enforcing religious freedom in indonesia 127
Ilyas preferred was that Ahmadis returned to the true faith. He stressed
however that violence was never an option. But if Ahmadis refused to
repent, they would have to declare a new religion. ‘But I am an optimist’,
Ilyas said. ‘Rapprochement would be better. The solution is dakwah.’
Asked whether disbandment of the organisation would be of any help,
the kammi chairman said he did not think that would solve anything. The
skb in itself also was not enough, as there always needed to be dialogue:
‘[t]here have to be laws, but the rapprochement has to be facilitated
through dialogue. Don’t keep repeating the same history, until we end up
with violence.’
With regard to human rights discourses in the ongoing controversy,
Ilyas said it was difficult to draw the line, as mainstream Muslims also
had rights. ‘People can choose whatever religion they want to follow, that
is their right. We cannot force them. But we have to teach people our
understanding. If they want to accept it, that’s great. If not, go ahead. But
then they cannot lay a claim to Islam, because there are rules.’
5 Conclusion
The Ahmadiyah controversy over the past few years has given rise to an
interesting interplay between ideological considerations and political
pragmatism. This can be seen from the variety of arguments used,
solutions proposed and references made to such notions as the rule of
law, human rights, religious pluralism and social stability. The framing of
rights discourses is a crucial element in this ongoing debate, particularly
the relation between various conceptualisations of the rights of believers,
the rights of citizens and the rights of human beings. Such rights are seen
by some as one and the same, by others as complementary to each other
and yet other people consider them to be in outright contradiction.
There is an overwhelming rejection of Ahmadiyah teachings within
mainstream Indonesian Islam, among both politicians and civil society
activists. Practically nobody agrees with Ahmadis’ religious beliefs, and
only a very few people hesitate to call them deviant. For the majority it is
clear: Ahmadis are not proper Muslims and they should either repent
or stop claiming to be part of Islam. However, the almost universal
rejection of Ahmadiyah teachings on the level of religious understanding
does not mean that most people (or even many people) think that
violent confrontation is an option for solving the problem. In fact,
most mainstream Muslim civil society leaders and politicians from
Islam-based parties do consider Ahmadiyah deviant in terms of religious