Evolution of Religion and Belief: Post-2017 Constitutional Court Decision

1. Zainal Abidin Bagir Center for Religious and Cross-cultural Studies, Universitas Gadjah Mada Indonesia “Agama” and “Kepercayaan” after the 2017 Constitutional Court Decision

2. Introduction • Religion(agama), belief (kepercayaan), adat, and culture (budaya) are unstable categories; changing definitions, overlaps, represented in different offices  different regulations • Post-1998 trends:Revival of adat and religion Relatively more recognition of adatand non-world religions. • The 2017 Constitutional Court Decision on ID Card defines agama as comprising kepercayaan. To what extent does it affect the overall Indonesian construction of religion?

3. The construction of “religion” in the 1965 “Defamation of Religion” Law. 6 World Religions Other World Religions Local Religions/ Beliefs - The freedom to exist and to practice - The protection (from defamation) - The distribution of state fund - - The freedom to exist and to practice - Not prohibited, as long as they do not defame the six religions Limit of recognition - The prohibition to name “beliefs” as religion and practice them as (resembling) religious practice; government is to ‘straighten’ it. - Local religions are not indicated/recognized Protection No recognition

4. Governed Religion • (i) six world religions(agama) • (ii) other world religions(agama) • (iii) belief (kepercayaan) • (iv) indigenous/local religions(culture, adat) • The reality of “lived religion” further complicates the typology and each of the categories.

5. 1970 - 1980s • 1973 MPR decree: kepercayaanis equivalent to religion referring to Art. 29 of the 1945 Constitution: • (1) The state is based on the Oneness of God/ Divinity • (2) The state guarantees the freedom to embrace religion and worship according to one’s religion or belief. • 1978 MPR decree: kepercayaan is culture; members of kepercayaan should choose one of the religions

6. Constitutional Amendment Debate(1999 – 2000) • Fascinating debate on central issues related to religion, which includes religious freedom (2000) • Art. 28 E (1) on religion • Art. 28 E (2) on belief, thought, conscience • Art 28J: “Religious values” as a ground of limitation • Proposed amendments of Art. 29 (2000 – 2002): • The return to Jakarta Charter, or obligation for followers of religions to observe their religious teachings • Adding an article on state’s obligation to not act in opposition to religious values • Excluding belief/“kepercayaan” completely

7. Civil Administration Law (2006, 2013) • A decree on converting followers of kepercayaanto one of the six religions (2005); a letter from Mendagri that the marriage can’t be registered (2006) • But, in 2006: the religion column on the ID card: • “Agama”: Six religions • and “Others” (or blank), for religions not recognized as religions yet, or followers of kepercayaan

8. 2010 Decision on blasphemy law • Acknowledgement that followers of AK are equal citizens; and that they do experience discrimination; but it is the result of implementation of the law; not the law itself. [3.73] • It is not the authority of the Court to change the law  but the government and Parliament. • So, despite the acknowledgment, the Court leaves the norm, the paradigm of religious governance intact.

9. 2017 Decision on KTP/ID Card • UUD 1945 acknowledges the existence of AK as different from but equal to religion: Art. 28E (1) on religion and (2) on kepercayaan. • Supported by the discussion during the Amendment (145-146) •  KTP should be open to the two different categories • The problem is the law itself. • Categories (ii), (iii) and (iv) are combined

11. Conclusions • The 2017 CC Decision is very significant and has changed part of the norm/paradigm of religious governance (from four categories to three or, the furthest, two categories) • The status now: “different but equal” • Note: the argument against kepercayaan (incl. during the Constitutional Amendment) is normative, based on what constitutes “religion”, as a central feature of Indonesia versus the argument based on the sociological fact of the existence of followers of kepercayaan.

12. Conclusions However • (1) it still reduces the complexity (one of the fixed categories to choose from; and considering kepercayaanand agama leluhuridentical; further, now (world) religions other than the six have to go to Kepercayaan column. • (2) the decision is still half-way from fully equal citizenship • (3) the implementation; • Critique of any governed religion: it is blind to the complexity of lived religion (including the combination of religious identities) • Nevertheless, very significant, if compared with the unstable (non-)recognition of kepercayaan (which was almost gone from the state lexicon during the Constitutional Amendment)