Hundreds of Indonesians are on the brink of being driven permanently from their homes by fellow citizens, sharing the fate of thousands before them in other sectarian conflicts. The difference is that the latest bunch of displaced villagers are from a minority Muslim denomination, which apparently faces greater challenges than those of a different religion altogether.
Villagers from Sampang regency in Madura, East Java, have taken refuge in an indoor tennis stadium for more than a week now. The followers of the Shia minority sect were attacked by a crowd on the morning of Sunday Aug. 26, just as they were celebrating the customary Lebaran Tupat, a week after the Idul Fitri celebrations at the end of the Ramadhan fasting month.
The attackers were fellow Muslims from the Sunni majority; two men were killed, one from each side, and another remains in a critical condition. The government has offered to "relocate" the villagers, even though there is no guarantee that the new, unidentified, location will be any safer for the displaced community. This uncertainty leads to the question: Will Indonesia's Shiites share the fate of the Ahmadi minority?
About 100 Ahmadis have remained in shelters since they were attacked in 2006 in Lombok, West Nusa Tenggara. In the wake of the attacks Muslim leaders quickly reiterated that Shiites were Muslims, thus apparently having a better guarantee as Indonesian citizens. However the Shiites were attacked anyway, just as in the previous assaults against the Ahmadis that ended with two dead in Banten last year and just like the intimidation and threats against Christians, although without the forced disruption of hundreds of congregations and sealing of churches.
All this shows clearly to the world how Indonesia manages its differences; it doesn't, we just hide them from sight. To think that only a few years ago visiting State Secretary Hillary Clinton cited Indonesia as the world's model where Islam and democracy could live side by side.
The case of the Sampang Shiite refugees is not on the scale of the dramatic stories from Maluku and Central Sulawesi years ago where Muslims and Christians terrorized and killed each other, displacing thousands of residents. One would have thought that the local and central government, honed so long on the values of Pancasila and respect for diversity and humanity, could manage the tensions between a few villagers.
The protracted uncertainty over the Shiite minority demonstrates the glaring trend of continued failure to protect all citizens, not only at a local level. Sampang officials have insisted that they tried all they could to mediate the conflict between local Shiite leaders and the Sunni ulema, the most influential party in Madura.
Human rights watchdog, Setara, has listed hundreds of cases of religious-based violence and discrimination. They include numerous bylaws restricting minorities like the Ahmadi, and also local regulations inhibiting freedom of worship for Christians. And yet the government has deemed that these policies do not exceed the authority of regional governments, neither do they contravene the Constititution.
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has left local leaders to solve such problems largely by themselves. Yet the Constitution is crystal clear on the state's obligation to protect all citizens equally and to guarantee their rights to a decent life.
Strangely, while ministers dismiss the Sampang attacks as a family feud following a love affair involving Shia and Sunni relatives, they continue to offer to "relocate" the entire Shiite community from their homes.
Many Indonesians may dismiss the Sampang attacks as an unfortunate excess of the notoriously volatile Madurese culture. But unless the government immediately guarantees the safety of the Shia minority, without displacing them, the message that minorities have long suspected is only reinforced – that beautiful Indonesia is not really safe for them.