Legislating Student Study Time...

As a teacher it would be a very positive development if students would study for at least two hours a day in addition to the six or so hours they spend at school. The reality is that students need to be inspired to do this. However, the Depok City Council has decided that the best way to get students to study is to pass a city ordinance (by law) that mandates students must study for two hours between the hours of 6pm and 8pm. The ordinance requires that students also spend some of this time studying the history of Depok.

It is hardly surprising that the driving force behind such a law is none other than one of the wives of Tifatul Sembiring (TitS), Sri Rahayu. Obviously, there is some family competition here as to who can garner the most coverage for the promotion of ineffective legislation. Rahayu's argument is that Indonesians must accept that to be a scholarly nation they have to ingrain study into the culture of the masses. If they won't come willingly, then we will legislate to make it happen.

There are a couple of problems with the legislation. There is no Depok history curriculum in place. This curriculum will not be in place until at least 2012. More importantly, the ordinance does not include any sanctions for failure to comply. Herein lies the problem. If students are not inspired or inclined to study then they won't, particularly when they know that they will not be punished for not doing it. And, parents need not fear the long arm of the Depok ordinance if they too cannot be punished for not forcing their children to study.

What would be interesting is if the ordinance included provisions to set up the education police. The education police would be granted the authority to randomly visit homes of school-age children and check that they are at home and doing their homework. The ordinance would even be a little scary if the education police then had the power to impose on-the-spot fines or arrest children they found wandering out on the streets or in malls and send them to "reform schools" for the truanting and delinquent type.

The ordinance goes on to say that the community is obligated to create an environment that is conducive to studying. I wonder if this means that Mosques will not be able to have loud calls to prayer or Koran recitals during the hours of 6pm to 8pm?

Unfortunately, the ordinance is a waste of time and has been a waste of taxpayer Rupiah as there has simply been no consideration given to enforcement. The standard problem of any piece of legislation at any level of government is enforcement. If no thought is given to enforcement and no provisions are put into place allowing for enforcement or compliance to occur, then compliance will just not happen.

As an educator, I want to see children learn, I want to see children gain the knowledge they require to be successful, I want to see children contribute now and in the future, and I want to know that they have been inspired to learn. But, this ordinance is not the way to create a nation of learners.

Separation of Mosque and State...

One of the fundamental principles that make a democracy is that there needs to be separation between the state and the predominant religion of that state. In the Western context this is referred to as the separation of Church and State. In essence, religion plays no role in the affairs of state. This is sometime problematic as the US has found out with things like the pledge of allegiance and the display of the ten commandments at a court house.

In the Indonesian context, perhaps the terminology is the separation of Mosque and State. Indonesia is a democracy but sometimes there is a questionable separation between Mosque and State, particularly in terms of the recent drive to enact religious bylaws that may not be constitutionally valid. However, the Ministry of Religious Affairs has placed the issue firmly back in the spotlight by providing awards to Provincial Governors and District Heads for their efforts to enact and implement Syariah-inspired regional regulations.

The first issue is whether a Ministry that is supposed to represent all religions in Indonesia has acted responsibly in recognising just one of those religions, Islam. Is this indicative of favouritism or discrimination? The reality is that within the Ministry of Religious Affairs each religion is represented by its own directorate. These directorates are responsible for the administration of their own affairs. So, in this regard there is no reason why these directorates could not initiate similar awards. However, the real question is whether the Ministry would back these awards.

The awards in question were for the promotion of Islam through the enactment and implementation of Syariah-inspired regional regulations. On the entirely hypothetical front, if a province was to draft, debate, enact and implement ecclesiastical-inspired regional regulations, would these be recognised by the state and would the Ministry of Religious Affairs be favourable towards an award that recognised these efforts if a recognition initiative came from the relevant directorate? It would seem unlikely.

In the big scheme of things there is nothing wrong with the Ministry of Religious Affairs recognising and rewarding Islam-related achievements provided that these are not recognising initiatives that strip away basic human rights of Indonesian citizens. The reality is that some of those individuals recognised for their efforts to promote Islam have also promoted regional regulations that strip away basic human rights and discriminate against minorities and discriminate against women.

The fact that the Ministry has chosen to recognise Syriah-inspired regional regulations as progress seems to be politically motivated and designed to pander to Islamic political interests rather than the greater interests of the state. If this is the case then there are arguments to be made that the Ministry is crossing that degree of separation that is expected.

Ho hum...

School for Virgin Girls Only...

They obviously do not have a lot to do in Jambi.

Jambi is a province in Indonesia. It is located on the island of Sumatra. It now has a new claim to fame in Bambang Bayu Suseno. Suseno is a legislator in the local parliament up there in Jambi. He has decided in his infinite wisdom that all young girls intending to enroll in a state school must first undergo a virginity test.

Yes, punters, a virginity test. It seems that in Jambi only virgin girls have a right to get an education. I am guessing that Suseno must be thinking that a girl who is no-longer a virgin probably has nothing else left to learn so why waste time getting an education in school?

Suseno seems to think that this is a way of protecting the girls and maintaining their dignity. Protecting them from what? And, maintaining what dignity? Since when has it been a good idea to base access to education on your virginity status? Perhaps we could tie young Suseno to a stake and set him on fire. If he lives he is not fit to be a legislator, and if he dies he is...oops!

Which gives rise to my next point. Are these virginity tests infallible? Is there a right to appeal? Who makes this life-altering judgment? I wonder what "age" are we living in now? Are there any exceptions where a non-virgin might be granted a reprieve to enter a state school although she is no longer "pure"? I only ask because I am wondering how constitutional it is to exclude students based on their virginity status from state schools. I am also wondering whether it is right to exclude a victim of rape from gaining an education?

But why test for just virginity? And, why just the girls? Why not test all girls and all boys to determine whether they are virgins? While we are testing them, why not check out their IQs and exclude anyone below 99 as being a little too slow for state school and anyone over 101 as being too demanding, and therefore too difficult to accommodate in a state school. From there we should also start testing for medical conditions. So, anyone wearing glasses are excluded from state schools. Let's face it, there would need to be too may resources devoted to providing the necessary facilities for sight-challenged students. The list can go on and on and on and on.

The whole idea that you would want to test for virginity as a pre-requisite for entry into state schools is absurd.

Not to be deterred though, Suseno is focused on his plan of drafting a regional law that mandates entry to state schools in Jambi be based on the successful completion of a virginity test. Successful here being you test positive for virginity.

I am still shaking my head as I think about how silly this is. Maybe it is just a publicity stunt? Then again, they test for virginity in Africa, and give the girls a certificate if they pass the test (make the grade so to speak).

Canings in Aceh...

There is a need to respect the laws of any place you live or visit, but there are those times when one wonders whether the laws in question have earned the right to demand the sort of respect that they do. That said, Aceh's Sharia Police have caned a few people of late for the 'crimes' of adultery and gambling.

The idea that these two particular activities are crimes in the human realm is indicative of our over-zealousness to do God's work. For the true believers, it would seem that you do not trust God to do that which God does, punish those who sin against him (or her) by breaking the rules. In any event, they are God's rules so perhaps God should also be responsible for meting out the punishment.

The idea of a public caning always reminds me of going to the movies when I was a kid and watching a western. In particular, the ones where there is a public hanging, which in turn draws big crowds of onlookers. I have never really since the spectacle value of public executions or in this case canings. I have always wondered, but never enough to do a psychology degree, whether this was just a simple case of blood-thirstiness with the prospect of watching someone die or be physically beaten to a bloody mess. Maybe that can be my next course of study.

Nevertheless, canings in Aceh are reportedly to be more about public humiliation than they are about inflicting pain. Supporters of caning argue that there is a huge deterrent effect because of the physical nature of the punishment. Yet, the reality is there are very strict rules in place for where men and women can be caned with respect to body parts and how hard these lashes can be. Truth be told, when I was in high school, corporal punishment was still an available option for teachers to control unruly students (or those who were too big a smart arses for their own good, like me). So, I am thinking with the cane in the "right" person's hand, some serious pain and physical damage can be inflicted.

The adulterers each received eight strokes of the best from the cane master (or is that cane master lash?). The maximum penalty under the relevant Qanun, No. 14 of 2003, as I recall is nine strokes. There is also a minimum of three. So, I guess the offence was at the top end of the scale but it was not the most serious form of adulterous behaviour.

The gamblers received eight and seven lashes of the cane respectively. Interestingly, this means that gambling and adultery are pretty much on the same seriousness level in this case. These gentlemen were in breach of the provisions of Qanun No. 13 of 2003.

These canings follow a series of canings that took place in June. It would seem that the Acehnese authorities are ratcheting up the caning activities in the lead up to Ramadan.

One final point, if it was me about to be caned and I was walking up to the public caning platform in order to receive my punishment for whatever it is that I had been sentenced for, I would not know whether to laugh or cry having had a look at the fashion sense of the executioner! There seriously must be potential for the launch of a whole "executioner" line of tailored fashions.

Ho hum...

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.

HIV / AIDS, Microchips, and Papua

The Papuan Provincial Government has drafted a Regional Regulation that includes an article that requires certain people living with HIV / AIDS to be micro-chipped. This seems to fly in the face of other measures that Indonesia has taken to reduce the stigma associated with being HIV positive. Indonesia has laws and regulations in place that make it illegal to discriminate against people living with HIV / AIDS in the work place and the general community.

The article defines "certain" people as being those that are "aggressive". Aggressive in the context of the regulation are those that are aggressively seeking out sexual partners and presumably spreading the virus without informing their prospective partners of their HIV status.

I am not sure how the microchips are going to prevent the aggressive individuals that are so micro-chipped from having sexual intercourse or infecting others. At best the microchips will allow authorities to track movements and general locations where these aggressive people are. I just do not see how the microchips will alert a potential victim to the HIV status of the micro-chipped person.

The idea of chipping aggressive people is just so subjective in nature that it is difficult to see how it can possibly work without falling foul of the constitutional provisions prohibiting discrimination. Who is to decide what constitutes aggressiveness and how is aggressiveness to be measured?

There is something that seems to be inherently wrong in tagging people within certain groups. I wonder how long it will be until there are regional regulations that require the micro-chipping of people from marginal groups such as the homeless, minority faiths, gays and lesbians, expatriates, to name but a few.

I am sensing that there will undoubtedly be plenty of concerned citizens and NGOs that will band together to challenge the validity of the regional regulation. Tagging people is just wrong, at least, to my mind.

Steal and Lose a Hand!

The implementation of strict Sharia Law in Indonesia was always thought to be a matter of time proposition in the world's largest Muslim nation. However, there was always an underlying hope that this would not come to pass as the potential for this to become a trigger of social unrest and conflict is also a matter of time proposition. Unless, the laws apply universally across the archipelago then a double standard of punishment will be in effect. No doubt an interesting case for the Constitutional Court to hear in light of the no discrimination articles in the 1945 Constitution.



With the decentralization and devolution of central government authority as a consequence of greater regional autonomy there has been a significant increase in the number of Sharia-based or inspired laws finding their way on to regional statute books. Bulukumbu in the Province of Sulawesi is touted often as an example of Sharia Law implementation.



Since 2002 there have been laws implemented relating to the drinking of alcohol, gambling, the compulsory wearing of Islamic attire, as well as compulsory learning of the Koran. Depending on who you ask there is a sense that with the implementation of Sharia Law there has been a decrease in crime, gambling, and other sinful activities. There is also a belief that women are more pure. This is to be expected considering that Sharia Law is seen as the laws of God as implemented on earth.



For non-Muslims wanting to become part of the Civil Service in this part of the world, a headscarf for women is also compulsory attire. The justification is that it is part of the uniform and if you want the job you wear the uniform, simple enough!



However, it is being reported that 20 villages within the Gantarang municipality have agreed to implement a regulation that requires the hand of a thief to be cut off. It seems that this is conditional on the thief being caught red-handed (pun intended). At the same meeting it was also agreed that for offences relating to alcohol and gambling the public canings will be upped to a level of 80 lashes.

In the period since regional autonomy was legislated there has been an explosion in the numbers of regional regulations being enacted. The exact amount of suspect regional and local regulations that would not comply with the necessary superior legislation is estimated to be in the hundreds and possibly thousands. It is not uncommon for the Department of Home Affairs to cancel non-complying regulations. So, it will be interesting to see whether this particular regulation survives the cut (again the pun intended).

The biggest fear is vigilante justice. How is this regulation to be enforced and who gets to decide when the punishment must be implemented. In Indonesia it is not uncommon for a victim to scream out thief and the local populace come to the rescue by chasing down the alleged perpetrator and beating them senseless, sometimes to death, but without a doubt within an inch or two of their lives. This form of retribution is often excessively violent and because of its instantaneous nature completely free of any due process of law.

But in the meantime if you are ever in any one of these villages make sure anything you pick up you put back or pay for it!