By: Ahmad Pahlevi) *
Minister of Religion Fachrul Razi stressed that there would be no khilafah state system in Indonesia. Because, its existence is not in accordance with the ideology of Pancasila. Minister of Religion Fachrul also continues to be committed to eradicating radicalism which is a real threat to society.
Polemic of the Khilafah seems endless. Groups who want a government system according to Islamic law are likely to continue to reap controversy. Not intended to underestimate the understanding of a religion. Because, it is clear that the Republic of Indonesia is a country known for diversity, namely, ethnicity, religion, race and culture. So if the Archipelago implements the Khilafah country system, what about the others?
This indeed tends to be complicated, on the one hand there is a desire to advance Indonesia with governance in the time of the Prophet. However, on the other hand, the existence of religious tolerance as part of human rights is also considered quite crucial. Applying the ideology of Pancasila is expected to be a middle ground, because the five principles completely cover state administration which is quite complex.
The statement of former Indonesian Hizb ut-Tahrir (HTI) spokesperson Ismail Yusanto when comparing President Joko Widodo’s leadership treatment of the Khilafah was like Pharaoh’s treatment of the US Musa. This was stated when responding to the statement of Fachrul Razi as Minister of Religion, related to the ban on khilafah understanding in Indonesia. He said the Jokowi administration overestimated the pro-Khilafah group. On the other hand the results of the SMRC survey said that groups supporting the Khilafah were only a handful of people.
Ismail accused the government’s fear of the Khilafah movement making them launch every means. Like, the use of the term deviant or radical. So there was a shift in the treatment of government in combating Muslims. Previously, the method used was to stamp terrorism or war on terrorism. However, now the government is considered to treat the Islamic movement with the stamp of radicalism. He concluded that anyone who was anti-democracy would be considered radicalism.
Ismail added, there was no choice but to put up a fight. But he did not agree if he had to fight with violence such as the stabbing incident of former Coordinating Minister for Politics and Security Wiranto, some time ago. He chose to launch a fight with two options. Namely, brainstorming and still practicing religion.
Previously, Minister of Religion Fachrul Razi had stressed that the government would ban the existence or spread of Khilafah ideology in Indonesia. This was conveyed in front of the mosque’s priests at the Workshop on Improving the Role and Function of the Mosque’s Permanent Imam. Fachrul stated that there was really no need for any debate regarding this khilafah understanding. Because, the teaching contains more elements that are detrimental to the integrity of the Indonesian nation.
For information, a Saiful Mujani Research and Consulting (SMRC) survey in 2017 showed that as many as 79.3 percent of respondents disagreed if the Republic of Indonesia adheres to the Khilafah system, around 9.2 percent said they were pro-Khilafah, and 11.5 percent of respondents gave answers do not know.
Responding to the statement of former HTI spokesman, it seems there is something wrong. Bearing in mind, the Indonesian state or government does not fight Muslims. However, against the deviant ideology which is mostly in the name of Islam. So, it is clear what direction this government wants. Namely, defending the Muslims themselves, so that they are no longer used as “sacrifices” for irresponsible elements.
Not to mention, understanding the Pancasila ideology which in reality some people only judge from the outside. In fact, this legal and complex ideology covers the whole essence of state administration. Which, also in accordance with religious teachings, without prejudice to others. In fact, a number of literatures state that in Pancasila, there are no precepts that can lead to the teachings of shirk or tohagutism. If you pay close attention and detail, the five precepts in Pancasila are all messages that are in conformity with the universal values of Islam.
For example, the Prophet invites all elements of society to unite if they are then attacked by the enemy, the Quraysh group. Logically, if with non-Muslim groups only the Prophet could establish unity in the country of Medina, shouldn’t Muslims also be able to do the same thing? Relation to unity in terms of kindness with groups other than them. In the perspective of Islam, Indonesia is considered to have practiced the spirit of the Koran and the sunnah of the Prophet in order to establish and maintain unity from the smallest to the largest level.
So it can be concluded, Pancasila is not something that should be questioned and compared with the understanding of this khilafah. Justifying the teachings of the Khilafah is certainly not prohibited, but applying it to a governmental system on a larger scale seems indeed inappropriate.
) * The author is a social political observer
