<![CDATA[The increase in the minimum age of marriage to 19 years through Law Number 16 of 2019 is a legal policy aimed at strengthening child protection, preventing early marriage, and improving family quality. However, the increasing practice of marriage dispensation raises issues regarding the effectiveness of this regulation in achieving the expected legal objectives. This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of the implementation of marriage dispensation after the enactment of Law Number 16 of 2019 and to examine judges’ considerations from the perspective of Jasser Auda’s maqāṣid al-syarī'ah system. This study is empirical legal research using a socio-legal research approach. Primary data were obtained through the analysis of three decisions of the Boyolali Religious Court, namely Decision Number 171/Pdt.P/2024/PA.Bi, Decision Number 19/Pdt.P/2026/PA.Bi, and Decision Number 110/Pdt.P/2026/PA.Bi, which were selected purposively because they represent variations in the reasons for granting marriage dispensation. The data were analyzed qualitatively through data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing using the perspective of Jasser Auda’s maqāṣid al-syarī'ah system. The results showed that the practice of marriage dispensation is still dominated by considerations of pregnancy outside marriage, biological relations between prospective spouses, concerns about the occurrence of prohibited acts, and considerations of public benefit that are casuistic in nature. This condition indicates that the phrase “urgent reasons” does not yet have clear operational parameters, thereby opening wide room for judicial discretion. As a result, marriage dispensation has undergone a functional shift from an exception mechanism to a legal instrument that is relatively frequently used to legitimize underage marriage. From the perspective of Jasser Auda’s maqāṣid al-syarī'ah system, the implementation of the regulation has not fully realized child protection and public benefit comprehensively because it is more oriented toward resolving short-term problems than achieving long-term legal objectives. The conclusion of this study affirms the need to strengthen the parameters of “urgent reasons” and ensure consistency in applying the principle of the best interests of the child so that marriage dispensation can return to its function as an exceptional legal mechanism and support the effectiveness of the policy limiting the minimum age of marriage.]]>
