Work for most part unaffected in country with world’s largest Muslim population

For hundreds of millions of Muslims, this week marks the start of Ramadan, the Islamic month of fasting and praying. In some Middle Eastern countries, government and business virtually shut down during Ramadan, but in Indonesia, with the world’s largest Muslim population, work for the most part goes on unaffected.  

On Wednesday, the first day of Ramadan, loudspeakers broadcast the call to prayer at the Sunda Kelapa mosque in Jakarta, but the scene is quieter than usual.

The food vendors and merchants who usually line the entrance to the mosque are gone. There is little demand for their products during the Islamic holy month, when Muslims focus on fasting and spiritual introspection.

Hananto Prasetyo says Ramadan is special time for Muslims. He says in this one month they evaluate and test themselves, from desire and other forbidden things, to get closer to God.

Away from the mosques, few concessions are made to accommodate the sacrifice Muslims in Indonesia make during Ramadan.

Some Muslim majority countries basically shut down for the month to allow people to rest and pray. History professor Azyumardi Azra at the State Islamic University says that is not the case in Indonesia.

“In the few early days of Ramadan of course life is getting slower a bit for a few days, but, and then probably on Monday next week life is getting back to normal,” said Asra.  “It is different from fasting in Ramadan in many Middle Eastern countries because in many Middle Eastern countries people are awake all night and then they sleep all day.”

Indonesian Muslims like Edi Hadiman must perform their religious obligations in addition to regular jobs. And he says that is the way it should be.  He says it is a test for Muslims, but religious people should remember that it is difficult to get into heaven.

There are some restrictions on businesses in Indonesia. Most bars and nightclubs must either shut down or stop selling alcohol.

Some strict Muslim groups, such as the Islamic Defense Front or FPI, have tried to enforce these restrictions in the past by raiding bars and restaurants.

Azra says these groups are supported by authorities who want to been seen as standing up for Islamic values.

“They have some kind of collaboration. In fact now they ask FPI and other groups to help the police. So they use them actually. The police use them. So I think this is not appropriate, you know you cannot use this group as supporting police,” Azra added.  “The police should enforce law and order without involving this kind of group.”

But he says for the vast majority of Indonesians observing Ramadan is personal choice that reinforces Islamic values of tolerance and peace.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to block a lawsuit against a former prime minister of Somalia over claims that he oversaw killings and torture in his home country. The high court said it will allow lawsuits against Mohamed Ali Samantar to go forward despite his claims of immunity under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. However, the court warned that the U.S. District Court will have to decide whether Samantar can access other claims of immunity that could stop the trial.

The court’s decision could have broad foreign policy implications. Allowing lawsuits against former foreign officials living in the United States could increase the likelihood that U.S. officials would be sued in overseas courts. A rise in the number of U.S. lawsuits dealing with past actions in foreign countries could also affect the United States’ current ties with those countries.

Omar Jamal, the first secretary of the Somali mission at the United Nations, said the court’s decision could result in “baseless” lawsuits that “probably will jam the courts.”

“The court has spoken, and therefore we have to live with that,” he said in a statement.

Samantar was defence minister and prime minister of Somalia in the 1980s and early 1990s under dictator Siad Barre.

He now lives in Virginia. He is being sued under the Torture Victim Protection Act by Somalis living in the United States who were subjected to persecution in the 1980s. They say Samantar was in charge of military forces that tortured, killed or detained them or members of their families.

A federal judge had thrown out the lawsuits against Samantar, saying he is entitled to diplomatic immunity under the FSIA. That law says “a foreign state shall be immune from the jurisdiction” of federal and state courts in most lawsuits. The federal judge said that protection extends to “an individual acting in his official capacity on behalf of a foreign state.”

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, saying that immunity does not extend to individuals, only to foreign states and their agencies.

The high court upheld that ruling.

“There is nothing to suggest we should read ‘foreign state’ …to include an official acting on behalf of the foreign state, and much to indicate that this meaning was not what Congress enacted,” said retiring Justice John Paul Stevens, writing the unanimous judgment for the court. “The text does not foreclose petitioner’s reading, but it supports the view of respondents and the United States that the Act does not address an official’s claim to immunity.”

The court said its decision does not mean that the lawsuit against Samantar automatically goes forward.

“Whether petitioner may be entitled to immunity under the common law, and whether he may have other valid defences to the grave charges against him, are matters to be addressed in the first instance by the District Court on remand,” Stevens said.