•  
  •  
 

Abstract

The notion of cultural relativism has always been a fundamental challenge to upholding human rights values, especially regarding gender mainstreaming and the equality of both sexes. In this sense, there is a view that cross-cultural moral values are not acceptable given thecultural traits that produce their own modes of thinking and ideology. It is thus understandable that Article 5(a) of the Women’s Convention (i.e.,The Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women), which is the only provision in international law that seeks to modify cultures that prejudice women, will deal with constant hurdles in countries like Indonesia that firmly embrace cultural values. This is true even though a signal of commitment has been shown by ratification because the signal itself makes not reservation to the obligations stipulated therein. However, these commitments remain highly questionable as discriminatory laws remain in force across the country from the national to the local level and new discriminatory regulations continue to be issued. The Committee of Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) has reminded Indonesia at some occasion that cultural and religious values must not undermine the universality of women’s rights. Nevertheless, up until now, the authorities have always failed to create a clear timeframe for revision of laws that institutionalize negative stereotypes against women. Taking this perspective into account, this paper will explore the reasons for and indicators of Indonesia’s failure to implement Article 5(a) to modify cultural values and stereotypes against women in its legal system and instruments. In doing so, this paper will also dig deeper into Indonesia’s barriers to implementing its state obligations under this article.

Bahasa Abstract

Gagasan relativisme budaya selalu menjadi tantangan mendasar untuk menegakkan nilai-nilai hak asasi manusia, terutama mengenai pengarusutamaan gender dan kesetaraan kedua jenis kelamin. Dalam pengertian ini, ada pandangan bahwa nilai-nilai moral lintas budaya tidak dapat diterima mengingat ciri-ciri budaya yang menghasilkan cara berpikir dan ideologi mereka sendiri. Dengan demikian dapat dimengerti bahwa Pasal 5(a) Konvensi Perempuan (yaitu, Konvensi Penghapusan Segala Bentuk Diskriminasi Terhadap Perempuan), yang merupakan satu-satunya ketentuan dalam hukum internasional yang berusaha mengubah budaya yang merugikan perempuan, akan menangani dengan rintangan konstan di negara-negara seperti Indonesia yang memegang teguh nilai-nilai budaya. Hal ini benar meskipun suatu isyarat komitmen telah ditunjukkan oleh ratifikasi karena isyarat itu sendiri tidak membuat reservasi terhadap kewajiban-kewajiban yang diatur di dalamnya. Namun, komitmen ini tetap sangat dipertanyakan karena undang-undang diskriminatif tetap berlaku di seluruh negeri dari tingkat nasional hingga lokal dan peraturan baru yang diskriminatif terus dikeluarkan. Komite Penghapusan Diskriminasi Terhadap Perempuan (CEDAW) telah mengingatkan Indonesia pada beberapa kesempatan bahwa nilai-nilai budaya dan agama tidak boleh merusak universalitas hak-hak perempuan. Namun demikian, hingga saat ini, pihak berwenang selalu gagal membuat kerangka waktu yang jelas untuk revisi undang-undang yang melembagakan stereotip negatif terhadap perempuan. Mempertimbangkan perspektif ini, makalah ini akan mengeksplorasi alasan dan indikator kegagalan Indonesia dalam menerapkan Pasal 5(a) untuk mengubah nilai-nilai budaya dan stereotip terhadap perempuan dalam sistem dan instrumen hukumnya. Dengan demikian, makalah ini juga akan menggali lebih dalam hambatan Indonesia dalam melaksanakan kewajiban negara berdasarkan artikel ini.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY Books, Journals, Articles · Adriaan Bedner & Stijn van Huis, A plurality of Marriage Law, Utrecht Law Review, Vol.6, 2010 · Anwar Nasution, Government Decentralization Program in Indonesia, Asian Development Bank Institute, Tokyo, 2016 · Amnesty International, Indonesia Briefing to The UN Committee on The Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, London 2012 · Amnesty International, Left Without Choice: Barriers to Reproductive Health in Indonesia Executive Summary, Amnesty International Publication: London, 2010 · Arskal Salim, Dynamic Legal Pluralism in Indonesia: The Shift in Plural Legal Order in Contemporary Aceh, Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology Working Papers, Halle, Germany, 2009 · CEDAW Working Group of Indonesia (CWGI) and Amnesty International, Open Letter on Indonesia’s Lack of Progress in Implementing Recommendations of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, Jakarta, 2013 · Chiongson, et. al, Role of Law and Justice in Achieving Gender Equality, World Bank Development Report, 2012. · Christopher Joyner, and John Dettling, Bridging the Cultural Chasm: Cultural Relativism and Future of International Law, California Western International Law Journal, Vol 20, 1989 · Damos Dumoli Agusman, Treaties Under Indonesian Law, in Jurnal Opinio Juris Vol. 17, January-April 2015 · Elene G Mountis, Cultural Relativity and Universalism: Reevaluating Gender Rights in a Multicultural Context, Penn State Law Review: Vol. 15: No. 1, Article 3 · Elizabeth Sepper, Confronting The “Sacred and Unchangeable”: The Obligation to Modify Cultural Patterns Under the Women’s Discrimination Treaty, University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law, Vol. 30, Iss. 2, 2014 · Fons Coomans, et. al, Methods in Human Rights Research, Intersentia, AntwerpOxford-Poland, 2009 · Francis Raday, Culture, Religion, and CEDAW’s Article 5(a), 2003 · Fred L Pincus, Readings for Diversity and Social Justice. Edited by Maurianne Adams, et. al., New York, 2000. · Graeme Hugo, The International Handbook of the Demography of Race and EthnicityVolume 4 of the series International Handbooks of Population, Springer, 2010. · Human Rights Commission’s Discussion Paper, A Fair Go for All: Addressing Structural Discrimination in Public Services, 2012 · Ilias Bantekas and Lutz Oette, International Human Rights Law and Practice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2016. ~ 24 ~ MAXWELL R. ABBOTT Volume 9 Number 1 , January - April 2019 ~ INDONESIA Law Review · Ingrid Westendorp, Women’s Convention turned 30, Intersensia, CambrideAntwerp-Poland, 2012 · Intan Paramadhita, Cultural Identity and Female Representation in Indonesian Women’s Magazine, Wacana Vol 3, Universitas Indonesia, 2003. · Leigh Pasqual, Time for Action: Implementing CEDAW in Southeast Asia, United Nation Development Fund for Women, Thailand, 2009 · Marsha A. Freeman et. Al (ed) The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women: A Commentary, Oxford University Press, 2011 · Pranab Bardhan, Decentralization of Governance and Development, Journal of Economic Perspective, University California Berkeley, California, 2002. · Rikki Holtmaat, Towards Different Law and Public Policy: The significance of Article 5a cedaw for the elimination of structural gender discrimination: Research Undertaken for the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment in the Netherlands, 2004 · Rikki Holtmaat, The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women: A Commentary, Oxford University Press, 2011 · Rikkki Holtmaat and J Naber, Women’s Human Rights and Culture: From Deadlock to Dialogue, 2010. · Robin Bush, Regional ‘Sharia’ Regulations in Indonesia: Anomaly or Symptom?,Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2008. · Sally Engle Merry, Legal Pluralism, Law and Society Review, Vol. 22, no.5, 1988 · Simon Butt, Regional Autonomy, and Legal Disorder: The Proliferation of Local Laws in Indonesia, Sidney Law Review, 2010. · Simon Butt, The Position of International Law Within The Indonesian Legal System, Emory International Law Review. Vol.28, 2014. · Stijn Van Huis, Islamic Courts and Women’s Divorce Rights in Indonesia: The Cases of Cianjur and Bulukumba, Leiden University Repository, 2015. · The New York Times, As Shariah Experiment Becomes a Model, Indonesia’s Secular Face Slips, 16 January 2017. · The Asia Foundation, Religious Courts: Improving Women’s Access to Justice in Indonesia, 2013. · The New York Times, As Shariah Experiment Becomes a Model, Indonesia’s Secular Face Slips, 16 January 2017. · The National Commission on Violence against Women, In the Name of Regional Autonomy: The Institutionalisation of Discrimination in Indonesia: A Monitoring Report by The National Commission on Violence Against Women’s Constitutional Rights in 16 Districts/Municipalities in 7 Provinces, Jakarta, 2010. · Ward Berenschot and Adriaan Bedner, An Introduction to Indonesia’s Struggle to Make the Law Work for Everyone, KITLV, HuMa, VVI Leiden University, Epistema Institute, Jakarta, 2013. · Yew Feng Hui. Ed, Rachel Rinaldo, Encountering Islam: The Politics of Religious Identities in Southeast Asia, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore, 2013. EliMination of CultuRE-BasEd disCRiMination against WoMEn ~ 25 ~ Volume 9 Number 1 , January - April 2019 ~ INDONESIA Law Review Laws, Regulations, Conventions, General Recommendations, State Reports · Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (Women’s Convention) · CO India CEDAW/C/IND/CO/3(2007) · CO Indonesia CEDAW/C/EST/IDN/CO/5(2007) · CO Fiji Islands, A/57/38, 26th Session (2002). · CO Ireland, A/54/38, 21st Session (1999) · CEDAW/C/IDN/CO/5 · CEDAW/C/IDN/CO/6-7 · CEDAW/C/BOT/CO/3 · CEDAW/C/TZA/CO/6 · CEDAW/C/IDN/2-3 · CEDAW/C/IDN/CO/6-7/R.1 · CEDAW A/55/38 Jordan 2000 · CEDAW A/56/38 Guinea 2001 · CEDAW A/56/38 Singapore 2001 · CEDAW/C/NER/CO/2 NIGER · CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.10 · Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, A/66/254, 2011 · General Comment No. 28 (the Core Obligations of States Parties under Article 2 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women). · General Recommendation no 19 (Violence Against Women). · General Recommendation no 21 (Equality in Marriage and Family Relations). · General Recommendation no 24 (Women and Health). · Law no 48 of 2009 on Judicial Power (Undang-Undang Kekuasaan Kehakiman). · Law no 12 of 2011 on Law-Making (Undang-Undang Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan). · Law no 24 of 2000 on International Agreement (Undang-Undang Perjanjian Internasional). · law no 7 of 1982 on Ratification of Convention on the Eliminationof all Forms Of Discrimination Against Women (Pengesahan konvensi mengenai penghapusan segala bentuk Diskiriminasi terhadap wanita). · Law no 52 of 2009 on Population and Family Development Law (UndangUndang nomor 52 tahun 2009 tentang Perkembangan dan Kependudukan Keluarga). · Government Nangroe Aceh Darussalam Instruction no 02/INSTR/2014 on Café and Internet Service Regulation (Instruksi Gubernur Nangroe Aceh Darssalam tentang Penertiban Café dan Layanan Internet). ~ 26 ~ MAXWELL R. ABBOTT Volume 9 Number 1 , January - April 2019 ~ INDONESIA Law Review Internet Website · http://cedaw-in-action.org/en/indonesia/,accessed on 25 November 2017. · http://www.refworld.org/pdfid/521c4f954.pdf,accessed on 25 November 2017. · https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=IND&mtdsg_no=IV8&chapter=4&lang=en,accessed on 27th November 2017. · http://www.indexmundi.com/indonesia/demographics_profile.html,accessed on 28th November 2017. · http://factsanddetails.com/indonesia/People_and_Life/sub6_2d/entry-3989. html, accessed on 29th of November 2017.

Download

Share

COinS