Iim Halimatusa'diyah – The leadership of Indonesia's second-largest Muslim organisation has decided to accept a government mining licence, just like the largest. Consternation from eco-activists and others within has ensued, together with warnings about a loss of moral direction.
Following Nahdlatul Ulama (NU)'s decision, Muhammadiyah, the second-largest Islamic organisation in Indonesia, has formally accepted the mining license (IUP) offered by the government to religious organisations. A backlash has ensued from Muhammadiyah's grassroots members and activists.
A few days before Muhammadiyah announced its decision, the Center for the Study of Islam and Society (PPIM) at Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University (UIN) Jakarta launched a national survey on Muslims' views on Green Islam in Indonesia as part of the Religious Environmentalism Action (REACT) programme funded by the Netherlands. REACT aims to empower religious leaders, youth and faith-based environmental activists, and provide a forum for policymakers to share experiences in protecting the earth from environmental and climate change. The survey was conducted from 1 March to 21 April 2024 on a total of 3,045 Muslim respondents, of which 1,525 were male and 1,520 female. They ranged from 16 to 81 years of age.
The survey revealed the duality in the attitudes of Indonesian Muslims when they view economic activities such as mining and their impact on climate change (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Muslim Respondents' Views on Mining Ownership by Islamic Organisations and Climate Change (see original article)
Source – Data from National Survey, Center for the Study of Islam and Society (PPIM), Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic at University (UIN) Jakarta. Charts by author. Note: The sample comprised 229 Muhammadiyah-affiliated respondents, 2,319 NU, 133 affiliated with "other" Islamic organisations and 364 with no affiliation. This reflects the nationwide proportion.
Looking at the survey findings, Muhammadiyah's decision to accept the mining concession is unsurprising. The proportion of Muhammadiyah-affiliated Muslims (numbering 229 respondents, or almost 7 per cent of the total) who agreed with mining ownership by Islamic organisations was relatively high, at 70.29 per cent. On the other hand, Muhammadiyah-affiliated Muslims were most likely to agree that economic activities such as mining are responsible for climate change, with 69.91 per cent holding this view.
The findings also show that over a quarter of those affiliated with the two largest Islamic organisations were most likely to disagree with the issuance of mining permits by the government to religious organisations. In fact, 29.88 per cent of NU-affiliated Muslim respondents (over 75 per cent of the survey cohort) and 28.59 per cent of Muhammadiyah-affiliated ones disagreed with religious organisations owning mining businesses.
Muhammadiyah's recent decision to follow NU's footsteps is regrettable. First, the acceptance of mining concessions by Muhammadiyah as an organisation was a stab in the back to organs within Muhammadiyah that have long been active in the Green Islam movement and voiced actions and concerns for environmental issues. Muhammadiyah has various institutions and communities that focus on national and local environmental issues, including the Environmental Assembly and the Muhammadiyah Disaster Management Center (MDMC). The Muhammadiyah Women's Wing (Aisyiyah) also has an Environment and Disaster Management Center (LLHPB). Among Muhammadiyah youth, there are Muhammadiyah Green Cadres (KHM/Kader Hijau Muhamamdiyah) and Green Students (Pelajar Hijau) within the Muhammadiyah Student Association (IPM).
Therefore, it is unsurprising that Muhammadiyah's decision has received mixed responses from within. KHM, for example, shortly after the Muhammadiyah central leadership's acceptance statement, immediately expressed their criticism and proposed a motion of no-confidence against the Muhammadiyah leadership. KHM posted the hashtag #IslamBerketambangan ("Mining Islam"), a pun on Muhammadiyah's slogan "Islam Berkemajuan" (Progressive Islam). They also demanded that Muhammadiyah hold a second plenary meeting inviting regional boards throughout Indonesia to discuss the decision. While the meeting was held on 27-28 July, this failed to sway Muhammadiyah's decision.
In addition, Hening Parlan, a female environmental activist from LLHPB Aisyiyah, criticised this decision and expressed her disappointment that Muhammadiyah, as an organisation, accepted mining concessions. Amien Rais, one of Muhammadiyah's elite figures and former People's Consultative Assembly speaker, also strongly criticised this decision. Rais stated unequivocally that mining inevitably destroys the environment and that the mining world was a vicious world in which some players were "bandits without morals".
Second, Muhammadiyah's decision to accept this mining concession indicates Muhammadiyah's overstretching from its primary activities as an Islamic organisation focused on social and religious affairs. Although Muhammadiyah has extensive experience in managing economic ventures in education and health, it has no expertise in mining.
One of the reasons given by Muhammadiyah's central board for accepting the mining concession was that Muhammadiyah wanted to set a good example by doing "green mining." However, the crucial question is its feasibility and whether mining can ever be environmentally friendly. Mining corporations often extract the most profit by paying little attention to environmental costs. If Muhammadiyah wants to implement "green mining," Muhammadiyah must allocate substantial financial resources to minimise the detrimental impact on the environment. Thus, the prospect of Muhammadiyah earning smaller profits to improve the welfare of the ummah (Muslim community) must be adequately considered. On the other hand, if Muhammadiyah's intention to act exemplarily fails, it could bring about public distrust of Muhammadiyah; by accepting such a licence to mine, Muhammadiyah is risking its reputation as a moral guardian of the nation.
Third, the decision undermines Muhammadiyah's political independence, which is has so far maintained. The acceptance of a mining permit from the Widodo government implies that Muhammadiyah has aligned closely with the government. This will make it difficult for Muhammadiyah to be critical of the government.
One way Muhammadiyah has challenged the government in the past is through the judicial reviews of various laws deemed detrimental to the public, known as "constitutional jihad" (or "a meritorious struggle or effort through the constitution"). In pursuing this constitutional jihad, Muhammadiyah successfully annulled Law No. 7 of 2004 on Natural Resources. Additionally, this movement has targeted several other economic laws, such as those on investment, electricity, and foreign exchange traffic. These laws were deemed inconsistent with the 1945 Constitution, which prioritises the state's role in managing resources for the welfare of all Indonesian citizens.
The state's co-optation of the two largest religious organisations in Indonesia has become more apparent with Muhammadiyah joining NU in accepting mining licences. If these two large organisations lose their political autonomy, then on whom can the public pin their hopes for criticism of the future government? Particularly with the impending change in political leadership, critical civil society is necessary as one of the main pillars in controlling government policies and potential overreach.
[Iim Halimatusa'diyah is a Visiting Fellow in the Regional Social and Cultural Studies Programme, ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute, a Senior Lecturer at Islamic State University (UIN) Syarif Hidayatullah, and a Deputy Director for Research at the Center for the Study of Islam and Society (PPIM) UIN Jakarta.]
Source: https://fulcrum.sg/muhammadiyah-and-the-problem-of-mining-by-islamic-organisations-in-indonesia