INTRODUCTION

On 30 October 2008, Indonesia's Pornography Law (No. 44 of 2008) was passed after much controversy. The Bill was supported by a loose coalition of conservative Islamist groups and Islamic parties, including MUI (Majelis Ulama Indonesia, Indonesia's Council of Ulama, or religious teachers), which issued an official statement, endorsing the immediate passage of the Bill and more radical groups such as FPI (Front Pembela Islam, the Islamic Defenders Front). Despite the fact that the Criminal Code contains articles, which could be used to charge pornography, but which were not being properly enforced, the Islamic party PKS (Partai Keadilan Sejahtera, the Prosperity and Justice Party), supported by a number of other political parties, was keen to introduce a special Pornography Law, as a means of enforcing Islamic morality throughout Indonesian society. PKS's hopes for the Pornography Law were high. It stated that the Pornography Law would save current and future generations from moral depravity, that pornography is a deviation, and against Eastern culture (budaya ketimuran) (PKS 2006). In other words, Eastern culture was seen in oppositional terms to the “depraved West”. Conservative Muslims called on the state to implement laws for the whole community, Muslim or otherwise, which fitted their own standards of morality. The reference to “Eastern culture” can be seen as a way to broaden their Islamic standards to other Indonesians of different religions. As such, it was part of an attempt to incorporate, at a national level, more conservative Islamic values into Indonesian society in general and its legal system in particular.

The Bill was rejected by a broad coalition of liberal Muslims, religious minorities, feminists, and artists. The groups most vocal in opposition to the Bill were religious minorities (particularly the predominantly Hindu Balinese and the predominantly Christian Papuans), who opposed domination of Islamic values (Kearney 2006; Sawitri 2006); feminists, who were concerned that the Bill would restrict women's daily lives and choices of clothing and behaviour (Arivia 2006; Allen 2009); and artists, who worried that the Bill could lead to a new moral censorship (Lindsay 2008). Liberal-thinking Muslims in this loose coalition of activists who opposed the Bill (who also overlapped with the above categories, of course), included the late Abdurrahman Wahid (Gus Dur), former Chair of Nahdlatul Ulama and former President of Indonesia (Jakarta Post 2006b). Liberals tend to view morality and religious belief as personal issues.