December 20, 2024
JAKARTA – The world is working hard to halt femicide, or the murder of women based on prejudice against their bodies, sexuality or social/gender roles that are seen as not in line with men’s desires. This practice is in principle the same as genocide, killing of a certain (minority) ethnic group based on ethnic prejudice against them.
One femicide practice that is truly brutal but difficult to rouse public awareness about is female circumcision. This mutilation is often carried out silently as a cultural practice intertwined with religious views.
According to the Survey of Women’s Life Experience (SPHPN) in 2024, female circumcision was still practiced by 46.3 percent of those surveyed in Indonesia. Previously, the nationwide Basic Health Research (Riskesdas) put together by Statistics Indonesia in 2013 found that circumcision was used on 52 percent of females, from babies to adults.
Fortunately, on the policy level, the government has shown extraordinary and commendable action. Government Regulation No. 28/2024 has banned the practice of mutilation or cutting female genitals.
The SPHPN survey also noted that the main motive behind performing circumcision is religious teachings that have been absorbed into traditions passed down from generation to generation.
The government is also firm about this: freedom of religion and belief is protected by the law. At the same time, Indonesia has also been very firm that violence against women is a violation of human rights and must be prohibited.
The dilemma between protecting freedom of belief and preventing human rights violations is often faced by countries that are championing democracy.
In the Netherlands, a controversy sparked after newspaper De Volkrant published a report on Dec. 12 that the As-Soennah Mosque in the Hague had disclosed semi-publicly (through a webinar in 2018) that female circumcision is “recommendable”. The mosque reasoned that several hadiths mention that circumcision is sunna, and therefore good and recommended. As-Soennah is well known as an ultra-conservative mosque.
It led to a court case. The Raad van State, the country’s highest administrative court, ruled that the mosque has the right to hold such an opinion, based on the argument of freedom of religion. Therefore, the city does not have the right to interfere with religious belief. On the other hand, the Dutch government prohibits medical procedures being performed outside authorized healthcare institutions.
A local women’s NGO in the Hague, “Femmes for Freedom”, stated their disappointment over the decision, saying that the court was more concerned with defending religious freedom than considering the integrity of women’s bodies.
Indonesia still has much work to do to address this dangerous practice. Efforts continue to be made through multiple approaches, such as prohibiting healthcare workers from performing it, and having local community health centers (Puskesmas) reach out to midwives to encourage them to stop the practice.
I am currently conducting research using an ethnographic approach on the question of why people still want to circumcise their daughters, as well as changes in attitudes toward female circumcision. As part of this research, I study rulings or fatwas from four religious institutions: Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), Muhammadiyah, the Indonesian Ulama Council (MUI) and Indonesian Women’s Ulama Congress (KUPI). KUPI was included because it is a religious organization that places special attention on issues related to gender and religion. I explored further through in-depth interviews with their leaders.
Interestingly, all four of these institutions agree that the procedure is prohibited. This is a great relief. The difference lies in the emphasis in terms of religious law.
Muhammadiyah affirmed that female circumcision is not recommended. First, because the hadith used as the legal basis are weak; second, because the Prophet himself never recommended it or had it done to his daughters.
NU and MUI share the position that based on the hadith that they use as a reference, female circumcision cannot be prohibited. However, if it turns out that the procedure gives rise to damage (mudarat) then the state is obliged to ensure that it is not harmful.
In contrast, KUPI conducted a very strict critique of the references and concluded that female circumcision is haram. It posits that circumcision on men is very different to that on women. Female circumcision, it said, has unclear standards and is very risky since it involves a vital organ.
All four religious organizations agree that maslahah or well-being is the highest ethical standard in any action based on religious views.
Thus, both those who employ strictly textualist arguments and those who process the texts using the principles of ushul fiqh reach the same conclusion.
Of course, there are groups who believe that female circumcision is sunna, meaning it must be done since it will bring an advantage, as well as being a widespread tradition in many regions such as Gorontalo, South Sulawesi, West Nusa Tenggara and Banten.
In many issues related to religion as related to health and population, the Indonesian government has designated itself the party with authority. Indonesia has produced policies demonstrating the government’s authority, such as when religious leaders agreed that family planning is allowed as long as it does not violate religious norms. Using the concept of emergency that is accepted as a standard in Islamic law, family planning has been accepted.
As parties claiming to hold authority in the issue of female circumcision, religious organizations, which are generally led by men, often persist in opinions according to their own perspectives and interests as patriarchs.
However, a more general view in the moderate and more mature style of Islam, which grants interpretive space for women, confirms that the main ethics in the structure of legal thinking considering maslahah must consider the views and experiences of women.
Therefore, the standard of well-being to determine the benefits of female circumcision must also include the psychological experience and lived reality of women.
Thus, the benchmarks to assess the harmfulness of female circumcision are not limited to the physical aspect but also include the psychological, social, mental and spiritual aspects. Including the experience and knowledge of women in the considerations for prohibition of female circumcision will provide valid authority in interpreting the benefits of female circumcision. And this is what most Islamic religious organizations in Indonesia have done.