In today's state practice, the relationship between religion and state can be classified into three forms, namely integral (union of religion and state), intersectional (intersection of religion and state) and secularist (separation of religion and state. Furthermore). , regarding the classification of the relationship between religion and the state, firstly, the state based on religion, in this country there is a union of state and religious authorities (waliyul amri kalifatullah sayyidin panatagama, caesaro papism). Third, the secular state, in this model state there is a separation of state and religious authority, or in the extreme state, the state does not care about religion and religion is not related to the state 10.
Therefore, the relationship between religion and the state in Indonesia has been clarified in several articles. To ensure that the relationship between religion and the state remains harmonious amid the dynamics of political, economic and cultural life, we must continually discuss it so that we come to understand that religion and the state are like two parts. sides of a coin, where they are different but cannot be separated. The tension in the relationship between religion and state arises when there is no symbiotic-mutualistic relationship between the two (checks and balances).
PROVISION CONCERNING RELIGION IN TWO COUNTRIES: HOW WE LEARN FROM THE FACTS?
As a multi-ethnic and multicultural immigrant country, the United States is a place where different faiths and religions meet. The United States is also the country with the largest number of Protestant Christian residents in the world and the largest number of members of Christian denominations in the world. Although it is a country that adheres to liberalism, most people in the United States believe that religion plays an important role in their daily lives.
The United States is a secular country, so the government does not recognize any specific religion as an official religion. The legal basis for religious freedom in the United States is contained in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The United States guarantees the freedom of worship and practice of religion to every citizen.
This is stated in the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting freedom of religion; nor does it restrict the freedom of speech, or the freedom of the press, or the right of peaceful assembly, and the right to petition for damages and to complain to the government." In 1979 the United States Commission on Human Rights reaffirmed the meaning of the term religious discrimination 18. The right to freedom of religion is included among the human rights guaranteed by the government, the legal basis of which is set forth in the State Constitution.
The US Human Rights Commission describes religious freedom as the right to or not to embrace a religion or belief. The US House of Representatives passed a bill restricting the US president from imposing a travel ban on religious grounds.
LEGAL INSTRUMENTS OF BLASPHEMY: SOME CONTEMPORARY AND CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES
However, this is not the case in the State of Indonesia, in Article 4 and Article 22, paragraph all circumstances and by any party. The state gives respect and guarantees to all religions in Indonesia based on the Indonesian constitution, namely the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia 1945 (UUD 1945) and Law Number 39 of 1999 on Human Rights (Human Rights Act). One form of the crime of blasphemy is insulting God (blasphemy or worship of God) in the form of hurting, harming, tarnishing God's reputation/good name.
Legally, blasphemy is part of a religious offense which has been regulated in the Indonesian Penal Code (KUHP), The general conditions for criminal acts under the Indonesian Penal Code are against the law (wederrechtelijkheid), fault (schuld) and the possibility of being responsible according to the Criminal Code (toerekenings- vatbaarheid). Jakarta: Gramedia, 2003). . mental state of the person who commits a criminal act and the relationship between this state and the act carried out in such a way that the person can be blamed for having committed the act 23. The article, often referred to as the article re. blasphemy is Article 156 letter a of the Criminal Code.
Since the blasphemy article was enacted, many individuals have been subject to this article, from the case of HB Jassin in 1968, Arswendo Atmowilonto in 1990, Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, Chief Gafatar Abdussalam alias Ahmad Musadeq, to the case of the alleged burning of the Christian Bible(s) in Papua was committed by a member of the Indonesian National Army who was tried by a military court in Jayapura, Papua in 2017. They were all charged with insulting and blaspheming religion and using several provisions such as Article 156 of the Criminal Code, Article 156 of the Criminal Code and Article 157 KZ. If any man by writing or speaking blasphemes or blasphemes God, or writes or speaks obscenities about and about our Saviour, Jesus Christ, or about and about the Trinity or any person thereof, let him not be punished with a greater fine. one hundred dollars, or imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or both such fine and imprisonment as aforesaid, in the discretion of the court.
Blasphemy can be committed by using language that is obscene and insulting to God, or by continually criticizing Him, His creation, His government, the final judgment of the world, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, or the Holy Scriptures, such as contained in the Bible. canonical books of the Old and New Testaments, or by exposing any of these mentioned beings or writings to contempt and contempt, and it is not necessary that the state should prove all their actions. Such prosecution cannot be sustained unless it is commenced within five days of the commission of the offence.”
BLASPHEMY CASES: EXAMPLES FROM TWO COUNTRIES
An official report was then drawn up on behalf of reporter Iman Sudirman on October 9, 2016. On October 12, a report was filed with the police on behalf of complainant Ibnu Baskoro and on October 20 on behalf of reporter Aswar. If we look at the Indonesian Constitution, the 1945 Constitution is very clear about guaranteeing the independence of Indonesian citizens to embrace and worship their respective religions in accordance with their religion and beliefs.
Following the report, the complainants requested the Fatwa of the Indonesian Ulama Council, on 11 October 2016, MUI issued the opinion and religious position of the Indonesian Ulama Council stating that Basuki Tjahaja Purnama's statement was categorized as: (1) insulting the Qur'an and or (2) insulting the ulama which had consequences. The Criminal Investigation Unit of the POLRI held a limited open court case on 15 November 2016 inviting the Reporting Party, the Reported Party, Witnesses and Experts. The following day, on November 16, 2016 at 10:00 am, the Criminal Investigation Department announced the determination of the suspected candidate for governor of DKI, Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, as a suspect for blasphemy.
On Friday, December 2, 2016, large demonstrations again took place with demands from the police to arrest a suspect of blasphemy against the DKI gubernatorial candidate, Basuki Tjahaj Purnama. In addition, Andi Hamzah stated in the expert affidavit above that: the formulation of the crime of blasphemy must be in accordance with the principle of legality, nullum delictum nulla poena sine praevia lege poenali, there must be provisions of laws and regulations. before the crime is committed. Ahok's remarks as Governor of DKI Jakarta during his working visit to the Thousand Islands met the formulation of the offense in Article 156a of the Penal Code based on Decision No. 1537/Pid.B/2016/PN.Jkt Utr, which must be considered.
The sentiments expressed by Ahok are considered insults or blasphemy against Islam, namely against the Quran and Ulama according to the religious opinions and positions of the Indonesian Ulema Council on October 11, 2016. The panel of judges, in their deliberations, agrees with the religious opinion and position of the Indonesian Ulema Council of Ulema. The expression of this statement is considered to be against the law because the act is prohibited under Article 156a of the Criminal Code.
With regard to the ability to take responsibility, Jan Remmelink has indicated that the determination of whether or not a person can be held accountable will depend greatly on the existing social situation and circumstances, including the nature and context of the criminal offense committed has actually been committed.
CONCLUSION
34; Efektivitas Pengaturan Masalah Kerukunan Umat Beragama dalam Hukum di Indonesia." Jurnal Hukum Penelitian Pandecta 11, no. Aksi Bela Islam: Kliktivisme Islam dan Kewenangan Baru Propaganda Keagamaan di Era Milenial Indonesia." Jurnal Islam dan Masyarakat Muslim Indonesia 9, no.Hukum dan Agama di Indonesia: Mahkamah Konstitusi dan UU Penodaan Agama.” Asian Journal of Comparative Law 7, no.
34;Konstruksi lokal penodaan agama di Jawa Timur." JIIS-Jurnal Islam Indonesia 13, No. 34;Toleransi Beragama dalam Konstitusi dan Jaminan Perlindungan Hak Asasi Manusia." Jurnal Scientia Indonesia 8, No. Medina-Te: Jurnal Kajian Islam 13, No. Mengkaji Politik Hukum Kebebasan Beragama dan Berkeyakinan di Indonesia.”
Jurnal Pendidikan Hukum Klinis Internasional Indonesia 2, No. Prasetyo, Kresna Adi dan Ridwan Arifin. 34; Analisis hukum pidana mengenai tindak pidana penodaan agama di Indonesia. “Uji UU Gorontalo 2, No. Pultoni, Siti Aminah dan Uli Parulian Sihombing.
