Islam and Democracy in Indonesia: A State-Religion Perfect Model

Eunike Cahya Utaminingtyas

Since the downfall of longstanding Former President Suharto in May 1998, Indonesia has
entered a new stage of democracy called reform era. Most people have enjoyed freedom of
expression and opinion, freedom of information, checks and balances between the executive
and legislative. The closure of military leadership in new order has brought Indonesia define
their political movement by creating a bunch of political parties. The first elections in the
reform era in 1999 has resulted in at least 48 political parties that some of them are religious-
political party. The first presidential election in Indonesia in 2009, four Islamic parties of the
38 parties that were competing. They are the Crescent Star Party (PBB), the Prosperous
Justice Party (PKS), the Indonesian Nadhlatul Community Party (PPNUI), and the United
Development Party (PPP).And most of these religious-political party has competing till
recent election in 2015. In Indonesia, religion especially Islam as the majority is not just
religion by society but its ideology that sometimes define the political action of country
without declared as religion-state. The consistency of religion-political parties is a proof that
somehow religion and nation can live hand in hand.

According to United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, Indonesia is the

worlds largest Muslim country with accounts for over 250 million Muslims with no
constitutional declaration of neither Islamic state or Islam as state religion. It is interesting
when Indonesia as home of the worlds largest Muslim population with 86 percent adhere to
Islam also be the worlds third largest democracy has declared an open democracy and
pluralist society despite the majority there. Islam as religion define ideology as total
implementation of sharia laws and how Islam can be a religion and country as well. But in
Indonesia surveys conducted since 1998 concluded that Indonesian Muslim are against the
implementation of sharia laws and dislike Islamist Parties. According to Indonesian Election
Commission, since 1999 until 2009 these Islamist parties percentage of votes for national
parliament (DPR-RI) seats are still under 15%. Against the tide, Islam and democracy in
Indonesia is living in such a harmony. This is interesting when theoretically, state-religion
relationship cant be together and blend it will make one of them overrule the other. Even, in
some theory answer the question of statereligion relationships that separation needed to be
done when necessary and they are allowing to be together when they can support each other

1
and living in diversity. Indonesias democracy is one of kind where Islam can stand as
religion and ideology without overruling the other.

Joyous relationship between Islam and democracy is following by creating the four pillars of
the Members of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR), they are: 1) the Pancasila
(Indonesias five-point ideology), 2) The 1945 Constitution (UUD 1945), 3) the Unitary State
of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI) and 4) the state motto Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (Unity in
Diversity).The essence of this foundation is diversity and unity. All of them consist of how
people should be unite in diversity. Pancasila as Indonesias ideology consist the unity of
Indonesia in third sila in accordance with Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI)
that focus on unity and the diversity in Bhinneka Tunggal Ika which is unity in diversity. All
of them motivated people to be one nation. And the most interesting part, it is made by MPR
from diverse parties as political action and foundation of the country and implemented by
both nation-political parties and religion-political parties.

There are essentially four ideological positions in the Muslim world today: fundamentalist,
traditionalist, modernist, and secularist. Each group contains subgroups that blur the
distinctions among the primary groups. Fundamentalists reject democratic values and
contemporary Western culture. They want an authoritarian, puritanical state to implement
their extreme view of Islamic law and morality. They are willing to use innovation and
modern technology. They do not shy away from violence. There are two strands of
fundamentalism. One, grounded in theology and usually rooted in a religious establishment,
belongs to the scriptural fundamentalists. The radical fundamentalists, in contrast, are much
less concerned with the literal substance of Islam, with which they take considerable liberties
either deliberately or because of ignorance of orthodox Islamic doctrine. Al Qaeda, the
Afghan Taliban, Hizb-ut-Tahrir, and a large number of other Islamic radical movements and
diffuse groups worldwide belong to this category. Traditionalists want a conservative society.
They are suspicious of modernity, innovation, and change. They are also divided into two
groups. The distinction is significant. The conservative traditionalists believe that Islamic law
and tradition ought to be rigorously and literally followed. They see a role for the state and
for the political authorities in encouraging or at least facilitating this. However, they do not
generally favour violence and terrorism. They concentrate their efforts on the daily life of
society. Their goal is to preserve orthodox norms and values and conservative behaviour to
the fullest extent possible. Their posture is one of resistance to change. The temptations and
the pace of modern life are seen as posing major threats. The reformist traditionalists believe
that Islam, to remain viable and attractive throughout the ages, must be prepared to make
some concessions in the application of orthodoxy. They are prepared to discuss reforms and
reinterpretations. Their posture is one of cautious adaptation to change, being flexible on the

2
letter of the law to conserve the spirit of the law. Modernists want the Islamic world to
become part of global modernity. They want to reform Islam to bring it into line with the
modern age. They actively seek far-reaching changes to the current orthodox understanding
and practice of Islam. They want to jettison the burdensome ballast of local and regional
tradition that, over the centuries, has intertwined itself with Islam. Secularists want the
Islamic world to accept a division of mosque and state in the manner of Western industrial
democracies, with religion relegated to the private sphere. They further believe that religious
customs must be in conformity with the law of the land and human rights.
Considering that 4 types of Ideology of Muslim all are coexist in Indonesia, therefore
what such a strategy might look like to socialising of "four pillars of democracy" for the
Islamic citizens. The pillars correspond to the postures that the government should take into
account toward the four ideological groups and toward ordinary Muslim citizens in countries,
not toward Islamic party, since parties with religious affiliation are not popular among
masses.

References:

United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. The Religion-State

Relationship and the Right to Freedom of Religion or Belief. Washington: U.S.
Commission on International Religious Freedom, 2012

Buehler, Michael. Islam and Democracy in Indonesia. Insight Turkey Vol.

11 / No. 4 / 2009 pp. 51-63