Constitutional Court’s Researcher M. Mahrus Ali moderated the 6th session of 2021 ICCIS virtually with Khairil Azmin Mokhtar, Cekli Setya Pratiwi and Tri Sulistianing Astuti on Thursday afternoon (16/9). Photo by PR.  

---

Thursday, 16 September 2021 | 13:25 WIB 

BANDUNG, PUBLIC RELATIONS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COURT - On the final session of “The 4th Indonesian Constitutional Court International Symposium (also known as 2021 ICCIS), there were 3 (three) speakers presenting their research papers namely Cekli Setya Pratiwi of the Institute of Human Rights and Peace Studies, Mahidol University, Thailand (“Rethinking the Constitutionality of Flawed Indonesia's Anti-Blasphemy Law”), Khairil Azmin Mokhtar of the International Islamic University of Malaysia (“Unmasking The Devil: The Role of The Court and Islamic Religious Authorities in the Battle against Religious Extremism and Terrorism in Malaysia”), and Tri Sulistianing Astuti of the School of Government and Public Policy Indonesia (“Satire Expression and Blasphemy: Finding Its Proportionality in Indonesian Religious Society”).

Mokhtar reviewed the role of judiciary and Islamic authority in fighting extremism and terrorism in Malaysia. In his research, he used a legal approach by analyzing the constitution, laws, emergency regulations, court cases, and other relevant materials. He explained that Malaysia took pride in the diversity of religions, ethnicity, and culture that the country had. That being said, religious freedom was essential for Malaysia as a democratic country and it was both guaranteed and protected by the Federal Constitution. 

From his point of view, Malaysia initially saw religious extremism as a result of misguided religious interpretation especially Islam by some groups in order to spread disbelief among the people and weaken the democratically elected government. However, later on Malaysia adopted a holistic and practical counter-terrorism strategy to eradicate terrorist organization as well as to prevent a potential extremism ideology from growing. This approach allowed the right steps and proportional response to the act of terrorism. 

 “Then the law enforcer along with the judiciary and Islamic authority continues to work hand in hand to fight not only the terrorist organization, but also the ideology. Therefore, fighting religious extremism and terrorism in Malaysia could happen continously and effective.” he said.  

Application of Human RIght in the Blasphemy Law Review

On the same occasion, Pratiwi in her paper focused on reviewing the constitutionalism of Blasphemy Law which frequently showed up in Indonesian Constitutional Court’s Decisions namely Decisions Number 140/PUU-VII/2009; 84/PUU-X/2012; and 76/PUU-XVI/2018. From her perspective, the Court indeed admitted the content of the Blasphemy Law was ambiguous causing it to have multi-interpretation, however at the same time the Court declared that the law  was constitutional due to the religious rights contained in the law was in line with  Article 28J of the constitution. Should the law be nullified, it would cause a legal vacuum.  

She further explained that despite the fact that the Blasphemy Law had been reviewed multiple times, the lack of clarity in the Court’s Decisions addressing the norm was a relatively new precedent. Many countries had adopted the international treaty of human rights, including the ratification of the Covenant of Civil and Political Rights and the derivatives. The question was how the judiciary would apply those human rights norms and principles accurately as a whole, especially in the case of reviewing a law that required further analysis.  

“Therefore this research was begun by studying whether the conception of the intersection between several rights such as freedom of expression, religion, and faith and the restriction of human rights which had been decided and binded by the Court’s Decision. Failure in approving the core principles of non-discrimination in respecting the religious freedom and its basic boundary might cause a country to excessively restrict those rights. Hence, it was necessary to again review the constitutionality of Blasphemy Law more thoroughly,” said Pratiwi which was also a lecturer at the Law Faculty of Universitas Muhammadiyah Malang. 

Satire and Religious Freedom

Meanwhile, Astuti shared about the freedom of speech and religion as the fundamental rights of everyone in a democratic country. She believed that freedom of speech allowed the media to find the truth in the form of innuendo and satire as an expression. However, she admitted that innuendoes and satire as a way of expressing and finding truth did more harm than good to the religious aspect of the society. She took the example of a satire cartoon called Charlie Hebdo which became an issue of debate. 

In her research, Astuti aimed to answer  2 (two) questions. First, how freedom of speech and religion got mixed and tangled in innuendoes or satire. Second, how the government created the boundary concerning religion-related satire based on the proportionality test for Indonesians as religious issues were easily misused and resulting in violence. 

“As a conclusion, religious innuendos or satire as an expression should be restricted in the case of blasphemy based on the proportionality contained in Article 28J Paragraph (2) of the constitution. It (the restriction) considers the contain and purpose of the innuendoes, writer’s role, political context while respecting the ethics, races, and others. That the sensitive issue among the religious community in Indonesia and restriction of those expressions should be regulated in laws to prevent the misunderstanding of religion-related satire and causing it to be blasphemous in the Court’s decision,” she explained.  

 On a side note, the international symposium would be held on 15-16 September 2021 using the hybrid method (virtual and on-site) in Bandung, West Java. Previously, the Court had hosted similar programs: 2017 ICCIS in Solo, 2018 ICCIS in Yogyakarta, and 2019 ICCIS in Bali. Due to the pandemic, the program was halted in 2020. ICCIS itself was a global academic forum held annually to discuss the matters, ideas, and challenges of constitutional law, human rights, and democracy. This year it focused on religious issues in the context of constitutional rights. The Center of Case Research of the Constitutional Court opened the chance for academics to send out their articles and selected articles would publish in the Court’s journal called Constitutional Review.

Writer: Sri Pujianti
Editor: Tiara Agustina
Translator: WA

Translation uploaded on Sept 20, 2021 at 11:36 WIB

Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case of any differences between the English and the Indonesian versions, the Indonesian version will prevail.

 

---