---

Tons of inter-faith couples in Indonesia could rejoice themselves after Article 2 verse (1) of Act 1/1974 (Act of Marriage) which hinders their relationships’ sustainability is being challenged in Constitutional Court (MK).

Two graduates and one student from Indonesia University, challenged the Article towards 1945 Constitution. Damian Agata Yuvens, Anbar Jayadi, and Lutfi Saputra argued that Article 2 verse (1) Act of Marriage, in which implicitly bars inter-faith marriage, shall be labeled as non-binding.

As known, the Article says the validity of a marriage depends on the ruling of which religion the couples live their faith in. Article 2 verse (1) says: “Marriage is valid, if it’s accomplished under the ruling of particular religion and faith.”       

Damian Yuvens said that the article sets barrages that international realm has gotten rid of, religion and race. The Article forces someone to obey particular religion’s rule for marriage matter, while the freedom in having faith and marriage are basis of human rights.  

Another Plaintiff, Anbar Jayadi, said that the ruling of the Article prompts negative adaptations to repel the regulation. For example, there have been several violations to defy national and religion law. “National law is harmed by getting married abroad or getting married under custom” Anbar explained toward Panel of Justices, led by Justice Wahiddudin Adams. “Defying religion law is done by converting religion,” she added.

He said that the regulation is failed to fulfill the requirement of being a set of norms. Because, instead of giving clear message whether the inter-faith marriage is allowed or not, the Article repels back the decision to the people’s opinion.

Inter-faith marriage issues have prompted a choir of debate. Many say it is prohibited due to the faith existence, but some people, including Islam’s clerics, expressed that inter-faith marriage is allowed in some conditions.

Philosophical Studies

In response to it Deputy Chief Justice Arief Hidayat said that the Plaintiff must complete their lawsuit with philosophical studies. He implied that living in the archipelago requires Constitutional understanding. He reminded that Indonesia’s Constitution philosophically is neither Islamic nor Secular. It is, Pancasila, in which conveys “The oneness of Almighty God”, figures which principles of life we should rely on.   

“Pancasila’s vibe shall live in our daily life, legal principle must be built on universal foundation, which aligned with Pancasila,” Arief Hidayat explained.

Justice Muhammad Alim cited that 1945 Constitution is the Supreme Constitution for this country. “If there was opposing norms, it is 1945 Constitution we have to rely on, not ICCPR or other international rules,” he said (Winandriyo Kun Anggianto/mh/kun)

---