[FULL] Dialog - Paskibraka Lepas Jilbab,BPIP Dikritik Keras [Metro Hari Ini]

Summary

The video features a heated discussion on the controversy surrounding a BPIP regulation that allegedly required female Paskibraka members to remove their hijabs during the August 13 inauguration ceremony. MUI Chairman for Da’wah and Ukhuwah, KH Muhammad Kholil Nafis, strongly criticizes the policy, calling it unconstitutional, discriminatory, and contrary to Pancasila, which guarantees religious freedom and diversity. He argues the rule contradicts higher laws, previous regulations, and Indonesia’s pluralistic values. Although BPIP later clarified that hijab-wearing participants may perform on August 17, MUI insists this verbal clarification is insufficient, demanding formal revocation of the regulation, accountability, and an investigation into those responsible.

Takeaways

• 😀 MUI (Indonesian Ulema Council) criticizes BPIP's (Indonesian Presidential Work Unit) decision to ban the hijab for Paskibraka Putri members during ceremonies.
• 😀 MUI argues that banning the hijab is unconstitutional and contradicts Pancasila, Indonesia's state ideology which guarantees freedom of religion.
• 😀 MUI emphasizes that Pancasila supports religious diversity and the policy undermines Indonesia's foundational values of unity in diversity (Bhinneka Tunggal Ika).
• 😀 The controversy arose from a BPIP decision issued in 2024, which contradicted a 2022 regulation allowing hijab for Paskibraka members.
• 😀 The decision to ban the hijab in ceremonies is seen by MUI as a deliberate action, not a mistake, questioning BPIP's understanding of Pancasila.
• 😀 MUI claims the ban represents an attempt to enforce uniformity and suppress religious expression, which could foster intolerance.
• 😀 MUI denounces the policy as unjust and unwise, claiming it infringes on the rights of Muslim women who want to participate in Paskibraka events while wearing the hijab.
• 😀 BPIP attempted to clarify the policy, stating that Paskibraka members could wear hijabs during the flag-raising ceremony, but MUI believes this isn't enough.
• 😀 MUI demands the BPIP's head and responsible parties be held accountable for what they see as a violation of Indonesia’s constitutional principles.
• 😀 The MUI also insists that a mere apology is insufficient, and that the controversial policy must be rescinded to protect the country's religious freedoms and the integrity of Pancasila.

Q & A

What was the controversial rule regarding the hijab for the Paskibraka Putri during the flag-raising ceremony on August 13?

The controversial rule was that the Paskibraka Putri members were initially prohibited from wearing a hijab during the ceremony, which sparked strong criticism from various parties. The criticism centered around the idea that this rule went against the principles of Pancasila, Indonesia's national ideology.

How did the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) respond to the issue of banning the hijab for Paskibraka Putri?

The MUI strongly criticized the rule, stating that it violated the principles of Pancasila, especially the constitutional right to religious freedom. They argued that such a policy disregards Indonesia’s diverse cultural and religious norms, which should be embraced rather than enforced into uniformity.

What is the significance of Pancasila in the MUI's argument against the hijab rule?

Pancasila is the foundation of Indonesia’s national philosophy, and it guarantees the freedom to practice religion. The MUI emphasized that the rule banning the hijab contradicted Pancasila’s commitment to religious freedom and diversity, as it imposed a standard that ignored the nation’s pluralistic nature.

Why did the MUI argue that the policy was not in line with Indonesia’s commitment to diversity?

The MUI argued that the policy aimed to enforce uniformity by disallowing the hijab, which disregarded Indonesia's core value of 'Bhinneka Tunggal Ika' (Unity in Diversity). By enforcing a single standard of appearance, the policy contradicted Indonesia's principles of embracing religious and cultural differences.

What was the MUI’s stance on the legal basis of the hijab ban for Paskibraka Putri?

The MUI believed that the hijab ban violated Indonesia's Constitution, which guarantees the right to practice one's religion freely. They argued that the policy conflicted with higher laws, such as the 2022 Presidential Regulation and BPIP's own previous guidelines, which allowed for the wearing of the hijab.

How did the MUI interpret the actions of BPIP in creating the hijab rule?

The MUI believed that the BPIP's actions were not a mistake but rather a deliberate attempt to impose uniformity, which they saw as a form of oppression. They argued that by requiring the Paskibraka Putri to remove their hijabs, the policy was an abuse of power that violated individual rights and religious freedom.

What was the MUI’s response to BPIP's official statement that allowed Paskibraka Putri members to wear hijabs during the upcoming ceremony?

The MUI appreciated BPIP's change in stance but felt that it was insufficient. They argued that while the policy had been revised for the upcoming ceremony, the decision did not address the deeper issues, such as the existence of contradictory policies and the need for the official regulation to be revoked entirely.

Why did the MUI call for accountability from BPIP’s leadership?

The MUI demanded accountability from BPIP's leadership because they viewed the policy as a serious violation of Indonesia’s values and legal framework. They believed that the BPIP’s decision was a form of intolerance that harmed the nation’s unity and caused unnecessary conflict, and that the individuals responsible should be held accountable.

What did MUI say about the concept of 'voluntary' participation in the ceremony if hijab removal was mandated?

The MUI dismissed the idea of 'voluntary' participation as illogical and coercive. They argued that requiring Paskibraka Putri members to sign a statement under pressure was not voluntary at all and represented an abuse of authority, calling it a form of tyranny.

What were the MUI’s broader concerns regarding BPIP’s policies and their impact on the country's unity?

The MUI expressed concern that BPIP's policies were creating division and undermining the country's unity by imposing a uniform standard that ignored Indonesia’s diverse religious and cultural heritage. They warned that such policies could lead to more friction between religion and state, and could potentially harm Indonesia’s social cohesion.