PANDANGAN HAKIM TERHADAP STANDAR PERTENGKARAN SECARA TERUS-MENERUS SEBAGAI PENYEBAB PERCERAIAN (STUDI DI PENGADILAN AGAMA YOGYAKARTA)

Risa Beta Anjani, NIM.: 21103050120 (2025) PANDANGAN HAKIM TERHADAP STANDAR PERTENGKARAN SECARA TERUS-MENERUS SEBAGAI PENYEBAB PERCERAIAN (STUDI DI PENGADILAN AGAMA YOGYAKARTA). Skripsi thesis, UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA.

Preview	Text (PANDANGAN HAKIM TERHADAP STANDAR PERTENGKARAN SECARA TERUS-MENERUS SEBAGAI PENYEBAB PERCERAIAN (STUDI DI PENGADILAN AGAMA YOGYAKARTA)) 21103050120_BAB-I_IV-atau-V_DAFTAR-PUSTAKA.pdf - Published Version Download (9MB) | Preview
	Text (PANDANGAN HAKIM TERHADAP STANDAR PERTENGKARAN SECARA TERUS-MENERUS SEBAGAI PENYEBAB PERCERAIAN (STUDI DI PENGADILAN AGAMA YOGYAKARTA)) 21103050120_BAB-II_sampai_SEBELUM-BAB-TERAKHIR.pdf - Published Version Restricted to Registered users only Download (7MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

Divorce due to continuous quarrels has become one of leading causes of the rising divorce rate in Indonesia. At the Religious Court of Yogyakarta, this phenomenon is often used as the primary basis in deciding divorce cases. However, the absence of a clear legal standart regarding the duration and intensity of such quarrels makes it difficult to determine wether a marital conflict qualifies as “continuous”. This raises questions about how such standards are interpreted and to what extent judges have the discretion to define them. Therefore, it is important to understand how judges perceive and assess the threshold of quarrels as a valid ground for divorce. This research is a field study with a descriptive-analytical approach using a juridical-normative method. Data were collected through direct interviews with four judges at the Yogyakarta Religious Court, supported by analyses of court decisions, legal regulations, and relevant literature. The theoretical framework employed in this study is Judicial Activism, which views judges not merely as enforcers of the law but as active interpreters who consider social dynamics in their judgments. This theory helps explain how judges can act progressively when interpreting vague or open legal provisions. The results of this study indicate that judges hold diverse views regarding the threshold of continuous quarrels as grounds for divorce. Generally, judges apply contextual considerations such as the intensity of conflict, duration of quarrels, evidence of separate living arrangements, and the psychological condition of each party. Judges do not rely solely on literal interpretations of legal texts but also consider principles of substantive justice and the well-being of the litigants. This shows that the practice of judicial activism is indeed exercised by judges in handling divorce cases based on continuous disputes, allowing for more humanistic and fair outcomes in legal decisions.

Share this knowledge with your friends :

Actions (login required)

View Item