Religious Persecution of Ahmadiyya Muslim Community
Recommend UsEmail this PagePersecution News RSS Blog
Introduction & Updates
<<… Indonesia >>
>> Papers & Analysis
Monthly Newsreports
Media Reports
Press Releases
Facts & Figures
Individual Case Reports
Pakistan and Ahmadis
Critical Analysis/Archives
Persecution - In Pictures
United Nations, HCHR
Amnesty International
US States Department
Urdu Section
Feedback/Site Tools
Related Links

The Heavenly Decree is the English translation of Asmani Faisala by Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the Promised Messiah and Mahdi (as) and the Founder of Ahmadiyya Muslim Jama'at. It is addressed to his contemporary ulema, specially Miyan Nadhir Husain Dehlawi and Maulawi Muhammad Husain of Batala who had issued a fatwa of heresy against the Promised Messiahas and declared him a non-Muslim, because he (the Promised Messiahas) had claimed that Jesus Christ had died a natural death and the second coming of Masih ibni Mariam (Jesus Christ) is fulfilled by the advent of Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas. Because (by the time the book was written) the ulema had refused to debate this issue with the Promised Messiah, he invited them, in this book, to a spiritual contest in which the question whether someone is a Muslim or not would be settled by Allah himself on the basis of four criteria of a true believer as laid down by Him in the Holy Quran. He also spelled out the modus operandi of this contest and fixed the period of time frame within which this contest would be decreed by Allah. He declared that God would not desert him and would help him and would grant him victory.
US$8.00 [Order]

Home Worldwide Indonesia April, 2010 Court justices accused of …
Court justices accused of ‘distorting’ testimonies

Wed, 04/21/2010 9:03 AM

Court justices accused of ‘distorting’ testimonies

Arghea Desafti Hapsari, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The Constitutional Court has again become the target of criticism following its ruling on the controversial Blasphemy Law, with plaintiffs accusing the judges of distorting the opinions of expert witnesses.

Just weeks after giving the nod to the divisive pornography law in late March, the Court on Monday ruled to uphold the 45-year-old law on religious blasphemy. Only one judge, Maria Farida Indrati, had a dissenting opinion.

But this held no sway in the final outcome as the Court turned down a judicial review request by human rights groups and high-profile figures such as late former president Abdurrahman Wahid and progressive Muslim scholar Siti Musdah Mulia.

A lawyer for the plaintiffs, Uli Parulian Sihombing, on Tuesday criticized the way judges had claimed that the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) had recommended keeping the law when in fact the latter had requested revisions to be made to it.

The panel of judges in its argument said that of the 24 parties whose testimonies were heard, two — Komnas HAM and the Indonesia Confucianism High Assembly (Matakin) — had said that the contested articles in the law were still needed and should not be revoked before a new and more comprehensive regulation was enacted.

Chief justice Mahfud MD did not return numerous calls from The Jakarta Post on Tuesday.

Komnas HAM chairman Ifdhal Kasim, who testified in February, said several articles in the law needed to be revised. He argued that the law “rests on the old Constitution, which opposes the new [amended] Constitution”.

“That’s why, based on the new Constitution, there needs to be a review [of laws] produced by former administrations,” he said.

The law stipulates criminal penalties for those who intentionally publicize, recommend or organize public support for a different interpretation of the six officially recognized religions.

Opponents say the law has been used to persecute members of religious minorities and of traditional beliefs, including when members of the Ahmadiyah sect were forced to take refuge after enduring violent attacks against them. The Court, however, said the law was needed to maintain public order.

On Tuesday, Uli also said that judges had not made an objective decision based on facts and evidence.

Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) chairman Amidhan, on the other hand, expressed his support for the Court ruling. He said that the law was needed to maintain harmony among religions. “Without the law, there would be chaos. I fear people would take the law into their own hands,” he added.

Amidhan also said that the law could be revoked only if Indonesians were “wiser”. “But the people are not as wise as in the US, where religion is a personal matter,” he told the Post.

Masdar Farid Mas’udi from Nahdlatul Ulama, the country’s largest Muslim organization, voiced a different opinion, despite the organization’s official position supporting the court’s ruling.

He said that by keeping the law, the numerous Islamic preachers who criticized other religions and therefore broke the law “would now have to be prepared to be arrested and face criminal charges”.

“They are the ones who supported this law and they cannot be above it,” he said.

Top of page