Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.562
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Indonesian Journal of Innovation Studies Academia Open
Moh. Muhibbin
Program Pascasarjana, Magister Hukum, Universitas Islam Malang
Computer Science & IT Education Engineering Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Medicine & Pharmacology Public Health

Published : 4 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 4 Documents
Search

 1 
Legal Protection for Wives in Joint Property Division After Divorce Mutiara Far'h Riasya; Moh. Muhibbin; Budi Parmono
Academia Open Vol. 11 No. 1 (2026): June
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/acopen.11.2026.13048

Abstract

General Background: The division of joint property following divorce remains a central issue in Indonesian family law, particularly under the normative framework of the Marriage Law and the Compilation of Islamic Law, which traditionally emphasize equal distribution. Specific Background: In practice, rigid application of a 50:50 division often fails to address situations where one spouse bears a dominant economic role, especially in cases involving wives as primary breadwinners. Knowledge Gap: There is limited doctrinal clarity on how courts should reconcile formal equality norms with factual disparities in economic contribution within marriage. Aims: This study aims to analyze legal protection for wives in joint property disputes where husbands fail to contribute economically, as reflected in Blitar Religious Court Decision Number 1560/Pdt.G/2023/PA.BL. Results: Using a normative juridical method with statutory, conceptual, and case approaches, the study finds that the court allocated 80% of joint property to the wife and 20% to the husband, based on evidence of the wife’s exclusive financial contribution and the husband’s failure to fulfill economic obligations. Novelty: The decision demonstrates judicial recognition that justice in joint property division need not follow a mathematical formula, but may adopt proportional distribution grounded in substantive justice. Implications: This ruling provides an important precedent for strengthening legal protection for wives, affirming that factual economic contributions and vulnerability after divorce must guide equitable resolution of joint property disputes in Indonesian religious courts. Highlights: Judicial reasoning prioritized factual economic roles over formal equal-sharing norms. Proportional allocation was grounded in evidence of exclusive financial responsibility. The ruling strengthens doctrinal support for equity-based asset distribution in divorce cases Keywords: Joint Property, Legal Protection for Wife, Divorce, Economic Contribution, Court Decision.
The Judge's Ex Officio Authority in Fulfilling Wife and Child Support Rights After Divorce in the Religious Court: Kewenangan Ex Officio Hakim dalam Pemenuhan Hak Nafkah Istri dan Anak Pasca Perceraian di Pengadilan Agama Dian Maulidah; Moh. Muhibbin; Diyan Isnaeni
Academia Open Vol. 12 No. 1 (2027): June
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/acopen.12.2027.15070

Abstract

General Background Divorce generates continuing economic obligations toward former wives and children, making postdivorce maintenance a central concern in religious court proceedings. Specific Background Indonesian judges may exercise ex officio authority to determine maintenance even when it is not expressly requested, provided legal requirements and trial facts support such intervention. Knowledge Gap Previous studies have predominantly emphasized normative foundations and judicial authority, while empirical evidence concerning courtroom application, maintenance determination, implementation constraints, and the roles of judicial actors remains limited. Aims This empirical legal study examines the implementation of ex officio judicial authority in fulfilling postdivorce maintenance rights at the Malang Regency Religious Court and identifies factors shaping its application through a socio-legal approach, interviews, documentation, and legal literature. Results Ex officio authority functions as a legal protection mechanism based on trial facts, the husband’s economic capacity, the needs of former wives and children, proportionality, and child welfare. Its implementation is shaped by legal awareness, evidence of economic capacity, mediation, and judgment enforcement. Novelty The study proposes an integrated strengthening model comprising normative foundations, evidentiary reinforcement, procedural reinforcement, and judgment enforcement. Implications Religious courts should strengthen fact-finding capacity, legal aid services, mediation, and interinstitutional coordination to support the actual realization of maintenance entitlements after divorce. Highlights: Four implementation determinants emerged: legal awareness, proof of husbands’ economic capacity, mediation, and judgment enforcement. Awards depend on courtroom facts, financial ability, claimant needs, proportionality, and child welfare considerations. The proposed model integrates normative grounding, evidentiary quality, procedural coordination, and execution of decisions. Keywords: Ex Officio Judge, Maintenance Rights, Divorce.
Lex Favor Reo in Indonesia’s Criminal Law Transition: Prinsip Lex Favor Reo dalam Transisi Hukum Pidana Indonesia M. Hafidz Halim; Ahmad Syaifudin; Moh. Muhibbin
Indonesian Journal of Innovation Studies Vol. 27 No. 4 (2026): October
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/ijins.v27i4.2245

Abstract

General Background: Indonesia entered a major criminal law transition on 2 January 2026 through the effective implementation of the National Criminal Code (Law No. 1 of 2023) and the 2025 Criminal Procedure Code (Law No. 20 of 2025). Specific Background: This transition raises juridical issues concerning cases involving acts committed before 2 January 2026 while judicial proceedings remain ongoing, particularly regarding the application of provisions that are more favorable to defendants. Knowledge Gap: Previous studies have predominantly examined the formation, legal policy, and substantive aspects of the National Criminal Code, while empirical examination of transitional provisions through actual post-implementation judicial decisions remains limited. Aims: This study analyzes the normative construction of lex favor reo under Articles 2, 3, and 618 of the National Criminal Code and the procedural transition under Article 361 of the 2025 Criminal Procedure Code, as well as their application in narcotics cassation cases. Results: Using normative legal research with statutory and case approaches, the study qualitatively analyzes legislation, Supreme Court Circular Letter No. 1 of 2026, and relevant narcotics cassation decisions from January to early March 2026. The findings show that the Supreme Court distinguishes substantive and procedural criminal law: substantive provisions follow lex favor reo, whereas procedural provisions depend on the stage of defendant examination. Novelty: The study uses actual cassation decisions from the initial months of the transition to examine judicial reasoning in practice. Implications: Potential disparities in lower courts, uneven institutional readiness, and uncertainty concerning the commencement of defendant examination require continued judicial training and compilation of transitional jurisprudence. Highlights: Substantive and procedural criminal law follow different transitional rules. The Supreme Court generally maintained this distinction in narcotics cassation decisions. Transitional implementation still presents interpretive and judicial consistency challenges. Keywords: Principle of Retroactivity, National Criminal Code, 2025 Code of Criminal Procedure, Transition Period, Lex Favor Reo
Reconceptualizing Consumer Legal Protection and the Status of P2P Lending Fintech Operators in Indonesia: Rekonseptualisasi Perlindungan Hukum Konsumen dan Kedudukan Penyelenggara Fintech P2p Lending di Indonesia Gatot Siswa Adiyatna; Diyan Isnaeni; Moh. Muhibbin
Indonesian Journal of Innovation Studies Vol. 27 No. 4 (2026): October
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/ijins.v27i4.2330

Abstract

General Background: The rapid expansion of peer-to-peer lending in Indonesia has generated complex regulatory challenges involving platform responsibility, contractual relationships, borrower safeguards, and lender risk allocation. Specific Background: Licensed platforms operate as digital intermediaries within tripartite relationships, while abusive debt collection, illegal operators, information asymmetry, and credit-default allocation create significant concerns for platform users. Knowledge Gap: Existing regulation leaves uncertainty regarding responsibility for lender losses, particularly when default arises from deficient credit scoring, fraud, or platform misconduct. Aims: This study examines the juridical position and responsibilities of licensed and unlicensed P2P lending operators and formulates a prescriptive framework for borrower and lender protection through normative legal research using statutory and conceptual approaches. Results: Licensed operators qualify as Other Financial Services Institutions and platform providers, maintain a mandate relationship with lenders, and bear vicarious liability for unlawful debt-collection practices. Unlicensed operators constitute financial-sector offenders whose agreements are void ab initio and unenforceable under the Ex Turpi Causa doctrine. Safeguards comprise preventive mechanisms, including CAMIL restrictions, SupTech, interest-rate limits, and Escrow and Virtual Accounts, alongside LAPS SJK, OJK sanctions, civil remedies, and integrated criminal enforcement. Novelty: The study proposes a mandatory Protection Fund to address lender exposure to default associated with platform fraud or negligence. Implications: This framework clarifies platform accountability while providing a regulatory basis for more balanced safeguards for borrowers and lenders. Highlight: Licensed platforms function solely as digital intermediaries within tripartite contractual relationships. Unlicensed operators’ agreements are void ab initio and unenforceable under the Ex Turpi Causa doctrine. A mandatory fund is proposed to address lender default-risk allocation gaps. Keywords: Consumer Protection, P2P Lending, Platform Provider, Vicarious Liability, Protection
Co-Authors Ahmad Syaifudin Budi Parmono Dian Maulidah Diyan Isnaeni Gatot Siswa Adiyatna M. Hafidz Halim Mutiara Far'h Riasya