Rights Activists Pan Court Ruling Refusing to Sanction Interfaith Marriages

Jakarta Globe, Kennial Laia, Basten Gokkon & Erwin Sihombing, Jun 19, 2015

Couples of different religions will still not have their marriages officially sanctioned
 after the Constitutional Court rejected a judicial review of the1974 Marriage Law.
(JG Photo/Fajrin Raharjo)

Jakarta. Human rights activists have lambasted the Constitutional Court for rejecting a judicial review calling for official recognition of interfaith marriages, saying the ruling failed to protect the rights of those wishing to marry someone of a different religion.

Poengky Indarti, the executive director of the rights watchdog Imparsial, said that with the ruling handed down on Thursday, the government would continue to have free rein in interfering with individual privacy. She said that by not granting the judicial review of the 1974 Marriage Law, the court had deprived mixed-faith couples of the right to have their union sanctioned by the state.

“The marriage law should have been formulated to provide a solution for couples with cultural and religious differences, and even different citizenships,” Poengky told the Jakarta Globe on Friday.

“The country shouldn’t limit its citizens’ choice to marry based on a religion sanctioned by the state. With this rejection, the government will continue to not accommodate interfaith marriage. The government will not legitimize the rights of those who want to marry a partner from a different religious background. This is not fair,” Poengky said.

She said many couples were compelled not to marry, or to undergo often disingenuous religious conversions in order to register their marriage with the government’s Religious Affairs Office. Others who can afford to choose to get married overseas and then have their foreign marriage certificate notarized once they get back.

Hendardi, the chairman of the Setara Institute, a rights and democracy watchdog, called Thursday’s ruliing discriminatory and said other means must be found to ease the burden of interfaith couples who face difficulty trying ti register their marriage with the state.

“Because the country has refused to legalize interfaith marriage, there should be other mechanisms that can make it possible. Otherwhise people will continue to be discriminated against in this regard,” he said.

De facto ban

The ruling was the culmination of a judicial review process begun last year when a group of five petitioners sought to challenge Article 2 of the 1974 Marriage Law, which states that a marriage is only considered legitimate by the state if conducted according to the religious traditions and beliefs of the bride and groom.

The article has long been considered a de facto, if not explicit, ban on interfaith marriages, given that wedding rites vary among different religious beliefs, thus making it impossible for a mixed-faith couple to fulfill the requirement of the article.

The Constitutional Court, however, ruled that the article should stand.

“The court rules that the petitioners’ request does not have a legal basis and therefore rejects the appeal for a judicial review,” Chief Justice Arief Hidayat said.

The court did not consider the clause that effectively outlaws interfaith marriage a violation of the Constitution, Arief said, because marriage does not only include formal aspects, but also “spiritual and social” aspects.

The court stated that religion was an important platform for individuals and communities when they establish a marriage, and that the state must provide legal certainty and protection for nuptials.

The court also rejected the petitioners’ request to raise the legal age for marriage to 18 years from 16 at present, based on recommendations from the Women’s Health Foundation (YKP) and the Child Rights Monitoring Foundation (YPHA).

The court said that raising the legal age for a marriage would not guarantee a decrease in the number of women potentially at risk of reproductive health problems, adding that the law as it stood already took into consideration all health, social and financial aspects when stipulating a minimum age of 16.

The petitioners had argued that the current legal age also violated girls’ right to complete their education and could lead to a higher maternal mortality rate. Indonesia already has the highest maternal mortality rate in Southeast Asia.

The Indonesian Council of Ulema (MUI) welcomed the ruling as “in line with all religions.”

“Besides, there’s no religion that encourages its congregation to mary a person of a different faith,” MUI secretary general Tengku Zulkarnain said on Friday as quoted by Republika Online.