By; Ahmad Haris
After the development of the blasphemy case of the Governor of DKI Jakarta, Basuki Tjahaja Purnama alias Ahok, Jokowi is often referred as a President who is anti-Islam. It cannot be denied, Ahok’s case that brought the Al-Maidah 51 letter in his campaign did indeed have a considerable impact on a number of religious groups in Indonesia. Starting from the demonstration to the appeal through social media to demand Ahok get the appropriate legal process.
Of course, the submission of these demands is the right that can be done by every Indonesian citizen as long as it does not lead to anarchic action. Unfortunately, on several occasions demanding Ahok to be imprisoned, not infrequently President Jokowi was dragged to the point of being accused of being one of the supporters of religious persecution by various parties. The reason is none other than because people thinks the government is very slow and even tends to intervene in handling the Ahok case. So that gradually, the stigma of supporters of religious opponents began to shift into the issue of Jokowi’s Anti-Islam.
Allegations of Jokowi’s intervention in the Ahok case tend to be odd, if we see the final results of the court. Precisely, on May 9, 2017, Ahok was officially sentenced to 2 years in prison for a blasphemy case. Based on the results of the court’s decision, Ahok fulfills element 156a of the Criminal Code which reads “Sentenced to imprisonment for a maximum of five years of anyone intentionally issuing feelings or committing acts of hostility, abuse, or desecration of a religion adopted in Indonesia. ”
Through this decision, it can be seen that there is actually no legal intervention carried out by President Jokowi. If there is legal intervention, Ahok should be acquitted by the court or at least a light sentence of 1 year imprisonment. But the reality that happened was inversely proportional, the judge even gave a much heavier verdict. This clearly shows the independent and professional attitude of the judge to adjudicate the decision according to his assessment of Ahok.
The judge’s final decision on the Ahok case should be a question for the community whether Jokowi is indeed an anti-Islam figure? Moreover, since Ahok was sentenced to the end of his term of detention, Jokowi’s Anti-Islamic perceptions still continue to roam across social media. This then made me wonder, is Jokowi’s Anti-Islamic stigma just a perception or just politicization?
Some figures who once linked Jokowi and Anti-Islam were Fahri Hamzah, a political party from the PKS. In his interview with Twitter, he said, “Among Jokowi’s great sins is to allow the proliferation of elements of Islam and # Islamophobia through the medium of ideological conflict.” In addition, Ismail Yusanto, spokesman for ex-HTI banned organizations, also said that the regime currently in power is an anti-Islamic and repressive regime because of the government’s refusal of Islamic organizations. If seen from these figures, it can be judged to some extent that both have an interest in cornering President Jokowi for both political interests and the interests of his organization.
Thus, although I cannot express directly the stigma of Jokowi Anti-Islam, it is an attempt to politicize certain parties. However, the community has been able to assess directly through their respective views, whether the accusation of Anti-Islamic Jokowi is a perception or even part of efforts to politicize certain parties. To conclude this paper, I quote Azyumardi Azra, Muslim Scholar, “It is clear that the anti-Islamic narrative of Jokowi is baseless and many are based on political interests to create manipulative narratives. Therefore, stop it!”
*) FISIP Students of Dharma Agung University
