<![CDATA[Marital agreements are recognized in Indonesian positive law and Islamic family law as legal instruments for regulating the rights and obligations of spouses and providing legal protection within marriage. However, their implementation remains limited among rural Muslim communities due to the dominance of socio-cultural values and low legal awareness. This study aims to analyze community perceptions of marital agreements, examine the influence of legal culture on their implementation, and explore their function as legal protection mechanisms within the framework of Islamic family law. This research employed an empirical legal method with a socio-legal approach. Data were collected through interviews, observation, and documentation involving married couples, religious leaders, community leaders, and village officials in Jati Jajar Hamlet, Palengaan Laok Village, Pamekasan Regency. The data were analyzed qualitatively through data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing. The findings reveal that marital agreements have not become part of the local legal culture. Most community members perceive such agreements as symbols of distrust and practices that are inconsistent with the sacred nature of marriage. These perceptions are reinforced by limited understanding of Islamic family law and the strong influence of customary traditions and religious-cultural values. Nevertheless, Islamic family law recognizes marital agreements through the concept of syurūṭ fī al-nikāḥ, supported by the legal maxim al-muslimūna ‘alā syurūṭihim and the objectives of maqāṣid al-sharī‘ah. The study further finds that marital agreements function not merely as contractual arrangements but also as preventive legal instruments that provide legal protection for vulnerable parties, particularly women, by safeguarding property rights, clarifying economic responsibilities, and minimizing potential household disputes. This study contributes to the socio-legal discourse by demonstrating that resistance to marital agreements is primarily rooted in legal culture rather than religious doctrine.]]>
