
Part of an ongoing article series on Indonesia’s regional elections 2024.
Introduction
Indonesia’s recently concluded regional head elections revealed a significant yet underexplored phenomenon: The participation of reformed terrorists, often dubbed as “credible voices”, in the democratic process.
For individuals who once opposed Pancasila and democracy, this marks a profound shift. It also carries far-reaching implications for Indonesia’s democratic consolidation and deradicalisation efforts.
Based on an exclusive interview with reformed terrorists, this piece highlights their participation in the elections, evolving views on Pancasila, aspirations for a democratic system and perspectives on political Islam, highlighting the challenges as well as opportunities of their sociopolitical integration.
Evolving Views
Radical and terrorist groups in Indonesia, such as Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) and Jamaah Ansharut Daulah (JAD), have long condemned democracy and Pancasila as un-Islamic, advocating instead for a sharia-guided Islamic caliphate as an alternative.
These groups view democracy as a concept imposed by Islam’s enemies – the West – and perceive Pancasila as incompatible with their interpretation of Islam, owing to its pluralistic and inclusive principles.
Figures like Aman Abdurrahman, an Indonesian Daesh ideologue, have labelled the Indonesian government as kufr (infidel) and thagut (tyrannical), labelling Muslims who support democracy or Pancasila as equally guilty of kufr. This opposition often leads to violence, particularly during elections, as exemplified by the arrest of suspected terrorists months before last year’s presidential election.
For some, however, this rejection of democracy and Pancasila has begun to shift. Reformed terrorists, through deradicalisation programmes in prison and community engagement, have transitioned from staunch opposition to active participation in democratic processes.
This is consistent with Walter Lippmann’s pseudo-environment concept, which shows how people act based on narratives and cultural influences, not reality. These radical individuals have stopped opposing democracy once they are placed in a community that challenged their previous beliefs with alternative narratives, ones that promote democratic values and moderate Islamic teachings.
After their release from prison, reformed terrorists now view democratic participation not as a betrayal of their faith but as a way to contribute positively to society. The discussion below provides some examples.
Examples from West Java
According to the National Counterterrorism Agency, as of April 2024, Indonesia is home to 2,059 reformed terrorists, approximately 43% of whom have either been conditionally released or pledged allegiance to the state (abandoned their radical views).
In the lead-up to the 2024 regional elections, several political candidates sought their support, recognising their symbolic and strategic influence.
Munir Kartono, a reformed terrorist and credible voice from West Java, shared that a regent (bupati) candidate approached him during the campaign, seeking to leverage his influence within a community that includes nearly 50 reformed terrorists. While Munir declined to endorse a specific candidate, he actively promoted peaceful and successful elections.
Once influenced by Daesh-JAD narratives, Munir’s perspective shifted thanks to the deradicalisation programmes he participated in. These programmes introduced him to alternative narratives and facilitated intensive engagements with figures such as academics and religious leaders, broadening his understanding of Pancasila and democracy.
Though previously an opponent of democracy, Munir is now part and parcel of the nation’s democratic process. He views events like regional elections as opportunities to contribute to the society. Munir now believes that democracy, as a concept, should not be conflated with its flawed implementation, asserting that if problems arise, the actions of individuals, not the concept itself, are to blame.
Even now, Munir acknowledges that while he has embraced Pancasila and democracy, he remains critical of contesting election candidates. He carefully evaluates their campaign promises and takes into consideration aspects such as their appearance, style and Islamic identity—although the latter is no longer a dominant factor in his decision-making process.
Perspective from East Java
Arif Budi Setyawan, a credible voice and former JI affiliate from East Java, has had the same experience.
Like Munir, he was approached by political candidates, including a regent candidate and someone running for the Regional People’s Representative Council. He was even invited to join a candidate’s campaign team – though he was later snubbed.
Arif explained that his initial rejection of Pancasila and democracy stemmed from his perception that these systems are corrupt and flawed. This is a demonstration of Lippmann’s stereotype concept, whereby people use their cognitive shortcuts (or simplified reasoning) to simplify complex realities into fixed ideas (or rigid assumptions).
In Arif’s mind, radical narratives previously reduced democracy into symbols of corruption and un-Islamic governance, reinforcing his opposition and discouraging participation in democratic processes.
However, deradicalisation programmes challenged and dismantled these stereotypes. Arif came to see democracy as distinct from its flawed practitioners, recognising it as a framework that, when aligned with Pancasila, could benefit both Muslims and the broader community. He believed that adhering to Pancasila helps Muslims achieve their goals and aspirations.
Arif views regional elections as equally critical as presidential elections due to their localised impact. He believes regional leaders’ work and promises can be more closely monitored, perceiving voting as an ikhtiar (effort) towards a better future for his religion.
“If the candidate doesn’t deliver, it’s not our fault—we’ve done our part. The rest is on them,” according to him.
Arif prioritises realistic campaign promises and proven track records when selecting candidates, rejecting superficial qualities or overly idealistic agendas. This reflects a significant departure from the radical stereotypes he once held, as he now evaluates candidates with a more nuanced understanding of democracy’s potential to drive meaningful change.
His emphasis on candidates’ knowledge, coupled with guidance from respected ulama, reflects his reformed approach to democratic participation, free from the oversimplifications that previously shaped his worldview.
Symbols and Associations
As the majority religion in Indonesia, Islam has significantly influenced the country’s politics since before independence in 1945. Consequently, the adoption of religious symbols and associations in campaigns continues to be a prominent feature of Indonesian politics, particularly during elections at both national and regional levels.
For instance, candidates who utilise religious symbols, such as female candidates wearing hijab, tend to receive more significant support from Muslim voters compared to those who do not.
Like Islam in politics, radical Islamist groups have also been a recurring presence throughout Indonesia’s sociopolitical history, from the Darul Islam movement in 1948 to the emergence of terrorist groups like JI in 1993 and JAD in 2015. The recent disbandment of JI in June 2024 raises the possibility that its members may become more active in formal political processes.
However, reformed terrorists like Munir and Arif view political Islam in Indonesia as far from ideal, both before and after their transformation. As shown above, they acknowledge the gap between the ideals of political Islam and its practical implementation in the country.
Munir, for instance, observes that political Islam in his regional community remains closely tied to identity, be it Islamist or not. Yet, he believes that individuals can embrace multiple identities rather than being confined to a singular one, suggesting that one can be both an Islamist and a nationalist simultaneously.
In the context of regional elections, Munir expressed that while he does not criticise voters who base their choices on religious preferences, he emphasises that these preferences must not lead to violence or manipulation of religious leaders (ulama and kyai) for political gain. Overall, he believes that Indonesian political Islam, in its current form, falls short of embodying true Islamic values and integrity, often fostering division instead of unity.
In addition, Arif similarly highlights religious leaders’ significant influence in regional politics, particularly in areas like East Java, where the Nahdliyin culture remains strong. He observes that politicians often leverage religious leaders and pesantren owners with large followings to shape voter preferences, highlighting their utilisation of religious symbols and associations.
The bottom line is that both Munir and Arif are concerned with the “exploitation” of religious figures as political tools. This sentiment reflects broader issues in Indonesia’s national and regional elections, where the interplay of faith and politics compromises the integrity of both.
Democratic Vision
Overall, despite their critiques, Munir and Arif emphasise the importance of political participation and the role of religious identity in shaping voters’ choices, especially in regional elections. Having once held radical views, they now stress the importance of democratic participation, such as in elections, while critically engaging with political Islam, reflecting their transformation as reformed individuals.
Both envision a future where Indonesia’s politics matures, realising its democratic ideals guided by the principles of Pancasila and a genuine commitment to public welfare. They hope for national and regional leaders who actively listen to public aspirations and work to curb money politics, recognising its corrosive impact on the very democracy they have painstakingly come to trust. In the end, the participation of reformed terrorists in Indonesia’s regional elections symbolises a broader ideological shift and a reconciliation between faith and democracy. It also indicates the success of deradicalisation programmes in Indonesia, offering hope for a more inclusive and resilient democratic future.