RESTRICTIONS OF THE RIGHTS OF FREEDOM OF RELIGIONS: COMPARISON OF LAW BETWEEN INDONESIA AND GERMANY

IF 0.1 Q4 LAW Indonesia Law Review Pub Date : 2018-12-31 DOI:10.15742/ILREV.V8N3.510
A. Saraswati, Setiawan Wicaksono, Ranitya Ganindha, M. C. Hidayat
{"title":"RESTRICTIONS OF THE RIGHTS OF FREEDOM OF RELIGIONS: COMPARISON OF LAW BETWEEN INDONESIA AND GERMANY","authors":"A. Saraswati, Setiawan Wicaksono, Ranitya Ganindha, M. C. Hidayat","doi":"10.15742/ILREV.V8N3.510","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The rights of freedom of religion and beliefs are constitutionally guaranteed, both in Indonesia and Germany. However, the right of freedom of religion is not unlimited. This paper aims to identify and analyze (1) Why there is the right of freedom of religion is restricted; (2) What product of the law is that regulates restriction on the right of freedom of religion in Indonesia and Germany; and (3) What purpose do Indonesia and Germany have in restricting the right of freedom of religion? This paper uses a normative research method that references legislation and takes a historical and comparative approach. The restriction of freedom of religion exists to protect the fundamental right or freedoms for every individual to avoid chaos. The restrictions on freedom of religion in the Indonesian Constitution are stated in Article 28 of the 1945 Constitution; Article 73 of Law No. 39 Year 1999; Article 18 of Law No. 12 Year 2005; and in PNPS No. 1 Year 1965. While Germany does not set explicit restrictions, the environment comes from the level of the Act: namely, Article 166–167 of the Criminal Code. In Indonesia, public order is defined as conformity of justice in consideration of morality, religious values, and security in a democratic society. Meanwhile, Germany defines public order as the protection of society based on the principles of balance and tolerance, in that individual freedoms must be balanced with other people’s fundamental rights, although this also means that a person’s idea of divinity must be excluded.","PeriodicalId":13484,"journal":{"name":"Indonesia Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indonesia Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15742/ILREV.V8N3.510","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The rights of freedom of religion and beliefs are constitutionally guaranteed, both in Indonesia and Germany. However, the right of freedom of religion is not unlimited. This paper aims to identify and analyze (1) Why there is the right of freedom of religion is restricted; (2) What product of the law is that regulates restriction on the right of freedom of religion in Indonesia and Germany; and (3) What purpose do Indonesia and Germany have in restricting the right of freedom of religion? This paper uses a normative research method that references legislation and takes a historical and comparative approach. The restriction of freedom of religion exists to protect the fundamental right or freedoms for every individual to avoid chaos. The restrictions on freedom of religion in the Indonesian Constitution are stated in Article 28 of the 1945 Constitution; Article 73 of Law No. 39 Year 1999; Article 18 of Law No. 12 Year 2005; and in PNPS No. 1 Year 1965. While Germany does not set explicit restrictions, the environment comes from the level of the Act: namely, Article 166–167 of the Criminal Code. In Indonesia, public order is defined as conformity of justice in consideration of morality, religious values, and security in a democratic society. Meanwhile, Germany defines public order as the protection of society based on the principles of balance and tolerance, in that individual freedoms must be balanced with other people’s fundamental rights, although this also means that a person’s idea of divinity must be excluded.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
宗教自由权利的限制:印尼与德国的法律比较
宗教和信仰自由的权利在印度尼西亚和德国都受到宪法的保障。然而,宗教自由的权利并不是无限的。本文旨在识别和分析:(1)宗教自由权利受到限制的原因;(2)印尼和德国规定限制宗教自由权利的法律是什么产物?(3)印尼和德国限制宗教自由权的目的是什么?本文采用借鉴立法的规范研究方法,采取历史与比较的研究方法。限制宗教自由的存在是为了保护每个人的基本权利或自由,避免混乱。1945年《宪法》第28条规定了《印度尼西亚宪法》对宗教自由的限制;1999年第39号法律第73条;2005年第12号法律第十八条;以及1965年PNPS第1期。虽然德国没有明确的限制,但环境来自法律层面:即《刑法》第166-167条。在印度尼西亚,公共秩序被定义为在民主社会中考虑到道德、宗教价值观和安全的正义的一致性。同时,德国将公共秩序定义为基于平衡和宽容原则的对社会的保护,因为个人自由必须与他人的基本权利相平衡,尽管这也意味着必须排除个人的神性观念。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Limiting the Legality of Determining Suspects in Indonesia Pre-Trial System Understanding the Role of Consent in Data Protection Regime: How Indonesia Can Learn From the GDPR Simple, Speedy, and Low Cost Trial : A Panacea For Corruption in Indonesia? THE ADMISSIBILITY OF EARTH OBSERVATION DATA IN LEGAL PROCEEDINGS: A CLOSER LOOK TOWARDS DATA IMAGING CRIMINISTRATIVE LAW: DEVELOPMENTS AND CHALLENGES IN INDONESIA
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1