Plenary hearing of judicial review of the Blasphemy Law, Thursday (7/12) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ganie.

The Constitutional Court (MK) once again held a judicial review hearing of Law No. 1/PNPS/1965 on the Prevention, Diffusion, and/or Religious Blasphemy (Blasphemy Law) filed by the Ahmadiyya community. The eighth session of Case Number No. 56/PUU-XV/2017 was held by the Constitutional Court (MK) on Thursday (7/12) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court.

The hearing that had originally been scheduled to hear the Government’s Expert had to be postponed because the Board of Agency of Counseling, Development, and Preservation of Marriage (BP4) of the Ministry of Religious Affairs Soefyanto as the Government’s Expert submitted a paper containing a written statement today. Deputy Chief Justice Anwar Usman explained that the paper containing the written statement of the Expert should have been submitted up to two days before the hearing.

"The hearing today is to hear the statements of the House and experts from the President. And it turns out that a paper or a written statement from the expert of the Government was only received today. Well, the rules that have been practiced several times and always announced in every hearing before it is concluded that written statement is submitted at least two days before the day of the hearing. So, an Expert from the Government, Mr. Soefyanto, cannot be heard today. Please wait until the next hearing," said Anwar.

Previously, the Petitioners who were Ahmadiyya adherents claimed their constitutional rights were violated by the enactment of Articles 1, 2, and 3 of the Blasphemy Law. According to the Petitioners, the Joint Decree of the Minister of Religious Affairs, the Attorney General, and the Minister of Home Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia concerning Warning and Order to Adherents, Members and/or Leading Members of the Indonesian Ahmadiyya Jama\'at (JAI) and Members of the General Public (Joint Decree of 3 Ministers) drafted based on the three articles are detrimental to the Petitioners. The Joint Decree of 3 Ministers establishes Ahmadiyya as a cult.

The Petitioners were directly affected and their rights to religion and worship were restricted and suppressed because of the joint decree. There was a domino effect in the lives of Ahmadiyya adherents, for example the Petitioners could no longer worship in the mosques they had built because they were sealed or burned down, they could not record their marriage in Religious Affairs Office (KUA), and they were even evicted from their residences. Therefore, the Petitioners requested that Articles 1, 2, and 3 of the Blasphemy Law be declared contrary to the 1945 Constitution with constitutional conditions, in particular Article 28C paragraph (2), Article 28D paragraph (1), Article 28E paragraphs 1) and (2), Article 28I paragraph (2), Article 28G paragraph (1), and Article 29 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution and having no binding legal force as long as it is interpreted to be against the citizens of the Ahmadiyya community who only worship in their places of worship internally and not in public. (Lulu Anjarsari/Yuniar Widiastuti)