ORTODOKSI FIKIH POLIGAMI: BIAS PATRILINEAR DALAM PERTIMBANGAN HAKIM PADA PEMBERIAN IZIN POLIGAMI DI PENGADILAN AGAMA BANTUL

Fanridhal Engo, NIM.: 24203011068 (2026) ORTODOKSI FIKIH POLIGAMI: BIAS PATRILINEAR DALAM PERTIMBANGAN HAKIM PADA PEMBERIAN IZIN POLIGAMI DI PENGADILAN AGAMA BANTUL. Masters thesis, UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA.

Preview	Text (ORTODOKSI FIKIH POLIGAMI: BIAS PATRILINEAR DALAM PERTIMBANGAN HAKIM PADA PEMBERIAN IZIN POLIGAMI DI PENGADILAN AGAMA BANTUL) 24203011068_BAB-I_IV-atau-V_DAFTAR-PUSTAKA.pdf - Published Version Download (11MB) | Preview
	Text (ORTODOKSI FIKIH POLIGAMI: BIAS PATRILINEAR DALAM PERTIMBANGAN HAKIM PADA PEMBERIAN IZIN POLIGAMI DI PENGADILAN AGAMA BANTUL) 24203011068_BAB-II_sampai_SEBELUM-BAB-TERAKHIR.pdf - Published Version Restricted to Registered users only Download (16MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

This study stems from the fact that Indonesia’s marriage system adheres to the principle of monogamy, yet polygamy remains permissible through petitions to the Religious Court, subject to strict alternative and cumulative conditions. In practice, the Bantul Religious Court has issued rulings granting polygamy permits even when discretionary conditions were not fully met, with the first wife's consent serving as a crucial basis; thus, the central issue concerns how judges construct legal reasoning to legitimize their rulings and the extent to which the protection of the wife—as a vulnerable party—is genuinely prioritized. This qualitative study employs a descriptive-analytical approach and utilizes critical discourse analysis. The theoretical framework draws on Ziba Mir-Hosseini’s gender discourse, focusing on three analytical areas: the distinction between sharī'ah and fiqh, the principle of justice, and patriarchy within fiqh. Research data were gathered from five polygamy permit rulings at the Bantul Religious Court, interviews with four judges, and supporting documentation, followed by analysis involving data reduction, data presentation, interpretation, and conclusion drawing. The findings reveal that judges at the Bantul Religious Court establish the legitimacy of their rulings through four mutually reinforcing argumentative stages: affirming the legality of polygamy and the husband-wife power dynamic; treating the wife’s body and condition as objects of proof; positioning the wife as a "safety valve" for legitimacy; and framing the approval as a form of household protection serving the husband's interests. In several rulings, discretionary conditions were treated as negotiable elements, justice was reduced to procedural formality, and claims of maṣlaḥah (public interest/benefit) were invoked to justify granting the petition; meanwhile, women's voices appeared more frequently as administrative legitimations—such as expressions of sincerity (ikhlas) and consent (ridho)—rather than as subjective experiences subjected to critical scrutiny. Thus, this study identifies tendencies toward Sharia-fiqh orthodoxy, patriarchal bias, and limited substantive justice in judicial reasoning; these factors position decisions granting polygamy permits at the Bantul Religious Court more as a form of patriarchal administrative legality than as a manifestation of substantive gender justice.

Share this knowledge with your friends :

Actions (login required)

View Item