TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - The police should not use the Pornography Law to target Rizieq Syihab. Even if they have evidence of his intimate and racy chat with Firza Husein, a woman who is not his wife, the police should not be trying to use it to send the leader of the Islam Defenders Front (FPI) to court.
This law has faced public criticism since before it was passed nine years ago, namely that it is an unwarranted public intrusion into people's private lives. The state has no right to punish a person who is alleged to have asked another person to commit a pornographic act, as long as it was not for public consumption.
This particular case is more complicated because the police have never really disclosed their sources in obtaining evidence of the intimate cell phone chat between Rizieq and Firza. The police said they obtained the evidence based on a report from an organization and a website, but have never revealed the main source of the conversation. And neither have the police confirmed that the inappropriate chat was extracted from Firza's cell phone when she was arrested for treason, in the wake of the huge Islamist rally last year. Examining the contents of a cell phone belonging to a person under investigation for another offense--no matter if the conversation took place or not--is a violation of legal procedure, meaning it will be easy to have the case dismissed in court.
Therefore, rather than using the Pornography Law and the Electronic Transactions and Information Law to prosecute Rizieq, the police should use other law. There are many offenses thought to have been committed by Rizieq and FPI members, who are infamous for taking the law into their own hands. A video of Rizieq's sermon calling for the killing of people with different beliefs is enough evidence of public incitement to violence as covered by Article 160 of the Criminal Code, which specifies a punishment of six years in jail. The destruction of public places and cafes seen by the FPI as 'dens of vice' is another example. As leader of the FPI, Rizieq must take responsibility.
By using a case involving sexual matters, the government leaves itself wide open to accusations of 'criminalizing' Islamic leaders. Conversely, a counter-attack from Rizieq and his associates could easily be interpreted as an attempt to oust the government--or at least to damage the image of Joko Widodo enough to prevent his re-election in 2019. This suspicion was strengthened by the fact that Rizieq is being defended by attorneys and politicians known to be opposed to the Jokowi administration.
Hence, this dispute shows that the law has become only a tool for political transactions. No wonder the meeting between Jokowi and members of the National Movement to Safeguard the Indonesian Ulama Council's Fatwa (GNPF-MUI) in the palace on Idul Fitri triggered rumors about the intense political negotiations between the two sides. Everybody knew the GNPF was behind the 411 and 212 mass rallies organized to press the court to punish Basuki Tjahaja Purnama for blasphemy.
President Jokowi should reject all efforts at negotiation. At the same time, he must order the police to not continue with the pornography case, but to investigate the acts of violence clearly committed by the FPI. If he does this, it will be difficult to accuse the president of criminalizing the ulamas. Jokowi will attract public support for having the courage to uphold the law--by investigating crimes that have been swept under the carpet for years.
Jokowi must not repeat the old practice of the government nurturing vigilante groups for short-term political interests. These groups have been punished for minor transgressions but have been allowed to grow so they can be used against political opponents. For example, groups claiming to be religious have often been used to oppose rumors of the revival of communism, or as a means to demand illegal payments on behalf of uniformed officials.
There must be no more cases being allowed to remain in limbo--neither prosecuted nor dropped--as a means to put pressure on Rizieq and other religious figures. Politically, this 'strategy' seems to be reliable--especially to safeguard Jokowi until 2019. Since their success in pushing the court to punish Ahok, it has been an open secret that the aim of the 212 group was to prevent Jokowi's re-election in 2019--if not to bring him down before then.
Continuing his leadership is Jokowi's political right. Conversely, aiming for power via election is the right of his opponents. Democracy provides a path for both sides to compete. Using the law as a political tool is a betrayal of the law itself.
Read the full story in this week’s edition of Tempo English Magazine
