Arghea Desafti Hapsari, Jakarta – With the marathon hearings of a judicial review request of the blasphemy law still going on, activists have questioned whether the Constitutional Court's nine judges can shed their religious leanings and be impartial.

Petitioners expressed their concerns Monday over the judges' inclination toward a religious point of view in commenting or asking questions of witnesses or experts testifying in court.

A lawyer for the petitioners, M. Choirul Anam, said the court had often heard judges using their knowledge and understanding of their own religions to argue in several hearings.

"The panel of judges once argued about secularism, saying they were concerned this judicial review request [over the blasphemy law] could be seen as an effort to uphold secularism," he said.

"I say they can ask about anything in the court, but it must be based on their understanding of the Constitution."

Petitioners, comprising several NGOs and activists espousing pluralism, have requested the court review several contentious articles in the 45-year-old law.

A slew of hearings is currently underway to present a total of over 60 experts sharing their views on the controversial law.

Each hearing has been attended by dozens of people, including members of the hard-line Islamic groups Hizbut Tahrir and Islam Defenders Front (FPI) staging rallies every day of the hearings.

After days of heated debate and controversy, the Constitutional Court is now facing a big challenge, Anam said.

"The challenge, however, doesn't come from outside the court," he said. "The challenge lies in the court itself... whether it uses constitutional logic [on which to base its argument] or the judges' understanding of their own religions.

"Should the court resort to the latter, this request will never find justice. And that day will be written in history."

He added the judges tended to explore whether the law upheld freedom of religion in the country, rather than other kinds of basic rights, such as legal certainty and equality before the law.

"We hoping the court will be independent and not get trapped in [staging a debate on] religious teachings – for the Constitutional Court is not the place to do so – instead of trying the law's constitutionality," Anam said.

Court chief Mahfud M.D. previously vowed to issue a fair ruling on the judicial review request. "Every law should be fair to all people," he said.

"This means all Indonesian citizens have to feel the blasphemy law is fair to each one of them. Whether it is will be up to the court to decide."

Petitioners have also lamented the Religious Affairs Ministry's stance on the case. The ministry opposes the move by the petitioners, saying that without the law, "chaos will reign".

Muslim scholar and petitioner Dawam Rahardjo said the ministry should represent the state, and not just Islam.

"[The ministry] should open its eyes to the fact that so many people are in support of the review of the law," he said. "When did it become the Islamic Affairs Ministry?"

The Indonesian Bishops Conference (KWI) and the Indonesian Communion of Churches (PGI), representing country's Catholics and Protestants, have backed the review of the blasphemy law.