By: Ajeng Mufadillah)*
Since the issuance of Perppu. 2 year 2017 which is focused on mass organizations anti Pancasila by President Joko Widodo, pros and cons color our social media. Almost every group in WA posted a short article in the form of an analysis of the existence of Perppu. 2 year 2017 on Amendment to Law no. 17 of 2013 on Community Organizations. To make it easier to remember, the Perppu is then briefly known as the Pancasila Anti-Organization Order. The context of the birth of the Perppu is the national crunch of the growing understanding of radicalism which is actually disseminated by some organizations. So simply the Perppu is aimed at defending our house named Indonesia where all diversity is acknowledged and protected.
Of course there is no perfect state organizer, nor is there a regulation without weakness that opens up a wild gap. Therefore, our duty is to guard and supervise the implementation of this Perppu so as not to be interpreted “nonsense” by certain elements. In the context of a country that needs solidarity in responding to the radicalism movement, it is very strategic if the input or critical of the lack of Perppu is conveyed with constructive purpose. Borrowing the term Prof. Sulis Irianto, that do not let excessive criticism that beat the government precisely to burn our house together, Indonesia.
There are seven things I need to tell the public why the Perppu is important to support.
First, the purpose of Perppu. 2nd year 2017 itself is protecting our house together named Indonesia from radicalism who wants to change the state base. So we must always put this Perppu interpretation on its noble aim.
Second, the context of the birth of the Perppu to respond to the national crunch where the teachings of radicalism have penetrated into the private spaces of the family and all aspects of community life. Consequently, excessive fanaticism exposes one group, superiortas to one group’s truth claims, hateful propaganda craze in the realm of social media and real, and of course violent acts are no longer in the public eye.
Not only that, high intolerance develops in society also very threatening diversity in Indonesia. The intolerant survey by the Wahid Foundation (2016) mentions that 59.9% of 1,520 respondents, Indonesians have hated groups, they are LGBT, communist, Jewish, Christian, Shia, Wahabi, Buddist, Chinese, 92.2% of them disagree someone from the group It works in government. 82.4% of them, are less likely to live next door to one of these groups.
Another survey by PPIM on intolerance with 1200 female and male respondents also showed that although 76% agreed with Pancasila values, and 84.7% agreed NKRI-based Pancasila, but the Survey found 22.8% agreed to inspiration of the Islamic state. This survey also shows bad perception towards non-Muslims that is 62.7% disagree jd president, 64% agree to be a teacher in public school; 55.3% allowing worship services: 42.2% disallow, 51.6% agree to build church: 45.8% disagree
Third, the target of the emergence of this Perppu is on the social organization that is anti Pancasila. This means that mass organizations who deliberately from the beginning of their establishment already have an agenda to replace the Pancasila state will be the target of this Perppu. What if the Perppu is interpreted differently and is used to attack other minorities? If that happens then of course it must be returned again to the purpose and context of issuance of this Perppu. Furthermore, it should be seen whether the minority group organization has an agenda to replace Pancasila. If not, then of course this Perppu does not apply. Despite the fact that minority groups are still entangled in the interpretation of religious blasphemy and defamation. But as long as they are not anti-Pancasila, certainly not in the context of this Perppu.
Today we need a solid saying no to all forms of radicalism that are threatening our country. It takes bold steps to keep Indonesia united. I agree with all the criticism that many parties have expressed in viewing the Perppu, but I would prefer that the Presidential Office immediately facilitate and consolidate these criticisms and inputs into constructive constructions and arguments for a better CSO Act rather than a hot ball to be used By supporters of radicalism to delegitimize the position of the state. I agree that we should all oversee the implementation of this Perppu not to be illegally interpreted. We are encouraging further mechanisms to be deployed by the government to ensure that the Perppu will become a law that better protects our community organizations, which are struggling to keep the house with Indonesia.
Comments are closed.