Disruption of GMS Church Service in Bantul: Why Does Religious Intolerance Persist?

A group from the Islamic Jihad Front (FJI) Yogyakarta forcibly dispersed a worship service of the Gereja Misi Sejahtera (GMS) congregation in Sewon, Bantul, on Sunday, May 24th, 2026. The disbandment was reportedly accompanied by “intimidation, physical and verbal threats.”

This incident is not an isolated case of violations against freedom of worship and the establishment of places of worship in Indonesia. Just two months prior, hundreds of people demanded the permanent closure of the prayer house for the POUK Tesalonika congregation in Teluknaga, Tangerang Regency.

Indeed, throughout 2025, the Setara Institute recorded 221 incidents of violations against freedom of religion or belief (FoRB), affecting 239 victims across Indonesia. Among these, the destruction, rejection, sealing, and prohibition of worship and the establishment of houses of worship were the most dominant patterns of infringement.

This raises critical questions: Why do these violations persist? Are the existing regulations effective in preventing them, or do they, paradoxically, contribute to the underlying issues?

How Local Residents View the GMS Presence

On Sunday, May 24th, 2026, hundreds of people gathered on Jalan Wirjono Projodikoro, Bantul, Yogyakarta, to witness a group from the Islamic Jihad Front (FJI) dispersing a worship service held by the Gereja Misi Sejahtera (GMS) congregation.

Mbah Ipin, a 61-year-old local resident who runs a stall next to the GMS building, recounted the scene on Tuesday, May 26th. “During the incident, I was trading, serving customers. My stall was packed with people buying snacks,” he said.

Mbah Ipin admitted he learned about the dispute over the place of worship from his customers. “The incident itself didn’t last very long, about half a day. It was mostly those guarding and watching who stayed the longest,” he noted. Mbah Ipin has lived in Glugo Hamlet his entire life, long before the GMS building was constructed.

Before the incident, Mbah Ipin claimed he was unaware of a church operating next to his stall, believing the building to be a warehouse. However, he stated that he personally had no issue with a church being there.

“Worship is a human right, a conviction towards the Creator. If it disturbs others, then it’s wrong. As long as it doesn’t cause disturbance, it’s fine. Perhaps those who protested are just envious or something; I don’t know,” he expressed.

Similarly, another Glugo Hamlet resident, 65-year-old Zainar, also saw no problem with a church in her area. She emphasized that everyone has the right to embrace a religion and worship according to their beliefs.

“It’s not a problem. In Islam, it’s stated, ‘My religion is my religion, and your religion is your religion.’ The important thing is that people are kind, good, and lively. People can shop at my stall,” she said. “And I’d be happy if it’s lively; hopefully, there will be customers here. I’m happy, oh Allah, I hope someone buys from my stall. I have no other thoughts.”

Zainar also confirmed her prior knowledge that the GMS building was intended to be a church. “Workers at the church used to eat here. I asked them where they worked, and they replied they were renovating the church just west of the hospital,” Zainar recounted.

Conversely, a segment of the local community opposed the GMS’s presence. The Head of RT 06, Glugo Kulon, who wished to remain anonymous, stated his objection. “From my perspective, I reject it; I don’t agree. I also didn’t know it was a church,” he told Detik.com in Glugo, Bantul, on Tuesday, May 26th.

The RT Head claimed that the GMS Bantul initially applied for a domicile permit for a foundation office, not a church.

In response to the mixed local opinions, BBC News Indonesia attempted to interview the head of Glugo Hamlet and the village head of Panggungharjo, both of whom declined to comment.

Meanwhile, the Acting Head of the Bantul Regency National Unity and Political Agency (Kesbangpol), Yulius Suharta, affirmed that citizens’ right to worship according to their religion and beliefs is guaranteed by the constitution. “If a group of people stops [worship], it becomes a cross-sectoral responsibility. Ensuring citizens can worship is a government commitment to enable its residents to practice their religion and perform worship,” Yulius stated.

Chronology: GMS vs. FJI Accounts

Josiah Michael, Public Relations for GMS Central, described how dozens of individuals from the Islamic Jihad Front (FJI) Yogyakarta arrived and forced the GMS Bantul to disband its worship service at 07:59 AM WIB on Sunday, May 24th. Josiah further claimed, on Tuesday, May 26th, that their actions were accompanied by “alleged acts of intimidation and threats, both physical and verbal.”

The worship service was ultimately forced to disperse after the disturbance. “This incident left scars and trauma on the congregation, especially the children,” he revealed. “Limiting worship through intimidation leading to violence is an act that injures the values of tolerance and national harmony,” he added.

On the other hand, Abdurrahman, Chairman of FJI DIY, acknowledged that his organization went to the GMS. This action, he stated on Monday, May 25th, was taken after receiving reports from residents who rejected the establishment and inauguration ceremony of GMS in their area.

“Yesterday, it became agitated because the residents had already rejected it. FJI also received reports, so we went there,” Abdurrahman said. He argued that the GMS’s presence in the area violated regulations, specifically lacking a church establishment permit and facing community opposition.

“If there’s a permit, residents should be asked for signatures. This didn’t happen, and suddenly it was built, and then yesterday they were going to inaugurate it,” he revealed. “If they truly want to establish a church, then by all means, but follow the procedures: get residents’ permits, residents’ signatures. Right? If residents don’t object, neither do we.”

Government Response

Following the virality of the disbandment incident on social media, government officials issued statements.

Bantul Regent Abdul Halim Muslih condemned the acts of persecution and intimidation experienced by the GMS congregation. “Acts of persecution and intimidation against worshippers performing their religious duties are not justifiable, neither from a religious nor a constitutional perspective,” he declared at the Manunggal Great Mosque in Bantul Regency.

After the incident, Abdul stated that his administration, along with the DIY Regional Office of the Ministry of Religious Affairs (Kanwil Kemenag DIY) and the Religious Harmony Forum (FKUB), would follow up on the GMS’s permit application, in accordance with Joint Ministerial Regulation (PBM) No. 9 and No. 8 of 2006. He added that during the permit processing, the GMS building could not be used for worship.

Meanwhile, Bantul Police Chief AKBP Bayu Puji Hariyanto reported that his department was investigating the alleged disbandment and persecution of the GMS worship service.

Before the incident, the Bantul Regional Government admitted it had knowledge of the planned mass movement towards GMS and had attempted to prevent it, but failed. “We tried to anticipate it, but the fact is, the movement occurred at the GMS activity site yesterday,” said Yulius Suharta, Acting Head of Bantul Regency Kesbangpol.

Yulius explained that prior to worshipping in the GMS building, the congregation held services by renting a space in a hotel in Bantul Regency. Subsequently, GMS rented a building in Glugo Hamlet, not far from the hotel. According to Yulius, the GMS management then processed a Certificate of Reporting (SKTL) issued by the DIY Regional Office of Kemenag. However, Yulius admitted he was unaware of the SKTL’s exact function. “Whether [the SKTL] truly means it can be used as a place of worship, or if there are still other administrative processes required,” he pondered.

DIY Governor Sri Sultan Hamengku Buwono X also responded to the worship disbandment. “Differences among humans exist. But people fail to understand that Allah indeed created different races, different religions, and different origins,” the Sultan remarked on Monday, May 25th. “So, in reality, difference is a certainty; it is His creation. No one is exclusively correct,” he continued.

Chairman of PBNU (Nahdlatul Ulama Executive Board) Ahmad Fahrur Rozi also expressed concern over the incident of intolerance. “The incident of worship disbandment in Bantul is deeply regrettable and must not recur. Freedom of religion and worship is guaranteed by the constitution, so all parties must prioritize tolerance, dialogue, and wise legal resolution,” said Gus Fahrur, as he is known, on Tuesday, May 26th.

Gus Fahrur emphasized that if there are administrative or permitting issues, they must be resolved through legal mechanisms and good communication, not through intimidation or forced disbandment.

Recurring Cases

Approximately two months before the GMS incident, on Friday, April 3rd, hundreds of people visited and demanded the permanent closure of the prayer house belonging to the Persekutuan Oikoumene Umat Kristen (POUK) Tesalonika congregation in Tangerang Regency.

Furthermore, throughout 2025, the Setara Institute documented 221 incidents of violations against freedom of religion or belief (FoRB), affecting 239 victims across Indonesia.

According to the Setara Institute, destruction, rejection, sealing, and the prohibition of worship and the establishment of houses of worship remain the most dominant patterns of FoRB violations in various regions. BBC News Indonesia has compiled several past FoRB cases:

• Forced disbandment of a retreat in Cidahu, Sukabumi;
• Attack and destruction of a Christian prayer house in Padang Sarai, West Sumatra;
• Prohibition of Toraja Church construction in Samarinda;
• Prohibition of church construction in Cilodong, Depok;
• Prohibition of Santo Joseph Church renovation, Karimun Islands, Kepri Province;
• Prohibition of HKBP Maranatha Church construction in Cilegon, Banten;
• Prohibition of GKI Taman Yasmin construction, Bogor;
• Prohibition of Filadelfia Church construction in Bekasi and Aceh Singkil Church;
• Prohibition of Batuplat Mosque construction in Kupang, East Nusa Tenggara, and Mushalla As-Syafiiyah in Denpasar City, Bali;
• Prohibition of GBI Tlogosari construction in Semarang.

A study by Komnas HAM (National Commission on Human Rights) indicates that conflicts over places of worship were first recorded in 1967 with the establishment of a house of worship in West Aceh, followed by a series of other incidents.

These recurring FoRB violations, according to Halili Hasan, Executive Director of Setara Institute, are caused by “the continued existence of discriminatory and intolerant regulations targeting minority groups. These regulations are preserved to restrict the space for minority groups to practice their religious teachings and rituals.”

What Do the Rules on Establishing Places of Worship Entail?

Guidelines and requirements for establishing places of worship are stipulated in Joint Ministerial Regulation (PBM) No. 9 and No. 8 of 2006 on the Implementation of Religious Harmony, Empowerment of Religious Harmony Forums, and Establishment of Places of Worship. This regulation replaced the previous Joint Decree (SKB) of Two Ministers from 1969, which granted regional heads the authority to issue permits.

Article 14 of PBM 2006 specifies that the establishment of a house of worship must meet administrative requirements, building technical requirements, and special requirements. The special requirements include:

1. A list of names and identity cards of at least 90 worshippers, authenticated by local officials;
2. Support from at least 60 local community members, authenticated by the village head/chief;
3. Written recommendations from the head of the regency/city religious affairs office, and written recommendations from the regency/city FKUB (Religious Harmony Forum).

Why Are These Regulations ‘Problematic’?

Thowik, a religious freedom and belief activist from the NGO Serikat Jurnalis untuk Keberagaman (Sejuk), argues that PBM 2006 is at the root of the persistent FoRB violations. “The PBM 2006 is the source of discrimination against citizens’ rights to obtain permits for establishing places of worship, and automatically, their rights to worship,” Thowik asserted.

Echoing this sentiment, Bonar Tigor Naipospos, Deputy Chairman of the Setara Institute National Council, also believes that the tiered requirements within the PBM contribute to the ongoing violations.

The ’60 Support and 90 Worshippers’ Rule

Bonar Tigor Naipospos, Deputy Chairman of the Setara Institute National Council, identifies the ’60/90′ requirement as the initial crisis point for constructing places of worship. “Because often the community rejects it, or is provoked by certain parties, or simply the number of supporters is insufficient. And even if support is obtained, if some community members object, it can lead to further dispute. Ultimately, the permit cannot be processed,” Bonar explained.

Thowik views the ’60/90′ rule as a basis for local officials and government authorities to show favoritism towards the aspirations of the majority group. “There are cases in one village where there are only 10 Muslim families, with the majority being Christian. But due to the 60/90 requirement, a church cannot be built because there isn’t enough support,” Thowik stated. “Then, in several areas in West Java, the Christian congregation meets the numbers, but support from the local community, which is predominantly Muslim, is lacking. So they cannot obtain a permit,” he added.

A Komnas HAM study also deems these support requirements contradictory. On one hand, the government attempts to regulate forum externum (collective worship), but on the other, the rule infringes upon forum internum (personal faith), which should not be intervened with. “This condition is reflected in the requirements proposed to guarantee the right to worship in relation to the establishment of a house of worship – it must always obtain approval from other citizens (congregations), through the FKUB mechanism and approval, and be authorized by the Regency/City Government,” the study concluded.

As a consequence, Komnas HAM notes, these requirements actually make it more difficult to establish places of worship, especially for minority groups. “The implication is that many religious communities are forced to worship in their respective places with an illegal or unpermitted status.”

Layered Permits and Recommendations

Secondly, recommendations from various parties, in several cases, become the very source of the permitting problems, according to Bonar. He noted that there are instances where the ’60/90′ requirement has been met, yet the permit is delayed indefinitely due to a lack of recommendation from local officials. “For example, HKBP Ciketing, Bekasi. Community support was obtained, but it was the FKUB that refused to provide a recommendation,” Bonar explained. “However, the PBM does not clarify whether the recommending party has the authority to refuse or not,” Bonar added.

Further examples include the POUK Tesalonika Church in Tangerang Regency and the Toraja Church in Samarinda, as cited by Thowik from Kabar Sejuk. Thowik stated that these churches had followed the PBM 2006 permit process. Yet, permits were not issued due to obstacles in obtaining recommendations from the FKUB, local heads, and the agency handling Building Construction Approvals (PBG). “So, it’s like an endless loop, and in the end, they don’t get the permit,” Thowik lamented.

Alleged Source of Extortion

Thowik further suggested that the PBM’s requirements, which he describes as difficult and discriminatory, are even suspected of becoming a source of extortion. Elaborating on the form of this alleged extortion, Thowik explained:

“To get 60 citizen endorsements, one has to visit each house. This often requires bringing something, whether rice or an envelope,” he noted. “Then the support must be verified by local officials, the village head or chief. This also requires bringing something; otherwise, it will be made difficult.”

The alleged practice doesn’t stop there but extends to relevant agencies when processing the PBG permit. “I even received complaints, with values ranging from Rp200 million to over Rp1 billion,” Thowik revealed. “However, this practice is difficult to expose. If exposed, their PBG permit could be revoked, and they would be accused of bribery,” Thowik added.

Possible Solutions

Thowik asserts that the president holds significant authority in resolving the persistent issues surrounding places of worship. The solution, he suggests, is to revoke PBM 2006 and establish a more progressive presidential regulation (Perpres) governing the establishment of places of worship.

According to the Setara Institute, this Perpres should embody the substance of strengthening the guarantee of the right to worship, rather than preserving a social veto mechanism against religious and belief minority groups. “For example, the requirements should consider spatial planning or the guarantee of worship. So, it shouldn’t be based on the approval of other people,” said Tigor.

Komnas HAM concurs, arguing that regulations should ideally focus on objective criteria such as conformity with spatial planning, prohibition of places of worship for practical political activities, acts of imprisonment or detention, and harmony with the surrounding regional landscape. “Ideally, the establishment of a place of worship should not be burdened with conditions that are heavily dependent on the subjectivity and approval of other parties,” the Komnas HAM study concluded.

Former Minister of Religious Affairs (Menag) Yaqut Cholil Qoumas once planned to remove the FKUB recommendation requirement for establishing places of worship. This change was slated to take effect after the issuance of a presidential regulation concerning the establishment of places of worship. “Then, the recommendation for establishing a place of worship would only require the Ministry of Religious Affairs; FKUB would be removed,” Yaqut stated on Saturday, August 3rd, 2024. The removal was proposed, he said, because the FKUB recommendation had become an obstacle to establishing places of worship.

However, this plan has yet to materialize.

—

Journalist Mustaqim in Yogyakarta contributed to this article.