The Petitioner’s expert taking oath before the Court to testify at a material judicial review hearing of Lw on Halal Product Assurance, Monday (2/5/2024). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.
JAKARTA (MKRI) — Numerous fatwa institutions will potentially lead to diverse fatwas, which will in turn impact legal uncertainty, said Asrorun Niam Sholeh, a fiqh professor of the Sharia and Law Faculty of Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta Islamic State University and first deputy for youth empowerment of the Ministry of Youth and Sports in his testimony as an expert for the Petitioner of case No. 58/PUU-XXI/2023 on Monday, February 5, 2024 in the Constitutional Court’s plenary courtroom. He challenges Article 48 points 1, 19, 20, and 32 of Law No. 6 of 2023 on the Stipulation of Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No. 2 of 2022 on Job Creation into Law (Job Creation Law).
He also said halal is a religious terminology that is the domain of religion and religious institutions. Halal fatwa is an answer to Islamic law on issues related to food products, medicines, and cosmetics as well as used goods. As a product of ijtihad (independent reasoning) on dynamic and actual problems, it opens the possibility of different views in finding answers. Meanwhile, the guarantee of halal products requires legal certainty—a single answer in the form of a fatwa by a fatwa institution that is used as the basis for issuing halal certificates.
He then explained that to provide a guarantee of legal certainty, it is necessary to unify fatwa through a religious fatwa institution recognized by statutory provisions. Various laws and regulations mandate the MUI to carry out the task of determining religious fatwas for the purpose of unifying fatwas and guaranteeing legal certainty. The mandate to the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) is based on the factual condition that MUI is a forum for deliberation of ulama, zuama, and Muslim scholars and a forum for various Islamic community organizations in Indonesia.
In addition, Asrorun explained that before being amended through the Job Creation Law, the Halal Product Guarantee (JPH) Law had shown a commitment to fatwa unification and fatwa institutions by emphasizing that the determination of product halalness was carried out by MUI. Meanwhile, the Job Creation Law mandates the Fatwa Committee formed by the Minister of Religious Affairs to determine the halalness of products. The Fatwa Committee, in addition to contradicting the symbiotic paradigm in the relationship between religion and the state that has become a national consensus, has also caused legal uncertainty.
“The provision of Article 33A distinguish regular halal certification applications from those carried out by micro- and small business actors through halal statements. Determination of product halalness for regular halal certification is carried out by the Indonesian Ulema Council, while the determination of product halalness for halal certification carried out by micro- and small business actors through halal statements (or known to the public as self-declaration) is carried out by the Halal Product Fatwa Committee,” Asrorun explained before Chief Justice Suhartoyo and the other constitutional justices.
He asserted that the differentiation of authority to determine the fatwa between the two institutions, which is based on the halal certification paths (regular and self-declaration or halal statement by business actors), is contrary to religious norms considering that halal is a religious legal decision that is single, not tiered; there are no levels of light halal. There is no such things as regular halal or halal by declaration, as well as low, medium, or high quality halal. This can clash with religious norms, thus impacting legal uncertainty guaranteed by the Constitution, reduce public confidence, and damage efforts to guarantee halal products.
“Legal uncertainty of the guarantee of halal products due to two institutions that determine product halalness is not just potential, but has manifested, and occurs in the community. One of the problems that arose was when the Fatwa Committee issued a fatwa on the halalness of Nabidz brand grape juice products. Nabidz products have applied for halal certification on May 25, 2023 through self-declaration with the assistance of the Halal Product Process (PPH) by the PPH facilitator. Its halalness was determined on June 12, 2023 by the Fatwa Committee formed by the Minister of Religious Affairs. Later on, there was an uproar in the community because it turned out that it was not in accordance with the standard halal fatwa set by MUI. The MUI Fatwa Commission also conducted an examination, and it turned out that the products contained alcohol, which according to the MUI fatwa standard, was forbidden and could not be certified halal. This case caused an uproar in the community,” he revealed.
As a result, continued Asrorun, there were police reports against the company, sanction on the PPH facilitator, and revocation of halal certificates for Nabidz products. The dualism of the institution for determining the halalness of products in the Job Creation Law has clearly caused legal uncertainty and caused uproar in the community, which if left unchecked will harm the community and hamper the efforts to guarantee halal products aimed at by this Law. This norm is contrary to Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, which reads, “Everyone shall be entitled to fair legal recognition, certainty, protection, and assurance and equal treatment before the law.”
If the formation of the Fatwa Committee was aimed at acceleration, it is not a valid reason to violate several legal principles as well as religious norms and national consensus. In addition, the factual condition as illustrated in the attachment of the expert statement shows that the institutional capacity of MUI in determining product halalness is still very large compared to the products to be examined.
Also read:
Petitioner Questions Institution Authorized to Judge Halal Disputes
Petitioner Revises Petitums in Case on Job Creation Law
The Petitioner of case No. 58/PUU-XXI/2023, Rega Felix, challenges Article 34 paragraph (2) of the JPH Law and Article 48 point 19 of the appendix to the Job Creation Law, which specifically contain amendment to Article 33 paragraph (5) of the JPH Law, and Article 48 point 20 of the appendix to the Job Creation Law, which specifically contains addition to Article 33 paragraph (1) of the JPH Law. He alleges that the mandatory halal product insurance system is subject to legal disputes such as those on the determination of halal or non-halal brand names. The JPH and Job Creation Laws, he argues, which led to the establishment various fatwa institutions such as the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) and the Halal Product Committee, have led to higher potential of disputes.
Also read:
Court Reviews Constitutionality of Two Halal Certification Institutions
Indonesia Halal Watch Revises Petition on Dualism of Halal Certification Institutions
Meanwhile, in case No. 49/PUU-XXI/2023, Indonesia Halal Watch, represented by chairman Joni Arman Hamid and secretary Raihani Keumala, argue that the changes to and addition of norms have harmed them. These changes have led to a shift from Indonesia adopting a symbiotic paradigm to an integralist paradigm. Therefore, they allege, the articles as mentioned in the petition are contrary to Article 28D and Article 29 paragraphs (1) and (2) of the 1945 Constitution.
Also read: Govt: Halal Product Fatwa Committee a Solution to Expedite Halal Certification
Author : Utami Argawati
Editor : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR : Tiara Agustina
Translator : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)
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.
Monday, February 05, 2024 | 14:36 WIB 196