Legal Effects of the Constitutional Court's Ruling Against Marital Agreement in Mixed Marriages

Maulidia Mulyani
{"title":"Legal Effects of the Constitutional Court's Ruling Against Marital Agreement in Mixed Marriages","authors":"Maulidia Mulyani","doi":"10.14421/ajish.v56i2.660","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": Prior to the issuance of the Constitutional Court (MK) decision Number 69/PUU-XIII/2015, some mixed-marriage couples complained about the state policy that does not allow mixed-marriage couples to own assets, both in the form of building use rights (HGB) and business use rights (HGU). This article examines a marriage agreement made by a mixed marriage couple, namely Indonesian and foreign couples after the Constitutional Court decision Number 69/PUU-XIII/2015. The fundamental issues that is the focus of this article is how is the legal impact of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 69/PUU-XIII/2015 on marriage agreements in mixed marriages? The following findings were obtained using a juridical-normative approach and utilizing Gustav Radburch's theory of the legal purpose: first, after the Constitutional Court decision the perpetrators of mixed marriages had a looser time to make a marriage agreement. They can agree before the marriage contract or during the marriage bond. Second, a marriage agreement made during the marriage period will be valid the moment after it is made, and the separation of the joint property of both parties can immediately follow it. Third, when viewed from the theory of Gustav Radburch's legal objectives, the Constitutional Court Decision has fulfilled the purpose of making law: the realization of justice, certainty, and legal expediency. However, on the other hand, the Constitutional Court ruling has also put third parties in a vulnerable position.","PeriodicalId":138405,"journal":{"name":"Asy-Syir'ah: Jurnal Ilmu Syari'ah dan Hukum","volume":"97 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asy-Syir'ah: Jurnal Ilmu Syari'ah dan Hukum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14421/ajish.v56i2.660","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

: Prior to the issuance of the Constitutional Court (MK) decision Number 69/PUU-XIII/2015, some mixed-marriage couples complained about the state policy that does not allow mixed-marriage couples to own assets, both in the form of building use rights (HGB) and business use rights (HGU). This article examines a marriage agreement made by a mixed marriage couple, namely Indonesian and foreign couples after the Constitutional Court decision Number 69/PUU-XIII/2015. The fundamental issues that is the focus of this article is how is the legal impact of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 69/PUU-XIII/2015 on marriage agreements in mixed marriages? The following findings were obtained using a juridical-normative approach and utilizing Gustav Radburch's theory of the legal purpose: first, after the Constitutional Court decision the perpetrators of mixed marriages had a looser time to make a marriage agreement. They can agree before the marriage contract or during the marriage bond. Second, a marriage agreement made during the marriage period will be valid the moment after it is made, and the separation of the joint property of both parties can immediately follow it. Third, when viewed from the theory of Gustav Radburch's legal objectives, the Constitutional Court Decision has fulfilled the purpose of making law: the realization of justice, certainty, and legal expediency. However, on the other hand, the Constitutional Court ruling has also put third parties in a vulnerable position.
宪法法院驳回跨国婚姻中婚姻协议判决的法律效力
在宪法法院(MK)第69/PUU-XIII/2015号决定发布之前,一些混合婚姻夫妇抱怨国家政策不允许混合婚姻夫妇拥有资产,无论是建筑使用权(HGB)还是商业使用权(HGU)。本文考察了在宪法法院第69/PUU-XIII/2015号决定之后,一对混合婚姻夫妇,即印度尼西亚夫妇和外国夫妇所达成的婚姻协议。本文关注的根本问题是宪法法院第69/PUU-XIII/2015号决定对跨国婚姻中的婚姻协议的法律影响如何?采用司法规范方法并利用Gustav Radburch的法律目的理论得出以下结论:首先,在宪法法院判决后,跨国婚姻的肇事者有更宽松的时间来制定婚姻协议。他们可以在婚前或婚约期间达成一致。其次,在婚姻存续期间所签订的婚姻协议,自签订之日起即有效,双方共同财产的分割可立即随之进行。第三,从古斯塔夫·拉德伯奇的法律目标理论来看,宪法法院的判决实现了立法的目的:实现正义、确定性和法律权宜之计。但另一方面,宪法裁判所的判决也使第3团体处于不利地位。
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