TDB Vol. 3 No. 2: Building Tolerance and Inclusiveness: An NGO Conversation with 2018 ADHRA Laureate Gusdurian Network Indonesia

TDB Vol. 3 No. 2: Building Tolerance and Inclusiveness: An NGO Conversation with 2018 ADHRA Laureate Gusdurian Network Indonesia

Three leaders talk about the importance of building a culture of communication to counter intolerance, conservatism and radicalism. Olivia Yang reports.

“Justice will never be an accomplished state. As long as there are individuals and people on this earth, there would always be conflicts. Justice and a world equal for all will always be an elusive state. But humanity progresses. It is almost like a dance as old as time. Two steps ahead, one step back. Sometimes one step ahead and two steps back.”

Thus spoke Alissa Wahid at the 2018 Asia Democracy and Human Rights Award (ADHRA) ceremony in Taipei on Dec. 10, 2018.

Wahid is the founder and national coordinator for the Gusdurian Network Indonesia (GNI), laureate of the 13th ADHRA. The non-governmental organization is currently one of Indonesia’s leading groups combating radicalism and defending those who are discriminated against due to religious and minority suppression.

Established in 2010, the GNI is named after late Indonesian President K.H. Abdurahman Wahid, who was also known colloquially in Indonesia as “Gus Dur.” President Wahid was the first democratically elected president in Indonesia and had strived to promote interfaith dialogue and multiculturalism. His work became an inspiration for many Indonesians, also called “Gusdurians,” even after his death in 2009. The GNI was founded after his passing to encourage and consolidate interaction among Gusdurians, and further promote Gus Dur’s advocacy for minority rights, religious freedom and tolerance.

The main challenges in Indonesia today are religious populism, “hate spins,” radicalism and violent extremism, said Ms. Wahid. This is where the GNI comes in, as the arena for people from all backgrounds to work together as a democracy, especially at a time when the space for human rights activists is becoming gradually restrictive.

“‘God needs no defense,’ Gus Dur used to say. But now we see how God and religion are capitalized to gain political power, to discriminate [against] others, to do injustices. And when done in the name of God, how powerful. So this is [what] we currently focus on,” Wahid said in her acceptance speech.

Reverend Lazarus Chen (陳思豪) of the Koteng Presbyterian Church in Taiwan echoed similar concerns during a conversation with Wahid.

Chen is one of the religious leaders who have publicly supported marriage equality, especially during the lead-up to Taiwan’s referendum on the issue late last year.

Taiwan’s Constitutional Court on May 24, 2017, ruled that Taiwan’s Civil Code violates the Constitution’s guarantees of freedom of marriage and people’s equality. It gave the Taiwanese government two years to amend the law or pass new legislation to legalize same-sex unions.

In the local elections last November, a total of five referendum motions regarding LGBTQI rights were put on the ballot. Three of the motions aimed to refuse same-sex marriage under the Civil Code and ban LGBTQI education in schools. All three motions were approved in the referenda, while the other two pro-LGBTQI rights motions were not.

In the conversation with Wahid, Chen lamented the fear-mongering in Taiwan’s recent anti-same-sex-marriage campaign. According to him, most Christians in Taiwan believe that the Bible claims that homosexuality is a sin and therefore they do not support same-sex marriage. The results of the referenda, the reverend said, were “manipulated by Christians in Taiwan.”

“They use any kind of resource, including spreading disinformation, to influence and frighten the people in Taiwan to refuse same-sex marriage,” he said.

But he also pointed out that Christians only account for 6 percent of the island-nation’s population and called for non-Christian Taiwanese to “not be led by the few vicious Christians.” The reverend then stressed the importance of building a culture of debate and communication in Taiwan.

Wahid emphasized the value of dialogue, adding that although initiating theological conversations on LGBTQI issues in Indonesia is still very challenging — dangerous, even — “it has to start somewhere.”

“I think GNI is the only group that would put a transgender speaker in front of people on a stage, said Wahid. “But it takes a lot of work.”

The GNI national coordinator also emphasized the importance of staying close to those who hold different opinions and not treating them “as enemies because we need to influence them to have different perspectives.”

While working to enhance communication between groups that hold different values, Taiwan also strives to build tolerance toward Southeast Asian migrant workers, who currently account for nearly 700,000 of the country’s population.

Chang Cheng (張正), also a speaker at the conversation with Wahid, works to resolve the discrimination between Southeast Asians and Taiwanese through his Southeast Asia-themed bookstore, Brilliant Time Bookstore.

The bookstore runs a program called, “Bring Back A Book that You Cannot Read.” It encourages Taiwanese who travel to Southeast Asian countries to return with a book which is then given to migrant workers or spouses in Taiwan. This gives Taiwanese an opportunity to show kindness towards the migrant workers, said Chang. In addition to the program, the bookstore hosts around 30 talks each year on Southeast Asia topics to help the Taiwanese people learn more about the region and its cultures.

Chang also launched the Taiwan Literature Award for Migrants in 2014 with a goal to give and facilitate the Taiwan society in learning more about them. The first prize for the literature award is NT$100,000 (US$3,200), and last year, the award also received submissions from migrant workers in Hong Kong, Macau, Malaysia and Singapore. Chang said they are expecting to expand to South Korea and Japan this year.

“If we learn more about them, discrimination will be less,” said Chang. “In the dark, it is everyone’s duty to hold the torch.”

Reverend Lazarus Chen, Chang Cheng, Alissa Wahid, and moderator Taiwan Foundation for Democracy Vice President Ketty W. Chen (left to right). Photo Credit: Taiwan Foundation for Democracy

 

Feature photo: 2018 Asia Democracy and Human Rights Award Recipient Gusdurian Network Indonesia National Coordinator Alissa Wahid. Photo Credit: 黃謙賢/Taiwan Foundation for Democracy

TDB Vol. 1 No. 5: Constitutional Interpretation No. 748 Paves the Way for Marriage Equality in Taiwan

TDB Vol. 1 No. 5: Constitutional Interpretation No. 748 Paves the Way for Marriage Equality in Taiwan

Although the ruling by the Council of Grand Justices fails to resolve the dilemma between amending the Civil Code or enacting of a special act, many of the reasons listed by the judges to support their ruling indicate that the judicial system is on the side of progressive social values. Stacy Hsu reports.

 

A large crowd of gay marriage supporters standing anxiously outside the Legislative Yuan on May 24 cheered after Taiwan’s Council of Grand Justices ruled in an unprecedented move that the Civil Code’s prohibition of same-sex marriage is unconstitutional and demanded the law be amended within two years.

The ruling, titled Interpretation No. 748, states that the Civil Code, which currently prevents two individuals of the same gender from creating a permanent union for the committed purpose of managing a life together, is in violation of people’s constitutionally protected freedom of marriage and right to equality.

Article 972 of the Civil Code stipulates that an agreement to marry shall be made by “the male and the female parties” in their own concord.

The ruling accordingly urges concerned authorities to amend or enact laws within two years in accordance with the Interpretation, but allows them to decide in what manner they intend to achieve the equal protection of the freedom of marriage.

As the Interpretation enables homosexual couples to register their marriage should the authorities fail to complete relevant law amendments within the given timeframe, it could pave the way for Taiwan to become the first Asian country to legalize same-sex marriage.

The constitutional interpretation was issued in response to separate requests filed by the Taipei City Government and gay rights advocate Chi Chia-wei (祁家威) in 2015. Chi has sought legal recognition of his union with his partner in the past three decades. His latest attempt, in 2013, was dismissed by the Supreme Administrative Court in September 2014, prompting his request for an interpretation.

Gay rights advocate Chi Chia-wei, who initiated the appeal to the Council of Grand Justices, waves the rainbow flag during the 2016 LGBT Pride parade in Taipei (photo: J. Michael Cole)

The case has attracted tremendous attention both at home and overseas since the Council of Grand Justices held a closely watched hearing on same-sex marriage on March 24 this year.

Supporters of homosexual unions staked their hopes on the Interpretation after the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) administration gave signs it was stalling efforts to legalize same-sex marriage in the Legislative Yuan due to pressure from religious and conservative groups.

Several amendments to the Civil Code to recognize same-sex marriage cleared a legislative committee in late December 2016, but they have yet to be put on the agenda for a plenary review.

The Grand Justices stated that allowing same-sex marriage would not only not affect the rights afforded to heterosexual couples by the Civil Code or alter the existing “social order,” but could also constitute the collective basis for a stable society, as the need and longing to create a permanent, committed union are equally essential to both homosexual and heterosexual individuals.

The delays were also partly due to divided opinions among lawmakers, even within the DPP, on whether to recognize homosexual marriage by amending the Civil Code — which is deemed by conservative opponents as detrimental to the traditional family structure — or enacting a special law, which has been criticized by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) groups as discriminatory.

Although Interpretation No. 748 fails to solve the dilemma between amendment of the Civil Code and enactment of a special act, many of the reasons listed by the Grand Justices to support their ruling today indicate that the judicial system is on the side of progressive social values.

The Grand Justices stated that allowing same-sex marriage would not only not affect the rights afforded to heterosexual couples by the Civil Code or alter the existing “social order,” but could also constitute the collective basis for a stable society, as the need and longing to create a permanent, committed union are equally essential to both homosexual and heterosexual individuals.

The ruling also refutes the myth that homosexuality is reversible, arguing that sexual orientation is an immutable characteristic decided by many contributing factors and that homosexuality is not a disease.

Another argument frequently cited by opponents to same-sex marriage was also dismissed by the Interpretation. It stipulates that since the Civil Code does not make the ability to procreate a prerequisite for a heterosexual marriage, reproduction should not be seen as an essential element of marriage nor used as an excuse to deny homosexual couples their right to marry.

So far the ruling has met with vastly different reactions. Opponents of same-sex marriage have threatened to request another constitutional interpretation or to take the case to the Control Yuan for an investigation, while supporters have expressed their pride in “being Taiwanese.”

Both the Presidential Office and Legislative Yuan Speaker Su Jia-chyuan (蘇嘉全) said they respected the Interpretation, pledging to handle future legislative efforts with a tolerant and understanding attitude. However, as lawmakers from different parties remain divided on how to legalize same-sex marriage following the ruling, the road to achieving marriage equality in Taiwan may still be bumpy.

 

Top photo: J. Michael Cole

No More Articles