@mastersthesis{digilib73070,
           month = {August},
           title = {PENAFSIRAN HUKUM TERHADAP PUTUSAN NOMOR 211/PDT.G/2023/PA.YOGYAKARTA TENTANG AHLI WARIS PENGGANTI},
          school = {UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA},
          author = {NIM.: 23203011102 Safira Rahmanda, S.H.},
            year = {2025},
            note = {Prof. Dr. Ali Sodiqin, M.Ag.},
        keywords = {Penafsiran Hukum, Hakim Pengadilan Agama, Ahli Waris Pengganti},
             url = {https://digilib.uin-suka.ac.id/id/eprint/73070/},
        abstract = {Article 185 of the Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI) provides provisions regarding substitute heirs, stating that substitute heirs "may" replace the position of heirs who have died or whose inheritance has been discontinued. The use of the word "may" in Article 185 of the KHI is crucial, because it contains a fairly flexible meaning in its application. This is reflected in one of the Religious Court decisions, namely the Yogyakarta Religious Court Decision No. 211/Pdt.G/2023/PA.YK, where the concept of substitute heirs is a central issue. Where in the ruling, the Yogyakarta Religious Court Judge rejected the plaintiff's lawsuit because the plaintiffs were grandchildren of the testator's lateral line. In the context of religious court practice in Indonesia, judges' interpretations of the concept of substitute heirs are strongly influenced by academic backgrounds, understanding of Islamic jurisprudence, and the social dynamics underlying the case. Therefore, this study not only analyzes the decision normatively, but also explores the views of judges from Religious Courts outside the Yogyakarta Religious Court as expert informants, to determine whether there is consistency or variation in interpretation of the same norm.
This research is a library research. This study uses an empirical juridical approach. Data collection in this study uses primary data in the form of Yogyakarta Religious Court Decision No. 211/Pdt.G/2023/PA.YK and notes from interviews with judges at the Yogyakarta Religious Court and the Sleman Religious Court. The theory used in this study is the theory of legal interpretation by Sudikno Mertokusumo and A. Pitlo. The data analysis technique in this study uses the Miles and Huberman analysis technique in the form of data reduction, data presentation, and conclusions.
The results of this study can be concluded that first, the Panel of Judges at the Yogyakarta Religious Court rejected the plaintiffs' lawsuit because their relationship with the testator was limited to being the grandchildren of the testator's brother, not a direct blood relationship (nasab) as regulated in Islamic inheritance law (Faraidh). Then, the second finding shows that the Panel of Judges in Decision Number 211/Pdt.G/2023/PA.Yogyakarta appears to use a grammatical and restrictive interpretation method approach. This is evident from the legal considerations used by the judges in the decision. The Panel of Judges did not refer to Article 185 of the Compilation of Islamic Law in their legal considerations because the Panel of Judges understood that the use of the word "can" in the concept of substitute heirs according to the Compilation of Islamic Law is interpreted as facultative where the judge can choose to apply the concept or not in accordance with the facts and evidence presented in the trial. In addition, the use of a restrictive interpretation method is evident from the way the judges limit the scope of substitute heirs, namely only applying to descending lines.}
}