Gender Working Group

The second women’s network that had significant influence in promoting gender equality and women’s rights within the implementation of Islamic law in Aceh was the Gender Working Group, known by activists as GWG.

Different from JPUK, GWG applied a clearer structural system, as a result of it being under the Bureau of Women’s Empowerment. The head of the Bureau, Lailisma, automatically became the leader of GWG. She expected all women’s organizations working in Aceh to join GWG, but some local women’s NGOs did not join. They held regular meeting organized by the Bureau office. The head of the Bureau always opened the meeting. On average, the meeting was attended by about 10–12 activists. Interestingly, some of the audience were also male activists. In an interview, Lailisma in fact expected more activists to actively join GWG in order to push their agenda forward into government agenda (interview, Banda Aceh, 14 December 2007).

It was obvious then that there were significant differences between GWG and JPUK. In terms of its members, active members of GWG were mostly younger activists who are staff of new local women’s NGOs, for example, from Beujroh, Rifka An-Nisa, Balai Syura Ureung Inong Aceh, Bungong Jeumpa and Sri Ratu. Many of these activists were in their late twenties and early thirties. Interestingly, these activists mostly knew each other quite well because they came from the same student movement groups, active in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Unlike JPUK, activists from the Jakarta-based NGOs such as Kapal Perempuan and international organizations such as UNIFEM, UNFPA or the World Bank were also involved in GWG activities.

The history behind the establishment of GWG make it look like the perpanjangantangan or ‘extension’ of the bureaucracy. This can be seen for example in how the head of the Bureau attempted to direct the kind of programmes that GWG conducts. If JPUK has demonstrated its ability to influence policy-making, GWG’s activities were more inclined to building grassroots and public awareness on women’s issues. For example, in 2007 and 2008, to celebrate International Women’s Day, GWG organized a long march attended by hundreds of Acehnese men and women. In 2007, the march ended in front of the local parliament building. Activists met with members of local parliament to convey their assessments of the various issues that challenged Acehnese women in post-tsunami and post-conflict Aceh and that needed government attention. In 2007, GWG released a report that summarized their assessment of the problems still confronting Acehnese women in post-tsunami and post-conflict Aceh.

In their meetings, women activists at GWG discussed various problems Acehnese women have to deal with in their lives, including issues that were still considered to be very sensitive in Aceh, such as polygamy, domestic violence and homosexuality. They talked about how difficult it is to be an Acehnese woman nowadays, as they are tasked not only with helping with their children’s homework at night, since their husbands choose to spend their time in local coffee shops and only returning home at midnight, but also they need to support the household. Still, women have to accept the fact that their husbands are taking second wives and also that they are being discriminated against in taking socio-economic and political roles in the public sphere.

Thus, one issue that became the subject of discussion among activists at GWG was polygamy. However, it was interesting to see how activists showed their different views and perspectives on the issue of polygamy. While some activists agreed that polygamy is a form of domestic violence, others rejected the idea that it has to be categorized as domestic violence. The latter argued that Islam does not prohibit polygamy. In all these discussions, women activists at GWG usually referred to the views of Islamic feminists from Jakarta, such as Musdah Mulia. Musdah Mulia, a professor at the State Islamic University Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, works for the Ministry of Religion and is a prominent Muslim woman activist who believes that gender equality is taught in Islam. She has criticized the practice of polygamy, and the use of Islamic texts to justify polygamy (The Jakarta Post 2006).¹²

The many topics that GWG activists were interested in have caused concern to the head of the Bureau and GWG leader, Lailisma.

There was a meeting that the Bureau called to be organized on 29 January 2008. It was two days after hundreds of students of Dayah and traditional Ulama from Dayah organized a mass rally in front of the Grand Baiturrahman Mosque. The rally demanded the dissolution of women’s NGOs in Aceh, on the grounds that women’s NGOs work for Western interests to destroy Islamic values in Aceh and disrupt the implementation of Islamic law. Lailisma saw this movement as a serious threat to the women’s struggle because the Dayah community has strong support in villages across Aceh. Her great concern was the fact that the traditional Dayah community may not allow women’s NGOs and activists to work with villagers across the province. The rejection by conservative Ulama of the activities of women’s movements could jeopardize the agenda of women’s movements and, if this is not dealt with in a careful way, it may create greater resistance within conservative religious communities.

Confronted by this fact, the head of the Bureau along with women activists in Aceh expressed disappointment at the fact that conservative religious communities were still suspicious of the activities of women’s movements. Lailisma told dozen of activists sitting in the meeting room how disappointed she was when learning about such events. She said she immediately contacted several prominent figures, including the Head of the Office of Islamic Sharia, several government officials, a number of members of local parliament and senior women’s activists.

Lailisma also said that the resistance in the community to women activists was also driven by the fact that some of the activists have been too fervent in introducing the idea of gender equality in the training programmes they organized. She therefore reminded women activists at the meeting of the need to be ‘extra cautious’ in disseminating their programmes on issues of gender equality, especially when relating it to religion and local culture. She has pointed out that some activists, in particular those from Jakarta, often do not wear a scarf or jilbab when they reached out to villagers, carried out programmes, and met villagers, which according to many local Acehnese was a breach of the law and against local culture. This, she said, was one of the reasons why the appreciation of the work of women’s NGOs and activists was so minimal among the conservative religious communities. She also referred to foreign NGO activists who came and worked in villages and talked about gender equality without having an adequate understanding of local traditions. To her, introducing the idea of ‘equality’ to a strongly patriarchal community like Aceh must be done in a way that paid attention to the ‘culture of the people’ or ‘memperhatikan budaya masyarakat’.

The head of the Bureau also told a story, as an example. She said she heard from a report, which involved a health-based NGO working in several villages, that its workers talked to Acehnese villagers about female circumcision. They told villagers that circumcision to female babies must not be carried out and explained that there are no health benefits from doing it.¹⁴ Listening to this information, the community was shocked because they had long believed that female circumcision is part of the tradition and part of observing Islamic religious piety. Thus, what they heard easily caused anger among the community. Lailisma said it is this type of activity and information that led many Acehnese to think that the work of NGOs is ‘un-Islamic’ and corrupted Islam as a religion.

After telling this story, the head of the Bureau asked women activists to be very cautious with what they were telling villagers. In addition to that, Lailisma also warned the activists that it is very important for them to not question the implementation of Islamic law as, for her, all Acehnese activists should accept and support the process. In her words, ‘It is a pity if any of the Acehnese women activists still question the implementation of Islamic law’. She said that women activists must reject any accusations that Acehnese women have experienced a setback since the implementation of Islamic law. In light of this, it is obvious that Lailisma, as part of the government bureaucracy, must support the policies of the local government, including the implementation of Islamic law. Thus, any attempt to promote ‘equality’ and women’s rights within the agenda of the Bureau must be framed in terms of Islamic law.

An activist from An-Nisa, a new local women’s NGO, showed her support for Lailisma’s statement, saying that it is important that local women activists in Aceh understand how gender should be defined and how to disseminate the idea of gender equality to a strongly Islamic and patriarchal society. According to her, if women activists and their gender-related programmes aim to create equal social, economic and political opportunities for men and women, then they should be clear what ‘equal’ means in the context of Aceh. She argued that it would be hard, if not impossible, for women activists to achieve their goals if references are made to ‘equality’ as in the West. Any women activist who dreams of totally changing the character of Acehnese women to follow what woman in the West practise should leave Aceh, she said. She further argued that she was strongly against the attitude of some of her fellow activists from outside Aceh and who claimed to be working to advance women’s interests but did not pay attention to sensitive cultural issues such as veiling. She said she understand that many women activists believe that Muslim women have the right to choose either to veil or not because they understand the different interpretations of sharia, but that is not the case for many Acehnese. She argued that many Acehnese men and women still cannot accept a woman who does not cover her hair or who wears dress that is considered to be un-Islamic. Likewise, those who live in the villages have not yet been exposed to Fiqh knowledge as those activists had. Many Acehnese women, especially those who live in the villages, only understand that women are required to cover their hair and to wear a loose dress to cover their aurat, and perceive that it is what Islam requires. Thus, she suggested that her fellow activists should negotiate their own understandings on these matters with those subscribed to by most Acehnese. She said, ‘Even though you disagree with how the Qanun on Muslim dress has been implemented, we still need to pay attention to it if we want society to accept us’. This argument is significant, because, as for many other Muslim women in Indonesia, Acehnese understandings of Islam are mainly based on how Islam has been taught by religious leaders, mostly men. As a result, it becomes difficult to differentiate the ‘real teaching of Islam’ as activists may see it from what is believed to be the local tradition.

Apparently not everyone at that meeting agreed both with the head of the Bureau or the activist whose views I have first described. One activist, the Head of Women’s Studies Center of the Syiah Kuala University, Sri Walni, disagreed with what had been discussed. She said that, to her, it is the task of women activists to introduce the real teachings of Islam. It is the real challenge for activists or NGO workers to change the mindset of the community and the understanding of people in the villages. She further argued that the Acehnese need to be informed that they cannot rely only on the interpretations of Islam and social practices taught to them, because those interpretations and practices that have lived and practised in the society often derive only from local (patriarchal) cultures and not from Islam. To her, the reality that had been mentioned was the background for women activists to work in introducing new understanding to men and women.

From the above discussion, it was clear that women activists in Aceh were struggling to define how they should promote equality, women’s status and women’s rights while facing resistance from the conservative religious community. The different background and exposure among the activists themselves made it even more difficult for them in defining the strategy and approach they should use to achieve their goals.

The difficulty women activists face in challenging the conservative religious community stems, to an extent, from the lack of women activists’ knowledge of Islam itself. This is because most women activists come from secular educational backgrounds, which makes it difficult for them to base their arguments within an Islamic framework. However, there were indications that local women activists have begun to reread the Islamic texts, the Qur’an, Hadith and Fiqh commentaries, and learn from similar movements that have appeared in other Muslim societies and even from what has developed in other provinces in Indonesia (Anwar 2001; Othman 2006).

As in many post-colonial societies, local activists in Aceh as described above were reluctant to acknowledge that their struggle for equality is, to a certain extent, inspired by feminism. Basu (1995, 6), for example, observes that many women in the Third World are uncomfortable with the concept of feminism because of the widespread belief that its inspiration, origins and relevance are ‘Western’ and ‘bourgeois’. She further argues that many women narrowly associate feminism with certain ‘ideologies’, ‘strategies’ and ‘approaches’.

Fitri, an activist from Flower Aceh, an organization well-known for its struggle for human rights during military conflict, denies, however that the struggle for gender equality in Aceh follows feminist ideas (interview, Banda Aceh, 10 March 2007). According to her, feminism is not in line with the teaching of Islam. Fitri herself was not wearing proper jilbab, as she only covered her hair by draping a shawl and let her red-dyed hair fall on her back uncovered. Certainly, she was not the only activist in Aceh who strongly rejects the idea that women’s movements in Aceh are driven by feminism, despite rejecting the way the Islamic law has been enforced.

The Head of the Centre for Gender Studies of Syiah Kuala University, Sri Walni, was aware of this situation, but argued that resistance to outside values arises precisely because some women activists were being too cautious about using terms associated with the ‘Western’. She said that if lay people are critical of the terms ‘gender’ and ‘feminist’ because both are seen as ‘Western’, then women activists should show the Acehnese that ‘gender’ or ‘feminism’ is no different to ‘burgers’, ‘Kentucky Fried Chicken’ or ‘Pizza Hut’, all Western products that have increasingly become popular in Aceh. By saying this, she wanted to assure her colleagues that, as activists, they should not be over-cautious in introducing new understandings that can benefit women.

The meeting at the Women’s Empowerment Bureau’s office took almost two hours and at the end some activists were still not happy with what had been discussed. The head of the Bureau was still trying to demand that activists consider what she had said. When the meeting was over, I saw disappointment in the faces of many young activists. They resented the fact that, in their view, the Bureau had not listened to their concerns, instead wanting to co-opt women’s movements, as they saw it. One activist who sat next to me said, ‘See, I do not know where our movement will go from here’. She seemed to be deeply disappointed by the fact that the activities of women’s movements have to be subject to the approval of the authorities.

There were, however, some interesting developments at GWG in 2008. After my fieldwork finished, the Women’s Empowerment Bureau began the process of transforming to become a government agency. In Indonesia’s bureaucratic system there is a significant difference in terms of the administrative structure and authority between a government bureau and a government agency. The first has limited authority while the latter has wider administrative authority. One of the obvious differences is that a government bureau sits under the administrative structure of the local government, while as an agency it is directly responsible only to the Governor of Aceh. This transformation of the Bureau into an agency was the result of women’s activists’ intensive lobbying. Women activists perceive that given the complexities of gender problems, there is a need for a government agency that has the authority to address problems autonomously. As a government agency, the new institution no longer works under the supervision of the local government secretariat, and will be allocated a larger budget.

The transformation of the Bureau into an agency provides the institution with greater capacity to deal with the complexity of gender issues. It will, for example, have the authority to provide protection to children. In an interview I had with Lailisma, the head of the Bureau in 2007, she said that the transformation will be very helpful because under the current administrative structure her office was only given limited room to initiate policies and allocated a very small budget. In addition, all policies also need to be approved by the Provincial Secretariat. Problems appear as the Provincial Secretariat did not see women’s issues as its priority.

Despite the different perspectives of women activists and the head of the women’s Bureau, women activists (especially at GWG) expected Lailisma to lead the new institution. Compared to other women leaders in Aceh, Lailisma was one of the more moderate government figures and for that reason activists expressed their strong preference for her to fill the new post. Women activists were therefore disappointed when she was not appointed. Instead, Irwandi Yusuf,¹⁵ the Governor of Aceh, on 10 March 2008, assigned Raihan Putri to lead the new government body.¹⁶ This created bewilderment among women activists, especially those who were active members of the GWG, because Raihan,¹⁷ formerly the leader of the Center for Women Studies at the IAIN Ar-Raniry and a lecturer at IAIN, was considered by activists to be very conservative. Raihan had often attacked women activists and accused them of ignoring Aceh’s traditional values and Islam in promoting gender equality. Many local activists were therefore worried that the election of Raihan Putri would create a setback for women’s movements. In an interview before she was elected, Raihan had, for example, expressed her concern at the activities of women’s NGO activists (Banda Aceh, 5 March 2007). She mentioned, for example, that at one event she attended, organized by an NGO, the activist who opened the forum did not greet the meeting with Assalamu’alaikum (peace be upon you), the Islamic greeting, and instead, said, Selamat Pagi. To many Acehnese, including her, it is important that people greet each other with Assalamu’alaikum. This incident strengthened her argument that some activists ignore Islam and local traditional values and have their agenda of changing Acehnese culture. One activist told me that one of the reasons for the appointment of Raihan Putri over Lailisma was based on the answer she gave to a question asked by the governor during the interview process (interview, Banda Aceh, 7 June 2008). Both were asked about their views on polygamous marriage. It was circulated among activists that Raihan Putri said she accepts polygamy and that she understands Islam allows polygamous marriage. A different answer was, however, given by Lailisma. She said Islam inherently prohibits polygamous marriage and that the practice of polygamy disadvantages women.

In 2009, GWG has ended its affiliation with the Government Agency for Women and Children’s Protection. Raihan said there are too many differences in how GWG and her office view women’s issues in Aceh. According to her, one of the characteristics of women’s empowerment programmes in Aceh is that they need to be in accordance with Islamic law so that gender empowerment advocacy efforts must focus on creating Qanun that are gender-responsive based on Islam (interview, Banda Aceh, 27 January 2007). During my visit in June 2009, Raihan criticized some activists and women’s NGOs in Aceh for not paying attention to the special status of Aceh, that is, the application of Islamic law. She said that her agency has been trying to ensure that it advocates an ‘Islamic’ gender mainstreaming programme.

In 2008, soon after the agency was established, it published a book entitled Relasi Gender Dalam Masyarakat Aceh (Perspektif Islam) (Gender Relations in Acehnese Society (Islamic Perspective)). The book was written by Raihan herself, who also has a Master’s degree in Education from IAIN Ar-Raniry. The book explores several Qur’anic verses that outline how Islam guarantees equality between men and women and assigns the respective roles of men and women. In its preface, Raihan wrote that the book can be used as a reference in understanding ‘gender’, which has become increasingly popular among the Acehnese. She said, ‘gender’ in Aceh has to be understood within the framework of syari’at, which means that gender relations carry with them both the concepts of ‘equality’ and that of ‘differences’ among men and women. She wrote, ‘Islam strongly opposes Western principles of gender that advocate “free for all action”’.