Undemocratic Response Towards Deviant Judgement and Fatwa: Sunni-Shiite Conflict in Sampang, Madura, East Java

The study discusses how civic groups have judged other as deviant in the case of Sunni-Shiite conflict in Sampang, Madura, and how the state has responded to it. The term “deviant” has been an important subject to study in Indonesia because it helps us to understand how certain communities other the others who are different in terms of religious understandings. This article argues that the state has undemocratically responded towards several groups' judgment on Shiite in Sampang of being deviant; while Shiite community in Sampang are Indonesian citizen who are subject to the state protection. This situation is further exacerbated by the MUI recommendation to the state to stop Shiite community from practicing their rituals, as it clearly violates religious freedom and democracy. This study uses secondary data in the forms of the MUI fatwa, Tajul Muluk case documentation in Catatan Keberagamaan by Center for Religious and Cross-cultural Studies, and the conflict escalation narration by previous scholars. As a study focused on the dynamic of the conflict, this paper helps scholars, activists, and government critically comprehend the relation between the state and civic groups before and during conflict escalation. Further, it becomes critical analysis towards the implementation of democracy in Indonesia.

review, even though rejected by the Constitutional Court. The rejection then led Religious leaders to be able to capitalize their power, legitimacy, and authorities, as Melissa Crouch contended. 2 She argued that the rejection by the court is to keep blasphemy policy which then led religious leaders to be unchallenged. Another important research questioning the root of religious PLQRULWLHV ¶ discrimination by Frinke et all argued, that minorities represent the unwanted competition against majority religion, supported by the state, which then led to discrimination. They are, moreover, viewed as those threatening the larger culture and the state. 3 In this case, I consider some theories developed by scholars, such as Alfred Stepan, and John Rawls 6WHSDQ ¶V theorization of democracy and toleration helps me see how state responds to some religious group judgement of ³deviant´ towards other. It also explains how state should treat its citizens, with their differences, in the nature of democracy, in favour of harmony between its citizens, LQFOXGLQJ WKRVH IURP GLIIHUHQW UHOLJLRXV WUDGLWLRQV )XUWKHUPRH WKH WHUP ³3XEOLF 5HDVRQ´ LV DOVR KHOSIXO LQ ORRNLQJ DW KRZ VWDWH DQG LWV FLYLF organization make and should make their reasons reasonable in public.

B. The State and Civic Groups
Before going deeper to discuss about how state respond to certain religious JURXSV ¶ judgement of deviant towards other groups, it is important at first for us to define what it means by both state and civic groups here. Since the case I am taking is Shiite of Sampang case, and based on data I got from several sources, the state here is those institution legalized and recognized as part of state that are supposed to play role in managing harmony and political stability based on constitution and law. For example, The court is a state since it represents the state in processing Tajul Muluk, the leader of Shiite in Sampang, judgement based on legitimated law. The last is local government as those responsible in resolving conflict escalation as well as written in UU no.7 about resolving social conflict. Besides, the government, in this context, also those who have to protect minority and religious freedom.
Furthermore, what I mean by civic groups in this paper is those non-state community who are institutionalized under leadership or guidance of religious leader, such as NU, Basrra and any other groups that judge Shiite community in Sampang as deviant and recommend the state to also involve in stopping them from practicing their teachings and religious activities for the sake of religious harmony. They are also those who feel religiously offended then conclude that those deviant sects break their teachings, hence should be abolished. Moreover, MUI (Majelis Ulama Indonesia/Indonesian Ulama Council) is as civic groups representing the voice of Muslims. Besides, members of MUI also played roles in serving ummah, in terms of producing fatwa which some believe and implement it in daily lives. However, seeing the fact that Muslims are also divided into several groups with each different teachings, it becomes problematic when the question ³ZKLFK YRLFH RI 0XVOLPV JURXS VKRXOG 08, UHSUHVHQW"´ LV raised. Not only does it become theoretically problematic, but also pragmatically, because members of MUI sometimes measure whether or not certain group is deviant by investigating them on their own without having dLDORJXH ZLWK WKRVH RI JURXS ¶V PHPEHUV considered as deviant. This is also what I will be discussing in the next chapter.

C. The Religious Group Judgement on Shiite
Shiite community has already emerged in Sampang since 1980s and began to openly practice in 2004. However, the attack of some people who opposed to this community began to emerge in 2006. Following this situation, in 2009, MUI Sampang, Danramil, and Kapolsek stated that Shiite was not deviant, because they did not find any deviant in the sense that they are different from the basic of Islamic mainstream teachings. Even though this community felt secure by this statement, in contrast, non-Shiite community became stricter in opposing them. 4 There were three ultimatum offered to Shiite community by people who opposed to them when the tension increased in April 2011. They asked them to stop practicing their religious activities and go back to the right Islamic teaching, which means the Islamic mainstream teachings of Sunni, to leave Sampang without compensation of land or any asset they had, if those two options are not implemented, then they should die. Responding to this situation, local leader, MUI, and Muspida (Musyawarah Pimpinan Daerah/Local Leaders Forum) tried to resolve this problem but failed. 5 Bassra (Badan Silaturrahmi Ulama Pesantren Madura/Pesantren religious leaders Forum) and NU (Nahdlatul Ulama) worked together with MUI in discussing about how to solve the conflict beginning to escalate. Of Some religious leaders who involved in this are; Abuya Ali Karrar Sinhaji, Mudassir, Hamid, Fauzan Zain, and Syafiuddin. However, they never directly involved, in WKLV SHULRG LQ WKH ILHOG VLQFH WKH\ NQHZ WKH LQIRUPDWLRQV DERXW 6KLLWH ¶V teachings, considered as different, from their students. They started to have some discussion with some elites in government, and then also invited Tajul Muluk to encourage him to stop spreading and practicing his religion for its deviancy. Furthermore, after several dialogs between those of religious leaders with WKH LQYROYHPHQW IURP VRPH JRYHUQPHQW ¶V LQVWLWXWLRQ WKH\ GLG QRW ILQG WKH solution, because Tajul Muluk still insisted to practice his religon. Hence, the demonstration by some people opposing him emerged. In response to that, they held dialog again. For this time, the judgement of deviant WRZDUGV 7DMXO 0XOXN ¶V teachings happened. They then appealed the recommendation to local government WR VWRS 6KLLWH ¶V DFWLYLWLHV DQG WR UHORFDWH WKHP WR RXWVLGH 0DGXUa in order to create harmony and avoid communal conflict again.
In response to the tension between Sunni and Shiite, MUI as civic group and that representing Muslims voice decided to involve in it, in favour of religious harmony among people in Sampang. They started to find out whether or not Shiite teachings are deviant through investigating several books and activities consisting Shiite teachings and doctrines.
Right after violence conducted by Sunni Muslims towards Shiite in 29 December 2011, MUI Sampang produced fatwa WKDW 7DMXO ¶V WHDFKLQJV LV GHYLDQW and considered as blasphemy towards Islam in 1 January 2012 as written in 035/mui/spg/i/2012. Furthermore, PCNU Sampang also produced statement letter supporting fatwa of MUI Sampang. Following fatwa and several supports of recognizing Shiite as deviant, in 3 January 2012, Bassra (Badan Silaturrahmi Ulama Pesantren Madura/Pesantren religious leaders Forum) asked East Java MUI and MUI Centre to produce the same fatwa as well, and then to prohibit Shiite community to exist and to spread their teachings in Madura. Not only MUI in Sampang but also those from several districts in East Java such as Bangkalan, *UHVLN 6XUDED\D DQG WKRVH UHSUHVHQWLQJ 6XQQL VXFK DV -DP ¶L\DK Ahlussunnah ZDO -DPD ¶DK %DQJLO 3DVXUXDQ DQG *8,% Gerakan Umat Islam Bersatu/Muslims United Movement) Being asked to produce fatwa about Shiite, MUI East Java consequently also did it in 14 January 2012 after investigating several teachings and books of Shiite, deciding that Shiite Imamiyah Itsna Asyaariyah and other sects of Shiite which have the same teaching are deviant and may deviate others. As a result, MUI East Java recommended to all Muslims to anticipate and to be aware from being influenced by this kind of teachings. They also recommended to the government to not support and to stop them spreading teachings. Because spreading Shiite teachings among Indonesians as ahlu al-sunnah wa al-MDPD ¶DK followers, will cause political instability that will threaten the unity of Republic of Indonesia. 7 After producing such fatwa, MUI East Java also support religious leaders BMN in attempt to ask MUI Centre to produce the same fatwa by facilitating their trip. This was one of real support provided by MUI East Java for religious leaders. 8

D. 6WDWH ¶V 5HVSRQVH
1. Local Government (Pemda) Following anti Shiite movement in Sampang that has spread and has escalated, religious leaders who opposed to Shiite invited local government to discuss about how to solve the problem of Shiite considered as deviant, thus should be corrected or even be abolished and government should play roles in it. Since religious leaders (Kyai) in Madura also have certain political power to mobilize people, even though local government was only guest invitation in VHYHUDO GLVFXVVLRQV WKH\ HYHQWXDOO\ GLG QRW KDYH FKRLFHV EXW WR IROORZ N\DL ¶V instruction in order to avoid losing vote and support from society. 9 Besides following some forums of Sunni religious leaders, at the end of seeking ways to resolve this conflict, the government finally decided to resolve it by relocating Shiite community to Sidoarjo using three trucks and two police buses with three patrol cars to provide security. 10 Another role of local government that should be considered is Noer Tjahja, district head of Sampang, who involved in escalating the conflict. He ruled the district from 2008-2012 and ran for re-election in 2012. The challenge of 2012 election is the fact that he lost in village of Karang Anyam in previous election, where many Shiite community lived before the incident. So he had to win this area too. Since this re-election was more challenging and more difficult, he had no choice but to increase popularity through supporting anti Shiite activities WKDW ZDV FRQVLGHUHG DV SHRSOH ¶V LQWHUHVW EHFDXVH WKH\ ZDQWHG WKHLU YLOODJH WR EH neutral from deviant sects. 11 Furthermore, his explicit statement about Shiite was delivered through his speech during political campaign. He stated that Tajul, the leader of Shiite community, was deviant because of not obligating Jumat prayer and allowing PXW ¶DK 12 marriage and then might lead others to be deviant too. Hence, he asked people to be careful with this community and asked police to drive them away if they still practice their deviant teachings. 13

Court
In this case, Tajul Muluk was accused as a religious blasphemy doer and recognised DV GHYLDQW IRU LQVXOWLQJ 4XU ¶DQ WKDW KH VDLG LW LV QRW RULJLQDO )RU KH UHMHFWHG WKLV DFFXVDWLRQ WKDW 4XU ¶DQ KH DOZD\V XVH LV DV VDPH DV 4XU ¶DQ XVHG E\ other generally. Besides, he was also suspected that his speech was insulting the prophet sahabah, such as Abu Bakr, Umar bin al-Khattab, and Utsman bin Affan. However, this kind of suspicion is never proved in the court. 14 Thus, in 12 July 2012 he was sentenced by the State Court Sampang with two years in prison. This was lighter than was what imposed by Jaksa. However, he appealed the case to the State Court Surabaya, yet he recieved more severe penalty, four years in prison, then was it before. He appealed cassation again in Supreme Court, for the sentence remained and the earlier decision was strenghtened. 15 On the other side, the State Court Surabaya also sentenced six suspects of attackers towards Shiite community in 26 August 2012. They are; Mukhsin with ten months jailed, Mat Safi with one year and six months jailed, Saniawan with eight months jailed, Hadiri with for years jailed and the last, Rois Hukama as a main suspected, but was not sentenced and was free in 16 April 2013. 16

E. Challenging Democracy
Looking at how state and civic groups encounter with the existence of Shiite Community, there are DW OHDVW WZR VWDWH ¶V LQVWLWXWLRQ LQYROYLQJ LQ UHVROYLQJ this problem. First is the local government who are of course supposed to take responsibility in resolving the conflict as mentioned in ³'HPRFUDF\ PXst also have a constitution that itself is democratic in that it respects fundamental liberties and offers considerable protection for PLQRULW\ ULJKWV ´1 7 Since the founders of Indonesia took Pancasila as ideology, democracy was also chosen and was believed as an adequate system to implement in favour of protecting human right of each citizen. Even though Indonesia was under authoritarian government for many decades, its citizens have been trying to implement the real democracy for better Indonesia. It includes the protection of minority and religious freedom as mentioned by Stepan as well as written in UUD 1945, article 28 about human right.
However, if we see MUI in Indonesia, it is a manifestation of special privilege for Muslims to serve and to accommodate the interest of Sunni Muslims majority in Indonesia. That is why the teaching and certain way of producing fatwa is the way of Sunni. If we see historically, it was founded by Suharto regime to control ulama for the sake of his own regime. Since it is getting more independent now days, the state or government have more distance to it, thus they cannot control as much as did Suharto regime.
$V RQH RI FLYLF JURXSV WKDW VKRXOG EDODQFH WKH VWDWH ¶V SRZHr in democratic way, it becomes problematic when MUI produce fatwa that accommodate some Muslims interest on the one hand, but on the other, influence certain people in justifying their acts to violate other rights. Or in certain condition, people use MUI to support their acts of violating other right, which is incompatible with democracy system, referring to Stepan. How can civic group as civil society that should support democracy violate minority rights? It also shows that this civil society violate UUD 1945 article 28 about human right.
Looking at fatwa, VWDWLQJ WKDW 6KLLWH ¶V WHDFKLQJV LQ 6DPSDQJ LV GHYLDQW produced by MUI in Madura and East Java, as bodies of the state; it did not respect fundamental liberties and did not offer considerable protection for minority rights. Besides, they also recommended the government to stop Shiite spreading their teachings in Indonesia, considered as that having ahlu al-sunnah wa al-MDPD ¶DK IROORZHUV %HFDXVH LW ZLOO FDXVH SROLWLFDO LQVWDELOLW\ WKDW ZLOO threaten the unity of Republic of Indonesia. In contrast, MUI fatwa actually that which cause political instability threatening the implementation of UUD 1945, human right and religious freedom, because it support and strengthen violation of 6KLLWH FRPPXQLW\ ¶V ULJKW I also see the problematic interpretation of religious blasphemy law that which considered as deviant and usually is used by MUI to judge certain group. In this context, it means if Shiite teachings are different from and incompatible with the basic teaching of mainstream teaching, they will be considered as deviant, and they are. So difference from the basic teaching is deviant. In fact, before this violence emerged, MUI in Madura stated that Shiite was not deviant. This interpretation of constitution does not respect the fundamental liberties and does QRW RIIHU SURWHFWLRQ IRU PLQRULWLHV ¶ ULJKW RI UHOLJLRXV IUHHGRP Furthermore, Stepan also suggested that to apply democracy is to apply the ³WZLQ WROHUDWLRQ´ EHWZHHQ HOHFWHG JRYHUQPHQW DQG UHOLJLRXV LQVWLtution. The lesson he took from Western European democracy was no more hostile separation between state and church implemented in there. He stated to apply democracy does not necessarily mean that we have to apply secularism or to build a strict wall betweHQ VWDWH DQG FKXUFK 2QH WKLQJ ZH KDYH WR LPSOHPHQW LV WKH ³WZLQ WROHUDWLRQ ´ ,W PHDQV WKDW ERWK HOHFWHG JRYHUQPHQW DQG UHOLJLRXV LQVWLWXWLRQ VKRXOG be free from each other. On the one side, Government should respect the right of citizens to privately practice religion, on the other, religious institution also are not supposed to have privileged prerogatives to mandate public policy to democratically elected government. 18 Let us now turn to the case of local government, such as Noer Tjahya as district leader and Pemda/Pemkab policy as a whole. First, having considered 7MDK\D ¶V DWWHPSW WR LQFUHDVH KLV SRSXODULW\ WR ZLQ WKH UH-election through providing support to anti Shiite movement, it indicates that as government he was XQDEOH WR LPSOHPHQW WKH ³WZLQ WROHUDWLRQ´ DQG GHPRFUDF\ LQ WHUPV RI UHVSHFWLQJ citizens to privately worship and protecting minority. It also can be seen from his speech saying that Shiite community is deviant; hence they have to stop practicing their teachings and asked the police to drive them away if still practicing it. In favour of his popularity, he took the side of majority to show that he had the same interest as did they have. This unneutrality of government is incompatible with democracy system that should be implemented in multicultural country.
Second, it is getting worse when the local government decided to relocate Shiite community to Siduarjo in order to create harmony and to avoid violence. This kind of solution explains that to achieve harmony and to avoid social conflict among religious adherents, we have to abolish differences by abolishing some groups which are different from mainstream and making them as same as mainstream is. This relocation is explicit evidence that the government representing the state did not protect minority for the sake of protecting religious freedom.
The next is court. Based on the data I got, the people in Sampang claimed Tajul Muluk and his followers is deviant, but the verdict of the court was that he was guilty because of his statement of ³4XU ¶DQ LV QRW RULJLQDO ´ 7KLV LQGLFDWHV WKDW the court was unable to prove that he and his followers are deviant. Different claim about Shiite deviancy from some expert witnesses also led the court cannot claim whether or not Tajul and his followers are deviant. This also means that they are not deviant and should be allowed to practice their teachings in Sampang. But the fact that government relocate them is incompatible with the result of the court and UUD 1945 about religious freedom.
Furthermore, his penalty was increased to be four years after proposing cassation to the higher court, because he was claimed guilty for being the cause of conflict escalation, as mentioned above. This shows that the court victimised the victim. How can Tajul  In addition, he perceived that since we live in countries which have plurality of conflicting reasonable doctrines, which are different from each other, we find difficulties in obtaining agreement on comprehensive doctrine. Hence, there should be reasonable universal reason that can be accepted by all of citizens. In this case, he purposed the idea of politically reasonable addressed to citizens as citizens. Furthermore, Rawl also suggested what it means by such reason is public: fundamental political justice questioning constitutional essential and matter of basic justice, and its nature and content are public. About political right and liberties may be written in constitution and interpreted in Supreme Court or similar institution. 22 So according to this theory, in relation to Indonesia, there should be one reasonable idea which is universal and can be accepted by all of citizens contextually, in order to build democratic country where each citizen may UHVSHFW ULJKWV RI RWKHUV ¶ +DYLQJ WKLV LQ PLQG WKHUH DFWXDOO\ KDV EHHQ WKLV NLQG RI 19 Eksaminasi is Indonesian law term (derived from English; examination). It is a process of examining, by some scholars or practitioners FRXUW ¶V SURGXFW whether or not there are some SURFHGXUDO PLVWDNHV RU DEXVLQJ RI MXVWLFH SULQFLSOH LQ FRXUW ¶V decisions. However, it does not constitutionally bind, but can be the basic for higher court like cassation. LGHD IRXQGHG E\ ,QGRQHVLDQ ¶V IRXQGLQJ IDWKHUV ZKLFK LV Pancasila. UUD 1945 is also, in my view, considered as the idea of public reason constitutionally written in which people from different ethnics, religions, beliefs, and any other things are protected by the state. Public reason should also have, at least, three political forums where each citizen should seek reasonable ideas when involving in this forum. 23 The First, the discourse of judges in their discussion court. In my opinion, the process of Tajul 0XOXN ¶V MXGJHPHQW E\ WKH FRXUW LV LQFOXGHG LQ WKLV GLVFRXUVH ,Q WKLV FDVH Whe court actually has tried to make the decision reasonable by claiming that he was JXLOW\ IRU VWDWLQJ ³4XU ¶DQ LV QRW RULJLQDO ´ ,W PLJKW EH UHDVRQDEOH LI RQH FODLPV LW as insulting. In contrast, it would be unreasonable if the court claimed him guilty for his deviancy based on MUI fatwa. This fatwa does not represent the voice of Muslims as a whole or even more all citizens. However, some scholars and DFWLYLVWV VWLOO SHUFHLYHG WKDW WKLV FRXUW ¶V GHFLVLRQ LV ZHDN 2QH RI WKH UHDVRQV LV WKH IDFW WKDW 7DMXO ¶V penalty was increased became four years jailed based on claim that he has become the cause of dispute escalation. If it is so, then this victimisation of the victim is publicly unreasonable in terms of protecting the YLFWLP ¶V ULJKW DV HTXDO FLWL]HQ DV RWKHrs.
Second, the discourse of government officials. Government officials, in Sampang context, could mean local government/pemda/pemkab. Seeing that this government also played a role in escalating the dispute and did not protect Shiite minority in Sampang, by supporting anti Shiite movement through speech 7MDK\D ¶V VSHHFK UHORFDWLQJ WKHP WR 6LGXDUMR DQG DVNLQJ WKHP WR VWRS SUDFWLFLQJ UHOLJLRXV DFWLYLWLHV , IDLOHG WR VHH WKDW WKH ORFDO JRYHUQPHQW ¶V SROLFLHV DQG activities towards this minority was reasonable in public. It might be reasonable for only their side.
The last is the discourse of candidate for public office. 24 The way Tjhaya increased his popularity for the new re-election in Sampang through supporting anti Shiite community, considered as public interest, was unreasonable publicly. How can a leader of district, as body of the state, side and support certain community and violate the other rather than protecting all of his people? Furthermore, the idea of public reason should not belong to only certain background culture with its own non-public reason. 25 Having considered this in mind, thus the idea of public reason can be from either secular or religious, but each who brings it should make it reasonable in public and may be based on public interest. Each should make others sure that this idea is what they need for the sake of public interest, specifically for the sake of a country.
Thus, let us see whether MUI as civic group and its fatwa are public reason or not. Since MUI actually represents the voice of Muslims majority who are Sunni, it can be seen from how they judged Shiite as deviant through the standardisation of Sunni; I would say it is problematic if we want to relate to the 23 John Rawls, The Law of Peoples: With, The Idea of Public Reason Revisited (Harvard University Press, 2001). 24 -RKQ UDZO ³7KH ,GHD RI SXEOLF 5HDVRQ 5HYLVLWHG ´ The University of Chicago Law Review, vol. 64, No. 3 (1997), p. 765-807. 25 RawlV ³7KH ,GHD RI 3XEOLF 5HDVRQ 5HYLVLWHG ´ idea of public reason suggested by John Rawl. Because of MUI itself is civil society, and it is included in the discourse of government officials as one of public political forum. Hence, Rawl perceived;

³7KH
LGHD RI SXEOLF UHDVRQ GRHV QRW DSSO\ WR EDFNJURXnd culture with its many forms of Nob-SXEOLF UHDVRQ RU WR PHGLD RI DQ\ NLQG ´ 26 As civil society in the public political forum that deal with Muslims matter in daily life, funded by the government, and should support democracy, how can MUI judge Shiite iQ 6DPSDQJ DV GHYLDQW WKURXJK 6XQQL ¶V EDFNJURXQG FXOWXUH" And consequently, it strengthens the anti-Shiite movement in Sampang and in many other places in Indonesia. It also became one of justification for those who conducted violence towards Shiite community. So I would argue that MUI ¶V interpretation of blasphemy is not a public reason. It only belongs to certain background culture that should not be taken as account in justifying violent act towards other groups.
However, there were attempts to make it reasonable in public if we see MUI recommendation in its fatwa of Shiite. They recommended the government to stop Shiite community to stop all of activities and close their offices in order to create political stability and to keep the unity of Republic of Indonesia. 27 They framed it as well to make it as public interest; in contrast, their way of judging Shiite is deviant is not reasonable in public political forum.

G. Contestation between National and Islamic identity
Indonesia has been experiencing Islamization to this day and it is the process that never ends. This process also means a struggle for hegemony and in some ways for power. However, we have to note that Islamic party never gained a full control of the state meaning that political Islam has never won. However, the grass-root level Islamization has never stoped through culture, law, and politic, such as hijab as both fashion and life style and the codification of Islamic law into possitive law as represented in Religious Court, MUI, and Syariah District Regulation. The codification happens through negotiations between political elites. This Islamization then contributes to the contestation between national and Islamic identity in some ways, although many religious leaders and Islamic communities have agreed on being Muslims and nationalists at the same time. It becomes a contest when certain religious community feel threatened by other community, such as Shiite in Sampang, and then invited religious authoroties such as MUI and religious leaders to judge Shiite and brought the case to the court, and asked the state to stop them for practicing some rituals and spreading their teachings. As a result, The Government relocated them to Sidoarjo, the other city that far from their hometown. What happened was that Religious communities judged other as deviant and then invited and pressured the state to be on their side.
If we discuss what the national identity is then we should take Pancasila, Bhineka Tunggal Ika, and Constitution into account, where Shiite community is basically supposed to be protected by the state. The case of Sampang shows how Muslims majorites think of Islamic orthodoxy where the state has to involve in constructing and running it. It was a struggle of the orthodox Islamic identity in public sphere, instead of Democratic Islamic country. When the body of the state such as Court, Police, and District leader are pressured and forced to response to this, what kind of identity did they represent? Focusing the Court and District leader, Nur Tjahya, they indicated the un-neutrality, which means aligning themselves to Sunni-majorities.
Looking at another case, Identity contestation is part of nation-building, such as that happening in Malaysia where communities try to define what being Malays mean. However, Malaysia case is somewhat different in the sense that it defined in its post-colonial constitution that being Malays means having three pillars, such as Muslim religion, Malay language, and aristocratic Government of sultanate. These pillars should be embodied in every Malaysia citizens. What interesting is that there is a contestation within Islamic identity itself among radical and moderate dakwahist. Both groups have attempted to define what being Muslims mean, what kind of Islam is authentic, and what being Malaysians mean with their Islam as religion. 28 This case indicates that identity contestation is something unavoidable, yet the most important thing is that whether or not the contestation is in democratic ways. Indeed, this religion-state contestation has a significant effect in the condition of religious liberty in Indonesia. This designation has had various discriminatory effects on its adherents, which waters down significantly the guarantee of religious freedom in Indonesia. 29

H. Conclusion
/RRNLQJ DW WKH DOLJQPHQWV RI VRPH VWDWH ¶V LQVWLWXWLRQ VXFK DV ORFDO JRYHUQPHQW DQG FRXUW LQ UHVSRQGLQJ SHRSOH ¶V FODLP DERXW GHYLDQF\ RI FHUWDLQ community, which later led to violence, it can be considered as undemocratic and publicly unreasonable. As I have mentioned above about protecting minority ULJKWV LQ GHPRFUDWLF FRXQWU\ , IDLOHG WR VHH WKDW VWDWH ¶V LQVWLWXWLRQ VXFFHHG LQ protecting minority right and tolerate their religious freedom as citizens. Thus, what actually happened was undemocratic and publicly unreasonable way of the state in responding to the claim of deviancy from certain group.
If we see MUI as civic group and civil society that should suport democracy, it becomes problematic when producing such fatwa that supports and VWUHQJWKHQV RWKHUV ¶ ULJKW YLRODWLRQ ,W PLJKW EH DQ LQVWLWXWLRQ UHSUHVHQWLQJ 6XQQL PDMRULW\ RI 0XVOLPV ¶ YRLFH EXW FDQQRW recommend the state to stop other from practicing what they believe, which is in public political forum. Hence, the existence of MUI as an institution representing Sunni Muslims that wish Shiite community stop their rituals is undemocratic and publicly unreasonable.
)XUWKHU 1RHU 7MDK\D ¶V DOLJnments with Sunni majority in Sampang in claiming deviancy of Shiite community, thus they should stop their activities or go out of Madura, shows his powerlessness in implementing twin toleration in the country struggling for democracy. Besides, relocating Shiite community from their homeland to Sidoarjo, is a complex undemocratic way of local government in equally treating all citizens, even there is such claim of deviancy towards certain community.
The last is the role of the court. As one of political forum that should publicly reasonable in favour of democracy, the victimization of Tajul Muluk whose right is violated is one indicating unreasonable way of the court in protecting minority rights, thus, it also violates the written constitution UUD 1945 as a part of public reasoning and is undemocratic $QVZHULQJ KRZ VWDWH UHVSRQG WR UHOLJLRXV JURXSV ¶ MXGJPHQW RI ³GHYLDQW´ at the end of this paper, I would say generally that state has implied favouritism towards certain community by being an ally of that community and then violate RWKHU ¶V ULJKW ZKLFK LV DFWXDOO\ ZULWWHQ LQ D FRQVWLWXWLRQ DV D SDUW RI SXEOLF UHDVRQ Besides, the state also gave a special privilege for Sunni Muslims to judge other through MUI. This is what I consider as undemocratic and unreasonable favouritism towards Sunni-Muslims