@phdthesis{digilib59094, month = {March}, title = {PERSPEKTIF YURIDIS PENARIKAN TANAH WAKAF UNTUK DIBAGIKAN SEBAGAI HARTA WARISAN (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN PENGADILAN AGAMA SEMARANG NOMOR 987/PDT.G/2003/PA.SMG)}, school = {UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA}, author = {NIM.: 19103040125 Ahmad Maadiha Dzakiyul Fuad}, year = {2023}, note = {Pembimbing: Prof. Dr. H. Agus Moh. Najib, S.Ag., M.Ag.}, keywords = {Wakaf, Tanah Wakaf, Harta Warisan}, url = {https://digilib.uin-suka.ac.id/id/eprint/59094/}, abstract = {Waqf is holding or holding an object that according to the law remains in the waqif to be used for its benefits for virtue. Based on this understanding, the ownership of waqf goods cannot be separated from the waqif. Article (49) of Law Number 5 of 1960 concerning Basic Regulations on Agrarian Principles states that the land ownership rights of religious and social bodies will be recognized and protected. These bodies are also guaranteed to obtain sufficient land for their buildings and businesses in the religious and social fields. The problems in this study are (1) what factors are considered by the authorities (religious court judges) in settling the waqf land dispute. (2) What are the legal implications arising from the withdrawal of waqf land to be distributed as inheritance. This research uses qualitative research methods with an empirical juridical approach. Sources of data used in this research include, (a) a summary of the Semarang Religious Court Decision Number 987/Pdt.G/2003/PA.Smg, (b) literature studies from journals, scientific articles on perwakafan, and previous theses, (c) interviews with judges of the Semarang Religious Court. The conclusion obtained from this research shows that the withdrawal of waqf land can be done if the implementation of waqf does not fulfill the conditions and pillars of waqf as stated in Article (6) of Law 41 of 2004 concerning Waqf. As well as the suitability of the consideration of the panel of judges with the legislation on waqf in handing down the Semarang Religious Court Decision Number 987/Pdt.G/2003/PA.Smg.} }