The Closure of Isbat For Polygamous Marriage on Legal Purpose Perspective

Nihrul Bahi Alhaidar, Muhammad Muhajir, Syamsu Dhuha
{"title":"The Closure of Isbat For Polygamous Marriage on Legal Purpose Perspective","authors":"Nihrul Bahi Alhaidar, Muhammad Muhajir, Syamsu Dhuha","doi":"10.15642/alhukama.2023.13.1.1-26","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"After attendance, the enactment of the Supreme Court Circular (SEMA) Number 3 of 2018 answers the legal vacuum over isbat for Polygamous marriage. But in practice, the SEMA confuses its implementation. This study aims to analyze the application of polygamous marriage law in SEMA number 3 of 2018 and the juridical implications for justice, expediency, and legal certainty. This research includes normative legal research with statutory and conceptual approaches. Gustav Radbruch's theory of legal purpose is used as his analysis knife. The study concluded that closing the door of Isbat for Polygamous marriage is not the right solution because marriage isbat is one way to obtain legal guarantees in the eyes of the state. The aggrieved subject of the SEMA was a polygamous wife who could not take legal action in seeking justice. Judging from Gustav Radbruch's theory, SEMA number 3 of 2018 has not met the elements of legal objectives. The provisions in SEMA number 3 of 2018 only accommodate the interests of children. The rights of polygamous wives should be prioritized because the benefits received are more significant than tightly closing the door of isbat for Polygamous marriage. It is necessary to review SEMA number 3 of 2018 to contain concrete values of justice, expediency and legal certainty for children and wives.","PeriodicalId":245959,"journal":{"name":"AL-HUKAMA'","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AL-HUKAMA'","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15642/alhukama.2023.13.1.1-26","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

After attendance, the enactment of the Supreme Court Circular (SEMA) Number 3 of 2018 answers the legal vacuum over isbat for Polygamous marriage. But in practice, the SEMA confuses its implementation. This study aims to analyze the application of polygamous marriage law in SEMA number 3 of 2018 and the juridical implications for justice, expediency, and legal certainty. This research includes normative legal research with statutory and conceptual approaches. Gustav Radbruch's theory of legal purpose is used as his analysis knife. The study concluded that closing the door of Isbat for Polygamous marriage is not the right solution because marriage isbat is one way to obtain legal guarantees in the eyes of the state. The aggrieved subject of the SEMA was a polygamous wife who could not take legal action in seeking justice. Judging from Gustav Radbruch's theory, SEMA number 3 of 2018 has not met the elements of legal objectives. The provisions in SEMA number 3 of 2018 only accommodate the interests of children. The rights of polygamous wives should be prioritized because the benefits received are more significant than tightly closing the door of isbat for Polygamous marriage. It is necessary to review SEMA number 3 of 2018 to contain concrete values of justice, expediency and legal certainty for children and wives.
法律目的视角下对一夫多妻婚姻的关闭
会议结束后,最高法院颁布了2018年第3号通告(SEMA),填补了一夫多妻婚姻在isbat上的法律真空。但在实践中,SEMA混淆了它的实施。本研究旨在分析2018年第3次SEMA中一夫多妻婚姻法的适用情况,以及对正义、权宜和法律确定性的司法影响。本研究包括规范性法律研究与成文法和概念的方法。古斯塔夫·拉德布鲁赫的法律目的理论被用作他的分析刀。该研究的结论是,关闭Isbat对一夫多妻婚姻的大门并不是正确的解决方案,因为在国家看来,Isbat婚姻是获得法律保障的一种方式。SEMA的受害对象是一名一夫多妻的妻子,她不能采取法律行动寻求正义。从古斯塔夫·拉德布鲁赫的理论来看,2018年的第3号SEMA没有达到法律目标的要素。2018年第3号SEMA的规定只考虑儿童的利益。应优先考虑一夫多妻制妻子的权利,因为所获得的利益比为一夫多妻制婚姻紧紧关闭以色列的大门更为重要。有必要审查2018年第3号SEMA,以包含对子女和妻子的正义、权宜之计和法律确定性的具体价值观。
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