|
Because of their predominantly Malay Muslim populations,
Indonesia and Malaysia are similar in many respects, but their paths to
democracy could not be more dissimilar. While there are limitations and
shortcomings in the democratization of both countries, they are already
being touted as two different models as other majority Muslim
countries, particularly those in the Middle East, seek to engage in
democratic reforms.
Central to this, of course, is the role that Islam plays in politics.
Indonesia and Malaysia interpret the religion, and therefore sharia
(Islamic law), differently
Participants in a roundtable discussion on Islam and democratization in
Asia in Jakarta this week politely refrained from passing judgment on
which path -- the Indonesian or Malaysian way -- is the more desirable
or even the more "Islamic".
The Malay culture of not blowing one's own horn may partly explain this
reluctance, but a more plausible explanation is that democracy in these
two countries is largely still a work in progress. Malaysia can claim
that its approach has resulted in the economic well-being of its
people, but Indonesia can claim that its approach is far more
inclusive, and thus more accommodating of the interests of its
non-Muslim minority population.
But that makes the study of these two countries and the model they have
chosen all the more interesting. The jury is still out, and probably
will remain so for many years, about which of the two is superior.
The roundtable, jointly hosted by the International Center for Islam
and Pluralism (ICIP) and the Asia Foundation office in Jakarta, is the
second of its kind to be held in the region, following the one held in
September in Manila.
Besides looking at democracy building in the two Muslim majority
countries, the roundtable looked at developments in Muslim minority
countries like the Philippines and Thailand. Muslims in these two
countries differ on their leanings toward democracy: while they have
lived in flourishing democracies for all these years, they continue to
face persecution and even feel "dispossessed". Some participants from
the two countries were skeptical as to whether democracy is really the
answer to their problems.
Nevertheless, it is now widely accepted in most Muslim countries that
the compatibility of Islam and democracy is not an issue, virtually
writing off Samuel Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" theory.
Minister of Foreign Affairs Hassan Wirajuda, in his keynote address to
the roundtable, said it had now become clear that democracy was not an
exclusively Western value, but a value that belonged to all major
religions in the world.
"The debate on the merits of democracy and its compatibility with Islam
is over," Hassan pronounced. "The challenge in Indonesia today is how
to make Islam and all other religions an even more effective force for
reform and democratization."
This is also essentially what makes the path toward democracy in
Indonesia different from the path taken by Malaysia.
As one participant in the conference put it, Indonesia has taken the
"accommodationist" approach while Malaysia has taken the "hegemonistic"
way.
Islam is the state religion in Malaysia, and sharia is the law
prescribed for the Muslim majority. Non-Muslims, therefore, are subject
to different laws.
In Indonesia, Islam is one of the five religions recognized by the
state. While there had been demands to turn Indonesia into an Islamic
state and to impose sharia for Muslims, the debate ended -- for the
time being at least -- when the issue was put to a vote during the
debate on constitutional amendment in 2002. The pro-Islamic and
pro-sharia proponents lost the cause through a democratic process.
But while Islam as a political ideology has been widely rejected by the
majority Muslims in Indonesia, Islamic teachings and values continue to
play a major role in the realm of politics in the country. It is indeed
hard to state that Indonesia is a secular state in the same breath as
when we describe secular European states. Indonesia's 1945 Constitution
guarantees freedom of religion and obliges the state to protect the
rights and practices of devotees.
In his opening remarks, Douglas Rumage, head of the Asia Foundation
office in Indonesia, underlined the role played by mass-based Islamic
organizations in the two democratic general elections in the country
since 1999 as the chief contribution of Islam to democracy building in
Indonesia.
Islam as a political ideology is only one of many ideologies in this
budding democracy. The larger share of the votes in the 1999 and 2004
elections went to nationalist political parties like Golkar and the
Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle.
The different paths taken by Indonesia and Malaysia are dictated by
several factors.
Their colonial history is one: the Malaysian political system has a
British Westminster feel to it, and its legal system is the legacy of
centuries of British rule. Indonesia is a republic (against a kingdom
in Malaysia), and its legal system was established in the Dutch
colonial era.
But more recent history and politics also dictate their different paths.
Malaysian prime ministers, first Mahathir Muhammad and now Abdullah
Badawi, have been veering more and more toward Islamic conservatism,
partly to defuse the threat from the Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS). A
Malaysian participant in the roundtable said, however, that the debate
on the role of Islam and of the sharia in Malaysian democracy had been
limited to the political elite, leaving little room for public
participation.
In Indonesia, there is no longer any debate about sharia in the
national legislature, but some regions, Aceh and several regencies,
have adopted sharia in response to demands from Islamist parties and
ulema at regional level.
Surin Pitsuwan, former Thai foreign minister, and always an eloquent
speaker on Islam in Southeast Asia, approached the issue of democracy
and Islam from a totally different perspective.
For him, it is not so much a question of the role Islam can play in
democracy as an understanding of the importance of living in a
democracy to be a good Muslim.
In a closed Islamic society, people must pray five times a day and fast
during the holy month of Ramadhan, or face punishment. In an open
society, people have choices, including to ignore those obligations,
but also the option of being a good Muslim.
"I fervently believe that to be a good Muslim, you have to be in a
democratic system," he said.
|