Implementation of Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2016 on Mediation Procedure in Divorce Cases During the Covid-19 Pandemic at Religious Courts in Medan City

None Kusmalina, Budi Hartono, Dumasari Harahap
{"title":"Implementation of Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2016 on Mediation Procedure in Divorce Cases During the Covid-19 Pandemic at Religious Courts in Medan City","authors":"None Kusmalina, Budi Hartono, Dumasari Harahap","doi":"10.31289/perspektif.v12i4.10175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study undertakes an analysis of the implementation of Supreme Court Regulation (Perma) No. 1 of 2016 concerning Mediation Procedure I in the settlement of divorce cases during the COVID-19 pandemic at Religious Courts in Medan City, while also identifying inhibiting factors. A descriptive qualitative research method is employed due to the nuanced nature of the issues at hand. Key informants (Vice Chairman of the Religious Courts in Medan City), main informants (mediators), and additional informants (court clerks) constitute the research subjects. Data collection methods encompass observation, interviews, and documentation. Data analysis includes data reduction, presentation, conclusion drawing, and verification, with data validity confirmed through triangulation. The implementation of Perma No. 1 of 2016 is evaluated through the lens of Edward III's theory, encompassing communication, disposition, resources, and bureaucratic structure. However, the appointment of mediator judges remains suboptimal. Mediation of divorce cases at the Religious Courts in Medan City is perceived as less effective, supported by the limited number of successfully mediated cases. Inhibiting factors include the scarcity of mediator judges, inadequate accessibility to mediation rooms for many individuals, and a lack of public awareness regarding the significance of mediation in case settlements.","PeriodicalId":33355,"journal":{"name":"Perspektif Jurnal Ilmuilmu Sosial","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspektif Jurnal Ilmuilmu Sosial","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31289/perspektif.v12i4.10175","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

This study undertakes an analysis of the implementation of Supreme Court Regulation (Perma) No. 1 of 2016 concerning Mediation Procedure I in the settlement of divorce cases during the COVID-19 pandemic at Religious Courts in Medan City, while also identifying inhibiting factors. A descriptive qualitative research method is employed due to the nuanced nature of the issues at hand. Key informants (Vice Chairman of the Religious Courts in Medan City), main informants (mediators), and additional informants (court clerks) constitute the research subjects. Data collection methods encompass observation, interviews, and documentation. Data analysis includes data reduction, presentation, conclusion drawing, and verification, with data validity confirmed through triangulation. The implementation of Perma No. 1 of 2016 is evaluated through the lens of Edward III's theory, encompassing communication, disposition, resources, and bureaucratic structure. However, the appointment of mediator judges remains suboptimal. Mediation of divorce cases at the Religious Courts in Medan City is perceived as less effective, supported by the limited number of successfully mediated cases. Inhibiting factors include the scarcity of mediator judges, inadequate accessibility to mediation rooms for many individuals, and a lack of public awareness regarding the significance of mediation in case settlements.
在棉兰市宗教法院执行最高法院2016年第1号关于新冠肺炎大流行期间离婚案件调解程序的规定
本研究分析了2016年最高法院第1号条例(Perma)关于在棉兰市宗教法院解决COVID-19大流行期间离婚案件的调解程序I的实施情况,同时也确定了抑制因素。由于手头问题的微妙性质,采用描述性定性研究方法。主要举报人(棉兰市宗教法院副院长)、主要举报人(调解人)和附加举报人(法院书记员)构成研究对象。数据收集方法包括观察、访谈和记录。数据分析包括数据缩减、呈现、得出结论、验证,并通过三角剖分确认数据的有效性。通过爱德华三世的理论,包括沟通,处置,资源和官僚结构,评估2016年第1号Perma的实施情况。然而,调解员法官的任命仍然不够理想。棉兰市宗教法院对离婚案件的调解被认为效率较低,这是因为成功调解的案件数量有限。抑制因素包括调解员法官的缺乏,许多人无法进入调解室,以及公众对调解在案件解决中的重要性缺乏认识。
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
125
审稿时长
2 weeks
×
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