Voicing Democracy Without Harming: A Message from Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) and Muhammadiyah
By: Moeini Syakir
The wave of demonstrations since late August 2025 has been a sign of the vitality of citizen participation. However, this vitality has lost its illuminating power when swept away by anarchism: looting, destruction of public facilities, and even attempts at terror. At this point, aspirations that were originally intended to improve actually risk adding to social wounds. Therefore, peaceful calls from religious organizations and youth communities need to be read as ethical guidance, so that the energy of protest can again find a dignified form—in line with the maqāṣid al-syarī‘ah (obligatory principles of Islamic law): safeguarding life, property, sanity, and honor.
The Indonesian Ulema Council—through its Head of Fatwa, Asrorun Niam—placed firm moral barriers. He reminded that the expression of aspirations must not degenerate into destructive behavior. He emphasized that the public should refrain from vandalism, destruction of public facilities, as well as looting and appropriation of property that is not theirs. He also emphasized that items that have been illegally seized should be immediately returned to their owners or handed over to the authorities. Behind this appeal lies a clear public Islamic jurisprudence message: social anger should never trump justice, and public good cannot arise from deliberate facades (damage).
A similar tone echoed from Indonesia’s two largest Islamic organizations. The leadership of the Nahdlatul Ulama Executive Board (PBNU)—following a dialogue with President Prabowo Subianto in Hambalang—emphasized that aspirations be expressed politely. The Rais Aam (Rais Aam) of PBNU, KH Miftachul Akhyar, warned of the dangers of actions that could result in loss of life and state losses, while urging NU members to act as a buffer in society. This aligns with the adab al-ikhtilāf (the principle of mutual understanding): differences of opinion are the law of nature, but how differences are expressed determines their blessings.
Meanwhile, Muhammadiyah Chairman Haedar Nashir emphasized the need for dialogue and deliberation to find solutions to national problems and reminded the public not to be provoked by destructive issues circulating on social media without accountability for the truth. Both Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) and Muhammadiyah are actually restoring deliberative space—a space where arguments are heard while maintaining ethics.
At the local level, similar calls echoed from youth groups. The Chairman of Muhammadiyah Youth in South Lampung, Ahmad Hadi Hafidi, urged students and officials to exercise restraint and view the issue clearly, while reminding them not to risk their emotional power to the point of blocking the nation’s progress.
This message is crucial: public emotions are fuel that must be managed, not doused. Otherwise, they will become a fire that devours wisdom. From Kuningan, the GP Ansor leadership emphasized that freedom of expression is guaranteed by the constitution, but must not be tainted by violence. The Chairman of the GP Ansor Kuningan Branch, Cak Imin, assessed that student aspirations are an important part of democracy, but must be protected from destructive and divisive actions; what is needed is dialogue, not clashes. The Secretary of the Central Executive Board of GP Ansor Kuningan, M. Apip Firmansyah, even offered a bridge of communication, reminding them that students are national assets, the police are protectors of the community, and the government is a servant of the people. Therefore, all parties should sit together rather than face each other. This “bridge” mindset is the practice of ihsan in politics: prioritizing connections, not barriers.
If we interpret all these appeals through the lens of Islamic philosophy, three principles of public policy emerge. First, ḥifẓ al-nafs (protection of the soul). Whatever the purpose of the demonstration, human safety is an ethical boundary that must not be exceeded. Second, ḥifẓ al-māl (protection of property). Destroying public facilities and looting violates distributive justice; it shifts the burden of costs from the perpetrators to the wider community. Third, ḥifẓ al-‘aql (protection of reason). Panic and hoaxes dull reason; Therefore, the recommendation to verify information, reject provocation, and choose deliberation is a form of collective reasoning. These three principles combine to form the etiquette of public space: legitimate aspirations must be expressed in a legitimate manner.
For state administrators, this call for peace also carries reciprocal obligations: ensuring that channels for aspirations function, that officials prioritize a humane approach, and that any excesses of violence are handled transparently. A healthy democracy rests on trust; and trust is born of accountability. However, for citizens, the moral obligation is equally clear: protecting shared facilities, respecting the rights of others to work, school, and medical treatment, and refraining from actions that widen the gap of suspicion. When both sides fulfill their roles, conflict does not disappear, but is contained within the boundaries of law and morality.
