Indonesia’s Fragmented Responses to International Pressure During the 2016–2017 Blasphemy Case
This article examines how states respond to the use of international pressure as an instrument for promoting freedom of religion or belief (FoRB). It applies the framework of stigma management to understand the responses of Indonesia to international pressure due to the imprisonment of Basuki Tjahaj...
| Published in: | The review of faith & international affairs |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
2023
|
| In: |
The review of faith & international affairs
Year: 2023, Volume: 21, Issue: 2, Pages: 107-120 |
| Further subjects: | B
international pressure
B Blasphemy laws B Stigma management B freedom of religion and beliefs B Indonesia |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | This article examines how states respond to the use of international pressure as an instrument for promoting freedom of religion or belief (FoRB). It applies the framework of stigma management to understand the responses of Indonesia to international pressure due to the imprisonment of Basuki Tjahaja Purnama or Ahok for allegedly defaming Islam (2016–2017). This article argues that the responses were not monolithic. The state articulated a narrative that affirmed the importance of protecting FoRB, but also held that it is less urgent compared to respecting the rule of law and maintaining Indonesia’s sovereignty. The Indonesian Islamists disseminated a narrative that rejected the FoRB norms, framing them as an expression of Western hypocrisy. This variety of responses is reflective of the domestic political configuration. The state’s narrative was intended to appease the increasingly powerful Islamists and mitigate the international loss of reputation. The Islamists’ response, meanwhile, reflected their attempts to neutralize the influence of international discourses of FoRB on their projects to increase their domestic power. Combined, however, these discourses resulted in the justification of Ahok’s prosecution and the practice of Indonesian blasphemy laws. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1931-7743 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: The review of faith & international affairs
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1080/15570274.2023.2200271 |