Home Opinion Campaigning in Place of Worship

Campaigning in Place of Worship

Comments Off on Campaigning in Place of Worship
0
591

Act election campaign continued ban on houses of worship such as the electoral law then. The second revision of ignoring Article 69, concerning prohibited in the campaign. Thus, the prohibition in the 2017 election campaign still referring to the first revision of Law No.8 / 2015. The provision reads the letter i, banning the use of places of worship for campaigning.

Part Explanation of Law No.8 / 2015 does not explain the “place of worship” as what is prohibited is used for the campaign. Elucidation of Article 69 provisions of letter i just read, “quite clear”. Election laws mean prohibiting all places of worship, without exception. Wherever the location, regardless of the ownership, no matter what its form, place of worship is prohibited for campaigns. Point.

Means, Article 69 equate “place of worship” to the provisions of letter i with state facilities / local government in the provision of letter h. Thus, the election law mencampuradukan community ownership to the ownership of the state / local government. All mosques (/ mosque), churches, monasteries, temples and other places of worship must be clean of the campaign as well as meeting rooms, a ballroom, or the multipurpose building state / local government.

In fact, the place of worship is far more than the community-owned state / local government. The place of worship was widespread black plate outside the areas or government buildings. While the place of worship red plate usually only available in areas or buildings owned by the Government.

Equalizing the provision of letter i with the provisions haruf h means continuing secularisation astray. On the one hand, the state budget / area allocated to the private interests of certain groups in the form of provision of places of worship. On the other hand, state regulation of the elections through separate politics from public affairs, religious communities in places of worship.

If the state forbids worship black plate for the campaign, to secularize the country not only places of worship but also has forced the belief (/ interpretation) religion. Here, the state through public regulation, intervening in individual confidence even (mostly) religious society. The state becomes discriminatory because the judge, the true religion is that cleans the place of worship of a political campaign, simultaneously blame the country as well as punish religious believers who campaigned in places of worship.

State intervention on religious beliefs and the authority of a place of worship in the community obviously irrelevant. Besides unconstitutional, religious observance is likely to put the scriptures higher than the constitution. The prohibition campaign in places of worship potentially violated once left. The impact, not only lost the elections follow the rule of law but also will continue to be disturbed in the reporting of violations.

Not a few people / groups of people belief, politics is a concern for public / community. Thus, politics is a part of faith. Because faith-based, then the concept of religious placed as the ultimate reference.

Actuality religious people also needs to interpret religion are not only the concern of the vertical relationship with God but also horizontally impact on families, communities and countries. Religion is believed to provide solutions to problems of self and family at the same time public issues in society and the state.

In that conception, discuss the public aspect of public officials is a requirement. Naturally pilgrims in a place of worship discuss public interest, including choosing the head region. Criteria head of the region certainly can not be released.

The place of worship into a religious believer options include a collectivity to establish criteria for the head region. It may be that the criteria emphasize the quality of a good track record as an anti-corruption. It could also, the conversation leads to a track record of quality criteria at the same time the faith criteria. So, its normal in a place of worship is no appeal directly / indirectly choose certain candidates. Being unnatural (and should be punished) if an appeal to include and encourage coercive also violence.

It is the task of organizing the election detailing the provisions of the legislation into greater regulation run prospects. Law No.8 / 2015 Article 69 provisions of letter i prohibiting places of worship used to be relevant campaign is run if the associated provision of letter h. That is, prohibited / permitted her place of worship for campaigns related state ownership / LGs. Places of worship belonging to the Government, it is forbidden to campaign. Places of worship belonging to the community, allowed to campaign.

If the organizer of election regulations do not associate the provision of letters h and i, free and fair elections as a fruit of the Reformation continued theatrical life of inter-racial (ethnic, religious, racial and intergroup). SARA identity tend to be two faces. In acknowledgment of receiving all the different identities such as acceptance of the inherent identity but secretly consolidate into groups based claims of identity exclusivism. Conflict was distributed free-open but buried so potentially explosive, destroy democracy. []

USEP HASAN SADIKIN

Load More Related Articles
Load More By USEP HASAN SADIKIN
Load More In Opinion
Comments are closed.

Check Also

UMNO-mandering: Masalah Besar Pemilu Malaysia

Dalam studi kepemiluan, terdapat istilah “Gerrymandering”. Ini merupakan rekayasa sistemik…