On May 9, 2017, Jakarta Governor Basuki Tjahaja Purnama (Ahok) was sentenced to two years in prison by a panel of judges at the North Jakarta District Court. The court based its ruling on Article 156a of the Criminal Code (KUHP) regarding blasphemy.

Ahok is not the first. There are a number of others who have also been labeled as blasphemers. They include Lia Eden, Abdul Rahman, Ahmad Musadeq, and others who were former leaders of Gafatar; Hans Bague Jassin; Arswendo Atmowiloto; Saleh; Ardi Husein; Sumardin Tapaya; and Yusman Roy; as well as Mangapin Sibuea, the leader of the Kiamat Sect.

The Jakarta Legal Aid Institute (LBH), a partner of the Tifa Foundation, has condemned the attitude and actions of law enforcement officials who have once again invoked Article 156a of the Criminal Code in imposing sentences on members of the public. This is because, according to LBH Jakarta, the blasphemy provision is a regulation that violates citizens’ rights to freely express their opinions and thoughts, as stipulated in the 1945 Constitution and other laws.

Not only does it violate freedom of expression, but the use of blasphemy laws also has the potential to threaten the existence of minority groups in Indonesia. This is because minority groups are often criminalized by the majority group for allegedly violating the religious tenets of the majority, as has happened with the Gafatar, Ahmadiyah, and other groups.

What is the Jakarta Legal Aid Institute’s explanation and stance regarding the threats posed by Article 156a of the Criminal Code concerning blasphemy? Read the full statement in the following press release.

Press Release

Ahok’s Verdict: Blasphemy Laws Pose a Threat to Minority Groups and the Nation’s Democracy

STATEMENT BY THE JAKARTA LEGAL AID INSTITUTE
No.: 625/SK-RILIS/V/2017

The panel of judges at the North Jakarta District Court sentenced Basuki Tjahaja Purnama (Ahok), the defendant in the alleged blasphemy case, to two years in prison. In a previous hearing, Ahok faced alternative charges under Articles 156a and 156 of the Criminal Code, with a prosecution seeking a one-year prison sentence and a two-year probation period. This verdict signals a regression of democracy and the rule of law during President Joko Widodo’s administration.

The panel of judges applied Article 156a, which is, in fact, an anti-democratic provision that clearly violates a person’s right to express thoughts and hold views in accordance with their conscience, as well as the right to freedom of expression and opinion as stipulated in Article 28E of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, Law No. 12 of 2005 on the Ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and various other legal provisions.

Article 156a has long served as a pretext for the state and intolerant majority groups to criminalize minority groups or individuals whose beliefs differ from those of the majority, as was the case with Lia Eden, Abdul Rahman, Ahmad Musadeq, et al. (Former Gafatar Leader), Hans Bague Jassin, Arswendo Atmowiloto, Saleh, Ardi Husein, Sumardin Tapaya (whistling during prayer), Yusman Roy (multilingual prayer), Mangapin Sibuea (leader of an apocalyptic sect).

Furthermore, the wording of Article 156a of the Criminal Code is unclear, fails to meet the principles of lex certa and lex scripta in upholding the principle of legality, and is too subjective to be applied to the public. This makes the wording of Article 156a contrary to the principle of legal certainty, thereby also threatening the democratic principle that upholds the rule of law for the public. Currently, Ahok, amidst a predominantly Muslim society, has become a victim. In the future, it could be Muslim individuals in a predominantly Hindu, Buddhist, or Christian society who become the victims of criminalization.

In its ruling, the Panel of Judges also did not apply Article 156a of the Criminal Code as a substantive offense; the description of mens rea in the Panel’s legal reasoning was far-fetched and failed to be substantiated. The Panel of Judges failed to recognize that the elements of offending the Muslim community, causing unrest, and disrupting social harmony were actually spread by intolerant groups who reported Ahok and pushed for his trial. The Panel of Judges attributed all forms of unrest and mass movements that have caused public anxiety to Ahok alone and punished him for it. The Panel of Judges’ ruling in this case will actually encourage the public to be even more eager to use this anti-democratic blasphemy law in the future.

On the other hand, the Panel of Judges also failed to apply the law in a contextually appropriate manner and in line with previous judicial decisions, such as by referring to: (1) Constitutional Court Decision No. 84/PUU-X/2012 regarding the requirement for a warning in the form of a Joint Ministerial Decree and the repetition of the act after the issuance of such a warning before applying Article 156a with criminal sanctions against Ahok. The legal uncertainty that the Constitutional Court had sought to rectify was once again thrown into disarray by the Panel of Judges at the North Jakarta District Court.

By convicting Ahok, the judiciary has once again failed to serve as a place where the public can seek true justice. The judiciary has once again succumbed to public pressure. This sets a dangerous precedent for the enforcement of the law in Indonesia, where an individual can be punished based on public pressure, even though the court is supposed to be an independent body, loyal only to the values of justice, the rule of law, and the constitution. The rule of law has been sacrificed and replaced by rule by the masses (mobocracy), while legal processes and the facts of the trial have been disregarded.

However, despite all the shortcomings in law enforcement, the legal process ultimately continues. An appeal may be the next step taken to seek true justice. Hopefully, the appellate and cassation courts under the Supreme Court can still serve as bastions of justice where the public can place their hopes for justice and break the cycle of today’s flawed judicial system.

In light of this, LBH Jakarta states:

1. The Panel of Judges’ ruling in case 1537/Pid.B/2016/PN.Jkt.is unjust and has undermined the essence of the law and the judicial system, which is the place where the public seeks true justice based on legal certainty; furthermore, the Panel of Judges’ decision also contradicts the human rights principle of freedom of opinion and expression as guaranteed by the Constitution, Law No. 39/1999 on Human Rights, and Law No. 9 of 1998 on Freedom of Expression in Public, as well as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which was ratified by Law No. 12/2005.
2. The panel of judges at the North Jakarta District Court in the Ahok case succumbed to public pressure or interference from mass organizations, which is deemed to have undermined the judges’ independence in adjudicating the case based on the principles of democracy, justice, and the rule of law, thereby sacrificing the rule of law and legitimizing “rule by the masses” carried out by intolerant protesters.
3. We urge the Government and the Courts to strictly enforce the law in accordance with the principles of legal certainty, democracy, justice, and respect for human rights.
4. We urge the Government and the House of Representatives of the Republic of Indonesia to review the formulation of the blasphemy offense currently under discussion in the House of Representatives as part of the deliberations on the Criminal Code Bill, and to repeal this anti-democratic provision in order to uphold democratic principles, human rights, and the rule of law in Indonesia.
5. Encouraging the public to respect differences and the freedom of opinion and expression; if we do not work together to safeguard these rights, anyone could be imprisoned simply because their differing views or expressions are deemed to have hurt someone else’s feelings—something that is difficult to measure objectively.

With this statement of position, LBH Jakarta hereby declares that it will continue to monitor all law enforcement efforts, particularly on behalf of “victims” of criminalization under Article 156a of the Criminal Code, in order to uphold the rule of law and respect for human rights.

Jakarta, May 9, 2017
Sincerely,
JAKARTA LEGAL AID INSTITUTE

Contacts:
Alghiffari Aqsa (081280666410)
Yunita (08999000627)
Pratiwi Febry (081387400670)