Can political Islam support democratisation?

As shown in the Arab Spring movement across the Middle East, which started five years ago, Muslim populations in Asia and Africa have embraced democracy to fight discrimination, promote equality and social justice, as well as bargain for political and economic positions.
Democratisation has triggered more Islamic-inspired political rights and participation efforts – manifested in voter mobilisation during elections, aspiration for Islamic-inspired legislation and rallies demanding accommodation of other Muslim socio-religious matters – especially in countries where aspirations of political Islam had been suppressed, such as Indonesia during the New Order era.
However, to make democracy work, we need more than just political participation representing private and/or tribal interests. We need liberalism! Almost two decades ago, the writer Fareed Zakaria warned us that instead of equality, happiness and prosperity, illiberal democracy would lead us to new forms of totalitarianism by eliminating basic rights, especially those of minority groups.
While democracy basically means power is in the hands of the people, liberalism seeks to protect individual freedom and liberty, including free speech, assembly and ownership regardless of ethnic, class and religious backgrounds.
Like or not, Indonesia’s recent movements of political Islam – dubbed 411, 212, 112 and most recently 212 – have shown a spirited embrace of democracy by Muslims.
The attack on Jakarta Governor Basuki “Ahok” Tjahaja Purnama under the Blasphemy Law followed by the ulemas’ edict for Jakartan Muslims not to vote for him in the February 15 election due to his Chinese and Christian background were grounded in their Islamist political aspiration.
Both the movement and its causes have livened up our democracy – yet they violate the principles of liberalism.
The movement – often equated with a “holy war” for Indonesian Muslims to obtain dignity and supreme power in politics, economic and social life in this era of democratisation – has utilised religion and doctrines voiced by the Indonesian Ulema Council and other Islamic bodies, to frame their political purposes and agenda. The movement and its cause have been treated as sacred; thus any criticism of them, even from the government, is framed as an attack on their political rights under the democratic system and/or accused as a blasphemous act under the Blasphemy Law.
Next, by urging them not to vote for “the blasphemer” Ahok, the movement intimidated Muslim voters on election day. Ahok nevertheless topped the count and therefore qualifies for the runoff slated for April 19.
Principally, there is no free speech against the movement and no protection of individual freedom and liberty, as guaranteed within the liberal tradition.
If Indonesia follows this path, any democratic event – including elections for parliament, the presidency, governors and mayors – will become just a routine affair that will lead to polarisation and disintegration of the multi-ethnic, multifaith and multiracial society.
For political Islam to benefit society, it should not just engage with democratisation but also adopt the principles of liberalism. This idea is not new. In his work of the mid-1990s, Asef Bayat promotes the agenda of post-Islamism for Muslims eager to participate in democratisation beyond the primordial missions of political Islam.
Proponents of political Islam should learn that all Indonesian citizens have their civil and political rights guaranteed by the constitution regardless of ethnic and religious backgrounds. They should also learn to be calm and respect freedom of speech, especially speech critical of their religious doctrines. Islamists should also work hard to educate Muslim voters on politics, public affairs, human rights, anti-corruption activities and other projects to reduce social inequality and promote wider social justice.
By adhering to the principles of liberalism, political Islam will not only enrich the country’s democratisation but also sustain itself and benefit the whole populace of the nation, irrespective of their primordial roots and affinities.

Amika Wardana is a sociology lecturer at Yogyakarta State University.