Searching for Love

8/14/2019 Searching for Love

1/11

Searching for Love; A Documentary Film in Legalizing Inter-faith Marriage

Kusuma Subakir, MA

Abstract Menikahi Agama (Interfaith Marriage, Indonesian Style) is a short documentaryfilm on two couples of married who struggle for legalizing their interfaith-marriage.The story sequences took in both Solo (Heny-Budi) and Yogya (Maria-Iwan)demonstrate interfaith marriage which continuously take place in varied areas of Indonesia. Since the marriage Bill and several religious decrees banned the practice,interfaith marriage remains as a legal vacuum.

The paper completed with film resume and a series of the national marriage Billdescription which succeeded to control over religious affiliation of the actor. Alongwith this condition violence against women exacerbates in their status before the law,has addressed the existence of patriarchal-based society who ensued to put women asa secondary position within marriage institution. The film is an advocacy against thecomplexity of dualism legalization-system in Indonesia that affects not only marriagelegislation but also women position before the law.

Keywords: interfaith marriage, marriage Bill, dualism, state violence

A. Preface

Uprising global phenomena has given advance peoples attachment to technology.Consequently, the definition of media and film has grown more than a limited term of

journalism, which then includes peoples engagement on reporting the current testimony suchas citizen journalism or amateur film maker. The so called media conscious world, whichmoves faster than the speed of light, advantages us foreknow the news quickly. As such thehorrified Acehs tsunami disaster at December 2006 or the astonished September 11 incidenthas come up with on the spot report that rejigged by an effective device of technology. Thiswas also happened to the area of religious practices. Admittedly, it is difficult to come andconclude how religious life remains in this media-conscious world? Recently, the Islamicfilm in Indonesia is inimitably could not be separated from booming of Ayat - Ayat Cinta(Love Verses, 2007). Beside its successful story, the latest film calls the question of religionsrepresentation into being. Religion and its representation in terms of the moving image, asHastrup commented on his writing Anthropological Visions: Some Notes on Visual andTextual Authority:

The distance between reality and representation is almost entirely neutralized. Thevisual documentation has an immense power of seduction, which can hardly bediscussed, perhaps because the distance between reality and representation has beennegated (Crawford and Turton, 1992: 13)

The debate along representation also becomes coupling unit to the existence of bias in thefilm making. Again Hastrup convince us, bias is not necessarily an evil. As such, bias. isno more and no less than a subjective view. ( Ibid., 12) Another word, the near erasure of distance between reality and representation is a portrait of subjective taste of film maker, itmay indicates his/her involvement on the track of socially significant relationships, that arethem self invisible. Bias can be attained and be drawn ahead by the awareness of film asresult.

1


2/11

For both representation and bias, we begin our making film. From awareness; weexperience the increasing polarization between religious view and behavior in relation toreligious life in Indonesia. Such occurrence raises either in the type of relation betweenreligion and state or polarization among religious groups (intra or extra groups). While thedifference among variety of religious views happened obviously as the consequence of a

democratic society, polarization base on religious orientation works on the other hand. Thelatter appears in more contra-productive condition since it spreads essentially in variousspectrums and in some extent takes apart from societys attempt to gain social cohesion. Suchaccidents; debates on pornography bill, application on Syariah bill, idea of pluralism andliberalism and its surrounded debates, play apart in placing the society into more dilemmaticcondition; either fight in the name of religion or struggle for uniting diversity. (Film Booklet;2-6) What lie behind this social fragmentation is an oversimplified groups onto dominantfactions such as fundamentalist, liberalist, radicals, pluralist and so on. Unfortunately thoseideologized terms, where media used to take a part in this role, work to incline pseudo-real of religious condition. In other word, the polarization is no more than simplified conditionwhich does not merely depict more complex religious life and practice. (Mulkan, dkk. 2002:248, 289)

In order to follow from that consideration, the paper comes up with the explanationabout the subject in this film, the performer of interfaith marriage who struggle for legalizingtheir marriage to find out an accommodative institution for that purpose. What follows, thereview and commentary on law-barrier faced by majority of those performers entailed fromdualism in registering the marriage. This paper enclosed with the impact of state violence viamarriage Bill in Indonesia, where women undergo mostly.

B. Menikahi Agama; The Process of Making Film is The OutcomeBeside two side of fragmentation; state-religion and among religious groups, the

actual practice of religious life sometimes regarded unremarkably. In fact there are lot of social groups relation where such wisdom laid within. This distinct wisdom (e.g. tolerance,adjustment, care, respect, etc) either based on religious view or religious-inspired traditionmay become the source to live harmoniously. The social capital, which Johan Effendy used toname it as societys moral and ethic , for some reason become the potency to break upreligious problems. (Mulkan, dkk. 2002; 290) As an attempt of multiplying this ethicaltherapy, the film tries to follow the path of awareness raising through alternatives mediaalso trough real life portrait and publication. In doing so, the film publicized small scope of religious life and practice, such individual case or social group which is not merely representnational condition. Meanwhile this more close-up case might be counted as part of other social sectors and its form. The attempt, thus, comes up effectively with some lessons even

wisdom for other social condition.The process of making this film is valuable. Its not just about documenting thewedding ceremony; moreover it portrayed the struggle of two couples to search for chance of legalizing the marriage. Since the marriage institution has in charge with private life, for us(the film maker) the main process is an attempt to negotiate with the very sensitive life of the

bridegrooms. Their willingness and self openness in this documentary is a primary gate for usto go further. (Crawford and Turton, 1992: 11) Then, we begin with some steps of research;studying the issue, interviewing the experts, observing interfaith couples by following their effort to search for the possible institution and ended by keeping a record of their weddingceremony. Apart from that internal difficulty, the issue on religious debate as well socio-

political one faced by both performer and film maker, is no less important in this account.

But, the utmost goal of this process is the ability to transfer the idea into visual languagewhile at the same time we try to weaken the burden of film as media. The visual gain of

2


3/11

this film therefore the utmost outcome gained from our relationship with several interfaithcouples. ( ibid., 17)

Given that plurality is not only a mere religious problem, interfaith marriage alsoinclines in political stake where state has significance role on it. Apart from personalportrait, Menikahi Agama in larger context objectifies to portray the practice of

interfaith marriage which in fact might be a normal occurrence. Thus, the couplesmarriages become extraordinary because they were constrained by uncertain-administrative process.

The Couples Effort on Legalizing Their Marriage ProcessRia (26 years old) and Iwan (28 years old) are artist-couple who meet each other

trough their deep engagement with artisan community in Yogyakarta. Ria is the youngest of three children in her religiously-plural family, who since the death of her mother and father decided to live in Yogya and maintains her childrens puppet-house. On the other hand, Iwanis the only son of his divorced parent, lives with his mothers family in southern regency of Yogyakarta. Both of them were never declare their relationship, since they realized their different religious affiliation. Moreover the troubling fact of Indonesia marriage Bill whichstrictly banned interfaith marriage has made the condition goes in severe. Being realized bythis difficulty, Iwan and Ria never tried to urge each other to marry.

But time goes on faster, friendly relationship between Ria and Iwan grows infavorable turn. And since two years of their relationship they felt on lacked for marriage.Again, this was not easy. For Ria it could be less difficult, given that her older brother andsome of her parents family are engaged in this kind of marriage. But she was not feeling incomfort to see her familys style of marriage where one of the couple converted to othersreligion. If shes get married, convinced her self, she will never convert her spouse into her religion as well she wouldnt converts into her spouses religion. Happily, she was in one linewith Iwan in this reason. Therefore, on second year of their relationship Ria and Iwandoubtlessly encourage them self to bring the relationship into marriage. Little by little, theytried to consult with several people who have knowledge on this matter. Beside his effort tofind the ideal marriage, Iwan realized this was more difficult for him to inform to his loyalMoslem family. In fact, Iwan has to deal with his brother in-law who comes up with disputeand strictly disagrees with Iwans choice. Since his mother was out of country Iwan then triedto consult this matter into his uncles and aunts. It was an exhausted effort till he found thathis most beloved aunt guarantees and blesses his decision.

His effort moves beyond this point. Trough deep discussion between Iwan and Ria,also their eager desire to avoid forgery on legitimating marriage they decided to legalize themarriage trough Catholic Church. The later legitimating process has more trouble-free in

regard to religious affiliation.1

And in line with this decision, Iwan gets out of Islamicmarriage as he avoids the forced-conversion for Ria endured by Islamic system of marriage.In order to gain this troublesome attempt, Iwan has to ask letters of information from villagesgovernment which may burdens his religious affiliation. 2 On the other way, Ria has a great

1 Based on Canonic Law 1061 no. 1 and 2 also Canonic Law 1062, Catholic Church permits such interfaithmarriage. There were two model of inter religious marriage approved by Church pastoral, first is ecumenicalone (a marriage between two different church e.g. Protestant Church and Catholic Church) and the other ismixed marriage, marriage held by two different people with different religious affiliation. The last modelrequires a discrimination letter from pastoral. Both performer in this film, Heny-Budi and Ria-Iwan, used to

perform such letter. (Piet Go O. Charm, 1987, Kawin Campur Beda Agama dan Beda Gereja: Tinjauan HistorisTeologis, Pastoral, HUkum Gereja, dan Hukum Sipil, Malang: Penerbit Dioma)

2 Part of villages letter of information consists of religious affiliation which determines the upper institutionwithin marriage system of legalization. The letter for Moslem bridge or groom is specialized for Islamic

3


4/11

duty to find out a moderate church and pastor who are willing to bless their marriage. Nomore than a year this backbreaking effort fire up its light. Finally, June 23, 2008 Ria and Iwandeclare their promise of marriage in a Catholic church where they free them self fromreligions forgery.

Heny and Budi is another couple with different trouble of interfaith marriage in this

film. Heny (35) is Moslem woman who has just moved from Jakarta to Solo a year before her re-meet with an ex-junior school classmate, Budi (36). Its not really surprising that 2006sschool reunion -where Budi took in committees charge- unite them together. It was Henysforgetting memory about Budi which at last brought the gate for their relationship. And theyneed no more extended time to get closer and than decide their dream to build a lovely familytogether. But it was seem not easy since the first idea appears. Heny and Budi have differentreligious affiliation and gave them rough time to legalize their marriage. Even further, Henyhave more severe burden before Canonic Bill since she was widower, a marital status whichcollide with canonical principle. 3 Firstly , they tried to have help from Solo pastoral to dealwith this problem but then pastoral definitely rejects their application. Yet Heny and Budididnt want to stop their effort. During six months of struggle Heny tried to have the letter of dispensation beside she has to convince her familys objection. Among the spread of despair of this seemingly impossible marriage, Heny and Budi find a pastor who also involved ininterfaith community and later become the mediator for all bless coming. Then, Henysapplication was approved by the pastoral at the time when Henys mother sincerely affirmedher permission. Over all, this marriage also successfully took place with the help of

prominent interfaith group that concern on this issue.Differ from first couple who once legalized their marriage, Heny and Budi assured

them self to perform both of religious blessing; Islamic and Catholic process. The certainlegalization they got convinces their status before each religion. Its valid according to bothof religion, though they only got single states acknowledgement.

Ria and Iwans wedding might be an ordinary marriage if they were convert into onereligion even Heny and Budis struggle could be labeled as a weird by other people. Both of attempts were part of miserable-joy for interfaith couple in this country, who tried to behonest for their own self with no tiny infringe of states marriage system and Bill. Their sophisticated struggle in validating marriage process was just a dot among hundreds amountof Indonesian kind of contravene interfaith marriage in Indonesia.

C. National Marriage Bill no. 1/1974; a Dilemma for Interfaith Marriage

Apart from two couples effort in legalizing their interfaith marriage there was long-lasting history of debate on such matter. There were hundreds of individual cases which

prolonged the debate between religions interests on the status of interfaith marriage on one part and states attention on its legislation at the other part. Both religion and state are at thesame time failed to compromise each interest in general and accommodate the performersneed in particular. (Musdah Mulia, 2007: 135) The attempt of Heny-Budi and Ria-Iwan tovalidate their love into legal marriage status, in fact, has to deal with sophisticated barrier of administration and bureaucracy. This conclusion was taken from such research which dealswith performer of such marriage in Yogyakarta. As such, the preceded social research of thisFilm bore the evidence that there were several possibilities which shown the prevalence of

marriage system (Religious Office) and that of non-Moslem (Civil Registry Office). (Interview with the Head of Religious Office for Depok subdistrict, Mr. Syaifuddin Zuhri, M.Ag August, 23 2007 and the Head of Marriageand Divorce Division of Sleman Civil Registry Office, Mr. Sumardi, SH, March 28, 2007).

3 It is Mathius 18 verse 6, which considers marriage as a relation that could not be separated by human being.The verse points to the objection of Catholic Church to bless the marriage of a divorced man or woman.

4


5/11

interfaith marriage in both institution of Civil Registry Office (KCS, Kantor Catatan Sipil)and Religious Affairs Office (KUA, Kantor Urusan Agama) .4 Sleman regency, for example,there were 948 marriages registered in its Civil Registry Office during 2005. Among thosemarriages, at least 6 cases were interfaith kind of marriage where 4 of them were enclosedwith conversion letter. The other regency has raised its prevalence. Regency of Gunung

Kidul, for instance, 32 cases of interfaith marriages was discovered among 268 registeredmarriages at 2005. Among those cases there were 11 couples who enclosed their prerequisitewith conversion letter. Another words, there were (at least) 21 couples who failed to attachedsuch letter. From this prevalence, classically, we can assume that though government hascome up with those administrative requirements for legalizing interfaith marriage (byattaching the conversion letter as the evidence of subduing religion into partners religion)several performers failed to do so.

Meanwhile, no less than previous case, the Office of Religious Affair (KUA) bore themore severe evidence. Sri Wiyanti, has done the same research in Wonosari sub-district of Gunung Kidul regency. From 2878 of KUAs marriage data storage, there were 63 couplesidentified by interfaith marriage happened during 2000 up to 2003. Whilst 37 of those caseswere among Moslem men and converted Moslem women, the other 26 cases were registeredas marriage among converted Moslem men and Moslem women. Differ from previous sub-district; KUA in Depok sub-district, Sleman regency has accumulated 17 possible cases of interfaith marriage. Its based on the evidenced that there were 5 of those registered marriageenclosed with conversion letter while the rest are provided by different religious affiliation ontheir ID card.

Our deep question spread among that evidence then, how those cases may behappened? How the governments handle interfaith marriage in Indonesia? Primarily, how theBill speaks about this matter?

The promulgation of National Marriage Bill no.1/1974 was a great achievement of states government at that time. The spirit of unification performed by this Bill has torn downsuch stratified citizenship done by colonial governmental system. But, the unification was notmerely succeeded in regulating the plural-Indonesian condition. There was a long debates onthe draft of this Bill prolonged from 1950s era up to 1970s. Historically, it invoked severalfactions in parliament house even wider among society. The first phase of historical debatedealt with dispute among Islamic political faction which hardly work on implementing sevenwords of Jakarta Charter on the one part and nationalist-secular who have a preference for

breaking up between religion and state. The second phase of this debate had gone with twokinds of marriage bills, namely the Marriage Bill for Indonesian Muslims (RUU PernikahanUmat Islam) and the Marriage Bill on basic principles of marriage applicable to all religiousgroups (RUU Pokok-pokok Perkawinan). The first were submitted in 1967 and followed by

the later at 1968 respectively to the former Peoples Representative Council (DewanPerwakilan Rakyat Gotong Royong/DPRGR) .5 At the end of this question there were third 4 Both institutions are legal official government which deal with marriage registration. The further explanationof both officials takes place on the next chapter. The data collected by scrutinizing the prerequisite of legalizingmarriage which is submitted by each performer in each office. Parts of those requirements are: birth document,ID card, family document card, village official statement from each spouse, etc. (See, Prasyarat PengajuanPerkawinan, KCS Gunung Kidul, 2007) In order to find religious affiliation; we analyzed the consistency of religious affiliation of each document. Yet, we also tried to find the letter of conversion which may be written by

performer.5 Amongst the arguments objecting to the Bills was the lack of an alternative possibility for a secular wedding,namely a wedding that would not be conducted according to a certain religious law. The Christians faction tooobjected to the Bills as they thought that the Bills were reflecting the separation between citizens ( pengkotak-

kotakan warganegara ). The Christians favoured a more general Bill that would accord with their marriage rulesand would lessen Islamic influence.

5


6/11

phase of debate where debate re-emerged at New Order Era a new Marriage Bill was proposed in 1973. The new bill contained secular precepts and was perceived by manyMuslims as contradicting the shari`a . After moslems huge rallied and tough negotiation fromTNI fraction with Islamic parties, government than validating the bill at 1974.(Mujiburrahman, 2006: 165-166, Feillard, 1999: 129)

Thinking that Marriage Bill no. 1/1974 is the first marriage bill in Indonesia hasmisled our comprehensive knowledge. Earlier before National Marriage Bill was

promulgated there were several laws regulate marriage mater; part of them was Islamic Bill which was considered significantly as customary Bill by Bujgerlijk Weit (Colonial MarriageBill) . The bill was later on reformed and promulgated by Orde Lama as Bill no.22/1946concerned on the matter of Marriage, Divorce, and Reconciliation for Moslem citizen in Jawaand Madura. 6 The bill then became the primer source of the elaboration of IslamicCompilation Law (KHI, Kompilasi Hukum Islam) 7 which was legalized trough PresidentialInstruction at 1991 . (Mujiburrahman, 2006: 159-160, Gavin Jones, 2006: 4)

Moreover, among the less effective account of Marriage bill was debated articles oninterfaith marriage .8 After this long lasting debate, the regulation on such marriage wasunderstood as prohibited matter. At least, this conviction stood out in the part of interpretationof article 2 which explicitly said that the legal marriage according to this Bill is the marriagedone by single religious validating process. 9 If there would be two of religious affiliations,this kind of interpretation assures the principle of casting down of one spouse into anothersreligion. Consequently, there is no kind of mixed or interfaith kind of marriage in accordanceto this kind of interpretation. (Aburrahman, 1986: 45) The first interpretation was in line withthe view to read article 57. Though the term mixed marriage in the colonial era was assumedas marriage between different religious affiliation and groups, however Marriage Bill 1/1974regards this term as the marriage between Indonesian citizen (WNI, Warga Negara Indonesia)and foreigner citizen (WNA, Warga Negara Asing). 10 Followed by this consequence,Marriage Bill 1/1974 has kept silent with the fact of interfaith marriage, an issue which isregarded as legal vacuum . (Lukito, 2006: 3) Its obviously bear the evidence, that our problemon interfaith marriage was the distance between political reality and social reality. Thatinterfaith marriage where our National Marriage Law stood voiceless actually remains

practiced by our society.The condition goes even worse when we turn our eyes into the existence of dualism in

legislating-governmental level. This concern can be explained in certain: first, given that

6 The Bill adopted the principle of law used by Religious Court ( Priesterraden ) of colonial era. Its existenceeffectively facilitated the primary rule for Moslems marriage which was hardly needed at that time. At themeantime, there was also a distinct rule for Christianitys system of marriage, Huwelijks Ordonantie Chirsten

Indonesiers (HOCI) which than completely removed by Citizenship Administration Bill no.23/2006.

7KHI is abbreviated from Kompilasi Hukum Islam (Islamic Compilation Law) this compilation was not enacted by the legislature, rather implemented trough a Presidential Instruction.

8 Its significance of debate rose predominantly from colonial policy which separated Indonesian citizen for threestages; the foreigner European, China and Middle East group, and Indonesian native. The Mixture Bill of St.1898-158 was promulgated in order to link among different class of citizenship including marriage among them.While the kind of marriage goes continuously its regulation was remained debatably. More see: Gavin Jones,2006: 4

9 Articles 2 (1) states: There is no marriage outside of the laws of the respective religion and beliefs

10

Article 57 states: What is meant as mixed marriage in this law is the marriage between two people complyingin Indonesia with different law due to different citizenship and one of the parties is Indonesian citizen.

6


7/11

Law no.22/1946 (jo 1954) bear out a distinct institution in regulating and governingIndonesian Moslem marriage, KUA become a single significance institution deal with thisissue. Second, it was called Burgelijk Stand (BS) which was since Soekarnos era went over into Civil Registry Office and takes its role in regulating non-religious (means; non-Islamic)legislation of marriage. Both institutions stand with different function and principle within

governmental area. While the first relates tightly to Islamic marriage system of legislation,and part of Religious Ministrys branch, accordingly, it holds on the principle of religious/Islamic legislation of marriage. The later institution, on the contrary, affiliates withno one of religions apart from Islam but holds on registrar principle for those non-Islamreligions and its validating process. 11 Essentially, KCS takes its service for ministry of domestic affairs. (Suparman, 1996: 40; Lukito, 2006: 5)

Thus, the troublesome of unification in the context of National Marriage Bill hasmanifested its dualism in registering marriage in this country. A distinct rule for Moslemcitizen from non-Moslem once brings barrier of a typical condition, for example those whoaffiliate not with major six approved religions in this country or even couples who havedifferent religious affiliation. It can be inferred, simply, that marriage bill and its registrar institution had succeeded in preventing people from secular marriage (a marriage which ishold by no means of Marriage Bills purpose that its from religious legalization) as warned

by previous historical debates. But in other way, the segregation on registration of marriagefailed to synchronize religious affiliation with political realm delightfully. In fact, people hasto deal with both trouble of separated institution proceeded by religiously-political interest.Thus, there was no exclusion to see several religious forgeries within the heart of social

practice as it was actually realized as latent effect of such policy. Phenomena of nominalconversion seemingly- make sense for the performer also family in order to legitimatizetheir marriages status. (Musdah Mulia, 2007: 137)

Lately, ICRP 12 discovered several deviated practice of this dualism policy. Parallel tosocial research of this film, this organization mainly said that interfaith marriage is obviousfact happened in this country. During May-July 2005 observation there was several meansused by 8 observed couples in dealing with their marriage validation. They were did suchattempts:

1) On of couple made fake ID card, fabricate Islam in its religions affiliation.2) Doing nominal conversion; a pretended conversion in order to gain the legislation

process.3) Committed on a limited conversion, one of the couple converts into others religion

for certain times purposely. ( http://www.icrp-online.org/wmview.php?ArtID=27. Accessed: June 24, 2007)

These were all the contradiction. By when National Marriage Law 1/1974 struggled toliberate Indonesian citizen from colonial group of classification, as a matter of fact it misledIndonesian people into another mode of classification based on religious affiliation. Henceour visual research bears the evidence that the complexity of latent result appears from thisrecent classification. The complicated process of legalization does not only go hard with such11 During Sukarnos era, KCS played a deep role for legalizing the marriage process. Thats why some elder generation of interfaith marriages found more trouble-free process on validating their marriage. The activitysuddenly banned by the promulgation of Government Regulation no.9/1975 which regulated KCSs principlerole as administer and registrar of non-Moslem marriage.

12 Indonesia Conference of Religions and Peace, an interfaith organization bases its office in Jakarta and branchof WCRP in Indonesia. The organization seriously advocates such interfaith issues, avocation on freedom of

religion and belief, and so forth. Part of its division engages in advocating interfaith marriage couples whostruggle to legitimize their marriage. Heny-Budi one of two couples in this film was also advocated by thisorganization.

7
http://www.icrp-online.org/wmview.php?ArtID=27http://www.icrp-online.org/wmview.php?ArtID=27


8/11

performers, but also in fact can be difficult for the related governments official. The problem puts people on act of religiously pretense in regard to their marriage status.

D. Dualism of Marriage Administrative Institution; Between State Ambivalence andViolence

The last part of this paper designed to goes further from visual finding. Aconsideration on violence done by structural manner of state is the most important idea of thisdescription. Violence that has been done by state trough its policy and play inconjunction with religious justification. Such model is obviously loaded in promulgation of Marriage Bill 1/1974, particularly in the sense of interfaith marriage which was left invoiceless. The segregation of Moslem and non-Moslem administrative process (KUA andKCS) also became complement evidence where state intentionally imposed its policy bycontrolling over the classification among religious group. 13 In order to analyze one of

prominent case happened to Andy Vony and her spouse in higher court (Mahkamah Agung,MA), Ratno Lukito clearly stated that:

There seems to have a number of reasons behind the decision to resort to suchlegal circumvention. The most obvious one is inadequate legal response of the stateto the reality of interfaith marriage a frequent occurrence in Indonesian society.The situation is made worse by the fact that the administrative apparatus of marriage registration has been set up to segregate simply between Muslims non-Muslims. (Lukito, 2006: 6)

Practically, dualism on administrative practice presents oversimplified problem onthe ignorance of Indonesians plural religions. In other word, by distinguishing Muslimand non Muslim administrative it means overlooking other religions groups such as Hindu,Buddha, local beliefs (Aliran Kepercayaan) which opens the space for their interfaith

marriage. How such policy can be brought forth by state? Why the legal vacuum of interfaithmarriage in Marriage Bill harshly influence for interfaith couples? To see the deep root of such violence I come firstly to the deep characteristic of modern state. As being moderninstitution, nation state as a kind of organized body regulates in settling condition anddetermining rigidly. Later on, it functions in more bureaucratic which may easily degrade itsideal norm into a mere technical and ritual matter. (Bikhu Parekh, 2008: 71, Musdah Mulia,2007: 140) This condition was exactly done and consequently leaves the main problemunresolved. That is the problem of oversimplification in the realm of state code and the

practice of religious administration. This kind of bureaucratic regulations then predisposesthe practice of interfaith marriage as under the table contract. Therefore, the prevalence of interfaith marriage and the identified violation were all such consequence of this stateimposing norm toward society. A marriage between Muslim and non-Muslims has beeneliminated into a bureaucratic possibility, such as both couples in the film, move far awayfrom what religion ideally regard.

In spite of natural characteristic of nation-state, the near erasure of religion and stateclosure can be identified from the beginning of Bills promulgation. As result, severalreligious views of marriage were made explicit therein. It does not mean that religion should

be taken down from politic since this country is closely related to religious matter. Moreover,it should be a kind of a morning warns to see Jones and Heng Lee when they commented onclosed relation between Islam (religion) and state regulation :

States that declare themselves Islamic, or those with a strong Islamic faction, or even governments that have to engage with strong Islamist lobbies will need to

13 It has to be realized openly that this kind of classification by simply identifying religious affiliation which ismentioned in ID card.

8


9/11

rationalize their politics according to particular interpretations of the Islamic law. (Jones and Heng Lee, 2006: 7)

Jones alerts us about the fact of Indonesians marriage bill today. A rationalized interpretationof religion was clearly shown when the Bill states clearly that marriage is a religious-based

legal process where state has involved solely in ensuring religious legitimacy. But, another view contradict the bill by saying that if religion tried to be the guardian of norm in stateslife it would only be possible for a humanistic and universalistic kind of rule. The MarriageBill no.1/1974, then, has a duty of awareness from the latent consequence that is the secondstep of this idea. A step forward of this condition means a second warn for religion that itsmight be easily inclined to the realm of disintegrative aspect of religion. Again, Bikhu Parekhconsiders this superfluous aspect of contact between religion and state:

Although religion can make a valuable contribution to political life, it can also bea pernicious influence, (as liberal rightly highlight). Its often absolutist, self-righteous, arrogant .and can cause political havoc. It often breeds intoleranceof other religions as well as of internal dissent, and has a propensity towards

violence. (Bikhu Parekh, 2008: 72)

Seeing from both side of religions influence in states policy, Bikhu predicts on moresevere regulation and condition will happen for religious practical life into two side of condition; internally side and externally. Its internally condition for interfaith marriage;

because the interpretation of interfaith marriage remains debatably within religions sphere.The violence happened since religion adopted a single interpretation and apply for thenational level of regulation, it could be approximately estimated that it discriminates againstrest of views. Also the internal debate of religious matter remains extended toward other

political realm. Yet, the other tendency of violence happens in external matter . The external part of policy deals with states warranty over all citizens and their right. Explicitly, it can be

said that while its free for a religion to ban the practice of interfaith marriage for its ownfollowers;

It has no legal or moral right to use machinery of the state to impose a ban on othersand that its attempt to do so violates the principle of the very constitutionaldemocracy that gives it the freedom to propagate its views. (Bikhu Parekh, 2008:76).

So, its interfaith marriage condition in Indonesia where religion both internally andexternally spoke in the name of ideology. How the idea of violence can illustrate this kind of condition? In this kind of framework G. Baile points out the condition where violence (inthe structural manner) indicated by the existence of moral role monopoly. Its the idea

when violence comes into contact with religion as a sacred. (G. Baile, 1995: 27) The socalled sacred violence is kind of control which has a justification source from religionand its history. The performer of such violence where state and its policy take its role here-would easily consider the harsh as legal and valid action in the name of religion or its history.The main characteristic of this violence, first , the performer may have a completeauthority to used sacred name or that of reason in order to gain their nobility andright and finally dominate over others. The condition moves in second characteristicwhere the performer uses the name and the apparatus of state in order to operate itsviolence.

In fact, the bureaucratic effort in regulating interfaith marriage operates within twomodel of source; First trough text and its supporting interpretation of the sacred which may

produce and propagate its view unceasingly. State, in the case of interfaith marriage, may usereligious ministry for example to support its idea on banning such marriage. Second, the

9


10/11

personification of text via traditional figures who take its model role for all citizens. In themeantime, those figures have great effort supporting elites policy. (Mulkhan, 2002: 105)

E. Concluding Remark

Since marriage deeply deals with private life, its noteworthy to take womens position into our consideration. An intermingling condition between religion and state insacred violence works severely for womens stipulation. In this case, gender unequalcondition of Indonesian women moves and spreads trough three aspects of legal sphere, thoseare content of law, culture of law and yet its structure. (Musdah Mulia, 2007: 136) Theexamination of mixed marriage regulation in colonial era (Stb. 1989-158), take an instance,

bore the evidence that states policy has controlled its power toward womens status beforelaw, where women status are adapted and adjusted from their husbands status. At thiscondition, women even have no chance to consider their own status before law. The IslamicCompilation of Law (KHI) also moves in same line for this king of logic. Three parts of articles which refer to interfaith prohibition consider women as an object of law. This kind of view then affects the history of advocating interfaith marriage which moves on the same railin dealing with womens issue. Its a prominent historical event at 1986 has brought us anevidence. It was started by Jakarta Civil Registry Office ability to accommodate and legalizeinterfaith marriage at that time when such protest particularly from Council of Ulama (MUI)and Religious Ministry risen up. Both of latest institutions declared their objection on KCSs

practice and regarded it as breaking over the principle of Marriage Bill 1/1974 andPresidential Instruction 1983 on Civil Registrys Role on Administrative Matter. The debatewas ended by the agreement on regulating undeniably fact of interfaith marriage in Jakarta.Those agreements were 1) KUA responsible for validating marriage between Moslem manand non-Moslem woman, while 2) KCS took its responsibility on registering the non-Moslem man and Moslem womans marriage. At the meantime, Jakartas Council of Ulama(MUI) announcing the Fatwa in permitting the marriage between Moslem man and womanfrom ahlul kitab (people of book) while remained prohibiting the opposite. (Mujiburrahman,2006: 188) This kind of fatwa, in fact was in opposition to that of the National Council of Ulama (MUI Pusat)

While sacred violence remains occurred in political and social aspects, gender dimension regarded its legal construction as part of replica where political and religious ideaare crystallized together. Both of them built its ideal view of womans position and role in themarriage institution. Elsbeth Locher-Scholten, a postcolonial historian discovered Indonesianwomens position before law. Another word to say, Scholten preferred to say that theexistence of women in family including their status within interfaith marriage- was

conducted by the unity of religion, structure of state and patriarchal type of culture. But shewas not pessimistically to find this fact, because at the same time women were posed primarily in maintaining their religiosity and family. While the patriarchal view of structuredetermined their barriers trough position and role, Scholten saw the possibility of women inempowering their role in to gain their position as maintainer. (Locher-Scholten, 2000: 188)The more similar study was also revealed by Sri Wiyanti. She saw the gender role divisionhas standardized womens role and reveal their inferiority as the consequence. The utmostbarrier of womens weaknesses came from structurally and culturally gender divisionrole which in fact accommodated by our Marriage Bill. Their status before the law hasnothing to do with the guarantee of their equal role and responsibility within themarriage. This violence, said Wiyanti, make the condition more clear; in fact, marriage

is not only a matter of legal description, moreover its a portrait of representation wherereligion and culture intermingled each other. (Anshor, 2004: 67, 91)

10


11/11

F. Bibliography

Abdurrahman. 1986. Himpunan Peraturan Perundang-undangan tentang Perkawinan.Jakarta: Akademi Pressindo.

Anshor, Maria Ulfa, Martin Lukito Sinaga. (edt). 2004. Tafsir Ulang Perkawinan Lintas Agama; Perspektif Perempuan dan Pluralisme. Jakarta: Kapal Perempuan.

Baile, G, 1995, Violence Unveiled: Humanity at the Cross-Road, New York: The Cross-RoadPublishing

Charm, Piet Go O., Suharto, 1987, Kawin Campur Beda Agama dan Beda Gereja: Tinjauan Historis Teologis, Pastoral, HUkum Gereja, dan Hukum Sipil, Malang: PenerbitDioma

Feillard, Andree. 1999. NU vis--vis Negara; Pencarian Isi, Bentuk dan Makna. Yogyakarta:LKiS.

Ferlita, Ernest, 1998, Film and the Quest for Meaning on Michael Bird and John R. May, Religion in Film, USA: The University of Tennessee Press

Hastrup, Kirsten, 2002, Antrophological visions: some notes on visual and textual authorityon Peter Ian Crawford and David Turton Film as Ethnography USA: Manchester University Press.

Jones, Gavin, Chee Heng Leng, 2006, Muslim non-Muslim Marriage, Rights and The Statein Southeast Asia, with Emphasis on Indonesia and Malaysia background paper onWorkshop on the same title organized by ARI-NUS.

Lukito, Ratno, 2006, Trapped Between Legal Unification and Pluralism: The IndonesianSupreme Courts Decision on Interfaith Marriage presentation paper at Workshop onMuslims non Muslims Marriage, Rights and the State in Southeast Asia organized byAsia Research Institute, National University of Singapore, September 23, 2006.

Locher-Scholten, Elsbeth. 2004. Marriage, Morality and Modernity: The 1937 Debate onMonogamy dalam Women and The Colonial State; Essays on Gender and Modernityin the Netherlands Indies 1900-1942. Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press.

Mujiburrahman. 2006. Feeling Threatened; Muslim-Christian Relations in Indonesias NewOrder. Disertasi ISIM. Belanda: Amsterdam University Press.

Mulia, Siti Musdah , 2007, Islam dan Ispirasi Kesetaraan Gender, Yogyakarta: Kibar PressPanggabean, Syamsurizal, 2007, Religion, Violence and Reconciliation, Materi Kuliah

Yogyakarta: CRCS-UGM.Parekh, Bikhu, 2008, A New Politics of Identity: Political Principles for an Interdependent

World, New York: Palgrave McMilan.Suparman, Maman. 1996. Perkawinan Campuran Antaragama di Indonesia menurut

Undang-undang Perkawinan. dalam Jurnal Untag no. 6. Jakarta: September-Desember.Source, Daniel J. Leab, 2002, Introduction: Film and Religion on Film and Religion , Vol.

14, No. 2, USA: Indiana University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3815614Accessed: 08/07/2008

Prasyarat Pengajuan Perkawinan, 2007,Kabupaten Gunung Kidul: Kantor Catatan Sipilhttp://www.icrp-online.org/wmview.php?ArtID=27 . Accessed: June 24, 2007

11
http://www.icrp-online.org/wmview.php?ArtID=27http://www.icrp-online.org/wmview.php?ArtID=27

Searching for Love

Documents

Transcript of Searching for Love