Ariel and Miyabi (and Luna Maya and Cut Tari -- Possibilities)...

No, no, no!

It is not what you are thinking or what you are hoping for. There is no new tape of Ariel and Miyabi to add to the "Ariel Does Everyone He Can" collection. This is a story about Ariel getting some support from someone all to familiar with the attitudes of some Indonesians to sex and sex tapes, particularly for celebrities. Although, to be fair, Miyabi (aka Maria Ozawa) makes making sex tapes her professional calling. As far as I can tell, Ariel is still an amateur film maker and producer learning the trade.

If you want to read about Miyabi and her exploits, or lack thereof, in Indonesia, then I suggest you use the search feature for this blog. There are plenty of posts and plenty of photos, happy hunting. If you want to read a little about Ariel and his sex-capades then you will find most of them have been posted this month, so just look in the right hand column under 'July 2010', happy hunting there as well.

This post includes some 'safe' screencaps of some of the sex tapes out there at the moment. They are available over at Asia One.

Now, according to Miyabi, the moral police should not be judging Ariel or his exploits too harshly. In fact, she has used Twitter and 'tweeted' that people should not judge a book by its cover. I am not sure what she means by that, but perhaps she is referring to Ariel's sexual prowess and abilities as highlighted rather explicitly on the tapes. Or she might be referring to something else.

The best part about the Miyabi tweets is that she has expressed an interest in getting to know Ariel better. So, it seems that if things do not work out in Indonesia, there seems to be an opening in Japan that Ariel might be able to fill (no pun intended). Miyabi does think that Ariel is handsome and that "his girls" are good looking. This does sound like it has potential for a major film!

Syekh Puji Goes To Trial...

Pujiono Cahyono Widianto who is also known as Syekh Puji (Syech Puji) has finally gone to trial for marrying a 12-year-old, Lutfiana Ulfa, back in Ausgust 2008. The trial is being held in Central Java at the Ungaran District Court. Puji has been charged and indicted under two articles; art. 88 of Law 2002 (Child Protection Law) and art. 290 of the Indonesian Criminal Code (KUHP).

Each of the articles carry a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years. Puji is not expected to receive the maximum sentence. Though it would be a worthy statement that there is no religious exception to the laws of marriage, the protection of children, or the committing of crimes. Nevertheless, there will always be those that argue the laws of man (for want of a gender neutral term) will always be trumped by the laws of God.

The trial is being held behind closed doors. There is some argument as to whether this is necessary because the identity of the perpetrator of the alleged crime and the victim have both been revealed publicly and their photos splashed across the world's media pages. Nevertheless, Indonesian law generally protects the identity of minors involved in criminal matters, both as victims and as perpetrators. I have a picture of them both, but have opted for the one above. Perhaps this is what he is paying OC Kaligis to represent him.

If I was ever going to practice law in Indonesia and I was keen to practice criminal law, then OC Kaligis would be one advocate that I would try and convince to employ me. He gets plenty of interesting work. That is not to say that I would be keen to defend Syekh Puji, but I am a firm believer that everyone is entitled to get the best possible representation available, irrespective of their ability to pay. Obviously, the Syekh can pay!

This case and trial might be a little difficult for me to follow from Sydney, but I will do my best.

Stoning for Adultery -- Aceh Stepping Back In Time...

This is one of those moments where you shake your head, and fear for the future of Indonesia, all the while thinking, why? I have been thinking about writing this post for a while, but have held off to see whether the Aceh Regional House of Representatives (DPRA) would push this piece of legislation through before the term of the current legislature ends. I am not surprised that it passed, but it does pose some interesting issues going forward. I am also writing this post now because I have a copy of the Qanun and have taken the time to read it.

The DPRA passed the Qanun (Regional Regulation) on Jinayat (Crimes). Regional autonomy provides that regions can have more control over the regulation of their own affairs, and this includes the passage of regulations. In Aceh, this includes specific provisions that recognize the predominantly Muslim nature of Aceh. So, the drafting, enactment, and implementation of Syariah based regulations was not only contemplated but expected in the case of Aceh.

The Qanun is a perfection of a number of other previously issued Qanun (Nos. 12, 13, and 14 of 2003) and relies on Law No. 44 of 1999 on the Administration of the Special Province of Aceh and Law No. 11 of 2006 on the Governance of Aceh to provide the legal foundation for the drafting, enactment, and implementation of Syariah law in Aceh.

Interestingly, in the"In View Of ..." section of the Qanun, which generally lists the laws in hierarchical form, the Al-Quran (Koran) and the Al-Hadits (Hadiths) appear before the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and all subsequent legislation. This is interesting because it suggests that "God's Law" is superior to all "man-made law" (for want of a gender neutral term).

Stoning is not a punishment recognized in Indonesian law. In fact, it would not be too difficult to make an argument for stoning to be a cruel and unusual punishment that is also in every sense inhuman and degrading. And, consequently, clearly contrary to several constitutional rights guaranteed to all Indonesian citizens, particularly Article 28(I).

Yet, it is worth noting that caning is also not a punishment recognized in Indonesian law, but remains on the statute books in Aceh. So, it remains to be seen who will make a constitutional challenge to the stoning provision (at the moment there seems to be plenty of punters willing to step up and take the challenge).

My view is that it might not even have to go to the Constitutional Court. It is possible that this Qanun breaches the requirements of legislation higher in the hierarchy of laws. It would also seemingly breach a number of international obligations that Indonesia has signed on to. This would conceivably allow the Minister of Home Affairs to question the validity of the Qanun and any subsequent implementation, and ultimately this process would lead to the Qanun being declared unconstitutional.

The House of Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat / DPR) could also be more proactive in seeking to overturn this legislation as it would clearly suggest that a Qanun such as this one leads to a two-tiered justice system that discriminates against the followers of a certain faith.

Stoning is the sentence for those that knowingly commit adultery. However, this only applies to those who are married and knowingly commit this offense. For those that are unmarried, the punishment is up to 100 lashings with a cane. One of the accepted forms of evidence of adultery is a sworn oath that requires the oath maker to acknowledge that if they lie they will be damned in both this life and the afterlife. I am guessing this is meant to dissuade the aggrieved party from telling fibs. If you are a Muslim and not particularly devout then this might not be a consideration for you.

Funnily enough, not that there is anything funny about this Qanun, a woman who is pregnant outside of wedlock cannot be accused of adultery without sufficient evidence of her crime. Now, I would have thought aside from the immaculate conception that the chances of a woman outside of wedlock being pregnant would be pretty remote. I am obviously excluding cases where the woman has been raped from this scenario.

The Qanun also deals with rape. Rape includes anal and oral sex. However, somewhat disturbingly the definition implies that rape cannot occur between a husband and a wife. So, if you are married then "no" means "yes".

The other interesting aspect of this Qanun is that it provides for criminal fines to be paid in grams of pure gold. For example, if you get caught in the act of Liwath or Musahaqah, then the penalty is 100 lashes of the cane and a fine of 1000 grams of pure gold or 100 months in jail. It is a bit of a decision as to whether you want to part with the 1000 grams of gold or do the 100 months.

If one was thinking that this Qanun is the imposition of Syariah law and therefore only applies to Muslims living in Aceh, then you would be wrong. The Qanun definitely applies to all Muslims without exception. The Qanun also applies to any non-Muslim who commits an offense in concert with a Muslim, although this would seemingly require the non-Muslim part to acknowledge and choose to be tried under the provisions of this Qanun. The Qanun also applies to any non-Muslim who commits an offense under the provisions of this Qanun and where the offense is not explicitly regulated in the Indonesian Criminal Code.

The defense of the provisions are that they reflect what is contained in the Koran and the Hadiths, and thus are essentially the words of God and agreed recollections of the sayings of the Prophet. Simply, they cannot be changed or amended. In many senses, this is a step back in time to the time of 7th Century Saudi Arabia and one has to wonder what the relevance of those times are to 21st Century Aceh and more generally, Indonesia.

Hopefully, the incoming DPRA will see the error of the ways of the current DPRA and repeal this Qanun of their own accord.

Blasphemy in Indonesia

Blasphemy is an issue that is always interesting to write about as the possibilities are endless, at least in terms of the hypotheticals - the what ifs? This is even more so the case in Indonesia where even the slightest hint of blasphemy leads to violence and the destruction of private property and the desecration of religious property in some instances, it is fair to say there is nothing funny about blasphemy in Indonesia.

Indonesia is still not at the point of trying, as Malaysia has, to ban the use of certain words and restrict their usage only to Muslims. Malaysia decided that "Allah" was a Muslim term to refer to God and because it was a Muslim term then no other religions had a right to refer to their God as Allah. I would guess that to do so would amount to blasphemy.

Nevertheless, Indonesians, at least in some instances, have voiced extreme opinions on the issue of apostasy. The demand is for death for all apostates. The issue has come to the fore yet again as the government is set to continue its pursuit, some might say persecution, of Lia Eden, the leader of a messianic cult, who by all accounts is as mad as a two bob watch, for blasphemy. The most recent arrest is hot on the heels of the arrest of a teacher for supposedly scorning the Prophet. For some background on the Eden cult you can go here, here, and here.

The teacher, Welhelmina Holle, sparked a violent protest that led to the burning of churches and homes on Seram Island in the Moluccas. It remains unclear exactly what she said but obviously for some it did not matter. The fact that the allegation was made was enough for some to set out on a violent protest.

The actual law on blasphemy was a Presidential Decree that was enacted into law in 1965 (No. 1/PNPS/1965) and the key elements have in essence been extracted and included in the current Indonesian Criminal Code (Kitab Undang-undang Hukum Pidana / KUHP) as Article 156(a). The combination of these laws is designed to prevent "deviant interpretations" or any challenge to the long-standing norms particularly with respect to Islam, and to prevent any public discourse on religion by outlawing any utterances that can conceivably be deemed hostile or abusive or insulting of any particular religion.

This is problematic in a secular state as it gives the government or its appointed proxies the power to make subjective interpretations of what constitutes blasphemy or heresy. In many ways the power is a similar one to what has been seen before, as granted to the Roman Catholic Church during the Inquisitions. For many this might be a difficult concept to digest. However, it is as simple as recognizing that there is not the same separation of Church and State or in this case Mosque and State that many of us from a Western democratic tradition would recognize.

Yet, there is some separation in Indonesia as the Indonesian Ulema Council (Majelis Ulema Indonesia / MUI) has the power to issue fatwas (edicts) on all things Islam but these fatwas are not legally binding. In that sense it is a toothless tiger whose growl is much bigger than its bite. Although, it is a brave government that aligns itself against the MUI as to do so would expose it to charges of being anti-Islam or not sensitive to Muslim issues and needs.

I guess the point of this little musing was that on a personal level I have a real problem with people being jailed for their non-violent religious beliefs no matter how crazy and left or right of mainstream they might be. For example, if a shaven-headed woman wants to claim that she is the Archangel Gabriel and people want to believe that and follow her then so be it. Similarly, if someone wants to claim that there was another prophet after Muhammad and there are people prepared to belief that then so be it.

I leave you with these random thoughts.

If God sends his only son, Jesus Christ, to earth to die for our sins, then doesn't this suggest that Jesus is the most likely candidate to have been the last prophet (at least until the second coming of Christ)? And, therefore, would it be blasphemy to suggest that God got it wrong by sending his only son and decided to have another go at getting it right by selecting some random fella, who in this case just happens to be a fella named Muhammad, to be his final prophet on earth and to bring Islam to the world?

Then, if it is to be accepted that Muhammad followed Jesus as a prophet, then why is it not possible that God could have had second or third thoughts and decided that another prophet was necessary in order to perfect any imperfections that may have arisen?

Would it be blasphemy to suggest that Buddha never really reached enlightenment by suggesting that the Buddha has been reincarnated for another stint back in the real world?

Oh well! As Uncle Ned once said, "such is life"!