NUSANTARA: Journal Of Law Studies

Judicial Pardon in Criminal Verdicts: Balancing Between Justice, Legal Certainty, and The Utility Of Law

2025-05-13T10:01:04+07:00

The authority of judges to grant judicial pardon—namely, the discretionary power to reduce or mitigate criminal sanctions—raises fundamental legal concerns in Indonesia's criminal justice system. While judicial discretion aims to humanize the law and consider individual circumstances of offenders, its unstructured and inconsistent application often undermines the core objectives of criminal punishment: justice, legal certainty, and legal utility. This article explores the main research questions: To what extent does judicial pardon align with the philosophical objectives of criminal sentencing? How does this practice affect legal certainty and the perception of justice in society? Employing a normative legal research method supported by statutory, conceptual, and case-based approaches, this study critically analyzes judicial decisions in which leniency or mitigation was granted under the banner of judicial pardon. The findings reveal that while judicial pardon is rooted in compassionate justice, its inconsistent use without clear normative guidelines leads to disparities in sentencing, erodes public trust, and potentially weakens the deterrent effect of criminal law. Nonetheless, the study also finds that judicial pardon may serve rehabilitative and restorative aims when applied judiciously, particularly in cases involving vulnerable offenders or minor crimes. This research calls for a clearer doctrinal framework and judicial standards to ensure that judicial pardons contribute meaningfully to the balance between justice, legal certainty, and the broader utility of law in criminal adjudication.

Abuse of Authority in the Coastal Wall Project Case from the Perspective of Sharia Economic Law

2025-07-31T04:55:49+07:00

This study aims to analyze the case of abuse of authority in the coastal wall construction project in Tangerang, Banten, from the perspective of Sharia Economic Law. The case drew attention due to the involvement of maladministration, document forgery, and illegal issuance of land ownership and building use rights certificates, which resulted in the loss of fishermen’s access to their traditional fishing grounds and caused economic losses of up to IDR 24 billion. This study addresses two main questions: (1) What forms of authority abuse occurred in the project? and (2) How do the principles of Sharia Economic Law, such as trust (amanah), justice (‘adil), and public benefit (maslahah), assess such actions? The research uses a qualitative approach with a normative-juridical method and a comparative sharia perspective, involving content analysis of legal documents, investigative reports from state institutions, and literature in fiqh muamalah. The findings show that the abuse of authority not only violates Indonesian positive law but also contradicts key principles of Sharia Economic Law. The absence of sharia-based principles in public governance contributes to social inequality, loss of public trust, and ethical decay in resource management. The study concludes that integrating the national legal system with Sharia Economic Law values is essential to prevent power abuse and strengthen public officials’ accountability. This research offers an alternative framework based on maqāṣid al-sharī‘ah for ethical assessment of public policies and serves as an early reference for applying Sharia Economic Law in authority abuse cases in infrastructure development

LPG Gas Restriction Policy 3 Kg From The Fiqh Siyasah Perspective: Impact, Response and Its Influence on The Welfare of Muslim Communities

2025-07-31T08:14:27+07:00

This article examines the Indonesian government's policy of restricting the distribution of 3 kg LPG gas through the lens of fiqh siyasah (Islamic political jurisprudence). The policy has triggered significant public responses due to its direct impact on poor and vulnerable groups, particularly Muslims who rely on subsidized LPG for daily energy needs. Using a qualitative descriptive-analytical method, this study analyzes how the principles of fiqh siyasah such as public welfare (maslahah), justice (‘adl), and the protection of fundamental rights (maqāṣid al-sharī‘ah) serve as normative instruments in evaluating the legitimacy and ethics of public policy. The findings reveal that restricting LPG access without participatory and socially sensitive approaches leads to greater harm (mafsadah) for the poor. However, responsive actions like reauthorizing retailers reflect the Islamic principle of leadership flexibility in managing public affairs. This article highlights the urgency of integrating Islamic values into public policy to ensure social justice and community welfare.

Golden Indonesia Versus Anxious Indonesia: The Direction of Government Policy in Welcoming Golden Indonesia 2045 From The Perspective of Fiqih Syasah

2025-07-31T08:22:53+07:00

The Vision of Golden Indonesia 2045 is a national strategic ideal in welcoming a century of Indonesian independence. However, to achieve it, more than just physical and economic development is needed—moral strengthening, social justice, and ethical governance are inseparable parts. This article aims to examine the direction of government policy from the perspective of fiqh siyasah, by highlighting the extent to which values such as maslahah, ’adalah, shura, and amanah are reflected in currently implemented public policies. The research uses a qualitative approach through literature studies and normative-theological analysis. The results of the study show that although national policy planning is in line with Islamic principles, its implementation is still weak in terms of distributive justice, transparency, and public participation. Therefore, Indonesia will only truly move towards “gold” if the spiritual and ethical dimensions of sharia are made the main foundation in every state policy.

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

2025-08-01T19:46:09+07:00

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.

Kafa’ah in Islamic Marriage: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

2025-08-03T10:02:20+07:00

The concept of kafa’ah (marital compatibility) in Islamic marriage law has long served as a normative framework to ensure harmony between spouses based on factors such as lineage, wealth, profession, and religious commitment. However, contemporary societies face new realities—such as interethnic marriage, rising education levels, and socioeconomic diversity—that challenge traditional interpretations of kafa’ah. This study asks: how is the concept of kafa’ah interpreted, debated, and applied in contemporary Islamic scholarship and legal systems across Muslim-majority societies? The main goal is to systematically review the existing literature to identify dominant themes, gaps, and the evolving application of kafa’ah in modern contexts. Using a meta-analysis and the PRISMA framework, the researcher selected and analyzed 42 peer-reviewed articles published between 2000 and 2024, drawn from databases such as Scopus, ScienceDirect, and PubMed. The results show that most studies on kafa’ah still adopt a normative-theological approach, with limited empirical engagement. The concept is most frequently discussed in relation to social status, wealth, piety, and religious affiliation. However, a growing number of studies reflect a shift toward understanding kafa’ah in terms of mutual respect, shared values, and socioeconomic compatibility rather than rigid class or lineage standards. These findings suggest the need for a more contextual and reform-oriented approach to kafa’ah, especially in legal systems and religious fatwas that seek to balance tradition with social justice and contemporary realities.