Ulema and
politics, an old practice
|
Muhammad As’ad ; The Director of
The A. Wahid Hasyim Library
at The
Tebuireng Islamic Boarding School in Jombang, East Java
|
JAKARTA
POST, 15 Agustus 2012
Many have been following the
run-up to the second round of Jakarta’s gubernatorial election with enthusiasm.
As the capital of Indonesia, Jakarta is a miniature of Indonesia and hopes
abound for a better future for the city under a good leader.
The Sept. 20 runoff will pit Joko “Jokowi” Widodo, the mayor of Surakarta in Central Java previously unknown among Jakarta citizens but holding a distinguished track record as one of the best mayors in the world, against incumbent Governor Fauzi Bowo, making for an interesting and fierce competition.
However, a democratic event that should have followed the principles of fairness and integrity has now come into question because of the widespread use of negative campaigning exploiting ethnic, religious, racial and intergroup issues (SARA).
Unfortunately, these issues have mainly involved ulema who have attacked non-Muslim candidates while encouraging Muslim voters to only vote for Muslim candidates. Without a doubt, this is targeted at Jokowi and his running mate Basuki “Ahok” Tjahaja Purnama, a Christian Chinese-Indonesian.
One of the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) deputy chairpersons, Ma’ruf Amin, said that Jakarta would be better managed by someone who had the same faith as him and most people in Jakarta.
This premise was further propounded by several other ulema, such as an Indonesia Mosque Council leader, who was quoted by Koran Tempo daily as saying that Muslim people had to vote for a Muslim candidate, or else a disaster such as the earthquake in Padang would strike Jakarta.
The latest furor centered on dangdut singer Rhoma Irama, who was cleared by the Jakarta Election Supervisory Committee (Panwaslu) on Monday of allegations of using a place of worship for political campaigning. Rhoma can be seen on YouTube suggesting his audience should elect a Muslim leader, which he said was part of his responsibility as an Islamic figure.
This development, if not a setback, has at least threatened the fairness and integrity of the second-round election. Surely, ulema as people who have a deep knowledge of religion should guide their followers toward peace and tolerance, rather than fueling discrimination and perhaps acts of violence among their followers?
Nevertheless, religion is not the ultimate factor to be considered by voters. Should we vote for a Muslim candidate if he or she does not meet the criteria of a good leader? The answer is definitely not. Taqi ad-Din Ahmad ibn Taymiyyah, a prominent ulema in the eighth century stated in his book Al-Siyasah al-Syar’iyah that a just non-Muslim leader was better than an unjust Muslim.
In my own opinion, this negative campaigning will not significantly influence voters’ preferences during the runoff. History shows that ulema statements or edicts have failed to change voters’ preferences, including in the 1999 legislative election when the MUI ordered Muslims to vote for Muslim candidates in an apparent bid to block the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) which was led by Megawati Soekarnoputri.
According to the MUI, most of the PDI-P candidates were non-Muslims. The result was that the party won the most votes in the election.
The failure of ulema to influence voters is in fact a consistent trend in Indonesian history as evinced in the unsuccessful bid of Islamic parties to win the most votes in the elections held in the Old Order, New Order and reform eras.
The parties’ total votes have even declined from 37 percent in 1999 to 29 percent in 2009.
The first round of the Jakarta gubernatorial election saw Jokowi-Ahok finish first despite the negative campaigning against the pair. The result indicates that rather than SARA track records matter for Jakarta voters.
It is time, therefore, for the ulema to reposition themselves. Their support for some politicians — including dirty ones — has harmed their image and reputation. They have failed to follow in the footsteps of the military who were deeply involved during the New Order but returned to their barracks and their original role as defenders of the nation in the wake of reformation.
The ulema would be better returning to Islamic boarding schools or pesantren, their ummah and their natural habitat, where they can educate and enlighten their people.
At a time when most Indonesian Muslims are poor and uneducated, the role of ulema as leaders and prime movers is that we need the most.
It would be much wiser for the ulema to focus on their noble job of empowering Indonesian Muslims for the sake of the nation, rather than pragmatic politics which benefits a few people at the expense of many. ●
The Sept. 20 runoff will pit Joko “Jokowi” Widodo, the mayor of Surakarta in Central Java previously unknown among Jakarta citizens but holding a distinguished track record as one of the best mayors in the world, against incumbent Governor Fauzi Bowo, making for an interesting and fierce competition.
However, a democratic event that should have followed the principles of fairness and integrity has now come into question because of the widespread use of negative campaigning exploiting ethnic, religious, racial and intergroup issues (SARA).
Unfortunately, these issues have mainly involved ulema who have attacked non-Muslim candidates while encouraging Muslim voters to only vote for Muslim candidates. Without a doubt, this is targeted at Jokowi and his running mate Basuki “Ahok” Tjahaja Purnama, a Christian Chinese-Indonesian.
One of the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) deputy chairpersons, Ma’ruf Amin, said that Jakarta would be better managed by someone who had the same faith as him and most people in Jakarta.
This premise was further propounded by several other ulema, such as an Indonesia Mosque Council leader, who was quoted by Koran Tempo daily as saying that Muslim people had to vote for a Muslim candidate, or else a disaster such as the earthquake in Padang would strike Jakarta.
The latest furor centered on dangdut singer Rhoma Irama, who was cleared by the Jakarta Election Supervisory Committee (Panwaslu) on Monday of allegations of using a place of worship for political campaigning. Rhoma can be seen on YouTube suggesting his audience should elect a Muslim leader, which he said was part of his responsibility as an Islamic figure.
This development, if not a setback, has at least threatened the fairness and integrity of the second-round election. Surely, ulema as people who have a deep knowledge of religion should guide their followers toward peace and tolerance, rather than fueling discrimination and perhaps acts of violence among their followers?
Nevertheless, religion is not the ultimate factor to be considered by voters. Should we vote for a Muslim candidate if he or she does not meet the criteria of a good leader? The answer is definitely not. Taqi ad-Din Ahmad ibn Taymiyyah, a prominent ulema in the eighth century stated in his book Al-Siyasah al-Syar’iyah that a just non-Muslim leader was better than an unjust Muslim.
In my own opinion, this negative campaigning will not significantly influence voters’ preferences during the runoff. History shows that ulema statements or edicts have failed to change voters’ preferences, including in the 1999 legislative election when the MUI ordered Muslims to vote for Muslim candidates in an apparent bid to block the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) which was led by Megawati Soekarnoputri.
According to the MUI, most of the PDI-P candidates were non-Muslims. The result was that the party won the most votes in the election.
The failure of ulema to influence voters is in fact a consistent trend in Indonesian history as evinced in the unsuccessful bid of Islamic parties to win the most votes in the elections held in the Old Order, New Order and reform eras.
The parties’ total votes have even declined from 37 percent in 1999 to 29 percent in 2009.
The first round of the Jakarta gubernatorial election saw Jokowi-Ahok finish first despite the negative campaigning against the pair. The result indicates that rather than SARA track records matter for Jakarta voters.
It is time, therefore, for the ulema to reposition themselves. Their support for some politicians — including dirty ones — has harmed their image and reputation. They have failed to follow in the footsteps of the military who were deeply involved during the New Order but returned to their barracks and their original role as defenders of the nation in the wake of reformation.
The ulema would be better returning to Islamic boarding schools or pesantren, their ummah and their natural habitat, where they can educate and enlighten their people.
At a time when most Indonesian Muslims are poor and uneducated, the role of ulema as leaders and prime movers is that we need the most.
It would be much wiser for the ulema to focus on their noble job of empowering Indonesian Muslims for the sake of the nation, rather than pragmatic politics which benefits a few people at the expense of many. ●
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar