This paper critically examines constitutional court’s landmark decision in the Kartu Tanda Penduduk case, which equates ‘beliefs’ with recognised ‘religions’ in Indonesia. Scholars argue the court expanded religious freedom (Butt, 2021), whereas others point towards reversal of recent trends of upholding majority opinion against religious minorities (Bagir 2021). By analysing case records and interviews, this paper argues that although the court adopts an inclusive interpretation of Pancasila, recognising indigenous beliefs as believers in Almighty God, its implementation is limited by Indonesia’s differentiated citizenship model (Hefner 2021). Contrary to legal scholars who criticise the court’s unclear reasoning (Butt 2021), public opinion (Ibrahim 2022) and political context (Nalle 2021), the paper shows judge’s personal opinion impedes extending constitutional rights to beliefs. It further argues that strategic litigation by civil society groups, rather than the court, has enabled equal status to beliefs in a politically regulated sphere dominated by the majority religious group.