Pembatalan Izin Poligami di Pengadilan Tinggi Agama Maluku Utara

Rugaya Alkatiri, Abu Sanmas
{"title":"Pembatalan Izin Poligami di Pengadilan Tinggi Agama Maluku Utara","authors":"Rugaya Alkatiri, Abu Sanmas","doi":"10.46339/ijsj.v1i1.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study was conducted to Analyze and Correct the verdict No: 41/Pdt.G/2007/PA. Tte and Verdict No: 12/Pdt.G/2007/PTA. MU, which is the consideration of the Judges of the Ternate Religious Court and the North Maluku Religious High Court against the Verdict on polygamy permit cases that occurred in North Maluku Province. The Research Method used is Literature Research, namely: Activities to obtain Information relevant to the Consideration of judges of the Ternate Religious Court and the North Maluku Religious High Court against the ruling of polygamy permit cases. The result of this study is that the case of the Polygamy Permit Application filed by the F.A. who is domiciled as the Applicant, where the Judge in the First Level looks at the Sitting Case and Its Legal Considerations, so that the Panel of Judges in the First Level Court granted the Polygamy Permit Application. While at the Court of Appeal filed by M.A. who is domiciled as the Respondent at the First Level, but in the Appeal Level M.A domiciled as a Comparison, but in the Decision of the Panel of Judges at the Appeal Level by looking at the Sitting Case and Legal Considerations that the Verdict at the First Level is not acceptable on the grounds that the polygamy application case is a Case that is Voluntair (unilateral) not Contentiosa (has opponents where  The existence of the Respondent, the First Wife) then the case is considered Obscur Libel (Escape), because the Lawyer does not include the name of the Prospective Wife of the Applicant orbanding in the contents of the Application at the First Level and on the Counter Memory Appeal so that the Panel of Judges decides the Case is unacceptable.","PeriodicalId":102212,"journal":{"name":"Indonesian Journal of Shariah and Justice","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indonesian Journal of Shariah and Justice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46339/ijsj.v1i1.3","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

This study was conducted to Analyze and Correct the verdict No: 41/Pdt.G/2007/PA. Tte and Verdict No: 12/Pdt.G/2007/PTA. MU, which is the consideration of the Judges of the Ternate Religious Court and the North Maluku Religious High Court against the Verdict on polygamy permit cases that occurred in North Maluku Province. The Research Method used is Literature Research, namely: Activities to obtain Information relevant to the Consideration of judges of the Ternate Religious Court and the North Maluku Religious High Court against the ruling of polygamy permit cases. The result of this study is that the case of the Polygamy Permit Application filed by the F.A. who is domiciled as the Applicant, where the Judge in the First Level looks at the Sitting Case and Its Legal Considerations, so that the Panel of Judges in the First Level Court granted the Polygamy Permit Application. While at the Court of Appeal filed by M.A. who is domiciled as the Respondent at the First Level, but in the Appeal Level M.A domiciled as a Comparison, but in the Decision of the Panel of Judges at the Appeal Level by looking at the Sitting Case and Legal Considerations that the Verdict at the First Level is not acceptable on the grounds that the polygamy application case is a Case that is Voluntair (unilateral) not Contentiosa (has opponents where  The existence of the Respondent, the First Wife) then the case is considered Obscur Libel (Escape), because the Lawyer does not include the name of the Prospective Wife of the Applicant orbanding in the contents of the Application at the First Level and on the Counter Memory Appeal so that the Panel of Judges decides the Case is unacceptable.
取消北马鲁库宗教高等法院的一夫多妻制许可
本研究是对第41/Pdt.G/2007/PA号判决书的分析与修正。判决号:12/Pdt.G/2007/PTA。这是第三宗教法院和北马鲁古宗教高等法院的法官对北马鲁古省发生的一夫多妻许可证案件的判决的审议。所使用的研究方法是文献研究法,即:开展活动以获取有关第三宗教法院和北马鲁古宗教高等法院法官审议对一夫多妻制许可案件的裁决的资料。这项研究的结果是,在以申请人身份居住的联邦法官提出的一夫多妻许可证申请的案件中,一级法院的法官审查了正在审理的案件及其法律考虑,从而使一级法院的法官小组批准了一夫多妻许可证申请。在上诉法院提起的硕士是谁注册的,被申请人在第一个层面上,但在上诉级硕士注册的比较,但在小组的决定上诉法官的水平通过查看案例和法律方面的考虑,该裁决坐在第一级是不能接受的,理由是一夫多妻制的应用程序是一个案件Voluntair(单边)不是Contentiosa(也有反对者,被申请人的存在,第一任妻子),那么该案件被认为是模糊诽谤(逃避),因为律师在第一级申请的内容和反记忆上诉中没有包括申请人未来妻子的名字,因此法官小组决定该案件不可接受。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信