Deauthorizing Fatwa on Money Politics

Shifting Religious Morals in the Era of Transactional Democracy

Abstract

The recurring phenomenon of money politics in every electoral contest in Indonesia reflects a persistent tension between religious moral authority and electoral political rationality. Although Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), Muhammadiyah, and the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) have issued fatwas forbidding money politics as a form of risywah (bribery) that contradicts Islamic principles of justice and trustworthiness, the practice continues to flourish at the grassroots level. This research departs from a central question: why is the fatwa on money politics issued by major Islamic institutions in Indonesia ineffective in shaping the political behavior of the ummah in the Reformasi era? Using a qualitative method framed within the sociology of fatwas and the politics of Islamic law a combined analytical lens that examines fatwas as both normative-legal texts and socio-political instruments, this study analyzes fatwa documents, organizational publications, and elite as well as community responses to the practice of money politics. The findings reveal a process of deauthorization of fatwas, namely the weakening of religious moral authority under the growing dominance of transactional democratic logic and pragmatic electoral rationality. Fatwas function more as symbolic moral references than as effective instruments capable of transforming political behavior. These findings highlight the need to reorient religious authority from a purely normative approach toward an ethical-political praxis that is more responsive to contemporary socio-political realities. The study contributes theoretically by expanding the understanding of the relationship between religion and politics in Indonesia and by enriching scholarly discussions on the effectiveness of fatwas within the modern democratic sphere.