Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.61
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal JILS (Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies) Legitima: Jurnal Hukum Keluarga Islam
Try Hardyanthi
Faculty of Law, University of Pécs
Religion Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
Between Marital Property and Inheritance: Judicial Legal Reasoning of the Religious Courts in Resolving Post-Death Marital Property Disputes Winda Putri Prasmayanti; Safitri Mukarromah; Try Hardyanthi
Legitima : Jurnal Hukum Keluarga Islam Vol. 8 No. 1 (2025): Legitima : Jurnal Hukum Keluarga Islam
Publisher : Universitas Islam Tribakti Lirboyo Kediri

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.33367/legitima.v8i1.8170

Abstract

Purpose – This research analyzes the Purwokerto Religious Court's decision by examining the judges' legal reasoning in applying the principles of justice, legal certainty, and benefit in resolving disputes over joint property after death. In disputes over joint property after death, the main issue lies in determining the status of the property, whether it is joint property or inheritance, which affects the distribution of rights between the surviving spouse and heirs. Methods – This research uses a normative juridical method with a qualitative approach, using legal reasoning theory to analyze the Purwokerto Religious Court's decision No. 1655/Pdt.G/2020/PA.Pwt and interviewed the judges who handled the cases. The analysis also refers to the theories of joint property in Islamic and positive laws. Findings – The findings show that the panel of judges at the Purwokerto Religious Court applied both deductive and inductive legal reasoning to decide disputes over joint property after the death of one of the spouses. Deductive reasoning is reflected in the application of the Marriage Law, Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI), and Civil Code, which adhere to the principle of equal distribution. Inductive reasoning is applied through the assessment of evidence, witness testimony, and field inspections (descente), which resulted in only two assets being recognized as joint property, while other claims were rejected due to a lack of evidence. Claims related to personal property and inheritance were declared inadmissible on procedural grounds by the Court. Overall, this ruling demonstrates that judicial reasoning prioritizes legal certainty and evidentiary standards while ensuring substantive justice through the equal division of proven marital property. Research implications/limitations – This study can serve as a starting point for broader research with a larger number of decisions made.
Between Marital Property and Inheritance: Judicial Legal Reasoning of the Religious Courts in Resolving Post-Death Marital Property Disputes Winda Putri Prasmayanti; Safitri Mukarromah; Try Hardyanthi
Legitima : Jurnal Hukum Keluarga Islam Vol. 8 No. 1 (2025): Legitima : Jurnal Hukum Keluarga Islam
Publisher : Universitas Islam Tribakti Lirboyo Kediri

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.33367/legitima.v8i1.8170

Abstract

Purpose – This research analyzes the Purwokerto Religious Court's decision by examining the judges' legal reasoning in applying the principles of justice, legal certainty, and benefit in resolving disputes over joint property after death. In disputes over joint property after death, the main issue lies in determining the status of the property, whether it is joint property or inheritance, which affects the distribution of rights between the surviving spouse and heirs. Methods – This research uses a normative juridical method with a qualitative approach, using legal reasoning theory to analyze the Purwokerto Religious Court's decision No. 1655/Pdt.G/2020/PA.Pwt and interviewed the judges who handled the cases. The analysis also refers to the theories of joint property in Islamic and positive laws. Findings – The findings show that the panel of judges at the Purwokerto Religious Court applied both deductive and inductive legal reasoning to decide disputes over joint property after the death of one of the spouses. Deductive reasoning is reflected in the application of the Marriage Law, Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI), and Civil Code, which adhere to the principle of equal distribution. Inductive reasoning is applied through the assessment of evidence, witness testimony, and field inspections (descente), which resulted in only two assets being recognized as joint property, while other claims were rejected due to a lack of evidence. Claims related to personal property and inheritance were declared inadmissible on procedural grounds by the Court. Overall, this ruling demonstrates that judicial reasoning prioritizes legal certainty and evidentiary standards while ensuring substantive justice through the equal division of proven marital property. Research implications/limitations – This study can serve as a starting point for broader research with a larger number of decisions made.
Who Bears the Risk? Mapping the Legal Liability of Artificial Intelligence Providers in Indonesia’s Regulatory Landscape Ninik Zakiyah; Budi Santoso; Muh. Afif Mahfud; Edmon Makarim; Try Hardyanthi
Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies Vol. 11 No. 1 (2026): Contemporary Legal Responses to Technological, Economic, and Social Change
Publisher : Universitas Negeri Semarang

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/jils.v11i1.31133

Abstract

The accelerating advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) presents complex legal concerns in Indonesia, particularly in determining liability for damages arising from autonomous systems characterized by algorithmic opacity. Existing legal frameworks, including the Copyright Law, the Electronic Information and Transactions Law, and the Government Regulation on Electronic System Providers, have yet to adequately capture the legal implications of AI-based decision-making processes. This study employs a normative legal approach to examine Indonesia’s regulatory landscape and argues that AI cannot be acknowledged as a legal entity, thereby placing primary responsibility on AI system providers. While civil liability may be grounded in Articles 1365–1367 of the Civil Code, fault-based frameworks encounter significant challenges because of AI’s “black box” characteristics. Accordingly, this article proposes a shift toward risk-based approaches, including strict liability, shifting of the burden of proof, and mandatory transparency obligations. Furthermore, it emphasizes the need to transform ethical principles, as reflected in the Ministerial Circular on AI Ethics, into enforceable legal norms. A comprehensive regulatory framework integrating accountability, human rights, and legal certainty is therefore essential for responsible AI governance in Indonesia.
Co-Authors Budi Santoso Edmon Makarim Muh. Afif Mahfud Ninik Zakiyah Safitri Mukarromah Winda Putri Prasmayanti