In Memoriam Munir, Indonesian Human Rights Activist: Religion Must Benefit Humanity

(This article is translated to English version by Lanny Octavia and edited by Jonathan Zilberg, previously published in Indonesian on 13/9/2004)

On Tuesday, 7^th  September 2004, Indonesia lost a human rights activist whose integrity and dedicationa to justice is incomparable: Munir, SH. He passed away on a flight to Holland for study. As according to his name, Munir dedicated his life as a ‘light’ (munir) for the oppressed whose human rights are denied. Without any fear, Munir never gave up raising and defending the interests of the oppressed despite various threats. What was the philosophy of the belated activist of Kontras, YLBHI (Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation), with which he resisted oppression, state violence and injustice?

In memoriam of Munir, the Islamic Liberal Network presents the interview conducted by Ulil-Abshar-Abdalla with Munir about his philosophy of life and faith.

ULIL ABSHAR-ABDALLA: As an activist for human rights, you certainly have contempled the meaning of Islam during your career. Would you tell us about it?

MUNIR: I was involved in an extreme or radical religious path from 1984-1989. I carried knives in the name of religious conflict. In point of fact, I felt something missing with the function of religion. I came to question whether Islam had truly commanded me to be exclusive and to isolate myself from other communities. There was a battle inside me: Does Islam exist for Allah or does it exist for humans in order to construct a better society in general?

I found that religion is revealed for the latter purpose. I agree with Gus Dur (Abdurrahman Wahid) that God needs no bodyguards to protect Him. Religion must benefit humans. We often talk about the blessing of Islam for the universe (rahmatan lil- alameen), without understanding the essence. Eventually, I left that extremist group since it was impossible for me to survive in an exclusive community. Because Islam supports civilization, it should work for the betterment of human life.

On the contrary, religious extremism and intolerance will destroy human civilization. Many people think that they are constructing society, nevertheless they are constructing symbols which is destroying civilization.

ULIL: Your experience is interesting as regards persons who are members of a second community –religious or ethnic- rather than being Indonesian first and foremost?

MUNIR: Sometimes diversity stimulates religious or ethnic extremism. It always makes one’s own group absolutely essential and ignores others. Besides inter-religious extremism, the same thing occurrs within religious schools of thought. In Indonesia we have observed much bloodshed because of the diversity of religious schools’ approaches. Life seems to be a war for a space in heaven. This is the problem.

ULIL: At what point did you move away from extremism?

MUNIR: It was due to a question posed by my lecturer at that time, Malik Fajar (Minister of Education, Ed). He said:” I’ve never met such a foolish student as you who carries the spirit of war in the name of religion in order to control and dominate others.” To me now, Islam is liberal and accepts diversities. Islam has no authority when it cannot provide space for others. This question became the antithesis of the mainstream thought of several groups at that time. The extreme sect to which I belonged did not provide any space for others.

ULIL: Were you shocked when Malik Fajar rebuked you for this?

MUNIR: Yes I was shocked but I also felt inspired.

At that time I was an activist in the Islamic Student Association HMI. Mr. Malik’s second criticism was this. He said: learn about the true Islam! Please read the constitution of HMI, is it true that HMI is just for creating conflict or does it have a social mission?

Afterwards I found that Islam acknowledges the fact of injustice in social relations where there are oppressors and oppressed and that Islam should side with the oppressed in order to create justice. I think Islam is about justice, not exclusivism as we observe today. This made me leave extemism behind me. I found a new community that accepts diversity.

ULIL: You were lucky to move beyond extremism through finding a good mentor and becoming enlightened. Can present day extremists be enlightened like you were?

MUNIR: I think so. The main problem is that extremism is oriented to political power rather than to deep comprehension about the bitter intolerance for others. Extremism due to political desire is more dangerous than religious superficiality. Today, I think extremists are more political than theological.

ULIL: Could you explain that further?

MUNIR: I think extremism is born when the social-political situation creates pressure which threatens the community. However, there are religious justifications for political pressure. People legitimize the use of verses that Jews and Christians will always be the enemy of Islam (walan tardlâ ‘anka al-Yahûd wala al-Nashârâ hattâ tattabia millatahum, Ed). People use such verses without looking at the historical context of the verses. They always use it as if the enmity with Jews and Christian is permanent.

I think there are many justifications used regarding the fear about Islamization or Christianization. Such anxiety exists in every religion. Some people suppose that religious space will be blocked if Islam is politically defeated; they get worried about a being unable to pray in the mosque or to read the Koran. It can become a serious threat which tempts us to control and compel religious obligation. In this context, the notion that the state has to enforce religion emerges as does extremism which is due to an anxiety about being dominated by other countries.

ULIL: So extremists believe that Islam is being threatened and therefore must fight back?

MUNIR: I think religious outlook is determined by the context in which people live. Islamic schools of thought exist in a specific context and history. In this context, religion may become a form of resistance for the oppressed. But religious extremists should not attack humans who cannot be recognized as oppressors. I agree that Islam must provide the energy to fight against oppression, but not in order to fight certain religions. For instance, we are poor not because of Christian domination, but because of domination by capital or structure etc. I think religion can provide a new energy for people to resist oppression, as long as it has a clear target. But religion should not manipulate authority in order to fight the opponents through yells of kafir (infidel), murtad (apostate) etc.

ULIL: It seems that religion is a form of resistance?

MUNIR: I believe that Islam is a religion for oppressed people. It provides answers for their social problems. Meanwhile, the non-oppressed elements have the duty to help them and guarantee the end of oppression. That is the true Islamic society.

Fighting against poverty is necessary since poverty leads people into infidelity. So fighting against poverty is an important command for Muslim society. Islam does not command us to fight against other religions but against oppression and poverty. I think this is an important foundation for Islamic society and civilization.

ULIL: So this religious perception motivates you to defend the oppressed and fight for human rights? 

MUNIR: I was born in a religious family, in the normative sense. I think that is not enough. Being religious should go beyond normativity such as the assumption that being religious means to pray five times in a day etc. This is critisized by Cak Nur (Nurcholis Majid) as being merely a symbolic and formal piety. We have to realize that there are declarations in prayer which dictate certain actions in life. I cannot imagine declaring in my prayer “inna shalâtî wanusukî wamahyâya wamamâti…” (Verily, my prayer, my ritual, my life and my death…, Ed), and meanwhile be corrupt and ignorant of poverty etc. In that case, God would condemn me as a negligent, worthless and despicable person.

In this context, when I offer my prayer, I have to side with the poor and take the hard choice to fulfill the commands -such as defending the victims- as I have directed my face towards justice. To me, the Muslim community has to side with the oppressed. It is my choice and my belief. Building a just society is a religious struggle. A just society does not require everyone to be Muslim, but to manifest the Islamic notion of justice within society.

ULIL: Do you think that you still have to identify yourself as a pious Muslim when you fight for justice, or is this resistance beyond names and symbols?

MUNIR: I don’t know whether I can claim to be pious or not. But I am a part of society which believes that establishing an inclusive and unegoistic justice is the most important energy within Islam. I would abandon Islam if it did not promote this. I prefer Islam for this reason. And I cannot compel anyone to admit that Islam is inclusive and that therefore he or she has to embrace it. To me, when I prefer a choice, it should control my actions and attitude.

One should not be compelled to join in and one has the right to establish other processes. But above all, religion is an important energy for fighting against injustice. Here, I believe that Islam has a promising future. Inclusive Islam is not for pursuing power but an important energy for marginalized people.

ULIL: How do you feel about overt symbols of identity?

MUNIR: Sometimes I try and imagine what it is like for non Muslims to encounter Muslims exhibiting their Islamic physical attributes and claiming to possess the only truth. I even feel like a minority when I encounter men with long beards and black foreheads. Sometimes I am worried about being dominated by such measurements of truth. To me, these symbols are conter-productive with the obligation to introduce Islam to others and these attributes are cultural and historical products anyway. There must be a distinction between Arabic cultures in the period of the Prophet with Islam as a religion. These are two different things.

Hence, Arabic cultural symbols like wearing robes are not Islamic injunctions. They are part of Middle Eastern life. Afghani people have been wearing robes and growing their beards but this is not the measure of Islam. To me, the use of symbols creates distance and harms Islam.  Therefore we must avoid it. Wearing a tie or a robe will not threaten or dominate the truth. Clothing is a cultural product, not something for legitimizing domination.[]