Religious Freedom Comparison, Australia and Indonesia

-

Religious Freedom in Australia
Australia is a multicultural country with diverse society from many different cultures and ethnic backgrounds. The population of Australia come from all corners of the world. Nearly 30% was born overseas. As a multicultural country, Australia does not has national or official religion. The people have freedom to practice any religion or belief as long no law are broken. By law, everyone in Australia is free to express and maintain their cultural and religious traditions.

Australian values include:
  • respect for the freedom and dignity of the individual
  • freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and freedom of association
  • commitment to the rule of law, which means all people are subject to the law and should obey it
  • parliamentary democracy whereby the laws are determined by parliaments elected by the people, those laws being paramount and overriding any other inconsistent religious or secular 'laws'
  • equality of opportunity for all people, regardless of their gender, sexual orientation, age, disability, race or national or ethnic origin.
Australian constitution (Section 116) forbid the federal government to make any law for establishing any religion or for imposing any religious observance. 
In Australia, religion is not a sensitive topic and is not taken too seriously. Australian value cultural heritage highly and most believe that is one of Australia national identity which make the nation strong.

However, despite labelled as a "secular country", Australia respect freedom of religion. The establishment of places of worship such as mosques in Australia has never experienced any difficulties even though Islam is a minority religion. However, not all of them allow conditions such as "adzan" because the sound is quite disturbing. He said freedom of religion in Australia is permissible as long as it does not disturb other individuals. 

Religious Freedom in Indonesia
Indonesia is not a religious country that can apply certain religious laws. However, Indonesia is also not a secular country, so religions that are part of the life consciousness and beliefs of citizens must be protected and guide the management of the country, emphasized by Minister of Politics, Law and Security, Mahfud MD in front of hundreds of MUI clerics 9 November 2021. 

Indonesia is a Pancasila state, where all religions and their adherents are protected. In a country based on Pancasila, all religions are considered to bring good teachings, which are in accordance with the first principle.

In accordance to Article 29 paragraph (2) of Indonesia 1945 Constitution, "The state guarantees the freedom of every resident to embrace their own religion and to worship according to their religion and beliefs."
However the reality is in contradictory, the protection of religious minorities in Indonesia has not been well reflected, even though Article 29 of the 1945 Constitution contains a clause on freedom of religion. For the minority religion to build a place of worship, must obtain approval from 20 heads of families in the surrounding environment.

Indonesia adheres to the principle of decentralization, with a system of regional autonomy. According to Law no. 23 of 2014, regional governments are assigned and given the authority to regulate and manage their regions, based on the aspirations and interests of their people.
With this authority, it often happens that the establishment of places of worship or worshipping for minority believers is not permitted by local governments on the grounds that local residents of the majority religion refuses. 

Indonesian Survey Institute (LSI) research on November 2019 explained that more than 50% of muslims objected if non-Muslims built houses of worship around them. LSI also assesses quite a lot muslims (37.2%) who agree that religious minorities in Indonesia must follow the wishes of the majority muslims. 

Research Director of the Setara Institute, Halili Hasan, said it is the failure of the function of the regional government to provide protection for the freedom of religion and belief of its citizens. The regional and central governments must adhere to the constitution in their work and nothing else. Therefore, the government must ignore historical reasons that are considered contrary to the constitution, he added.

From this note, it can be seen that a country which prioritizes a religious approach and even has a ministry of religious affairs may not necessarily be able to guarantee religious freedom for its citizens compared to a country which does not regulate religion at all.

References:
- www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/dosen-bandingkan-kebebasan-beragama-di-australia-dan-indonesia-lt54298c85195c2/
- international.cit.edu.au/study/canberra/australian_culture
- www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about-us/our-portfolios/social-cohesion/australian-values
- www.liputan6.com/news/read/4707313/mahfud-md-sebut-indonesia-bukan-negara-agama-dan-sekuler
- www.indosport.com/ragam/20211225/mahfud-md-tegaskan-indonesia-bukan-negara-agama-maupun-sekuler?page=
- www.bbc.com/indonesia/indonesia-50740353


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Anak yang sejak lahir WNI "dipaksa" negara untuk mendaftar berkewarganegaraan ganda

-
Image
Kemajuan teknologi telah memberikan kemudahan dalam komunikasi dan transportasi sehingga pergaulan masyarakat tidak lagi hanya dalam lingkup nasional namun telah bersifat internasional. Setiap orang dapat dengan mudah berinteraksi dengan pihak lain dari negara yang berbeda, dan banyak pula yang bekerja maupun menempuh pendidikan di negara lain. Interaksi internasional tersebut menghadirkan persoalan baru khususnya ketika terjadi kelahiran anak dari orangtua yang berbeda kewarganegaraan. Mempertimbangkan persoalan tersebut, pemerintah kemudian memberlakukan Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2006 tentang Kewarganegaraan Republik Indonesia pada tanggal 1 Agustus 2006 yang menggantikan Undang-Undang Nomor 62 Tahun 1958 tentang Kewarganegaraan Republik Indonesia.  Di dalam penjelasan UU Nomor 12 Tahun 2006, disebutkan bahwa undang-undang tersebut dibentuk dengan memperhatikan asas-asas kewarganegaraan umum atau universal, yaitu: Asas ius sanguinis (law of the blood) adalah asas yang menentukan
Read more

Pengalaman Buruk di Praktek Dokter Hewan Bersama Sunter, Jakarta

-
Image
Sebagai seorang penyayang hewan khususnya anjing, saya ingin berbagi pengalaman dengan sesama penyayang hewan agar berhati - hati dalam memilih dokter hewan apabila hewan peliharaan anda sakit. Tulisan ini saya dedikasikan untuk seekor anjing chihuahua jantan saya yang bernama KENJI, yang telah setia menemani saya sejak masa kuliah di Sydney Australia tahun 2000 hingga akhir hidupnya di Jakarta tahun 2007. Ketika akan kembali ke Indonesia pada tahun 2004, saya memboyong Kenji dan adiknya Kairi ke Indonesia. Di Indonesia kedua chihuahua tersebut sempat ikut bersama saya beberapa tahun tinggal di pulau Belitung. Karena di Belitung tidak ada vaksinasi untuk anjing, pada tahun 2006, saya membawa Kenji ke Jakarta untuk vaksinasi tahunan dan rabies. Setelah selesai vaksinasi, ketika akan dibawa kembali ke Belitung, pihak Departemen Peternakan DKI Jakarta tidak mau mengeluarkan surat rekomendasi karantina yang merupakan syarat untuk penerbangan dengan hewan dengan alasan Belitung adalah da
Read more

Eksekusi Jaminan Fidusia Pasca Putusan MK

-
Image
Dua orang warganegara yaitu Aprilliani Dewi dan Suri Agung mengajukan permohonan uji materi terkait Pasal 15 UU No. 42 tahun 1999 tentang Jaminan Fidusia karena dianggap telah melanggar hak konstitusional pemohon. Sidang dipimpin oleh sembilan Hakim Konstitusi yaitu Anwar Usman selaku ketua merangkap anggota, Aswanto, Suhartoyo, I Dewa Gede Palguna, Enny Nurbaningsih, Arief Hidayat, Manahan M. P. Sitompul, Saldi Isra dan Wahiduddin Adams masing-masing sebagai anggota. Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) melalui Putusan No. 18/PUU-XVII/2019 tanggal 6 Januari 2020 memberikan tafsir yang berbeda mengenai cidera janji (wanprestasi) yang diatur di dalam Pasal 15 ayat (1-3) yang memberikan hak eksekutorial kepada kreditor. Sebelumnya pasal itu mengatur jika debitur (konsumen) cidera/ingkar janji, penerima fidusia (perusahaan pembiayaan) punya hak menjual objek jaminan atas kekuasaannya sendiri (lelang) sebagaimana halnya suatu putusan pengadilan yang telah berkekuatan hukum tetap ( inkracht ). MK
Read more