<![CDATA[Indonesia has an extensive regulatory framework for governing religious life, yet allegations of religious deviance continue to expose a tension between state regulation, social stability, and the constitutional protection of freedom of religion or belief. This article examines Indonesia from 2000 to 2020 and shows that, despite having legal and administrative tools, the government’s inconsistent application of them functions as a deliberate form of strategic ambiguity. Using a qualitative design, the study combines document analysis of key regulations and policy instruments with comparative case analysis of seven selected cases of groups labelled aliran sesat (lit. “deviant streams”) between 2000 and 2020. The data, including fatwas issued by the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI), government regulations, human rights reports, media chronologies, and scholarly literature, are analysed through thematic coding informed by Dunn’s policy framework and Blumer’s symbolic interactionism. The analysis identifies four recurring policy patterns: (1) selective law enforcement based on perceived social impact; (2) reactive rather than proactive government response; (3) selective adoption of MUI recommendations or fatwas; and (4) asymmetrical protection of rights. These patterns generate legal uncertainty and unequal protection, disproportionately affecting minority groups whose freedom of religion or belief is constitutionally guaranteed. The article argues that policy ambiguity is not merely an implementation failure, but a strategic governance pattern produced by competing imperatives of public order, majoritarian religious authority, and rights commitments. It recommends clearer procedural thresholds, rights-based early response mechanisms, and transparent institutional accountability in handling allegations of religious deviance, offering insights for the broader study of religion, society, and minority rights in plural contexts such as Indonesia.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
