitution when exercising his or her liberties and rights, in a manner of respect and recognition of others'€™ rights and liberties, saying that it should also be done to fulfill justice, which fits moral and religious values, security and public order in a democratic country.

The court also rejected the argument of the petitioners '€” who consisted of a number of law students '€” that the provision forced people to choose a specific religion as a basis of their marriage.

Article 2 is often criticized for causing an ambiguous interpretation of interfaith marriages.

Aside from obliging couples to follow religious rituals to officiate their vows, the article does not explicitly say that both couples should follow same religion to do so. It often triggers resistance to such unions since religious teachings do not allow them.

A Supreme Court decision in 1986 allowed a couple who followed different religions to get married, arguing that their differences in faith should not be an obstacle.

The court also found that a number of interfaith marriages existed and that some Islamic schools and Christian churches tolerated such practices, although they stopped short of endorsing them.

Interfaith marriage appeared to remain a sensitive topic in the world'€™s largest Muslim population. The issue has also caught the attention of netizens and sparked debates on Twitter.