Sharia Law Application

Common sense in applying sharia law

The demand for the application of sharia appears to be a consistent agenda among certain Muslim groups. This is clear from a recent seminar titled The prospect of sharia-based regional ordinance enforcement in West Nusa Tenggara organized by Muslim students at the University of Mataram's School of Law.

Various representatives of Muslim groups were present, some of whom demanded the incorporation of sharia into local ordinances. They insisted that sharia covers all aspects of life and must be introduced into daily life, both formally and informally. They said that sharia was not just a set of norms, but also stipulations that are legally binding.

As one of the panelists, I contended that such an idea was mostly based on tenuous arguments. It was merely a reflection of the defense of an identity, sometimes of fanaticism, rather than common sense. As a consequence, the proponents were unable to make convincing arguments to support their views, which were not formulated based upon empirical analysis and inquiries.

The main problem arising from the discourse on the application of sharia always concerns its basic concept. As it is common to all Muslims, sharia is generally widely defined as Islamic doctrines, principles and norms covering the all aspects of Muslim life, covering the aspects of worship, social relations, law, politics, human rights, gender and jihad. In its more specific formulation, sharia often refers to Islamic law. In this sense, applying sharia means adopting Islamic law.

Due to endless disputes over the basic concept of sharia, there is no single, united perception among Muslims of what sharia is, what its content is or how it should be applied. Consequently, some Muslim countries apply sharia, while others do not.

What makes me sad, and often embarrassed, is that human rights, the status of women and the protection of minorities are not properly appreciated in the legal systems of those countries that apply sharia. For example, violence, torture, deception and sexual harassment against Indonesian women workers employed in the Middle East often remain unresolved based upon our legal standards. The legal systems in those countries fails to protect the weak.

These facts are often neglected by the sharia proponents. They tend to focus on an idealized perspective, rather than what actually happens on the ground. This is what I call the simplification of sharia -- a lack of recent historical and empirical analysis regarding the application of sharia in state legal systems.

This is what has happened in West Nusa Tenggara. Some sharia-based ordinances were not formulated based upon close scrutiny, but were endorsed primarily to meet the interests of the local political elites. The issue of sharia surfaced in tandem with the local elections. It has become a political issue.

These ordinances were not formulated based upon socio-legal analysis and the people's needs. As a consequence, serious problems have arisen. For example, East Lombok passed a zakat (Islamic charitable donations) ordinance. Based on this ordinance, the East Lombok regent issued directive imposing a 2.5 percent deduction from the salaries of civil servants and teachers, ostensibly for charitable purposes.

As the ordinances have nothing to say about transparency in zakat management, teachers walked out on strike and staged a major rally to demand that the deductions be ended. Not surprisingly, the strike ended up in violence and destruction of property.

Another sharia-based bylaw was enacted in Dompu regency in 2002. The ordinance on regional strategic development planning for the 2001-2010 period was followed by decrees of the local regent requiring civil servants to be able to read the Koran.

The trend toward enacting sharia-based ordinances must be reconsidered. It would be more sensible if the desire for better law enforcement were start to start with an inductive analysis. Legislation must accommodate the basic needs of the people.

Instead of talking about formalization sharia, I would prefer to discuss sharia's purposes and its enforcement. Considering the aims of sharia, we do not have to allow ourselves to become trapped into a polemic on the issue of the application or recognition of sharia in national law.

The aims of sharia are to uphold justice, promote equality and bring about the well-being of the public. These aims, of course, suit everyone, regardless of their religion, race or nationality. It is in this sense that sharia is absolute and universally applicable. Sharia was revealed for the sake of both Muslims and other human beings.

If these aims can be advanced through legislation, whether it be called sharia or something else, sharia will automatically take effect. Any law, regulation or ordinance, as long as it promotes justice, advances equality, and brings about well-being and prosperity is congruous with sharia's purposes and therefore deserves the full support of all Muslims.

In the context of West Nusa Tenggara, where the human development index is very low, and in Indonesia in general, the application of sharia must have regard to its basic aims and directed at tackling the problems facing society. Applying sharia means empowering the law, improving social services, abolishing school so as to afford easy access to better education, and bringing about the well-being of all.