Mediation of Contested Divorce Cases in Indonesia: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Abstract

Contested divorce cases (cerai gugat) in Indonesia have significantly increased over the past decade, revealing deep social and gender-related tensions within the Islamic family law system. Despite the existence of a mandatory mediation process regulated under the Supreme Court Regulation (PERMA) No. 1 of 2016, mediation outcomes remain largely ineffective and inconsistent. This raises a fundamental question: To what extent does mediation in Indonesian religious courts function as a genuine conflict-resolution mechanism rather than a procedural formality? The review highlights three key findings: (1) The success rate of mediation in contested divorce cases remains below 20%, particularly in cases involving domestic violence, financial disputes, or high emotional conflict; (2) Institutional gaps, including poorly trained mediators and lack of standardized practice, contribute to procedural inconsistencies across religious courts; and (3) Structural issues such as gender asymmetry and distrust in non-litigation processes further diminish mediation’s potential. A comparative analysis with Malaysia, Morocco, and Egypt demonstrates that mediation systems rooted in religious legitimacy, cultural sensitivity, and gender equity tend to perform more effectively. The study concludes that for mediation to become a transformative tool in Indonesia’s family justice system, it must be reconceptualized as a culturally integrated, professionally supported, and ethically grounded process. The findings offer timely insights for judges, policymakers, and legal reform advocates working to strengthen the role of mediation in family law.