Analysing the State’s Laws on Religious Education in Post-New Order Indonesia

Mohamad Yusuf,1* Carl Sterkens2

1 Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
2 Radboud University, Nijmegen, Netherlands
* Corresponding Author

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14421/ajis.2015.531.105-130

Abstract


This article aims to analyse the Indonesian State’s laws regarding models of religious education, by evaluating Law No. 20/2003, concerning the national system of education and other related laws. Two questions are highlighted: What type of religious education is favoured by Indonesian state? Does the preference for a certain type of religious education reflect a specific vision of the state-religion relationship? Our data consisted of two sources: the State’s law on national education system, Law No. 20/2003, and the minutes of the Indonesian parliament meeting approving the law. We found that Law No. 20/2003 expresses the preference of the government for a mono-religious model. Indonesia is categorized as having preferred treatment for some religions or support for a particular religious tradition. This categorisation is confirmed by the results of our research findings indicated by the preferential treatment delivered by the State, and the State’s legislation and regulations on religion.
[Tulisan ini menganalisis legislasi negara terhadap pendidikan agama dengan cara mengevaluasi UU No. 20/2003 tentang Sistem Pendidikan Nasional beserta perundang-undangan terkait lainnya. Dua pertanyaan berusaha untuk dijawab dalam tulisan ini, yaitu: Model pendidikan agama yang bagaimana yang menjadi preferensi negara? Apakah preferensi tersebut merefleksikan visi negara terhadap model relasi negara-agama tertentu? Tulisan ini merujuk kepada dua data utama, yaitu: UU No. 20/2003 tentang Sistem Pendidikan Nasional serta Risalah Rapat Paripurna ke-35 DPR RI tahun 2003 yang mengesahkan UU No. 20/2003. Penelitian ini menemukan bahwa UU Sistem Pendidikan Nasional merefleksikan preferensi negara terhadap model pendidikan agama mono-relijius. Model pendidikan mono-religius ini merefleksikan preferensi negara terhadap model relasi negara-agama preferensial; negara mengakui lebih dari satu agama resmi dan memberi dukungan kepada institusi-institusinya, yang direfleksikan melalui legislasi dan peraturan terkait agama.]

Keywords


models of religious education; models of State-religion relationship; laws analysis

Full Text:

PDF

References


Assegaf, Abd. Rachman, Politik Pendidikan Nasional: Pergeseran Kebijakan Pendidikan Agama Islam dari Praproklamasi ke Reformasi, Yogyakarta: Kurnia Kalam, 2005.

Assyaukanie, Luthfi, Islam and the Secular State in Indonesia, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2009.

Baswedan, Anies Rasyid, “Political Islam in Indonesia: Present and Future Trajectory”, Asian Survey, vol. 44, no. 5, 2004, pp. 669–90 [http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/as.2004.44.5.669].

Durham Jr, Cole W., “Perspectives on Religious Liberty: A Comparative Framework”, in Religious Human Rights in Global Perspective: Legal Perspectives, ed. by Johan David Van der Vyver and John Witte, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1996.

Durkheim, Emile, The Rules of Sociological Method, 8th edition, ed. by George E.G. Catlin, trans. by Sarah A. Solovay and John H. Mueller, New York: Free Press, 1965.

Farah, Caesar E., Islam: Beliefs and Observances, 7th edition, New York: Barron’s Educational Series, 1968.

Fox, Jonathan, A World Survey of Religion and the State, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

Hefner, Robert W. (ed.), Remaking Muslim Politics: Pluralism, Contestation, Democratization, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005.

----, Making modern Muslims: the Politics of Islamic Education in Southeast Asia, Honolulu: Univ. of Hawaii Press, 2009.

Hermans, C.A.M., Participatory Learning: Religious Education in a Globalizing Society, Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2003.

Ichwan, Moch Nur, “Official Reform of Islam: State Islam and the Ministry of Religious Affairs in Contemporary Indonesia, 1966-2004”, Dissertation, Tilburg: Universiteit van Tilburg, 2006.

Jones, Robert Alun, Emile Durkheim: An Introduction to Four Major Works, Universitas Michigan: SAGE Publications, 1986.

Küng, Hans, Global Responsibility: in Search of a New World Ethic, New York: Crossroad Pub. Co., 1991.

Liddle, R. William, “Indonesia in 1999: Democracy Restored”, Asian Survey, vol. 40, no. 1, 2000, pp. 32–42 [http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3021218].

Mujiburrahman, Feeling Threatened: Muslim-Christian Relations in Indonesia’s New Order, Leiden: Amsterdam University Press; ISIM, 2006.

Permani, Risti, “The Economics of Islamic Education: Evidence from Indonesia”, Ph.D. Dissertation, Australia: University of Adelaide, School of Economics, 2010.

Steenbrink, Karel, Catholics in Indonesia, 1808-1942: A Documented History, Volume 2: The Spectacular Growth of a Self Confident Minority, 1903-1942, Leiden: KITLV Press, 2007.

Sterkens, Carl, Interreligious Learning: The Problem of Interreligious Dialogue in Primary Education, Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2001.

Sterkens, Carl and Mohamad Yusuf, “Preferences for Religious Education and Inter-Group Attitudes among Indonesian Students”, Journal of Empirical Theology, vol. 28, no. 1, 2015, pp. 49–89 [http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15709256-12341324].

----, “Religious Education in Religiously Affiliated Schools and the Influence of the State and Religious Community on School Politics”, in Muslim Christian Relations Observed: Comparative Studies from Indonesia and the Netherlands, ed. by Volker Küster, Robert Setio, and Indonesian Dutch Consortium on Muslim-Christian Relations, Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2014, pp. 47–71.

Ziebertz, Hans-Georg and Didier Pollefeyt, “A Move to Multi? Empirical Research Concerning the Attitudes of Youth towards Pluralism and Religion’s Claims of Truth”, in Interreligious Learning, Leuven Paris: Peeters Publishers and Booksellers, 2007.




Copyright (c) 2015 Mohamad Yusuf, Carl Sterkens

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.