The Conceptions of Sharia and Citizenship in Indonesia and Malaysia

Indonesia and Malaysia offer comparative perspectives concerning the relationship between loyalties to the Muslim umma, local ethnicity, and the modern nation-state, and how interpretations of the sharia and modern constitution, laws, politics, and policies intersect in multiple and changing ways....

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Muhamad Ali
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Universitas Islam Negeri (UIN) Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Centre for Asian Social Science Research (CASSR), Faculty of Social and Political Sciences 2019-12-01
Series:Journal of Asian Social Science Research
Subjects:
Online Access:https://cassr.net/jassr/index.php/jassr/article/view/12
_version_ 1798001433782517760
author Muhamad Ali
author_facet Muhamad Ali
author_sort Muhamad Ali
collection DOAJ
description Indonesia and Malaysia offer comparative perspectives concerning the relationship between loyalties to the Muslim umma, local ethnicity, and the modern nation-state, and how interpretations of the sharia and modern constitution, laws, politics, and policies intersect in multiple and changing ways. This article seeks to compare and contrast some of the contemporary discourses on sharia and citizenship as demonstrated by Indonesian and Malaysian scholars, politicians, and activists. Both Indonesian and Malaysian constitutions were born out of the modern notion of citizenship that recognizes religious diversity. On the one hand, the Constitution of Indonesia does not specify Islam as the state religion, but the government promotes official religions. On the other hand, the Constitution of Malaysia makes it explicit that Islam is the state religion while recognizing religious diversity. The Indonesian government does not conflate particular ethnicity with Islam, whereas Malaysia integrates Islam and Malay ethnicity amidst Malaysian religious and ethnic plurality. Both cases prevent us from categorizing each case as either an Islamic legal conservatism or a modern legal liberalism. These two cases resist the binary opposition between sharia conservatism deemed against citizenship and modern legal liberalism deemed against religious laws. There are ambiguities, contradictions, as well as compromises and integration between conflicting ideas and systems concerning Islam and citizenship.
first_indexed 2024-04-11T11:36:10Z
format Article
id doaj.art-de847f0d708246cc91a7ee7f586749d4
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2721-9399
2721-9593
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-11T11:36:10Z
publishDate 2019-12-01
publisher Universitas Islam Negeri (UIN) Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Centre for Asian Social Science Research (CASSR), Faculty of Social and Political Sciences
record_format Article
series Journal of Asian Social Science Research
spelling doaj.art-de847f0d708246cc91a7ee7f586749d42022-12-22T04:25:58ZengUniversitas Islam Negeri (UIN) Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Centre for Asian Social Science Research (CASSR), Faculty of Social and Political SciencesJournal of Asian Social Science Research2721-93992721-95932019-12-011110.15575/jassr.v1i1.12The Conceptions of Sharia and Citizenship in Indonesia and MalaysiaMuhamad Ali0University of California Riverside, USA Indonesia and Malaysia offer comparative perspectives concerning the relationship between loyalties to the Muslim umma, local ethnicity, and the modern nation-state, and how interpretations of the sharia and modern constitution, laws, politics, and policies intersect in multiple and changing ways. This article seeks to compare and contrast some of the contemporary discourses on sharia and citizenship as demonstrated by Indonesian and Malaysian scholars, politicians, and activists. Both Indonesian and Malaysian constitutions were born out of the modern notion of citizenship that recognizes religious diversity. On the one hand, the Constitution of Indonesia does not specify Islam as the state religion, but the government promotes official religions. On the other hand, the Constitution of Malaysia makes it explicit that Islam is the state religion while recognizing religious diversity. The Indonesian government does not conflate particular ethnicity with Islam, whereas Malaysia integrates Islam and Malay ethnicity amidst Malaysian religious and ethnic plurality. Both cases prevent us from categorizing each case as either an Islamic legal conservatism or a modern legal liberalism. These two cases resist the binary opposition between sharia conservatism deemed against citizenship and modern legal liberalism deemed against religious laws. There are ambiguities, contradictions, as well as compromises and integration between conflicting ideas and systems concerning Islam and citizenship. https://cassr.net/jassr/index.php/jassr/article/view/12Shariacitizenshipthe constitution of Indonesiathe constitution of Malaysiaethnicitylegal conservatism
spellingShingle Muhamad Ali
The Conceptions of Sharia and Citizenship in Indonesia and Malaysia
Journal of Asian Social Science Research
Sharia
citizenship
the constitution of Indonesia
the constitution of Malaysia
ethnicity
legal conservatism
title The Conceptions of Sharia and Citizenship in Indonesia and Malaysia
title_full The Conceptions of Sharia and Citizenship in Indonesia and Malaysia
title_fullStr The Conceptions of Sharia and Citizenship in Indonesia and Malaysia
title_full_unstemmed The Conceptions of Sharia and Citizenship in Indonesia and Malaysia
title_short The Conceptions of Sharia and Citizenship in Indonesia and Malaysia
title_sort conceptions of sharia and citizenship in indonesia and malaysia
topic Sharia
citizenship
the constitution of Indonesia
the constitution of Malaysia
ethnicity
legal conservatism
url https://cassr.net/jassr/index.php/jassr/article/view/12
work_keys_str_mv AT muhamadali theconceptionsofshariaandcitizenshipinindonesiaandmalaysia
AT muhamadali conceptionsofshariaandcitizenshipinindonesiaandmalaysia