Orientasi Filosofis Hakim Pengadilan Agama Dalam Menyelesaikan Sengketa Ekonomi Syariah

Zaidah Nur Rosidah, Lego Karjoko
{"title":"Orientasi Filosofis Hakim Pengadilan Agama Dalam Menyelesaikan Sengketa Ekonomi Syariah","authors":"Zaidah Nur Rosidah, Lego Karjoko","doi":"10.20885/IUSTUM.VOL28.ISS1.ART8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this study is to determine the philosophical basis in the legal finding school of thoughts used by religious court judges and their orientation in resolving sharia economic disputes. The research problem is answered by using a normative method with a case and conceptual approach. The results of the research and discussion conclude that first, sharia economic dispute resolution has a philosophical foundation from the values of Pancasila, especially the first, second and fifth principles. Second, there are two different orientations of religious court judges in deciding sharia economic disputes, namely legism oriented and begriffjurisprudenz orientation. Amongst the various decisions, there are judges that are still oriented towards legism, namely deciding disputes based on existing positive laws, based on the Civil Code (KUHPer) even though the dispute is a sharia economic dispute. There are also many judges who have an orientation to begriffjurisprudenz, in this case the judge uses the basis of Islamic law, namely the Al Quran, Hadith and the Fatwa of the National Sharia Council (DSN) of the Indonesian Ulama Council (MUI) and the Compilation of Sharia Economic Law (KHES) in their decisions in addition to using the Civil Code (positive law).","PeriodicalId":239318,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20885/IUSTUM.VOL28.ISS1.ART8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine the philosophical basis in the legal finding school of thoughts used by religious court judges and their orientation in resolving sharia economic disputes. The research problem is answered by using a normative method with a case and conceptual approach. The results of the research and discussion conclude that first, sharia economic dispute resolution has a philosophical foundation from the values of Pancasila, especially the first, second and fifth principles. Second, there are two different orientations of religious court judges in deciding sharia economic disputes, namely legism oriented and begriffjurisprudenz orientation. Amongst the various decisions, there are judges that are still oriented towards legism, namely deciding disputes based on existing positive laws, based on the Civil Code (KUHPer) even though the dispute is a sharia economic dispute. There are also many judges who have an orientation to begriffjurisprudenz, in this case the judge uses the basis of Islamic law, namely the Al Quran, Hadith and the Fatwa of the National Sharia Council (DSN) of the Indonesian Ulama Council (MUI) and the Compilation of Sharia Economic Law (KHES) in their decisions in addition to using the Civil Code (positive law).
宗教法庭法官解决伊斯兰经济争端的哲学取向
本研究的目的是确定宗教法院法官所使用的法律发现学派的哲学基础及其在解决伊斯兰教经济纠纷中的取向。运用规范的方法,结合案例和概念的方法来回答研究问题。研究和讨论的结果表明:首先,伊斯兰教法经济争端的解决具有潘卡西拉价值观的哲学基础,特别是第一、第二和第五原则。其次,宗教法院法官在处理伊斯兰经济纠纷时存在两种不同的取向,即法律主义取向和法律主义取向。在各种裁决中,有些法官仍然倾向于法律主义,即根据现行的成文法,根据《民法典》(KUHPer)来裁决争端,即使争端是伊斯兰教经济争端。也有许多法官倾向于begriffjurisprudenz,在这种情况下,法官除了使用民法(成文法)外,还在其判决中使用伊斯兰法的基础,即《古兰经》、《圣训》和印度尼西亚乌拉玛委员会(MUI)的全国伊斯兰教法委员会(DSN)的法特瓦和伊斯兰教法汇编(KHES)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信