OurIndonesia – Since June 2008, the anniversary of Pancasila becomes the commemoration of the National Monument (Monas). Perhaps we would state that the Monas tragedy is a form of impertinence against Pancasila, the national foundation that is believed capable of uniting Indonesia.
Those who three years ago chasing, hitting, kicking and berate the stalwarts of the National Alliance for Freedom of Religion and Belief (AKKBB) who wanted to celebrate the anniversary of Pancasila was a group of anti-Pancasila. Do they really have no place within the construction of the ideology of Pancasila?
In the end of 2009, some elements involved in AKKBB (including KH Abdurrahman Wahid) filed a judicial review against the 1965 PNPS Act. The act was considered to provide chances for religious freedom violations. The act was not considered coherence with the spirit of Pancasila which carries the values of freedom.
But soon we all knew the outcome. The Constitutional Court (MK) rejected all claims in the judicial review. And most surprising is that the discriminatory PNPS Act 1965 is considered coherent with the National Constitution and Foundation; Pancasila.
The birth of Pancasila was marked by a speech by Ir. Sukarno on June 1st, 1945 which addresses the basic formulation of the state. At that time there was a warm, progressive and constructive argumentation among the founders of the nation. According to Deliar Noer, then the founders of the nation divided into two friction, the friction of nationalist secular and Islamic nationalists.
No matter how warm discussion and argumentation, but all participants in BPUPKI wanted to find an agreed formula mutually agreed as the foundation of the state. The basic foundation of the state under discussion shall unite all existing visions.
One aspect that had been repeatedly emphasized by Bung Karno in his speech was the state that was being built was a state based on notion “all to all,” not a state for one person or group only, neither a state for one social class . Thus, a state which would be built was a nation-state.
What was interesting from the state foundation formula that proposed by Bung Karno was that the divinity principle that he proposed was actually listed on number five, the last. Indeed, Sukarno declared that the sequence of the principles state that he proposed did not mean anything. Maybe it was the cause that easily shifted the divinity principle that he proposed into the first list.
However, it is important to know that Sukarno once proposed a different editorial to the text that we read today about the divinity principle. The proposed Sukarno was “A cultured divinity, virtuous divinity of noble character, and divinity that has a mutual respect.”
These facts indicate that it was actually coming from Soekarno own pessimism that the new born state will be predominantly with religious nuance. That pessimism was then apparent at a later date. These days we see how the first principle is used by a number of people to restrict religious freedom. First principle is used to discriminate against others.
On August 18th, 1945, the Preparatory Committee for the Independence of Indonesia (PPKI) approved the Jakarta Charter’s manuscript except the “seven words” on the formulation of the first precept. The seven words were abolished and the first precept became “Belief in one God.” But we all know until today, there are still people who want to revive those “seven words”. And that is completely irrelevant.
Some claimed that the abolition of seven words on the Jakarta Charter or the Muqaddimah (preamble) of the 1945 Constitution was the greatest sacrifice of Muslims, for example, this concern was raised by Alamsyah Ratu Prawiranegara.
But it is not a few too those who stated that the existence of the first principle was the biggest sacrifice of the nationalist group. Either in terms of quantity and quality of the argument, it was obvious that at that time the nationalist group were more dominant. But here it is should be highlighted that here, we do not discuss the argumentation between the Muslim and non-Muslim groups.
What we discuss here is the group of nationalist muslim and political muslim groups. Inserting a precept with a monotheism bias on the first position represented the humility of the nationalist groups. For Sukarno and his friends, unity and independence are above all things.
With the inclusion of the divinity precept on the first principle, Mohammad Hatta humbly declared that it was very good because it provides the moral basis for the nation. However it does not necessarily mean that our state is a state religion.
“Belief in one God (Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa)” was the result of a compromise from our founding fathers. Of course we still continue to expect the realization of ” A Cultured Belief” as aspired by Bung Karno. We still continue to hope that divinity principle which encourages harmony and mutual respect, not vice versa.