Why do Indonesian politicians promote shari’alaws? An analytic framework for Muslim-majority democracies

Pisani, Elizabeth; Buehler, Michael

Abstract

Taking the discussion in the existing literature on the adoption of shari’a laws in democratising Muslim-majority countries as a starting point, we posit that there are two broad motivations for democratically-elected politicians to adopt shari’a laws and regulations: ideological conviction on the one hand and response to the expressed or perceived preference of constituents on the other hand. The ‘demand side’ can be further divided into the preferences of individual voters, and the interests of groups which act as power brokers, influencing the voting choices of individual citizens. These groups may be economic, religious, or other actors. These motivations are not mutually exclusive; the passage of a given shari’a regulation may fulfil two or all three of them simultaneously. However, we posit that the interaction between the place, timing, and content of shari’a laws passed in a nation as a whole will vary in various predictable ways, according to the dominant motivations. The dominant motivation may also affect the vigour with which the law is implemented.

Citation

Pisani, E., & Buehler, M. (2016). Why do Indonesian politicians promote shari’alaws? An analytic framework for Muslim-majority democracies. Third World Quarterly, 38(3), 734-752. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2016.1206453

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Acceptance Date: Jun 23, 2016
• Online Publication Date: Jul 29, 2016
• Publication Date: Jul 29, 2016
• Deposit Date: Aug 6, 2016
• Publicly Available Date: Aug 6, 2016
• Journal: Third World Quarterly
• Print ISSN: 0143-6597
• Electronic ISSN: 1360-2241
• Publisher: Taylor and Francis Group
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Volume: 38
• Issue: 3
• Pages: 734-752
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2016.1206453
• Keywords: Elections, Indonesia, Islamism, shari’a law, Southeast Asia
• Additional Information: Additional Information : Accepted version of an article published online by Taylor & Francis on 29 July 2016.