%0 Thesis
%9 Masters
%A Musfira Rahmi, NIM.: 24203011033
%B FAKULTAS SYARIAH DAN HUKUM
%D 2026
%F digilib:79029
%I UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA
%K Perceraian, SEMA Nomor 3 Tahun 2023, Pisah Rumah Enam Bulan,  Rasionalitas Hukum
%P 167
%T PEMAHAMAN DAN PENALARAN HAKIM DALAM PENERAPAN SYARAT TAMBAHAN PERCERAIAN PISAH RUMAH ENAM BULAN (STUDI PENGADILAN AGAMA SLEMAN DAN PENGADILAN AGAMA PADANG)
%U https://digilib.uin-suka.ac.id/id/eprint/79029/
%X Divorce rates in Indonesia have continued to show a significant upward  trend in recent years. In response to this situation, the Supreme Court issued  Supreme Court Circular Letter No. 3 of 2023, which establishes an additional  requirement of a minimum six-month period of living apart for couples filing for  divorce on the grounds of continuous disputes and arguments. In practice, the  application of this requirement has not been uniform among judges, raising two  key questions: why there are differences in judicial rulings at the Sleman  Religious Court and the Padang Religious Court regarding the six-month  separation requirement, and how judges interpret and approach divorce cases  following the enactment of Supreme Court Circular Letter No. 3 of 2023.  This study is a descriptive-analytical field study employing a sociological  approach to law. Data were collected through in-depth interviews with judges at  the Sleman Religious Court and the Padang Religious Court, as well as through a  document analysis of ten relevant divorce rulings. The analysis was conducted  using two complementary theoretical fram eworks: Gunther Teubner’s theory of  legal rationality, which distinguishes between formal, substantive, and reflective  rationality to examine the judges’ reasoning mechanisms; and Gustav Radbruch’s  theory of the purposes of law, which posits certainty, justice, and utility as three  values that are constantly in dialectical tension to explain the values judges weigh  in each ruling.  The research findings indicate that differences in the application of the  six-month separation requirement stem from variations in the legal facts  established during trial. Judges apply SEMA No. 3 of 2023 when the six-month  separation requirement is proven or when the case meets the exceptions stipulated  in the SEMA; however, in cases where the grounds for divorce fall outside the  scope of the SEMA, these provisions are not considered as a basis for decisionmaking.  This study also shows that judges view SEMA No. 3 of 2023 as a  guideline in adjudicating divorce cases; however, there are differing views  regarding the basis for deviating from these provisions. Some judges base such  deviations on the lex specialis principle, while others base them on the hierarchy  of laws. Furthermore, the study indicates that the application of SEMA No. 3 of  2023 is contextual but remains within the same legal framework. Differences in  the application of SEMA do not indicate that judges act arbitrarily or based on  personal preference; rather, they arise due to the characteristics of each case, the  weight of the evidence, and the legal facts revealed during the trial, ensuring that  judicial discretion is exercised within the bounds of applicable law.
%Z Prof. Dr. Lindra Darnela, S.Ag., M.Hum.