Negotiating State, Religion and Human Rights: Debate in the Indonesian Constitutional Court

摘要

One of the crucial issues in countries with a Muslim majority, not to mention Indonesia, is the relationship between the religion and the state. Although Pancasila and the Constitution (UUD 1945) are claimed final, it does not mean that the position of religion, state, and human rights is also final. Practically, the state, religion and human rights negotiate one another, and sometimes even create tension. Here, the negotiations between religion, state, and human rights are not only in political forums such as House of Representatives but also in the Constitutional Court sessions. Debate and argument contestation often occur in the forums. This article aims at identifying debate and argument contestation in the Constitutional Court. In theory, it focuses on two issues: 1) freedom of religion and belief; and 2) Marriage law. The result of the study argues that the Constitutional Court's decision, especially regarding the relationship among religion, state, and human rights, is based not only on legal considerations but also on non-legal considerations. According to this argument, negotiations and contestations among the three will always continue as Indonesia is neither one religion-based state nor a secular state that does not profess a religion at all.