U5293752

POGO8012

ASSIGNMENT COVER SHEET

Student ID Name Course code Submitted to Assignment title Word count

Seti Gautama Adi Nugroho POGO8012 Adrian Kay Short Paper 703

CHECKLIST
I have: followed the referencing rules set out in the Crawford Style Guide................................ Y followed the formatting rules set out in the Crawford Style Guide .................................. Y submitted the final version of this assignment to Turnitin ............................................... Y

Declaration
I acknowledge that I have read, and understand, the summary of the ANU Code of Practice for Student Academic Honesty which is available at: http://academichonesty.anu.edu.au/anu_policy_for_academic_honesty.html#codesummary I acknowledge that: this assignment is my own work this assignment is expressed predominantly in my own words the words and ideas of others, where used, are properly used and acknowledged no part of this assignment has been previously submitted for assessment. I understand that by submitting my work to Turnitin, my work will be retained in an electronic database by Turnitin, for the purpose of future checks. This database cannot be accessed by non-Crawford School Turnitin users without permission.

Seti Gautama Adi Nugroho ____ Signature

19 August 2013 _________________ Date

U5293752 Question:

POGO8012

In your own words, write a brief account of a human rights issue in your own society. How did it arise? Was it able to be resolved politically? References are only required in the case of direct quotes, but please do your best to minimise the use of these. Issues: hate speech in reformation era Increasing numbers of hate speech in mass media and social media in Indonesia has made minority groups wary. Justified by freedom of expression, some radical show their concern about growing deviant teaching that disturb a certain religious group. Radicals group, in their speech, condemned such teaching and promised elimination for deviant doctrine follower, which is part of minority group. For example, a sermon claimed that Shia is a deviant and it must be eliminated at all cost, had triggered some actual violence in some region in Indonesia. Freedom of expression brings positive and negative effects in Indonesia. Indonesia now has more democratic environment. Democracy gives people opportunity to raise issues and debate it in public space, for example mass media and social media. However, reformation aftermath reduces state capacity to prevent unwanted information in public space. Consequently, excessive practice of human rights may spread sensitive issue for some groups, which those issues were censored or prevented prior 1998. In democratic society, it is not a taboo to talk about religion and debate anything that related to it. Freedom of expression and believe are part of basic rights. However, in Indonesia religious debate tends to heat up society and pollute public space with hate speech. According to Human Right Covenant, hate speech is not part of freedom of expression, because it contains violence and discrimination. Therefore, democracy needs some extent of speech restriction. In religious sphere, some religious groups believe that religion doctrine should be defended at all cost, if it necessary by physical force. Beside, It is difficult to make conclusion in doctrine debate, because it depend how to interpret the doctrine. Furthermore, various religions have various doctrines, which this doctrine may contradict each other as well as level of the understanding of their follower. Therefore,

U5293752

POGO8012

comparing doctrine is not an apple-to-apple comparison and could confront their respective follower into open battle. In Indonesia, government specially regulates religious relationship under Ministry of Religion. However, it tends to be believed that government takes side in favor to majority religion. Since the sermon is a part of religion activities, government should regulate that. However, it seems that government did not make any action until hate sermon become physical violent. Furthermore, whenever violent actions happen and involve majority religious groups, government tends to blame the victim or not make any action. For example, extreme Sunni attacked Shia in Madura, government advised Shia people to move out from Madura or their safety is their own risk. The government did not provide protection properly and tend to blame the victim as wrong people in wrong place. This situation encourages Islamist extreme group to shout and do more violent. However, if there any violence action that is categorized as terrorism, government will act swiftly to punish, for example extremist bombing in Bali, the government employed all resources to resolve and punish the actors. Aftermath some series of violence against minority, some minority groups made protest and request government to prevent hate speech and violence. The group demanded that government must run the constitution properly, firm and fair for everyone. Correspondingly, some politician stated about their concern for the future of Indonesia, this include the president him self condemn the violent action. However, discomfort feeling that caused by hate speech is a subjective matter, which has subjective interpretation. Furthermore, government cannot take any action to prevent hate speech but violence. Besides, whenever there is a public debate regarding the position of minority and majority, it will bring doctrine debates in the public sphere. And any time doctrine debate happen, it will not be resolved because each side will not compromise. Therefore, hate speech have high level of difficulties to be proven as a crime, but violent is easier. The act of anti terrorism and the act of electronic information tried to prevent hate speech. These laws arrange how people should do and not do in public space and public information. However, these laws did not directly address hate message, but it arrange slander massages. Although hate speech is subjective maters as well as slander, the magnitude of hate speech is much more severe. Therefore, unless there is an anti hate speech act, hate speech in Indonesia will not be resolved.
3